Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Literature / Re: Yearly Reading Targets 2021
« Last post by The P on Today at 12:27:34 pm »
Beneath the Twisted Trees by Bradley P. Beaulieu ( :'()

I think I'm giving up on this series.  It's not bad.  I've mostly enjoyed it so far, but....  It just lacks some undefinable quality that would compel me to keep reading.  The writing itself is fine, the story is fine, the characters are fine.  Maybe I'm at the point in life where I really need something special to get me to read in the midst of constant interruptions and chaos (kids), I dunno.  But this series is not it for some reason.  It's like there are great ideas and possibilities lurking on the edges of where the story actually goes.  The whole time I'm waiting for that awesome something to break in and reshape the story, but it inevitably goes somewhere less exciting.  And it's not like nothing happens or the plot doesn't advance, we've come quite a way since the first book.  So a third of the way through book 4 I decided I was tired of it.  Quitting this far in leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but there it is.  I liked Beaulieu's earlier trilogy; he's not a bad writer.

I'm moving on.  Next is a KJP novella that I somehow missed a couple years ago.
2
Writing / Re: Three Roses, Bk. 1, by Roger Eichorn (sample chapters)
« Last post by reichorn on September 23, 2021, 06:08:45 pm »
Whoah, amazing to see an update Roger!

Glad to see you still lurking 'round these parts!  Yup, I'm STILL plugging away at the book... but now I'm doing it full-time, which means it's actually going to get done.  I'd love to know what you think of the new opening chapters.
3
Writing / Re: Three Roses, Bk. 1, by Roger Eichorn (sample chapters)
« Last post by sciborg2 on September 22, 2021, 11:09:32 pm »
Whoah, amazing to see an update Roger!
4
Writing / Re: Three Roses, Bk. 1, by Roger Eichorn (sample chapters)
« Last post by H on September 15, 2021, 04:17:25 pm »
Indeed, we have a Discord server and feel free to message me if you want an invite.
5
Writing / Re: Three Roses, Bk. 1, by Roger Eichorn (sample chapters)
« Last post by Wilshire on September 14, 2021, 02:51:54 pm »
Well I don't know if I'd qualify the SA community as going and/or strong, but we do persist! There's also a Discord now which several active member have migrated to (H can provide you the link if you're interested).
6
Writing / Re: Three Roses, Bk. 1, by Roger Eichorn (sample chapters)
« Last post by reichorn on September 14, 2021, 01:09:01 am »
Hey, Wilshire!  Glad to see the SA community going strong.

As for your question:  Yes, I've made significant changes to the book since July.  Indeed, I scrapped the opening chapters and rewrote them.  So while the prologue remains largely unchanged, the chapters are fresh off the presses.  I'm eager for reactions!
7
Writing / Re: Three Roses, Bk. 1, by Roger Eichorn (sample chapters)
« Last post by Wilshire on September 14, 2021, 12:08:54 am »
Thanks for the update. Someone not long ago was asking about this, looks like we have an update!

Also apparently H posted a link back in July - is this more updated than that (https://www.second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=765.msg49406#msg49406) ?
8
Writing / Three Roses, Bk. 1, by Roger Eichorn (sample chapters)
« Last post by reichorn on September 13, 2021, 09:32:22 pm »
Dear sorcerers, sloggers, and varied miscreants,

It's nice to be back!  I've not posted here for a long time.  Much has happened, to me and to the world.  I hope anyone reading this is well.  As longtime SA'ers may know, I've been working on a fantasy novel of my own for years, occasionally posting opening chapters on Bakker's blog.  Having finally fought my way free of graduate school, I've devoted this year to finishing the novel.  It will be done by the end of the year.

I've updated the sample chapters on Scott's blog.  You can find them here:

https://rsbakker.wordpress.com/stories/three-roses-bk-1-the-anarchy/

The Prologue had been up there in one form or another for years, but the two opening chapters are entirely new.  If you have the time and inclination, I would love to hear what you think.

Thanks!
9
Literature / Re: Yearly Reading Targets 2021
« Last post by The P on September 07, 2021, 01:08:11 pm »
A Door Behind a Door by Yelena Moskovich (18)

I picked this up on a whim.  It's not sff, but the guy who recommended it said it had some David Lynch vibes, which was enough for me.  I liked it quite a bit.  It has a strange style.  It's almost like very tiny chapters, sometimes only a sentence, with a bold-caps title that sometimes is part of the body itself.  The style makes it feel a little like stream-of-consciousness, but actually readable.  It reads very quick.  Under 200 pages, it could and probably should be read in one sitting.  I understand the Lynch comparison, in things get weird, but where Lynch goes for absurdia with the appearance of meaning, the weirdness here means something (I think, and I'm sure I don't get it all).

