(no subject)
Apr. 1st, 2013 07:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1. Finished The Captive Prince - and damn it, I want Volume 3 now. Stupid thing ended just when it got good. My main quibble with it - is that writer is far too interested in building up the romance and sex scenes, and less interested in the intriguing plot, which feels a bit cobbled together in places. But it did motivate me to go back to GRR Martin's Dance of Dragons - Martin is sort of the opposite extreme of SU Paget. Paget barely develops her supporting characters, who feel like snapshots, while George RR Martin over-develops his supporting characters - actually he not only develops them, he gives them a whole chapter to us their point of view. Say what you will about Martin, at the end of his books, no character regardless of how small or minor their role is left untouched - you even know what the character smells like by the time you're done. Undeveloped characters is not a crime that Martin is guilty of.
Also as much as I hate to say this ladies? But male writers appear to be a whole lot better at writing fight scenes and battle strategies. Maybe because they are just more interested in it? All that testorone has to go somewhere I guess - if you can't go out and fight someone, might as well write about it. Plotting a battle is a bit like plotting a football game - similar goals - get the ball in the other guy's territory without getting slaughtered.
While female writers are better at writing sex scenes - mainly because this is more like a game of cards or battle of wits...more focus on the foreplay, then on well on the actual goal. For women the longer it's drawn out, the more fun and better the climatic moment. It's all about the slow-build. The goal, eh...it's all about the means fellas. Two different ways of thinking at any rate. (Yes, I've clearly been jumping between romance fiction and violent guy books. You'd think it would be more jarring. Why I like both, is beyond me.)
2. Speaking of George RR Martin - had an interesting conversation with co-worker.
Co-worker: George RR Martin's books need to come with cliff-notes. You remember cliff-notes, right?
Me: Yep (although I rarely used them, being of the somewhat insane view that it was more fun to read the actual book and make up my own mind than read someone else's analysis of it instead. That said, I'd make an exception with Moby Dick and anything written by Henry James, who I was able to avoid - because I went to a Western Liberal Arts School as opposed to an NorthEastern Ivy League one...weird I know, but there it is. The US is oddly regional in its cultural tastes.)
Co-Worker: would certainly help with figuring out who everyone is. I'm reading Feast of Crows.
Me: Well there is a list of names at the back of each book - an appendix that has a list of all the characters in each house and their family trees and who's who, but you have to be careful about reading it. That's how I got spoilt on who died in the third book, Storm of Swords, which was frankly rather annoying.
Co-worker: I don't think I've read that book.
Me: You are attempting to read Feast of Crows without reading Storm of Swords?
Co-worker: is Feast the 3rd book?
Me: No, Storm is.
Co-worker: Oh I skipped that one. (So, basically co-worker skipped the best book in the series and started on the worst book in the series. Seriously if you wanted to skip one - it would be Feast of Crows. And even then...Granted co-worker has a low tolerance for gore, violence, and violent character deaths...so it may have been a good idea. Storm is the most of violent of the books, to my knowledge. And yes that's a warning to anyone who is about to watch the third season on HBO.)
Me: It's not going to make any sense. You should at least watch the tv series season 3 - it just started.
Co-worker: Oh I think I can figure it out.
Me: Okaay.
This reminds me of another work discussion regarding GRR Martin's books.
Co-worker: Catelyn is not a zombie, she's just mute. (this is co-worker 2 who has read all the books)
Me: No, she's a zombie.
Co-worker: It never says that.
Me: She died. Berdric brought her back to life with the unnatural fire, half her skull is still visible and she is speaking from her throat because her tongue is gone.
Co-worker: I thought she was just mute. I didn't she was a zombie.
Me: Well, zombies are a bit different in these books - undead might be a better word.
Co-worker 2 to Co-worker 3: Did you think Catelyn was a zombie?
CW3: No, didn't pick up on that.
Me: You do realize there are people online who have read these books five times and think she is a zombie, right?
