[Madness]

More evidence of my lies.

WE CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH! Madness, I find it hilarious that a certain someone said we should all think about your motivations.... Anyhow, I guess you should have spoiled us all and deceived us only if TRUTH was available to do so. 2 years and I think you did well, my friend.

Thanks, MSJ. I tried real hard.

More evidence of my lies.

Can’t you just admit that he gave you a fake book?

Umm...? That wouldn't be true. Hell - why not just accuse me of not having read any manuscript at all?

Why lie to us though?

Why lie to us though?

Well, it seems to me that Kellus having POV would be a spoiler until today. I wouldn't would've wanted to be in his shoes for the past two years or so.

To be a tease? To whet fan fervour (though, I'm starting to think that people only read Bakker so that they may better loathe the books)?

When Bakker made the decision to tell the fans to harass me, we'd talked about teasing, not spoiling, and really, at the the time, I think Bakker wanted me to talk about the process, to assure people that he was writing - all the time, at that.

Regarding a Kellhus POV and other questions I did not answer totally honestly over the past two years, ask yourselves: if you'd been in my position, would you have betrayed Bakker's trust? Because for me that was a non-starter. And ultimately, in regards to teasing vs. spoiler, I want you all to live Bakker's words for yourselves.

I dislike the idea of the "Noble Lie." But I did what I could to honour my position as Bakker's friend, student, and fan - I wanted to excite the fandom, not spoil you.

But, you know, I'm just over here, at the leading edge of my time/space crux, doing the best I can.

[Aural]

Regarding a Kellhus POV and other questions I did not answer totally honestly over the past two years, ask yourselves: if you'd been in my position, would you have betrayed Bakker's trust? Because for me that was a non-starter. And ultimately, in regards to teasing vs. spoiler, I want you all to live Bakker's words for yourselves.

I dislike the idea of the "Noble Lie." But I did what I could to honour my position as Bakker's friend, student, and fan - I wanted to excite the fandom, not spoil you.

I mean you could have avoided the question altogether... like you did with so many others.

[themerchant]

That's cool I was asking for clarification as folk were starting to speculate. Best to get it "on wax". Save folk speculating, or rather joking about not reading it (I don't think that was a serious charge) and then that being misinterpreted.

Dunno about hating, I loved it, really looking forward to the rest. The folk hating probably wouldn't be if they hadn't spent the last 5 years moaning about the thing they're now moaning about. You could set your watch by it.

I'm not mortally offended about the "lie". or outraged and doubting all your motivations roflmao as some poor souls are. Was just wondering and felt best to ask. Then we have an answer.

[profgrape]

If it was a lie that sent us down a years-long theory rabbit hole, I'd be pissed. But what Madness said about the Kellhus POV is pretty benign in the grand scheme of things.

[Wilshire]

In case there are those of you that only follow one or two topics and haven't noticed yet:
http://fantasyhotlist.blogspot.ca/2016/05/extract-from-r-scott-bakkers-great_18.html
Pat got his excerpt too.

[Madness]

Wertzone's review is up. It's fervour whetting as themerchant mentioned in another thread.

[themerchant]

Yeah his line about he can't see how this stuff was just meant to be mid book "convergence" (borrowing from Erikson's terminology)has me the most excited yet. Starting to get pretty spoilerly in that thread though in westeros, so don't go into it just thining the excerpts are getting discussed we get more than that.

MG i knew was going to love it, but to see Wert come out so strong on it as well as Pat it doesn't half warm my cockles.

[Madness]

Yeah - I'm excited for Grimdark Mag's still forthcoming review.

I believe I've mentioned this previously to MG and The Man Himself but given the nature of what he's withheld til now, I expected universally good reviews.

EDIT: And yeah...

I guess what I qualify as spoilers and what two major reviewers and the Westerosi qualify as spoilers differs quite a bit.

[H]

EDIT: And yeah...

I guess what I qualify as spoilers and what two major reviewers and the Westerosi qualify as spoilers differs quite a bit.

That's why I've been pretty mum since reading it.  Everything I say could be a spoiler to someone, since what I say and what I don't say could be construed (or misconstrued) any which way.

[themerchant]

EDIT: And yeah...

I guess what I qualify as spoilers and what two major reviewers and the Westerosi qualify as spoilers differs quite a bit.

That's why I've been pretty mum since reading it.  Everything I say could be a spoiler to someone, since what I say and what I don't say could be construed (or misconstrued) any which way.

Yeah and it's the folk who made the big deal about spoilers over there now asking the questions that are spoilers, go figure lol.

Some of them have a mental relationship with the books and especially the author. It's really strange.

[H]

Yeah and it's the folk who made the big deal about spoilers over there now asking the questions that are spoilers, go figure lol.

Some of them have a mental relationship with the books and especially the author. It's really strange.

Indeed, answer one, piss off another.

[themerchant]

One more review from GRim Dark and that should set me up nicely for TGO, which will set me up immensely for TUC, i'm assuming.

[Mithfânion]

Hey, this is the only info we have to go off of though, right? Anyhow, I didn't mean to stir the pot, sorry for doing so. My critic wasn't one to put down RSB. I just agreed with Pat that I think it couldve, would've been an excellent novel in its entirety. I'm sure TGO is great on its own and I'm excited for it. It was more of a "what could've been" type of thing. Sorry, don't mean to be a Debbie Downer.

I'll make this conversation make sense in the future, MSJ, if Bakker hasn't clarified before then .

Hey Mike, I was wondering when reading this, I know you've read the TGO manuscript, but did that include TUC ( or the draft of what will be TUC)? Or will the release of TUC be new content for you as well?

[Madness]

Lol - well, I'm not sure how the draft I saw has been split - though I have a good sense from talking with the ARC readers - and while there are things I can't unknow regarding the future of the series and forthcoming volumes, there's actually quite a bit of new content in TGO that wasn't in that portion of the draft. It's best been described by a member other than myself as seeing the black and white to full colour versions of the same narrative. As an aspiring writer, it strikes me as impressive that there are so, so many line by line changes in the comparisons I've made with some of the ARC readers.

[Mithfânion]

Yes, he does mention he does a lot of rewriting and polishing of the narrative and it seems then that this may sometimes include even fairly substantial things, as well as more minor stuff. In that regard the fact that he is buffing up TUC and making changes to it will mean you will find new stuff in that as well.