The Second Apocalypse
Miscellaneous Chatter => Literature => Topic started by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 09:40:21 pm
-
Personally, I love both the Second Apocalypse setting and the First law setting of Abercrombie. For those of you familiar with Joe Abercrombie, I personally habe no problem envisioning kellhus as a younger Bayaz (even if the world of Bayaz has been (almost) closed to the demonic side).
Any thoughts from the rest of you concerning siminalities/dissimilarities between Bakker and Abercrombie and/or opinions concerning Joe (he's a living genius/total twat)?
-
I've enjoyed Abercrombie's books, but as far as I'm concerned, Bakker's playing in a-whole-nother league. Kellhus as a younger Bayaz? I don't see it at all -- which is not to say that I don't recognize the similiarities between the two characters. I do. But even thinking about them together, I get a sort of 'cognitive dissonance' effect, since doing so involves overlapping a fully realized character from a three-dimensional fantasy world with a half-realized character from a two-dimensional fantasy world. Considering them together throws a light on how much weaker I think Abercombrie's books are in comparison to Bakker's.
I hasten to add that I don't mean to knock Abercombrie so much as to point up how good I think Bakker is. Again, I've enjoyed Abercrombie's books -- those of them I've read, anyway. I find them very enjoyable, and there are a great many positive things I could say about them. But at the end of the day, when I compare him to the 'greats' with my stern 'critic' hat on, I find that his world-building is slipshod and historically tone-deaf, his characterizations are often good but never attain to full-bloodedness (heh), and his narratives lack the depth needed to support their breadth (i.e., they have, to my mind, loads of unfulfilled narrative ambition).
-
+1 Bakker's in a-whole-nother league.
At first, Abercrombie felt like... the first author to write a book since the advent of movies. But since the First Law trilogy - which I liked - I have not finished Best Served Cold or The Heroes (bought both, read about 200 pgs each) and haven't bought Red Country as it is only in hardcover, where I'm at.
It actually puzzles me... I loved Before They Are Hanged.
-
For me, Bakker is the out-there mystical philospher-visionary of modern fantasy, mining the classic tropes of the genre and mixing in modern interpretations of the mythic interior.
JA is the super-hip beat poet of the genre, fusing the current trends with insight, panache and the influence of other media (esp. movies as Madness said above)
Kellhus = Bayaz? Nah...
Bayaz is something of a metaphor for corporate dominance.
Kellhus is more a Neitschean force of modernity (at least until he succumbs to revelation).
I disliked the trilogy (barring Logen), but loved the stand alones. ^.^
-
To me the similarities between Bayaz and Kellhus is that both are extraordinarily powerful characters that make the world their playing field, basically making tools out of people. For me, I take great pleasure in both of these writers exploring upon the consequences of the surrounding world of having such people around... There are of course a lot of differences between the two. Abercrombie for example appears to me to be consciously sparse with details concerning the larger setting of the world, in order to focus on the characters and their personal deleopment (or lack of development), while Bakker fields an artillery of details concerning the myriad of players that appear and the different parts of the setting. Reading a good Joe Abercrombie book is thus, for me, a lot like a watching a spectacular theater piece (the greek classics meet 'Black Adder'), while reading a Bakker book is like reliving the marvellous experience of lying under a table at the grandparents at an early age exploring mapbooks and encyklopedia's (feeling the immensity of a world opening up to you)... I like the description of Bakker as the 'philosopher' and Abercrombie as the 'poet' and to me they are equally amazing, but in totally different ways :-)
-
I don't see much similarities in both the characters and the writing style. I love Abercrombie for his cruel fighting scenes and his great characters. I read his novels like I would have played a cool, fast and action-paced computer game ten years ago.
I devoured all of Abercrombies books in a few days and it felt like ravenously eating a meal at burger king. It was very satisfying, but two hours later I feel hungry again.
With Bakker it is different: Reading Bakker is like a gigantic candlelight dinner in a dark mansion, dining with Cthulhu...
It is exuberant with strange food and that big guy with the tentacles on the other end of the table has some really interesting ideas 8-)
-
With Bakker it is different: Reading Bakker is like a gigantic candlelight dinner in a dark mansion, dining with Cthulhu...
It is exuberant with strange food and that big guy with the tentacles on the other end of the table has some really interesting ideas 8-)
I posted this on Bakker's facebook page. I couldn't resist. Some part of me will never be satisfied by comedy again. Hope you don't mind, Davias.
-
I devoured all of Abercrombies books in a few days and it felt like ravenously eating a meal at burger king. It was very satisfying, but two hours later I feel hungry again.
With Bakker it is different: Reading Bakker is like a gigantic candlelight dinner in a dark mansion, dining with Cthulhu...
It is exuberant with strange food and that big guy with the tentacles on the other end of the table has some really interesting ideas 8-)
This is brilliant. Love it.
-
Abercrombie is awesome, but so different from Bakker--love them both, Bakker more. It would be an impoverished genre if we couldn't have both. Abercrombie is like Lord of the Rings + Pulp Fiction, but Bakker's work has no analogue.
-
I agree completely. Abercrombie works well within the confines of the Fantasy genre, enriching it for his effort, while Bakker seems to be trying to push the boundaries, to see how far it can go.
-
Not sure if we are not a bit fanboy-ish here. I mean i agree, Bakker is better than Abercrombie (for my taste). But i am not sure Bakker is so much more literary or pushing boundaries or what-have-you than other top notch fantasy authors. It always depends on what you read into it *...or what you have already read. For some Bakker might be THE thing because they never saw those ideas in other works...but for others it's like "been there, done that"...if you know what i mean.