Both: Really? Why would anyone do that?
See this is why I don't discuss pop culture at work.
There are spoilers in the comments for Game of Thrones Book 3, S3, and for Captive Prince, so may want to avoid reading them if you want to stay unspoiled.
Also as much as I hate to say this ladies? But male writers appear to be a whole lot better at writing fight scenes and battle strategies. Maybe because they are just more interested in it? All that testorone has to go somewhere I guess - if you can't go out and fight someone, might as well write about it. Plotting a battle is a bit like plotting a football game - similar goals - get the ball in the other guy's territory without getting slaughtered.
While female writers are better at writing sex scenes - mainly because this is more like a game of cards or battle of wits...more focus on the foreplay, then on well on the actual goal. For women the longer it's drawn out, the more fun and better the climatic moment. It's all about the slow-build. The goal, eh...it's all about the means fellas. Two different ways of thinking at any rate. (Yes, I've clearly been jumping between romance fiction and violent guy books. You'd think it would be more jarring. Why I like both, is beyond me.)
2. Speaking of George RR Martin - had an interesting conversation with co-worker.
Co-worker: George RR Martin's books need to come with cliff-notes. You remember cliff-notes, right?
Me: Yep (although I rarely used them, being of the somewhat insane view that it was more fun to read the actual book and make up my own mind than read someone else's analysis of it instead. That said, I'd make an exception with Moby Dick and anything written by Henry James, who I was able to avoid - because I went to a Western Liberal Arts School as opposed to an NorthEastern Ivy League one...weird I know, but there it is. The US is oddly regional in its cultural tastes.)
Co-Worker: would certainly help with figuring out who everyone is. I'm reading Feast of Crows.
Me: Well there is a list of names at the back of each book - an appendix that has a list of all the characters in each house and their family trees and who's who, but you have to be careful about reading it. That's how I got spoilt on who died in the third book, Storm of Swords, which was frankly rather annoying.
Co-worker: I don't think I've read that book.
Me: You are attempting to read Feast of Crows without reading Storm of Swords?
Co-worker: is Feast the 3rd book?
Me: No, Storm is.
Co-worker: Oh I skipped that one. (So, basically co-worker skipped the best book in the series and started on the worst book in the series. Seriously if you wanted to skip one - it would be Feast of Crows. And even then...Granted co-worker has a low tolerance for gore, violence, and violent character deaths...so it may have been a good idea. Storm is the most of violent of the books, to my knowledge. And yes that's a warning to anyone who is about to watch the third season on HBO.)
Me: It's not going to make any sense. You should at least watch the tv series season 3 - it just started.
Co-worker: Oh I think I can figure it out.
Me: Okaay.
This reminds me of another work discussion regarding GRR Martin's books.
Co-worker: Catelyn is not a zombie, she's just mute. (this is co-worker 2 who has read all the books)
Me: No, she's a zombie.
Co-worker: It never says that.
Me: She died. Berdric brought her back to life with the unnatural fire, half her skull is still visible and she is speaking from her throat because her tongue is gone.
Co-worker: I thought she was just mute. I didn't she was a zombie.
Me: Well, zombies are a bit different in these books - undead might be a better word.
Co-worker 2 to Co-worker 3: Did you think Catelyn was a zombie?
CW3: No, didn't pick up on that.
Me: You do realize there are people online who have read these books five times and think she is a zombie, right?
Both: Really? Why would anyone do that?
See this is why I don't discuss pop culture at work.
There are spoilers in the comments for Game of Thrones Book 3, S3, and for Captive Prince, so may want to avoid reading them if you want to stay unspoiled.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-04-01 11:30 pm (UTC)I wonder about people who didn't pick up on her being killed, and her body dumped in the river for a while before she was reanimated.... did they just thing the author hadn't really meant it like that? LOL
Oh well. It will make the TV show more exciting for them if/when they watch that!
