Literature Recommended Literature

[hellrazoromega]

@hellrazoromega I also can't get much into the Song of Fire and Ice. Not because of characters death, but more about the way its written. There is a reason why his killing of characters seems to be effective because, as he himself said, there is more tension when a character is in a dangerous situation since they have a big chance of dying, making the tense moments more impacting, thus more effective. However, I also see the downside you and @Kaerri said. The appeal of some stories are the characters themselves, so the appeal of the book is lost when they die. I think that its more effective when important characters die at the middle-end of the book for single novels, and in series during the last few books. You get enough of the character to be satisfied, but you also get the effect of danger when other characters are in perilous moments.

I agree to a point. Surely I agree with the point about when death occurs, in the film Serenity the last part of the film was as tense as any I have watched in a long time. After Wash's death (and Book's earlier) all bets were off and the tension was palpable that anyone could die--even though no one else did. The danger with over doing death is that it becomes so common place that no one wants to risk becoming attached to any character---and that is a shame IMO. Also it leads to patterns--In Song of Fire and Ice the pattern is that if you stick to a cause or principle you are toast, if you are willing to be ruthless and flexible you will survive (as with real life there are of course exceptions, but they are rare).


On Lovecraftian writers, have you read August Derleth? There are mixed opinions on what he did with the Mythos (Cthulhu Mythos being a term he actually coined) but he is one of the few who wrote stories in the Mythos and was a friend and corespondent of Lovecraft himself. Many of the Old Ones that are considered canon today such as, Cthugha, Hastur and Ithaqua were created by Derleth. Some would argue that Robert Howard (also a friend and corespondent of Lovecraft) used elements of Lovecraft's stories in some of his Kull, Conan and other writings. Some were subtle and others not so subtle allusions to what we now call the Cuthulhu Mythos.

 

[Lady Sabine]

I think that the entire "everyone inflexible dies" is one of the shallowest and least accurate interpretations of ASoIaF. No offense to anyone here, but it's simply not true- I hear it all the time and I'd just like to clear a few things up, not trying to invalidate anyone's opinion or anything. This isn't addressed to anyone so much as it is a general statement as to a few of the themes and "patterns" present in the series.


Let's play a game list a few characters that are still alive (presumably, we haven't heard from some in a while) that are fairly to completely stuck to their morals:


-Daenerys. If she was doing the smart thing, she would be in Westeros by now. She cares more about protecting the innocent than pursuing her crown.


-Brienne. I don't know how much really needs to be said about her character other than she never lets anything come before what she feels is right.


-Varys. He was never devoted to a particular king, he was devoted to preventing war and bloodshed and violence. He's never taken an act that he had cause to believe would create widespread suffering.


-Stannis. Can't say anything about him without major spoilers, but he has never deviated from his "mine by right" POV. Ever.


-Asha Greyjoy. Not much to be said here either.


-Bran. Never ruthless, never bloodthirsty, though it did take him a while to get started on his current arc.


-Sam. He did a lot of great things up North, and so far hasn't really had to pay for them at all. I was sure his good deeds would cost him but GRRM really doesn't follow a formula.


-The Hound. There were various immoral acts under his master's reign that he never partook in. He was never a pure soul but his actions have largely been for the greater good, and he certainly isn't as ruthless as he'd like others to think he is.


-Doran Martell. The ultimate example. Gentle, peaceful, and anything but ruthless or flexible. His every action has been for a cause and justified, either by law or morality.


In the interest of avoiding spoilers, I'm going to avoid characters who were guaranteed dead, but this is far from a comprehensive list and there are several I chose not to include, so for those of you that haven't read everything including the TWoW previews, don't you worry your pretty little heads. ^^


The dude who got beheaded is the example everyone cites both as not getting attached and GRRM's indiscriminate killing. Well, his death was actually foreshadowed all the way through. As for indiscriminate killing, his death certainly served a purpose and was very discriminate. Without it we wouldn't have a full third of the conflict in the next book. Then, for not getting attached to POV characters? We actually don't lose (definitively) another major POV character. Ever. As for minor POVs? One, as far as I can recall. There are non-POVs that die, but fairly few that the audience had any real reason to grow attached to (I can think of only 3 to 7, and the series currently has 1.77 million words in 5 books, so...) and their deaths were all pretty much vital, not just added in for lulz.


