Monthly Archives: April 2016

Favourite Fantasy Books Part 1 : Magician by Raymond E Feist

Posted by RibaldRemark on
Magician-cover 1

The cover of the first edition of Magician that I ever owned.

Favourite Fantasy Books

Part 1 : Magician by Raymond E Feist

 

This is a series of posts about fantasy novels that I love, or loved, and that really got me into fantasy.  Some of them have not really stood the test of time, some I grew out of, and others are still great.  But all of them fed into how I came to love fantasy and how I perceive the genre.

 

Magician by Raymond E. Feist is the first book of the massive Riftwar Cycle, although back when I read it, all those years ago, it was simply Magician and book one of a trilogy, the Riftwar Saga.  Something a great deal more manageable than the 30 book ‘cycle’ it is now.  I was probably 12 or so when I picked it up in my local Waterstones bookshop.  It wasn’t the first fantasy book I ever read, but it has certainly been one of the most influential on my early fantasy reading tastes (even though they have evolved over time) and it really consolidated my love for fantasy.

 

For those that don’t know it, spoilers abound below, but let’s face it when a book is published in the early 1980s and has been republished many times since, you can’t really call foul on spoilers.  At some point you have to admit that a story is fair game particularly after 30 years.  But the warning is there regardless.

 

Continue reading →

Blog: Hugo Awards 2016… ugh not again

Posted by RibaldRemark on

hugo

Blog: Hugo Awards 2016… ugh not again

 

Well after the debacle of the last few years we once again have a contrary Hugo Awards list finalists (check it out here).  Thankfully this year there are still some really good authors and works on the ballot, although the Puppies are at it again in some of the categories.

 

So here is a breakdown of the list in all its glory with a bit of commentary from me when I feel the need:

Continue reading →

In the Dragon’s Den: Interview with Steven Erikson Part 3

Posted by RibaldRemark on

 

erikson

In the Dragon’s Den:  Interview with Steven Erikson Part 3

 

 

TCD:  Picking this up again, we were talking about SF, and it and your love of absurd comedy masking some pretty pointed observations and satire brings me on to Willful Child 2: The Wrath of Betty (coming from Tor in October I believe).  What can you tell us about it?

 

SE: Willful Child was a bit thin on the background universe.  I mean, I didn’t really have time for that stuff.  It just got in the way!  It definitely got in Captain Hadrian’s way.  But having set up the situation and the main characters, the second novel needed to bit more depth (depth, in fiction-writing terms, is what the characters have to wade through), which in turn meant more of the background information brought to the foreground, thus adding, er, depth.

So it’s a deep novel.  Deeper.  With more depth.

Anyway, my advance readers recoiled at first, since for some inexplicable reason my satire meter was cranked way over.  It bears keeping in mind the fuel that powers satire.  It’s a savage thing.  As much as one may go for laughs on the surface (and interestingly, most of the reviews of Willful Child more or less got locked on that surface stuff, with only a couple exceptions that I’ve seen), it’s the vicious current beneath it that drives the impulse to write this kind of fiction.

In other words, I needed to be fed up in order to write these books.  So, that inclines one to turn language into a weapon (and why not, we’ve weaponized everything else).  The way I see it, satire can use a scalpel, or it can use a broadsword.  It can also use both and everything in between, depending on the circumstances.

Curiously, if you look at some of the best satire, say, the stuff on television (The Simpsons, South Park, Family Guy), you can probably track how each series got more and more vicious as it went on.  This ramping up may appear on the surface to be nothing more than the need to escalate the shock quotient (possibly in acknowledgement of the numbing effect of multiple shocks), but what I see in it is the growing desperation of the creators in their efforts to shake us all out of our apathy.  And the more you fail, the angrier you get.

Wrath of Betty started out wielding not a scalpel, not a broadsword, but a flamethrower.  I had to halt part way through to toss the weapon and run around stamping out fires.  And then tone things down some.  So it took a bit longer than the first book.

Continue reading →

In the Dragon’s Den: Interview with Steven Erikson Part 2

Posted by RibaldRemark on

 

erikson_fi

In the Dragon’s Den: Interview with Steven Erikson Part 2

 

TCD:  So carrying on then from the other day, you also have The Fiends of Nightmaria about to be released, a new Bauchelain and Korbal Broach novella.  For those not familiar with this series of Malazan novellas how would you describe them? 

 

SE:  They’re just stories following two evil, insane heroes.  Nothing unusual there, really.  Oh, and it’s a lighter side of the Malazan world, assuming one can characterise ‘lighter’ as darker.  The whole Malazan Book of the Fallen is just the necessary frame for my Bauchelain and Korbal Broach novellas.  Most people have got that the wrong way round.  Everything important and vital that I feel the need to say shows up in the novellas.  Like, breasts with mouths instead of nipples and men who use beard trimmings to insulate their houses.  I understand that most of my readers are proceeding under a misapprehension about all of this, but I expect Fiends of Nightmaria to put them straight.

