[locke]

Personally? 

When I first read it, I thought the prologue was fucking amazing.  The first Achamian chapter was amazing.  Then the second Achamian chapter and I thought, WTF, shouldn't this be a Kellhus chapter or a new character.  Then the third achamian chapter and halfway through I began flipping through the book looking for the name kellhus.  I was shocked that 300 + pages later was the first reappearance of that amazing prolouge character.  I skipped those 300 pages and read through the Kellhus/Cnaiur/Serwe section until I saw the name Achamian again.  Then I went back to Chapter 3 to start reading the boring bits.

[Wilshire]

Personally? 

When I first read it, I thought the prologue was fucking amazing.  The first Achamian chapter was amazing. 

Actually now that you say that, I experienced much the same. I went back and read the prologue several times to keep me motivated through the end.

Aside, how is it that people are so inconvenienced by (a reading experience) TDTCB? I don't really understand. It remains consistently top three, whenever I rate the series, no matter what my mood.
...
I have nothing to apologize for for being a fan. Neither does anyone else. Nor should our recommendations constantly be disclaimers about difficulty and graphic gratuity. I refuse to use the FAQ as propaganda that makes a case for reading the books rather than being a helpful guide.

We must just not be as smart and literary inclined as you. Unfortunately, the general concurrences is that its a difficult start. From personal experience and from 2nd hand accounts, I think this is the first time I've ever heard someone that honestly didn't have any troubles or qualms from the start.

If you're honestly interested in disseminating the work, you might want to not take such comments quite so personally.

[Triskele]

Personally? 

When I first read it, I thought the prologue was fucking amazing.  The first Achamian chapter was amazing.  Then the second Achamian chapter and I thought, WTF, shouldn't this be a Kellhus chapter or a new character.  Then the third achamian chapter and halfway through I began flipping through the book looking for the name kellhus.  I was shocked that 300 + pages later was the first reappearance of that amazing prolouge character.  I skipped those 300 pages and read through the Kellhus/Cnaiur/Serwe section until I saw the name Achamian again.  Then I went back to Chapter 3 to start reading the boring bits.

This was very similar to my experience.  I was amazed at the prologue from the beginning and still think it's an amazing bit of writing. 

But Achamian's and Esmenet's early chapters are challenging.  They might suffer a tad simply for being what comes early in a difficult series (i.e., the reader is still doing a bit of "WTF?" to the names and history and general strangeness).  The story really picks up w/ Cnaiur and the re-introduction of Kellhus.

That being said, the difficult first part of the book does improve upon a reread when the reader is more familiar with the names, the world, and the complex plot that is already starting to move in Achamian's early chapters even if it wasn't so clear upon the first reading.

[Francis Buck]

Personally? 

When I first read it, I thought the prologue was fucking amazing.  The first Achamian chapter was amazing.  Then the second Achamian chapter and I thought, WTF, shouldn't this be a Kellhus chapter or a new character.  Then the third achamian chapter and halfway through I began flipping through the book looking for the name kellhus.  I was shocked that 300 + pages later was the first reappearance of that amazing prolouge character.  I skipped those 300 pages and read through the Kellhus/Cnaiur/Serwe section until I saw the name Achamian again.  Then I went back to Chapter 3 to start reading the boring bits.

Yup, pretty much the exact same thing here, except I only read a little bit of the later Kellhus parts before saying fuck it and going back to go straight through. It definitely required some effort though. I didn't really start liking Achamian chapters in general until TAE to be honest, and even then he's not my favorite. I still miss having a POV like Cnaiur, Conphas, or Kellhus in TAE, all three of which were by far the most interesting, probably because they were the most abnormal.

[Madness]

Apparently, I don't read books like everyone else here.

Quelle surprise.

We must just not be as smart and literary inclined as you.

This just isn't so and it does us both a disservice, I think.

Unfortunately, the general concurrences is that its a difficult start. From personal experience and from 2nd hand accounts, I think this is the first time I've ever heard someone that honestly didn't have any troubles or qualms from the start.

If you're honestly interested in disseminating the work, you might want to not take such comments quite so personally.

My rants are fueled by an abiding distaste for this prevalent attitude found in Bakker fans, especially as expressed on Westeros (which still likely gets more posts and proportionately more views than this entire forum does).

If it's perceived that I'm doing damage to the cause, let me know please (unless this is my warning, Wilshire ). I'll work to limit/sharpen my position so that it doesn't come off so... however it does.

I'm still honestly surprised by the difference in reading habits, though.

[Wilshire]

This just isn't so and it does us both a disservice, I think.

I think the only disservice is to you. Give yourself some credit. Aren't you in grad school? 

[Borque]

Westeros (which still likely gets more posts and proportionately more views than this entire forum does).

Not necessarily true, I think. Bakker activity there is in one thread. Here, it's spread out and nicely spread out over all the topics. There is a lot more repetition of themes and questions there.

[Madness]

Westeros (which still likely gets more posts and proportionately more views than this entire forum does).

Not necessarily true, I think. Bakker activity there is in one thread. Here, it's spread out and nicely spread out over all the topics. There is a lot more repetition of themes and questions there.

Agreed, I'm being dramatic. I did write proportionately . Half the posters there are the regulars here, anyways.