ASoIaF will never be everyone's cup of tea. It is brutal, is is bloody, and not everyone thinks that a few thousand named characters and a laundry list of themes are fun. I'm cool if you don't like it. ^^ But death of major characters is not commonplace. There aren't patterns that you can follow to predict deaths with even 50% probability. The deaths never get repetitive; they all hit close to home. Idealism is never simply rewarded but it isn't a one-way ticket either. The ruthless characters get what's coming to them just fine.


If the deaths are painful and you don't like them, well, that's what makes it fun for the rest of us. ^^ But as a wearer of an extra-shiny tinfoil hat for all my ASoIaF conspiracy theories, I want to offer my personal reassurances that formulaic is not and probably never will be a valid complaint. It's still plenty easy to get and stay attached. We see the world through the eyes of 31 characters so far (and more to come), and if you can only relate to the ones that die you're either phenomenally unlucky or unempathetic. :c I've only had three or four that I didn't find myself getting pretty attached to, even the ones I hated to start off with.


In closing, I strongly advise anyone who reads this thread not to discount ASoIaF for being formulaic or killing off someone every other chapter. Don't believe the hype! There are lots of other reasons to hate the series, too, and a lot of valid ones have been listed just on this thread. >

 

[hellrazoromega]

[QUOTE="Lady Sabine]I think that the entire "everyone inflexible dies" is one of the shallowest and least accurate interpretations of ASoIaF. No offense to anyone here, but it's simply not true- I hear it all the time and I'd just like to clear a few things up, not trying to invalidate anyone's opinion or anything. This isn't addressed to anyone so much as it is a general statement as to a few of the themes and "patterns" present in the series.
Let's play a game list a few characters that are still alive (presumably, we haven't heard from some in a while) that are fairly to completely stuck to their morals:


-Daenerys. If she was doing the smart thing, she would be in Westeros by now. She cares more about protecting the innocent than pursuing her crown.


-Brienne. I don't know how much really needs to be said about her character other than she never lets anything come before what she feels is right.


-Varys. He was never devoted to a particular king, he was devoted to preventing war and bloodshed and violence. He's never taken an act that he had cause to believe would create widespread suffering.


-Stannis. Can't say anything about him without major spoilers, but he has never deviated from his "mine by right" POV. Ever.


-Asha Greyjoy. Not much to be said here either.


-Bran. Never ruthless, never bloodthirsty, though it did take him a while to get started on his current arc.


-Sam. He did a lot of great things up North, and so far hasn't really had to pay for them at all. I was sure his good deeds would cost him but GRRM really doesn't follow a formula.


-The Hound. There were various immoral acts under his master's reign that he never partook in. He was never a pure soul but his actions have largely been for the greater good, and he certainly isn't as ruthless as he'd like others to think he is.


-Doran Martell. The ultimate example. Gentle, peaceful, and anything but ruthless or flexible. His every action has been for a cause and justified, either by law or morality.


In the interest of avoiding spoilers, I'm going to avoid characters who were guaranteed dead, but this is far from a comprehensive list and there are several I chose not to include, so for those of you that haven't read everything including the TWoW previews, don't you worry your pretty little heads. ^^


The dude who got beheaded is the example everyone cites both as not getting attached and GRRM's indiscriminate killing. Well, his death was actually foreshadowed all the way through. As for indiscriminate killing, his death certainly served a purpose and was very discriminate. Without it we wouldn't have a full third of the conflict in the next book. Then, for not getting attached to POV characters? We actually don't lose (definitively) another major POV character. Ever. As for minor POVs? One, as far as I can recall. There are non-POVs that die, but fairly few that the audience had any real reason to grow attached to (I can think of only 3 to 7, and the series currently has 1.77 million words in 5 books, so...) and their deaths were all pretty much vital, not just added in for lulz.


ASoIaF will never be everyone's cup of tea. It is brutal, is is bloody, and not everyone thinks that a few thousand named characters and a laundry list of themes are fun. I'm cool if you don't like it. ^^ But death of major characters is not commonplace. There aren't patterns that you can follow to predict deaths with even 50% probability. The deaths never get repetitive; they all hit close to home. Idealism is never simply rewarded but it isn't a one-way ticket either. The ruthless characters get what's coming to them just fine.