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 01:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 10:16 pm (UTC)I did read the Catelynn bit twice...I know that. Because I couldn't figure out what happened the first time around.
(I'm really bogged down in the Quentin chapter at the moment in Dance, I keep jumping to other books. Mainly because I don't care about Quentin. Martin and his need to bring in new points of view at random.)
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 02:31 am (UTC)I was like - eh, no, she was dead. For a while. Like two days. Stunk.
Then they re-animated her. Which makes her "undead".
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 02:48 am (UTC)It is going to be really cool when she 'comes back' on the show... all 1/2 decayed but able to walk and talk... so creepy... I can't wait (I find her to be kind of tedious and annoying in her living self righteousness and holier than thou state).
Am I ghoulish?
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 10:08 pm (UTC)I don't know...I think it's just going to be gross. Her skin is hanging off one side of her face, she has no tongue and her lips are sewn. Eww. I'm really hoping the tv series doesn't feel the need to go quite as far as the books. They didn't with Tyrion (who just has a nasty scar, and unlike the books, did not lose his nose). So perhaps...
Not a fan of gore. I struggle with the Walking Dead. Heck, I struggled with Buffy and Angel. Spend half the time, hiding my eyes. When I tell people I don't really like horror, I'm not kidding. Watched 95% of Cabin in the Woods, with my hands over my eyes. There's a reason I don't like hospitals, biology and could not become a veternarian - I ran into brick wall with dissection. Eww.
ETA: Although it may not even happen this season. We know that the Red Wedding will and my three favorite scenes in the book: Jamie/Brienne scenes. But I also know they are splitting Book 3 into two seasons.
Assuming they get a second season, I'm curious to see how many people jump ship after the Red Wedding (because that basically makes Ned Stark's death look like a walk in the park by comparison, actually it makes all death scenes on tv a walk in the park by comparison. When people complain about Ianto and Tara's deaths, I think - go read GRR Martin's Storm of Swords, and get back to me.)
I'm guessing they'll end with the big Joff scene, but not certain.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 10:59 pm (UTC)But yeah, it will take a while for HBO to get there.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-03 01:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-03 04:29 pm (UTC)but at the moment I am in a bit of shock: at water aerobics this morning I learned that one of my best friends thinks that Catelynn is still alive!!!! My friend is a careful reader who has read the books more than once... I think she got it in her head that Catelynn was alive when she talked to Brienne (was going to hang Brienne) , and she just wasn't paying enough attention to how dead Catelynn was after the Red Wedding (but she was really sure Catelynn lives... so weird).
no subject
Date: 2013-04-03 10:48 pm (UTC)My discussion with the co-worker who decided to skip over Storm of Swords and read Feast of Crows, was amusing.
Co-worker: they apparently killed off Rob Stark?
Me: Yes. There's actually four major characters who die in Storm, plus Jamie has a huge redemptive arc (I explain it to him and tell him who dies, although not in gritty detail - because he REALLY doesn't want to know.) And there's Wiki which gives plot summaries.
Co-worker: So (Coworker 2) was right and they did kill off Rob.
Me: Yes. Although that didn't bother me all that much, wasn't a huge fan of Rob Stark to be honest, or Catelynn for that matter. The way they did it though...ugh.
Co-worker: You are cold. (joking)
Me: What? They are fictional characters. Once you've dealt with real death and people close to you that have actually died...
Co-worker: True. Plus in sci-fi and fantasy, they can always bring them back.
Me: Sometimes as undead zombies...or if you are watching General Hospital as tangible ghosts. (As long as the actors are still alive, although that isn't always a pre-requisite.)
no subject
Date: 2013-04-04 03:46 am (UTC)And all the reports of her death were exaggerations.
I actually wrote up the most convincing evidence of Catelyn's death at my lj: http://embers-log.livejournal.com/297441.html
(although I'm sure my friend will want to read it for herself).
