I haven't started that particular series yet, so forgive my ignorance, but is it finished... or does it have some semblance of an end? You said after book 5 it starts converging, so does that mean it takes another 5 to close everything up or rather that some stories are simply never finished?

I started re-read #3 of TSA, currently about 1/3 of the way through TDTCB, but after I finish the first book I might segue into something else (maybe this?).

You start to get a sense of what the main conflict is going to be during book three (combined with "spoilers" compliments of the titles of the later books). Without giving anything away, I will say that the main series absolutely does resolve the main story. Due to the scope, there are many secondary conflicts that arise and get resolved, as well; some connect to the main conflict, some are more for character development.

There are, of course, other interesting plot lines that arise that don't get resolved, but they aren't integral to the main story. Off the top of my head, one such plot line pops up in the third book, and a potential deus ex machina for the main conflict gets pulled into that situation never to be heard from again (until Ian C. Esselmont's next book, that is).

The magic system actually gets fleshed out really well, but leaves enough mystery behind to prevent disillusionment. Some might disagree, however.

Anyway, in addition to the main series, you have the Ian C. Esselmont novels which fill in stories alluded to in the main series. For example, his first novel deals with the transition from Emperor Kellanved to Empress Laseen. His sixth novel will deal with a plot introduced in the third book, like I said above.

Erikson is about to release the second book of a trilogy dealing with the elder races, the elder gods, and the origins of the houses of magic. His next trilogy will deal with a character who made it to the end of the main series. This character has a goal in mind that didn't get fully developed in the main series (again, it was auxiliary to the main conflict in retrospect), so it looks like that will get resolved after all.

Like you said, an immense world has been created, with endless potential for storytelling. The Malazan Book of the Fallen is only one of these stories, and the end of that book does indeed conclude the story about the title Fallen.

I am literally stuck on the slog. I am in the middle of Deadhouse Gates, and I need a break. This is worldbuilding running amok. Might pick it up again later on. Although it is definitely worth reading, I feel something is missing, but I don`t know exactly what.

About to finish "The brotherhood of the screaming abyss" by Dennis Mckenna. Also started on "The curse of Chalion" by Lois Mcmaster Bujold.

It was kind of jarring when I read Deadhouse Gates and realized that there were only new plot-lines being introduced and that none of the lines started in Gardens of the Moon were even going to be mentioned. All I can say is get used to that

Quote from: Kellais on January 07, 2014, 06:57:25 pm

So, delavagus, i see you are a member here as well, so hopefully you'll see this in time...is there a worldmap? I am a total map-nut and i would love to see a map for this world.

Ask and ye shall receive: http://rsbakker.wordpress.com/stories/the-house-of-yesteryear-three-roses-book-one-2/three-roses-maps/

Fellow map-nut here. Awesome and thank you!!

we launched a biotech start up in june of this year

Congrats and welcome!

The issue, as I've always seen it, is that our notions of waves and particles are simply the best approximations to what things like photons and electrons are actually like.  For instance when we talk about an electron orbit, we're actually talking about the shape of the probability distribution of that electron - which is not to say that the electron is somewhere in the cloud, but that the cloud is the electron, until it is interacted with by something else.  I mean, we just don't have anything on the macroscopic scale that behaves anything like things on the quantum scale.  Shit's crazy.

The flatland analogy fits with string theory, where you could imagine an ant crawling on the surface of a hose, thinking it's a flat two dimensional surface, but looked at from a different enough scale that hose looks more like a one dimensional object (strings in the theory would be coiled around the hose in varying arrangements which define different particles, and from a distance we see only the particle, not the arrangement).

Of course, I would suggest you take anything from the What The Bleep/Law of Attraction people with a grain of salt - they always slip something subversive in their otherwise accurate descriptions of models.

Great post, especially with regard to the problematic nature of trying to explain quantum effects with more "traditional" models, and the deception peddled by What The Bleep Do We Know. There are behaviors on the macro-scale that can only be explained with quantum mechanics, though (e.g., the stimulated emission from lasers, or the color of the Lycurgus Cup), so it's not only nano-scale smoke and mirrors. The point remains that anyone wanting to understand quantum concepts would do well to discard all expectations based on "everyday" explanations.

lol, good one Mayna!


Also

"No T-shirts on the slog!"

Well done, and good ideas all around!

Was that all totally crazy?

Yes; however, that is prudent with these discussions. I personally enjoy any theory that results in the No-God being "good" in the most twisted, malformed standard of "good".

Welcome!

I think that after I recover I'm going to read all of the supplementary material and then reread the main series again (an action unprecedented for me), yeah