If the deaths are painful and you don't like them, well, that's what makes it fun for the rest of us. ^^ But as a wearer of an extra-shiny tinfoil hat for all my ASoIaF conspiracy theories, I want to offer my personal reassurances that formulaic is not and probably never will be a valid complaint. It's still plenty easy to get and stay attached. We see the world through the eyes of 31 characters so far (and more to come), and if you can only relate to the ones that die you're either phenomenally unlucky or unempathetic. :c I've only had three or four that I didn't find myself getting pretty attached to, even the ones I hated to start off with.


In closing, I strongly advise anyone who reads this thread not to discount ASoIaF for being formulaic or killing off someone every other chapter. Don't believe the hype! There are lots of other reasons to hate the series, too, and a lot of valid ones have been listed just on this thread. >

[/QUOTE]
No offense intended so I hope none is taken but many of the words here are subjective, when I say "inflexible" and "ruthless"--both, subjective. when you say "that is simple not true"--subjective. What is inflexible to me, may not be to the next person and may be on the other end of the spectrum to you. They are opinions--neither right none wrong-- just points of view.:smiled: Not trying to shoot you down, you obviously enjoy the heck out of Song Fire and Ice, (and more power to you I say :wink I myself was more of a Wheel of Time kinda guy when it comee to epic fantasy and I spent many an idle hour mapping out where I thought things might go. I did not take offense but I personally shy away from the argument that something based on so many subjective things is invalid. Were we talking about objective facts that would be another story. In my estimation people are entitled to think that way based on opinions just as others are entitled to disagree vehemently and I for one would give my right to defend that right for either side, even if I am one of those vehement dissenters.:smiled: I would never disparage someone for liking something I don't (not to say that anyone here has done that--I just hope no one got that impression from me) even though I get it all the time as one of 5 people on the Earth who actually enjoyed all three Star Wars prequels and all three Matrix movies (I have odd tastes--sue me).:tongue:


To be honest my statement was what I have heard from some others who have read the books (and the bit I did read). As I said I only read the first and did not care for it. As you say the term inflexible is relative so I don't think there is a right or wrong answer, as is the case with most things about people. As I tend to do I also noted that the are exceptions, just as you listed people that break the concept others have pointed out characters to me that fit the bill of inflexible -at least to them- who died. Most of them have been Stark's or their allies who clung to a sense to honor (again with exceptions as I know--not wanting to spoil anything based on the synopsis I have read).


Again I haven't read them, they weren't for me but I thought the ideas were compelling so I read a decent synopsis of the other books that are out so far and that was good enough for me. I've actually been witnessed a great deal of brutality in real life, sadly things that make what I read in the first book and the synopsis look like amateur hour--and I don't care for it in my fiction. To be fair it's not the brutality I mind it is the death of charters I am pulling for--more to the point I've seen enough "good" (another relative term) people die for all manner of reasons--some of them seemingly senseless. But to attribute any range of feelings, even about fiction, to one thing is foolishness in my opinion so I am sure there are other factors as to why I did not like the book--I just have not identified them, because I moved on to books I did enjoy.


Now to say subjectively that the stories are not formulaic I'll buy but to make that statement objectively I can't agree with just on principle. Not because I think they are formulaic , because I haven't read them all, but rather because I tend not to believe in absolutes when it comes to anything crafted by human hands. I'm sure there is someone(s) somewhere to whom they are formulaic even is that is a very small percentage. With the exception of death and perhaps a shortlist of other things I don't believe in the words never or always when applied to much about humans. Hence why I try to couch my statements and allow for exceptions (I don't always succeed--but I try). As I said I can understand why people like Martin's stuff, I even liked some his early work, but the man is not a god--someone(s) has to have figured out where he is going, in general, even if not is specifics. But as with every thing else that is just my opinion and I freely admit I can be, and often am, wrong:tongue:.