It really is disappointing, though, that (getting on a year and a half later) for many, many internet users that thread is still the only "Bakker forum" going.

This just isn't so and it does us both a disservice, I think.

I think the only disservice is to you. Give yourself some credit. Aren't you in grad school? 

Lol - probably getting on there, I still have some hurdles to go. I've been living quite a life.

This is the point though. You can't just go forming mystics about people, which imply intellectual divisions like this where there are none . Especially, as we basically started reading PON at the same age (if separated by a few years).

My head is going to explode for killing the mystery but a little more disclosure for the sake of the thread:

I started reading PON at 17. I've grown with these books more than most (obviously, as I'm still basically growing up) and it took me a long fucking time before I actually started to understand even so much as all the words at that age (thankfully I'd developed a habit of reading with dictionaries).

Hell, when I think back on how much my life has changed since WLW even, it actually boggles me.

So while our experiences necessitate changing our readings and developing ongoing comprehension, I find it hard to believe that someone in their mid-teens (and by extension, anyone) approaching this series, on their own, or worse by our recommendations, need the disclaimers to be convinced...

What happened to curiosity or self-exploration?

[Borque]

I have reflected on your comments. I think the suggested age span should be removed.

I still think that som kind of parental guidance is a good idea, though.

[Wilshire]

What questions is the PreFAQ supposed to answer? By which, I mean who is it catering towards? People have haven't started, people who just started, people who are finished with the series and are seeking answers, etc.

[Madness]

Lol - the PreFAQ is supposed to determine what type of questions the FAQ consists of. The FAQ is supposed to answer...

People have haven't started, people who just started, people who are finished with the series and are seeking answers, etc.

All of the above, if possible (remember, this cursory investigation has only manifested twice, first with Willem and now with Borque).

I have reflected on your comments. I think the suggested age span should be removed.

I still think that som kind of parental guidance is a good idea, though.

Borque, my commentary was in response to Wilshire calling me too smart for the lot of you - it just isn't true and so I replied to showcase that when I started this series I had probably a lot less intelligence or maturity than others did (and, certainly, than I do now).

I dislike when people underestimate themselves.

However, you raise an interesting distinction - I don't think we should actually make an age suggestion at all. What would be the point? We're not going to stop anyone from reading the series, if they so choose to do so, regardless of age, maturity, or our assessment of what is "appropriate" for who.

I assume (perhaps, erroneously) that those who find this place are, at least, acquainted with an adult worldview.

It's like video games (for which age restrictions are a joke). Call of Duty has ratings of Teen (13 and up) or Mature (17 and up) yet my older sister has doesn't even give a thought to letting my seven year old nephew play whatever he wants.

It's absolutely more difficult with books because of the personal and subjective reading experience. At least with video games, my parents could see what I was playing growing up and had the option to pull the plug on me. What kind of oversight is possible with books? What purpose would it serve to rate and enforce reading experiences in this fashion?

There's actually a Westeros thread on this buried in Gen. Chat or Literature. I may find it and link it as I'm interested in the opinions of others.

[Wilshire]

I don't think any specific mention of age would be prudent, but mentioning that its adult scifi/fantasy rather than "teen paranormal romance" (which is a genre now i guess) might be a nice heads up lol.

We could look to the posts with the most responses to get an idea of what a "FAQ" should contain.
Also, maybe it should be layered revelations

Frequently Asked question #one:
Answer (up though TTT)

(click to show/hide)

answer

Answer (up through TUC)

(click to show/hide)

etc.

Though that would be difficult for someone who's read all the things already.
Which, if I remember correctly, was a point of contention earlier (or at least in the Almanac discussion). It would be difficult to parse when/where the darkness was light up .
Also, though less difficult, it would be important to say if its hard textual "truth", or general community assessment/conclusion, and/or dissenting opinions.

[Madness]

I don't think any specific mention of age would be prudent, but mentioning that its adult scifi/fantasy rather than "teen paranormal romance" (which is a genre now i guess) might be a nice heads up lol.

Lol.

We could look to the posts with the most responses to get an idea of what a "FAQ" should contain.
Also, maybe it should be layered revelations

Frequently Asked question #one:
Answer (up though TTT)

(click to show/hide)

answer

Answer (up through TUC)

(click to show/hide)

etc.

Though that would be difficult for someone who's read all the things already.
Which, if I remember correctly, was a point of contention earlier (or at least in the Almanac discussion). It would be difficult to parse when/where the darkness was light up .
Also, though less difficult, it would be important to say if its hard textual "truth", or general community assessment/conclusion, and/or dissenting opinions.

All truth but I think we could spoiler revelations within one FAQ thread... how hard it is really to click on a spoiler tag?

[Wilshire]

Easy to spoiler tag hard facts, harder to tag revelations based on community conclusion rent from years of pouring over the text. Conclusions that may or may not be able to be discerned without the full knowledge of all the books.

But yes, reasonable tags of spoilers seems, well, reasonable.

[Madness]

Easy to spoiler tag hard facts, harder to tag revelations based on community conclusion rent from years of pouring over the text. Conclusions that may or may not be able to be discerned without the full knowledge of all the books.

But yes, reasonable tags of spoilers seems, well, reasonable.

Lol +1 for reasonable. Otherwise, at least you keep my feet on the ground when my ideals start me floating .