 

Continue reading →

Review: Fall of Light Book Two of the Kharkanas Trilogy by Steven Erikson

Posted by RibaldRemark on

Fall of Light

Review:  Fall of Light Book Two of the Kharkanas Trilogy by Steven Erikson

 

Shorter Review:

If you liked Forge of Darkness then you will like Fall of Light.  Same Shakespearean style and tone, although this time there are more elements of comic relief and respites from the darkness.  The civil war continues, the factions become more delineated and yet messier, and the War on Death gets some more attention.  What can I say?  It is a book two, so it follows on from Forge.

 

Longer Review:
(Spoilers for the first chapter, but no further)

With Forge of Darkness, Steven Erikson launched into the mythic history of the Tiste and began the story about the sundering of their civilisation and the creation of the distinct races.  Fall of Light continues this epic fantasy narrative by delving even deeper into the tensions that run rife in a civil war, and by exploring the various factions and how the individuals within those factions often have their own agendas.  It is always easy to see the grand sweeping movements that alter societies, but part of the focus of Fall is on how individuals actually shape and alter the course of history, almost without knowing it.  Some events seem inevitable, others can be changed, and the reader is in the privileged position to see how individual ambition, pride, and simple mistakes, cost the realm dear.

Continue reading →

In the Dragon’s Den: Interview with Steven Erikson Part 1

Posted by RibaldRemark on

 

Steve Erikson

 

 In the Dragon’s Den:  Interview with Steven Erikson

 

TCD:  Firstly I would like to thank Steven Erikson for agreeing to be the second author (and second Malazan author) to undergo my clumsy attempts to master the technique of interviewing.  So thank you Steve for doing this.

SE:  Just release all the funds you stole from my bank account and we can call it even.

 

TCD:  You promised that you wouldn’t mention the financial blackmail.  Anyway, it seems like you are going to have a busy year of releases as you have Fall of Light (Book 2 of the Kharkanas Trilogy) coming out this month and a new Bauchelain and Korbal Broach Novella Fiends of Nightmaria about to release from Subterranean Press.  Oh, and you also have Willful Child 2: The Wrath of Betty coming out this year as well.  But before we get started on that, I did have a couple of questions about the Malazan world and series in general if you don’t mind doing it that way around?

I recently posted an article about Worldbuilding and the Malazan World and I called your writing and world feminist.  I know critics are supposed to assume the author is dead and ignore their perspective, but I figured that given we were speaking I would ask your opinion on it and get some answers from the horse’s mouth.   It seems like too good an opportunity to miss.  So did you read the article, and if so, what are your thoughts?   

 

SE:   Yes I read the article and yes, of course I consider myself a feminist, in that I believe in equal opportunity for women and men, and that I continue to see all around me the persistent oppression of an intrinsically patriarchal society, and, finally, that the Malazan universe Cam and I created was explicit in its addressing that particular issue.  It was also consciously colour-blind.  To be honest, I am somewhat astonished that anyone would think otherwise of me.  One of the first things we realized in creating the Malazan world the way we did, was that we would not sign-post these fundamental shifts away from the real world.  After all, no-one in that world thinks about it either way.  It’s not a point of debate, period.  That said, it’s not, strictly speaking, an egalitarian world.  To be egalitarian in the proper sense would require doing away with class divisions, entrenched and institutional disparity of wealth (and anyone who would argue that our disparity of wealth is not institutional needs to open their eyes), and systems of exclusion.  We weren’t interested in a Utopian vision.  The Malazan world is a messy world, a world of vast inequalities (at least on the surface, with, say, a lowly thief on one side and a god on the other) and injustices.  Which is why a central theme to the novels relate to an argument in efficacy or potential efficacy, an assertion that someone like that lowly thief can turn the tables, can take down a god and change the world.  We were writing about agency and the power to change the world, one small gesture at a time.  Was that an idealistic notion?  Depends on how cynical you are.

It was interesting that in your essay you drew on the SF ‘what if’ premise when describing our approach to creating the Malazan world.  Personally that’s not surprising, since Herbert’s Dune was a huge inspiration for me, especially with how the first novel, Gardens of the Moon, was structured.  Dune drops you into the middle of a story.  I liked that.  I stole it.  I guess I didn’t do as well with it as Herbert did; or maybe the Fantasy genre readership was more resistant to that approach (though Glen Cook’s Black Company did the same).  Probably the former over the latter.  Anyway, one could easily write an essay on the parallel structure between Gardens and Dune; it’s all there, right down to epitaphs and quotes opening chapters.

Back to the feminism thing.  Unquestionably there has been a strange backlash to the notion.  Even the word has become pejorative.  It seems to me the only way to fight that is to identify directly with the label, not defensively, but matter-of-factly.  I admit that when I hear someone speaking against Feminism, I am dumbfounded.  If only in the name of fairness, and how can one argue against fairness?  Apparently, one can, and some do.  For me, I don’t get that and I’ve yet to see an argument raised against feminism that isn’t self-serving and specious.