 

[Lady Sabine]

I have the feeling we're running the risk of threadjacking here, so I'm going to keep this really brief. I love this conversation enough that I will totally take it over PM or onto another thread if it garners attention, but I don't think everyone here appreciates it as much as I do. xD


Anyway, I can totally see where someone could get the opinion that GoT gets repetitive. People do die, over and over again. However it would seem to me that, in a predictable or formulaic series, there would only be one likely ending that major fans buy into. Subjectively predictable? Maybe to a few people out of the twenty-odd million. Objectively predictable? I just can't agree with that at all. :c I'd like to think I'm pretty clever (even with copious evidence to the contrary, lol) and I don't consider one ending any more likely than many others, after reading the series three times and watching most of GRRM's interviews.


So, yeah. Don't read it because it's bloody. Don't read it because it's brutal. Don't read it because it is kinda pessimistic and can be cruel. Don't read it because you don't like seeing people you got attached to dropping over every 75k words or so. But if you weren't going to read it because you think you'll know when someone's about to die or what's going to happen next, read it anyway!

 

[augmentedspartan]

On Lovecraftian writers, have you read August Derleth? There are mixed opinions on what he did with the Mythos (Cthulhu Mythos being a term he actually coined) but he is one of the few who wrote stories in the Mythos and was a friend and corespondent of Lovecraft himself. Many of the Old Ones that are considered canon today such as, Cthugha, Hastur and Ithaqua were created by Derleth. Some would argue that Robert Howard (also a friend and corespondent of Lovecraft) used elements of Lovecraft's stories in some of his Kull, Conan and other writings. Some were subtle and others not so subtle allusions to what we now call the Cuthulhu Mythos.

I've heard of August Derleth before, although not for his stories but for the term he created (although I prefer the name Yog Sothothery for the Mythos). I'll be sure to give them a look, thanks. Although I think Hastur appeared on another story before Derleth's. Not only in The King in Yellow, but I think Lovecraft also mentioned him somewhere. I'm sure Derleth took him and made him a complete deity or something, right?


Is there any compilation of Derleth's stories you would recommend? Like an anthology or something.

 

[hellrazoromega]

I've heard of August Derleth before, although not for his stories but for the term he created (although I prefer the name Yog Sothothery for the Mythos). I'll be sure to give them a look, thanks. Although I think Hastur appeared on another story before Derleth's. Not only in The King in Yellow, but I think Lovecraft also mentioned him somewhere. I'm sure Derleth took him and made him a complete deity or something, right?
Is there any compilation of Derleth's stories you would recommend? Like an anthology or something.

Actually Hastur appeared first in Ambrose Bierce's writings and was briefly used by Lovecraft (and also used by Robert W. Chambers) before Derleth later fleshed him out. Me, I would recommend any of the items below, some are hit and miss but you will recognize many things that people often mistakenly attribute to Lovecraft himself (sometimes they are correct, other times they were created or fleshed out by Derleth). Some of his earlier stuff has slipped into the public domain and can be found for free on Kindle.

• The Survivor and Others (1957) with H. P. Lovecraft
  
• The Mask of Cthulhu (1958)
  
• The Trail of Cthulhu (1962)
  
• The Watchers Out of Time and Others (1974) with H. P. Lovecraft
  
• Dwellers in Darkness (1976)
  

 

[Lorelilly]

Terry Brooks with the shannara thrillogy!


(Fantasy and modern fantasy genre.)


I think he's an amazing writer and if you haven' t read


one of his books yet I would highly recommend it!


The way of writing, the story itself the characters

 

[hellrazoromega]

Terry Brooks with the shannara thrillogy!
(Fantasy and modern fantasy genre.)


I think he's an amazing writer and if you haven' t read


one of his books yet I would highly recommend it!


The way of writing, the story itself the characters

While even though there are so many parallels to the Lord of the Rings with the Sword of Shannara, too many for some people, I enjoyed the books quite a bit when I read them. Only the first two books were out when I found them and I recall eagerly awaiting the 3rd book. To pass the time while I waited I happily discovered The Dragon Riders of Pern books and devoured those, it will be interesting to see if Warner does anything with the option to make movies based on the Pern books that they acquired this year.

 

[Egolegume]

Maximum Ride (books 1 - 4) - James Patterson


If you like a fast, easy read this is it. The laguage Patterson uses in these novels is amazingly simple without losing anything. Novel series itself is fun, full of happy, sad, and action scenes that all make for an amazing read. I've loved this years for years, read them 9 years ago and I still love them. Admittedly I only care for books 1-4, which are the only ones you need, the additional books are not required to know the series story.


