Astonishing Essay on Prince of Thorns

[Ursa major]

Now that's over, perhaps someone can get on with that grimdark story where the hero is a tray of raspberry puddings? I'd buy it.

Fool!

 

[HareBrain]

Fool!

Such abuse is in no sense my just desserts.

In an effort to appear more intelligent, I shall give my opinion on this topic.

There are plenty of authors who, on encountering discussions like this, will take a look at their writing, think about what subconscious assumptions they've used without realising it, and have a good old cogitate about whether they should change anything. And that's great. (I am one.)

And there are many authors who ignore or never see such discussions and write in a more organic, free way, recking nothing of how they will be perceived. And that's great too.

The thing is, there's plenty of room for both, and both are valuable. There are enough authors of the first type to gradually change the genre, as it has always gradually changed. And there are enough of the second type to provide the raw, controversial stuff that makes grist to the mill of these kind of discussions and literature in general.

In summary: GROUP HUUUUGGGGG!!!!!!!

 

[lauren$77]

Ooh – I want to be part of the group hug, hope I’m not too late!

 

[HareBrain]

Looks like it's just us two, Lauren.

Have you brought any raspberry puddings?

 

[lauren$77]

This is the best I can whip up on such short notice! But there's plenty to share

 

[Boneman]

Such abuse is in no sense my just desserts.

In an effort to appear more intelligent, I shall give my opinion on this topic.

There are plenty of authors who, on encountering discussions like this, will take a look at their writing, think about what subconscious assumptions they've used without realising it, and have a good old cogitate about whether they should change anything. And that's great. (I am one.)

And there are many authors who ignore or never see such discussions and write in a more organic, free way, recking nothing of how they will be perceived. And that's great too.

The thing is, there's plenty of room for both, and both are valuable. There are enough authors of the first type to gradually change the genre, as it has always gradually changed. And there are enough of the second type to provide the raw, controversial stuff that makes grist to the mill of these kind of discussions and literature in general.

QUOTE]


This...

 

[Rolynd]

Now that's over, perhaps someone can get on with that grimdark story where the hero is a tray of raspberry puddings? I'd buy it.

I'll get something up on the crits board forthwith mate! Not sure where its going at the moment but pretty sure the bad guy gets his just desserts...

 

[vanye]

Even though this thread is fairly dated, I would like to add my opinion. As a piece of literary criticism I found the linked piece abysmal. Where's the theory? Where is the critic's self-awareness?

Literary criticism is not judging and moralizing, usurping the story and its meaning without reflection. On the other hand, as a piece of journalistic writing, the critique is OK, I think. It's interesting, however, how someone can open a book with so narrow a mindset that they only find ... themselves.

 

[Brian G Turner]

It is a interesting piece of criticism - but more for the way that it's critical of the story not adhering to early 21st century Western sensibilities. There are other criticisms relating to general storytelling which can be levelled at much of fiction anyway.

 

[Mark_Lawrence]

It's interesting, however, how someone can open a book with so narrow a mindset that they only find ... themselves.

Very well put. I'm tempted to steal that line and put it in a novel

I'm told that the same person later spent several tens of thousands of words on King of Thorns. I've not read the piece but I'm told it spends most of its time discussing Nietzsche, which is ... surprising ... and, as you say, may well reveal more about the interests of the person who wrote it rather than the book they wrote it about.

I wonder whether Prince of Fools will inspire such passions in the circles that critique to an agenda.

 

[End of Time]

Having read through that sprawling piece of work, I am shocked to find even the SFF-community being infected with the same thing that is killing videogame discussions.

I want to call it political correctness, but that would be doing political correctness a disservice... because none of it has anything to do with being correct, understanding, or in search of an open discussion on anything.

It all revolves around winning the oppresion olympics and being as hostile as humanly possible to whomever disagrees with you, throwing loaded terms around and using a set of phrases and buzzwords currently all the rage within certain circles.

There is no discussion, you cannot debate anything, because one side is very clearly using a moral argument against the other side. You simply cannot win the debate, because there is nothing to be won. The only thing you can do is save face and deny every accusation slung your way, not that it matters because once you've been categorized as something, it's impossible to escape whatever box you've been put into.

Do you like Game of Thrones? Did you know it's very problematic? The rampant sexism and misogyny throughout the novels is nothing compared to the rape and racism. You might not see it like that, because of your privilege. Are you sure you want to admit that you like something racist, sexist, and misogynistic? I mean, I'm not judging, but what does that say about you?

I once was offered a challenge, to pretend to be one of those people who takes offense at anything and everything, only to discover that it is so frighteningly easy to find the things I was already looking for. Emphasize the negative and let confirmation bias be your guide.

Here's a handy guide to being one of those people:
Everything is racist.