Continue reading →

In the Dragon’s Den: Ian C Esslemont Interview

Posted by RibaldRemark on

 

icesslemont02

Ian C. Esslemont Interview

Here we have my very first interview with an author, and I was lucky enough to get Ian C. Esslemont to agree to this.  So thank you ICE, and please forgive my unpolished interview technique.

TCD:    Your latest novel Dancer’s Lament (Path to Ascendancy Book 1) (currently available in the UK, and forthcoming in the US) is the first book of a prequel trilogy set in the Malazan world.  So, if you can forgive the bluntness, I wanted to ask a few questions about it and thought we would get some of the straightforward ones out of the way.  So what is Dancer’s Lament about?

ICE:    Firstly, many thanks for the opportunity to talk about the Malazan books. One of my main hopes for Dancer’s Lament is that any general fantasy reader who has previously never read anything from Steve or I can pick up the book and enjoy it, and perhaps become interested in the wider world portrayed.

For that reason what I will say about it is that it’s about character.  It is really, at its centre, a character(s) study – what choices they make and what the consequences are of those choices; how seemingly innocuous moves can have huge consequences later in life; and further, how the traditional history of “great events” and “great men and women” is to my mind completely misleading.

I will also say that I am very leery of the “prequel” word.  Don’t like it.  I see this as a new series in the Malaz world – the Path to Ascension – that (could) prove as long as it need be to tell its tale.

Continue reading →

Review: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (dir. Burr Steers, 2016)

Posted by RibaldRemark on

 

PPZ

 

Review: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (dir. Burr Steers, 2016)

 

Short Review:

Silly, entertaining, ridiculous fun.  If you enjoy Austen’s novels and are also fond of zombie stories, then this will be perfect for you.  If you like your zombie stories post-apocalyptic, then look elsewhere.  If you like your Mr. Darcy with bursting britches and soaking wet, then you might also want to skip this.  Basically the clue is in the title.

 

Longer Review:

It is a truth universally acknowledged that there are certain people who love Jane Austen’s work, and those that… don’t.  However there are those that are familiar with Austen’s stories (either the novels themselves or the endless BBC period dramas and other filmic remakes) but find them a little pompous, dry, and tedious.  There are also those that find the serious, dystopian horror of modern zombie stories to be a little too horrific and violent.  Good news then, because if this describes you, then Pride and Prejudice and Zombies might be the very compromise you were looking for.

Continue reading →

Review: Virtues of War by Bennett R. Coles (Titan Books, 2015)

Posted by RibaldRemark on

Virtues of War

Review: Virtues of War by Bennett R. Coles  (Titan Books, 2015)

 

Short Review:

Action packed military SF novel that is smart, well paced, and a blast to read. Coles’ characters are fascinating flawed heroes who are balancing their personal lives and ambitions with their duties as serving officers.  Given the plentiful action, it is surprisingly insightful and joins the ranks of great military SF like Haldeman’s Forever War and Heinlein’s Starship Troopers.

 

Longer Review:

Let’s face it, when it comes to literature I am more a fantasy fan than SF.  I might have studied SF, but my first love will always be fantasy.  So it came as something of a surprise how much I enjoyed this book.  Bennett R. Coles’ Virtues of War is one of those smart SF military fiction novels that dares to be read in two completely different ways.  On the one hand you could read it as a straight-up, gung ho, military SF action story and it doesn’t disappoint.  There are space battles, planet-side encounters, basically action aplenty.  Or, you could read it as a critique of expansionist military regimes, that still has sympathy and empathy for the men and women who serve in the armed forces.  I suppose, what I am trying to get at is that Coles breathes life into the old adage about ‘loving the soldier and hating the war’.  But, as with all attempts to illustrate concepts and bring them to life, it is more complicated than that, and Virtues is all the better for it.

Continue reading →

Review and Comments: Daredevil Season 2 (Netflix, 2016)

Posted by RibaldRemark on

daredevil-season-2-faq-pic

 

Review and Comments:  Daredevil Season 2 (Netflix, 2016)

Short Review:

Good, but not as great as the first season.  It has more fights, explosions, and killing than Season One.  It has gone more to the supernatural side of Daredevil stories and lessened the realism significantly.  Still does some very clever things with theme and character, but has a more complicated narrative structure that occasionally wobbles and feels a little overfull.

 

Longer Review:

I loved Season One of Daredevil.  I thought it was a gritty, ‘realistic’, down-to-earth superhero show that made the incredible seem plausible, did interesting things with character, and focused on telling a good story.  It was thematically consistent, and, in terms of genre, kept its sights firmly on the street crime elements that gave it an authenticity and credibility.   Season Two didn’t quite hit the same notes for me.  Don’t get me wrong, it is still better than the vast majority of other superhero shows, but the first season was so good that this time around my expectations were perhaps a little too high.   Of course you can’t really hold the show responsible for not meeting every viewer’s expectations, but when the first season creates them, you really hope that the follow up at least meets them.  But there are some aspects that just didn’t work as well for me this time.

Continue reading →