Of course your co-workers are way harder to talk to, I mean if people are going to skip entire books then there is no way you can actually discuss the books! LOL
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 12:02 am (UTC)Catelyn does not eat brains. Not yet, anyway. And what about those reanimated corpses beyond the Wall--are they zombies, too?
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 09:56 pm (UTC)Eh, you're behind the times. Zombies haven't been eating brains in most stories since Night of the Living Dead. In fact I think Anya on Buffy stated that this was a myth.
Check out Walking Dead - lots of zombies, don't really care all that much about brains.
And yes, the wights are most likely zombies...or undead. Whichever. Martin isn't clear. He calls them undead things. They remind me more of zombies than vampires, so going with that...I'd go with zompires, but there's no fangs or first for blood.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 10:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-03 01:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 10:03 pm (UTC)Action scenes require an economy of language. Dorothy Dunnett over-writes them to the point that you aren't sure what is happening. While writers like Patrick O'Brien, Dumas, Bernard Cornwell, Stephen King, Jim Butcher, Ernest Hemingway (actually very good in this regard), and GRRM - tend to be more direct. They don't write around it. And they don't spend a lot of time on how the characters feel so much as the what is happening.
Sex scenes - require the opposite. What's important here is less detail or less action and more focus on what the character feels or is thinking. Otherwise it reads like an anatomy lesson or is wham bang thank you ma'am.
Which is why for women - written text works better as erotica, and men prefer visual.
One's emotional/thinking, and the other is physical/not thinking doing. Just an odd pattern that I've been picking up on.
Strategy is different.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 12:33 am (UTC)*
*
*
*
*
*
Okay so now that you're done the big question is, do you think Laurent knows who Damen is? Coffeeandink was of the opinion he did not, or was repressing it. I think Laurent has known from the start but let Damen live (with occasional flaying) because he thought it was some strategy of his uncle's that he hadn't figured out yet, then decided to keep him around as a possible bargaining chip in his new alliance with the Akielons. The original plan to send Damen away before reinforcements arrived was actually a decent move on Laurent's part as it would have let Damen get off the playing board.
Now we have to wait so long to find out how Laurent will prevail, how Damen will get his kingdom back, and how our sexy princes can possibly maintain a relationship with so many issues! It's so hard to wait!
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 03:12 am (UTC)do you think Laurent knows who Damen is?
At first...I thought he didn't. But, then two things happen that changed my mind:
1.Laurent goes into detail about how the Regent and Trators (Damen's half-bro) worked together to kill Damen's father and do away with Damen (note he doesn't say killed Damen). Something he waited to tell Damen about and clearly knew all along. If he knew this all along...then why wouldn't he have figured out what his uncle was up to with Damen?
2. Laurent's deal with Nik. Which would not have worked if Damen, a) hadn't stuck around, and b) wasn't Prince Damianos. An Akielion solider would not have gotten that result. Also note that Laurent has Damen dress as a Lord when he meets the Messenger, hiding Damen's slave collar, and he goes out of his way to learn better Akilieon with Damen, and keeps Damen a bit out of sight of the messenger. If he didn't know - he wouldn't have done that.
Also, Damen makes it clear that Nik is the way back to his throne on more than one occassion. And the people who are brought in, the Akilieon prisoners tell Damen and anyone else within hearing that Nik would put Damen back on the throne.
So Laurent probably knew, but didn't know what to do about it initially. I'm sure he flirted with killing Damianos and definitely tortured him. He also makes a point of telling him how much he hated Damianos and why - explaining the reason he's torturing him.
There's also other bits that stick out:
* When Damen asks why Laurent didn't tell him about his plan up in the Vaskan camp regarding Aimeric's set-up. Laurent explains that he didn't know it was Aimeric. (He didn't trust Damen completely.)
* Laurent makes a point of examining the scar Damen got from August.
* Laurent puts Damen in charge of the troops but not completely, he's careful. And does it gradually, letting Damen win over the men. He sends Damen after Touras, while he goes after Guinon, telling Damen to essentially do the same thing he did in the Marlas battle.