Uncommon Heroes - Dee Henderson


I have a ridiculous love of military stories and in particular military romance. Uncommon Heroes is an amazingly well written, enthralling military romance series. Seriously, not kidding about how much I love this series.


Book One: True Devotion - Summary

Spoiler

Kelly Jacobs has already paid the ultimate price of loving a warrior; she has the folded flag and the grateful thanks of a nation to prove it. Navy SEAL Joe "Bear" Baker can't ask her to accept that risk again--even though he loves her. But the man responsible for her husband's death is back; closer than either of them realize. Kelly is in danger, and Joe may not get there in time. Uncommon Heroes: Welcome to a world where friendships go deep, loyalties stand strong, and uncommon heroes perform the toughest jobs in the world. Dee Henderson's military romance series provides a detailed passage into the world of the military and homeland heroes, and those they love.

Book Two: True Valor - Summary

Spoiler

Heroes get a new meaning when you see inside their lives. Gracie is a Navy Pilot; Bruce works Air Force Pararescue. With dangerous jobs--often away from home--they write love letters. When Gracie is shot down behind enemy lines, Bruce has one mission: get her out alive. Uncommon Heroes: Welcome to a world where friendships go deep, loyalties stand strong, and uncommon heroes perform the toughest jobs in the world. Dee Henderson's military romance series provides a detailed passage into the world of the military and homeland heroes, and those they love.

Book Three: True Honor - Summary This is my favorite of the four novels.

Spoiler

CIA officer Darcy St. James is after a man who knew September 11 would happen--a man who chose to profit from the knowledge. Navy SEAL Sam "Cougar" Houston is busy: The intelligence Darcy is generating has his team deploying around the world. Under the pressure of war, their romance flourishes. But it may be a short relationship: for the terrorists have chosen their next targets, and Darcy's name is high on the list. Uncommon Heroes: Welcome to a world where friendships go deep, loyalties stand strong, and uncommon heroes perform the toughest jobs in the world. Dee Henderson's military romance series provides a detailed passage into the world of the military and homeland heroes, and those they love.

Book Four: True Courage - Summary

Spoiler

Overview


Someone snatched his cousin's wife and son. FBI agent Luke Falcon is searching for a kidnapper and sorting out the crime. He's afraid it's the work of a stalker. He's afraid they're already dead, and he'll do anything required to get them back alive--he just didn't plan on falling in love with the only witness.


Uncommon Heroes: Welcome to a world where friendships go deep, loyalties stand strong, and uncommon heroes perform the toughest jobs in the world. Dee Henderson's military romance series provides a detailed passage into the world of the military and homeland heroes, and those they love.

American Sniper LP: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History


I won't say to much here, but certainly an eye opening read. It was page turner for me and I thoroughly enjoyed this mans recount of his military career.

Spoiler

Gripping, eye-opening, and powerful, American Sniper is the astonishing autobiography of SEAL Chief Chris Kyle, who is the record-holding sniper in U.S. military history. Kyle has more than 150 officially confirmed kills (the previous American record was 109), though his remarkable career total has not been made public by the Pentagon.


In this New York Times bestselling memoir, Kyle shares the true story of his extraordinary decade-long career, including his multiple combat tours in Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom) and elsewhere from 1999-2009.


Kyle’s riveting first-person account of how he went from Texas rodeo cowboy to expert marksman and feared assassin offers a fascinating view of modern-day warfare and one of the most in-depth and illuminating looks into the secret world of Special Ops ever written

 

[Grey]

I dislike Derleth with great intensity. He missed the point.

 

[TheLostChildren]

The All Souls Trilogy is amazing.


Also, The Kingkiller Chronicles by Peter Rothfuss is great. Not so patiently awaiting the release of book 3. haha

 

[hellrazoromega]

I dislike Derleth with great intensity. He missed the point.