Case in point - i once stumbled upon a forum where there was some discussion about PoN and there were a lot of posters who thought that the philosophic background and level of PoN was extremely superficial and nothing new at all (those posts were triggered because some posters were gushing how deep and new PoN was ;D ).
* what i mean is this: some deep meanings in books are wholly on you as the reader...other readers do not see it or, often times, i am sure that not even the author thought about it that way (i had a very interesting discussion about that topic with a swiss author once who visited our school...it was very enlightening. All the convoluted stuff some of the students read into the novel just were not there or at least not intended by the author).
Anyway, i guess what i am saying is - we here are heavily biased when it comes to "objectively" (it is in "", guys ;D ) weighing quality between Bakker and Fantasy Author X.
-
Lol guilty as charged. I never claimed to be reasonable.
I personally have never seen anything like TSA, in scope or content. There are many measures of an author's worth as a writer. One could argue that the point of writing a book is to have people read it, and therefore more popular = better author, and so Bakker is somewhere down at the bottom...
In this instance, I like both authors a lot, but for vastly different reasons. A book's worth is largely in the eye of the reader. An Author vs. Bakker topic, on a Bakker forum, will have an obvious conclusion. But hey, there isn't an objective answer anyway, so I don't feel bad :P.
-
True enough, Wilshire ;) I just felt like a bit perspective was needed and i had an urge to be "the voice of reason" .... ;) :P ;D
-
Discent! Stone the non-believer.
-
I have not read Abercrombie yet. Am I missing something great?
-
There is at least one other topic about Abercrombie lying around with more thoughts.
For me, I think his main series The First Law (Consisting of The Blade Itself, Before they are Hanged, and The Last Argument of Kings), is a great read. His characters are great: they are all dynamic, they have a lot of depth, and they all operate with some kind of grey morality (no easy right/wrong). There is a lot to like, and I'd say your missing something if you don't at least read the first book. BTW if you like to listen to audiobooks, this series is probably the best I've ever heard.
-
I might check him out later on. I am all sci fi ATM :)
Have never checked out audiobooks actually, to fond of reading.
-
@ Wilshire - Thanks for the tip about the Abercrombie audiobooks. I love audiobooks, but the reader has to be good or its just intolerable.
@ Royce - You gotta check Abercrombie out! I am rereading the First Law trilogy (that's what I recommend) and it's plenty of fun the second time around.
-
Steven Pacey is absolutely incredible (the guy who reads The First Law). If you can find a book you are interested in that he reads, you simply must get it.
The guy has great voices for every single character, including the women, and he carries through similar accents for people who originate from similar geographical locations. It really is superb.
-
Yea, I loved The First Law trilogy. And, what made me seek this thread (or start a new one, but I looked harder this time Wilshire ;) ), is what Francis Buck wrote in the Who's the Manipulator thread. Its about accessibility. Joe has already surpassed Bakker in sales and is a much more popular author. I love the books I flew through the trilogy. Joe's writing is addictive, when I pick it up I can't put it down. Last night, I purchased Half a King on kindle and blew through half of it in one sitting, its great. Its easy reading and very interesting and keeps you wanting more. Yet, I couldn't go and analyze and do what I do with Bakker. Francis Buck made a great point and Abercrombie is immediately who I thought of.
-
I loved First Law, but his stand-alones left me very disappointed. He obviously likes to whole character inversion thing, but a single book doesnt seem like enough time to build up a perception of a character and then flip it over on its head. He does this with nearly every character in every book, and it just didnt work when he tried to do that in anything less than 3 books.
I always recommend First Law to people look to read some good fantasy. Its a series that most every can enjoy, and so far no one has ever come back to me saying they couldnt finish it or didnt like it. I do not always recommend Bakker, and I think only twice the people I recommend it to come back and actually bothered finishing it and liked it.
-
I always recommend First Law to people look to read some good fantasy. Its a series that most every can enjoy, and so far no one has ever come back to me saying they couldnt finish it or didnt like it. I do not always recommend Bakker, and I think only twice the people I recommend it to come back and actually bothered finishing it and liked it.
No sure if you recommended it to me, but I didn't like it.
I find it rather difficult to compare RSB to Abercrombie with an impartial mind. One author I enjoy reading and on I don't. Just my $0.02...
-
Ah, you are one of the defectors, I forgot. I'm sure there are plenty out there that detest him, but I'm just using anecdotal evidence to suggest that he's generally fairly popular, bolstering the idea that he is more accessible.
Accessibility does not necessarily beget great writing.
-
I loved First Law, but his stand-alones left me very disappointed. He obviously likes to whole character inversion thing, but a single book doesnt seem like enough time to build up a perception of a character and then flip it over on its head
Only stand alone of his I've managed to read so far is The Heroes. I read it out of sequence without knowing, but from the small bit that I took in, it did follow that character model you described, but I think it worked out slightly better than described only because the novel builds on exposition one should have collected from the First Law trilogy. I have Best Served Cold on my shelf, even though I know it should have been read before The Heroes.
As cliche as Logen Ninefingers ended up being, I want the Bloody Nine. I want broken bones and blood in the snow and single combat. I found I really enjoyed Abercrombie's small combat descriptions.
The other two POV characters from the series didn't really catch me the same way. That said, I liked Black Dow all throughout his page time
-
I liked Best Served Cold well enough, but couldnt finish Red Country, it was just too formulaic.
That said, if you want more Bloody Nine... well I can't even tell you what book you should read or it will spoil it, though its not a terribly big reveal. If you'd like to know the title, read below. Otherwise, read all the stand-alone books, he's in there somewhere ;).
Anyway, if I read Red Country before Best Served Cold, I would have probably finished the former and not the latter, as above, so I dont think there was anything missing from Red Country... I just didn't want to keep reading the same thing. Other things on the shelf to read.