If the main character is white then that's just obvious racism, after all, why not write a main character of colour?
Is the main character non-white? Complain how the character is problematic because every trait is an indication of racism. Strong? Well that's just an obvious reference to black people not being intelligent and needing physical strength to compensate. Uses magic? Magical Negro, a black character in touch with an otherworldly spiritual side, how trite and cliche.
Positive traits that are opposites of the traits from the previous category? Basically call the character an oreo, race-traitor, or accuse the writer of just not being able to write characters of colour. Smart black character with a large vocabulary? Typical case of the writer just changing a white character to black, which is racist because it marginalizes and trivializes minorities.
Person of colour as a secondary character? Racist because the character isn't playing a substantial enough role, and is subservient to a white character plotwise or characterwise. Black best friend is a negative depiction of race relations.

And so on, and so on...

It is so incredibly easy to get offended by something, you can't ever refute any of the points made by the offended, because it's always moral outrage, always personal, and you can always be called a racist for not siding with them... after all something has been designated racist and you're trying to defend it against the allegation... what does that imply about you?

Not only that, when pressed or when there are certain rules in play, such as: "don't insult the creator". It's amazingly easy to give a blanket statement: "He might not have done it on purpose, after all he's only a product of the patriarchial/racist society in which he grew up, he simply isn't aware of his privilege."

Which boils down to the ever unsavoury: "Ich hatt es nicht gewust" or "just following orders"

 

[Null_Zone]

There really is some impressive privilege in some of theposts on this topic. In the west we have become distanced from the everydayviolence that still happens in large chunks of the world to the point it is nolonger an issue, something of mild historical interest and a perfect source ofentertainment. But sexual assault is still a feature of our lives so that isnot considered acceptable.



One day a bunch of heavily armed thugs turn up at your townor village, beat up a few people, kill any who resist and steal anything thattakes their fancy. Maybe they are acting under the auspice of the local(war)lord or can simply do this because there is no one to stop them. To us,this is standard fantasy. No so much to people in large chunks of Africa andportions of South and Central America. But a world where we don’t have to worryabout beyond a thought of “how terrible” is a particular atrocity makes the topten news stories. Add rape into mix of assault, robbery and murder and itbecomes something we can relate to so a serious topic. And even then thegeneral atrocities our brushed away.

 

[Ursa major]

Okay, but then what?

I doubt any of us here can change the agendas of any media, whether local, national or international. So setting that aside, what do you suggest we might do in the field we can affect, as writers or (by changing our buying habits) as readers?

 

[Null_Zone]

Personally, try to avoid the hypocrisy of violence beingportrayed good old family entertainment whilst sexual violence is the worstthing imaginable. Try not to ignore the full horrors of heavily armed groupstravelling through a territory and to avoid the prosaic shots of a burningfarmhouse with people dying cleanly of their wounds.
And perhaps most important of all, deal with the romanticismof warfare where the only blood shed is on the battlefield and no one reallygets before or after the battles
I believe Mark Lawrence has made a good attempt at this,showing the human cost of lawlessness for much of human history.

 

[Ursa major]

Thanks. Before this clarification, I wasn't sure where you were coming from.

I must say I prefer it when the drama arises from the consequences of earlier actions rather than being randomly evoked when a story looks like it may be flagging**.




** - Although, I suppose, there is something to be said for Raymond Chandler's view that:

When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

If you're a white man and you write a novel set in Africa - because you like the country and are genuinely interested in it - with three African characters... boy, you come in for some flack. Like - how dare you reach out, white man? I know this from personal experience.

 

[End of Time]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Sometimes you just can't win, because someone will always be offended by something.

 

[Mark_Lawrence]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Sometimes you just can't win, because someone will always be offended by something.

I believe some people define themselves by what offends them, and seeking out / declaring that offence becomes their raison d'etre. Reason ceases to become an effective tool when dealing with such individuals.

 

[Toby Frost]

As Tom Lehrer once said, on the issue of censorship, 'When correctly viewed, everything is lewd!'

And to quote George Orwell: 'Sometimes when I listen to these people talking, and still more when I read their books, I get the impression that, to them, the whole Socialist movement is no more than a kind of exciting heresy-hunt... to the tune of "Fee fi, fo, fum, I smell the blood of a right-wing deviationist!"'

 

[Idealect]

The reviewer opens the review by falsely labelling Jorg an Avatar and mostly harps on the idea that Jorg is supposed to be a spokesman for Mark Lawrence for the rest of the novel. It's more of a hatchet job than a review.

Near the end the reviewer takes the time to mock Jorg's perspective using long quotes from the book with commentary along the lines of "Ok, Jorg, suuure LOL, loser!" Well, ok if you really found his perspective so appealing I guess this is psychologically necessarry for you but maybe talk it through with your friends instead of pretending it's a review?

Or just don't read books written from the point of view of a charismatic killer if you're likely to be swept off your feet by their charisma which seems to be the reviewers real problem with the book.