It is rare for me to read outside my choice genre(s), but I'm glad I did in this case.  Being short helped its pitch.  Definitely worth the time if you want to try something more capital-L Literature.
10
The Unholy Consult / Re: Rereading again, new insights again
« Last post by H on September 02, 2021, 03:52:57 pm »
Another thing that I found interesting, were the similarities and continuity between PON Chapter 17 and the whole chapter 14 of TGO, where the Survivor has his insights (the "Cuts and cuts and cuts" chapter): It's the chapter where you have both the whole showdown between the great names and the emperor, the unmasking of Skeaös, and Kellhus's intruction by the pragma. Ever since reading it, I've been of a mind that the TGO chapter was key for understanding some major elements of the book. But together with the PON chapter, I think it explains exactly what has been going through Kellhus's mind ever since he was hung from the tree in Caraskand (so in TWP). It's still heavy stuff; I'm still trying to decipher it and share what I get, but I'll get to that when I reach the passages during the reread of the series ^^.

Yeah, I had, for a pretty long time, figured that Korginghus was "right" in his framing of the Absolute.  That is, in thinking of the Absolute not as a generative, "positive" accumulation of Being, but rather as a notionally negative Abolsute of loss.  I still think he is "more right" than anyone else (perhaps minus Mimara, but that is another issue really) but he probably misses something in his sort of Kierkegaardian frame.

From Todd McGowan:
Quote
The substantial Other in the case of Kierkegaard is more subtle. In many ways, Kierkegaard, despite his rabid opposition to Hegel, formulates a very Hegelian philosophy that identifies dialectical moments in the structure of belief. But Kierkegaard refuses Hegel’s interpretation of Christ’s death. For Kierkegaard, God remains utterly distinct from the world of finitude. The humiliation of Christ in the finite world does not manifest God’s descent or desubstantialization. This is an impossibility that would eliminate the infinite distance that separates the subject from God, but it becomes everyday theology in the Christendom that Kierkegaard excoriates. This infinite distance is correlative to the subject’s freedom. Kierkegaard poses it in opposition to Hegelian absolute knowing as the emblem of freedom.

The subject’s freedom, for Kierkegaard, depends on an absence of knowledge about God, who thus acquires a substantial status. Despite God’s appearance in the finite form of Christ, Kierkegaard’s God is not subjectivized. Kierkegaard’s critique of Hegel focuses on how the latter fails to grasp his own inability, as a finite subject, to know God. We can have access to God, but this access is only indirect, which is why Christianity requires the leap of faith on the part of the subject. Unlike Hegel, Kierkegaard gives the subject a task—accomplish the leap and become an authentic Christian—but the cost of this task is prohibitive.

And further:
Quote
The fundamentals of the critique originate with Søren Kierkegaard, who mounts it soon after Hegel’s death. For Kierkegaard, the problem with the whole is double: it is always only an illusory totality, a conceptual whole that fails to capture the actuality of the particulars, but the very attempt to conceptualize the whole has the effect of violently altering the status of the particulars. For critics of Hegel like Kierkegaard, the conceptual inadequacy of the whole augments rather than mitigates its violence. The thought of all particulars in light of their relationship to the whole distorts their particularity by framing it in terms of an illusion—the totality—and does not do them justice. The whole can never become whole enough to include the variegations of multiplicity that constantly escape it.
(Bolding added by me.)

Now, granted, I do take a sort of Hegelian Absolute (i.e. that contradiction is inextricable and is constitutive) to generally be the case, so where Koringhus does make some fair points, I think ultimately he does fail in some regard.  But he, I think, does give us something to think about in regards to just what we should even consider the Absolute to even possibly be.  That, of course, is situated very much astride what Kellhus' (and the rest of the Dûnyain) consider as the "achievable" Absolute.  There is a lot more here though, how the Kellhus/Dûnyain program adheres very much to a Logocentric idea, where I think Koringhus well and abandons that sort of thought.

In any case, I have likely rambled on enough with tangential nonsense at this point.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10