Yeah like I said opinions vary on him, he is not my fav either but he did flesh out many of the things people take for granted much all of the stuff people qoute or reference about Hastur came from Derleth. Sure Derleth did have some of his heroes escape unscathed but he alos had those who were doomed. To be fair Lovecraft's heroes sometimes manged to make "win"---"The Horror in the Museum", "The Shunned House", and "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward"---being prime examples. So IMO some, (though not all), of the critiques of Derleth are unfair and apply the 'Nostalgia Filter' a bit. Not to say Derleth did not make mistakes but it should also be noted that his continuation of the "Mythos" is a very likely reason it did not slip into obscurity after Lovecraft's death. His writings were never hugely popular during his life and Lovecraft never promoted himself--something Derleth did rather well.


In any case if you are a fanatic of the genre Robert Bloch was a protege of Lovecraft and in his early work he even collaborated some ongoing connected stories with Lovecraft.


Also for real hardcore readers I would recommend Lord Dunsay (Edward Plunkett)---the Gods of Pegana, especially. His stuff can be dry but ithad an influence for Lovecraft and a great many other writers of fantasy.

 

[BuddhistDracula]

I can only recommend Dracula by Bram Stoker I really love that book

Spoiler

I won't tell too much about it, but it's about a heartbroken and cold-hearted man who is being hunted by some guys who want to see him dead...

 

[hellrazoromega]

I can only recommend Dracula by Bram Stoker I really love that book

Spoiler

I won't tell too much about it, but it's about a heartbroken and cold-hearted man who is being hunted by some guys who want to see him dead...


lol. Wasn't that the one about the guy who did that thing that time?:tongue:

 

[BuddhistDracula]

lol. Wasn't that the one about the guy who did that thing that time?:tongue:

What do you mean by "that thing that time"?

 

[hellrazoromega]

Lol, it is a completely vague statement that could apply to anyone doing anything---in an attempt to be funny---which apparently failed:cry:.

 

[BuddhistDracula]

@hellrazoromega Ah, I see

 

[Dark Demon]

Hello everyone!,


Now for recommended literature I am indeed a book worm so I'd top off my hat to you for creating this thread. (: If you are a vampire-fan then a twilight fan this might be the right post for you.


- Black dagger brotherhood, This is a bit of a let down, but one of my favourites. If you don't mind the over use of London old time Gangster slang on modern minded centuries old vampires


- Dark hunter series,


- Dragon fury novel, Again uses the same tone but brilliant writer I hugely recommend it.


-Dark series, Carpathians / Ghostwalkers


- Immortals after dark,


- Lords of the under world,


- Lara Adrian,


- The Ferral Warriors


- Colin Fry,


- Dorren Virtue


-Nightwalker Series


- The Argeneau Vampires


- Traci delysia Wolter

 

[BDark]

I personally loved Jurassic Park, and am currently reading The Silmarillion (also by J.R.R. Tolkien) and later will start The Children of Hurin (also Tolkien). But certainly, I do recommend Jurassic Park !

 

[Kaerri]

Lost World is pretty good too, if you haven't read it. Next-to-nothing to do with the movie of the same name, if I remember right, but being a Malcolm fan you might enjoy it.

 

[BatLover]

* gasps* omg did you know jurrasic park isn't by J.R.R. tolkien?! * jurrasic park isn't by tolkien. it is by micheal clinton <-- probably mispelt

 

[BDark]

Lost World is pretty good too, if you haven't read it. Next-to-nothing to do with the movie of the same name, if I remember right, but being a Malcolm fan you might enjoy it.

It was a mistake I had done. Not ordering TLW with it, I mean. Now I'm sad.

* gasps* omg did you know jurrasic park isn't by J.R.R. tolkien?! * jurrasic park isn't by tolkien. it is by micheal clinton <-- probably mispelt

I never said it was by J.R.R. Tolkien. I know it's Michael Crichton.


@Hatchet (it won't let me tag people ;- , listen to these people, they know good shit.

 

[Kaerri]

It was a mistake I had done. Not ordering TLW with it, I mean. Now I'm sad.

Library?

 

[e v i]

I highly recommend "The Book Thief" by Markus Zusak. It's a historical fiction novel, and the author writes so beautifully. c: I wasn't able to set it down after I began reading!

 

[BDark]

Library?

Amazon, my dads uncle comes once a year from America and brings all the crap we ordered. I got three books this year.