He does attempt to send Damen away...giving Damen the choice to stay. Note he goes out of his way to make Damen's choice to stay and NOT as a slave but as Laurent's Commander, in charge of the army.
But he may not have thought it would work - because I think he's telling Damen the truth when he says that Damen is the wild card.
Neither Laurent nor the Regent knew what Damen would do. Would Damen join the Regent or try to escape or kill Laurent, or would he join with Laurent against the Regent? And I don't think it is until Damen saves Laurent's life at great risk to his own in the mountains - that Laurent realizes he has Damen's unconditional loyalty. He plays it very close to the vest up to that point.
Laurent probably realized after his uncle made the second attempt on his life - that he had a choice, he could either risk everything and trust Damen or leave him to rot. He decides to risk it. By risking it - he basically joins forces with the betrayed prince to best the Regent and Trators (Damen's bro).
It doesn't quite work for Laurent not to know. Although it would be incredibly ironic - because Laurent knows everything and for him to be that blind about Damen...LOL! But if he didn't know - why the whole deal with Nik? And he'd have to have known a while back or he wouldn't have risked that deal.
The original plan to send Damen away before reinforcements arrived was actually a decent move on Laurent's part as it would have let Damen get off the playing board.
Agreed. Laurent doesn't change his mind and try to keep Damen there until he realizes that Damen's loyalty to him is unconditional - note he does everything possible to piss Damen off and push him away.
If Damen had his own agenda or was putting his country first - and Nik arrived, Damen could turn his army against Laurent. He had to be sure he could trust Damen to not betray him with Nik's troops.
Laurent would have to be a complete fool not have seen it. And he's written too crafty for that. I also think Laurent may be worried about losing Damen...Damen's straight-forward and doesn't like deception. So it's a risky game he's playing.
Yeah, dang it, I want the next book. Now I'm hunting something similar and can't find anything. It's annoying.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 03:48 am (UTC)It's all quite delicious and in volume 3 I'm also wondering when we get to see Damen finally get hit with the clue stick about what's going on between Laurent and his uncle (I know Damen's too honourable and all that to realize but at a certain point come on!), and how big a role Jokaste will play in the story. Kastor seems like such a non-entity for all that he's the other major villain so I'm wondering if we'll find out that she's the one who got Damen shipped off to Vere.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 09:46 pm (UTC)True. But I think this is Damen's perspective. The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that Laurent knows. It certainly explains a couple of things, and while not necessarily "redeeming" Laurent's actions towards Damen, makes Laurent less of a sadist and just hunting revenge on some level...
IF Laurent knew - he couldn't let Damen or anyone else know - because he'd be expected to kill Damen outright, and if he tried anything else...it would make Laurent look bad in regards to his brother's memory. But, he can do little things ... and remember what he tells the men that capture them, "if you kill him, he won't suffer...he should feel pain". Granted he was doing that to save Damen's life - but I honestly think that was what he had been doing to Damanious all along. (Although he could just have been taking out his grief and fury at Damanious on an Akielion slave, but I doubt it - seems a bit too straightforward.)
Also there are clues - Laurent tells Damen that he was on the battlefield, that he saw Damanious kill his brother. So did Touras. That's why Touras finally recognizes him. If he didn't know initially, he had to have known after the final battle.
And he does try to kill Damen - twice, testing him - things he would definitely want to do to Damianos. 1) Flog him within an inch of his life for merely touching him, and 2) Drug him and make him fight Gavorot, with the hope Gavorot will rape and kill him. Or at the very least Damianos will be forced to do the same. Two perfect punishments for the man who killed his brother, a man of honor.
Although it is possible the writer will go the other route...and have Laurent shrug to the Regent, stating he knew all along, but leave us and Damen uncertain.
I'm also wondering when we get to see Damen finally get hit with the clue stick about what's going on between Laurent and his uncle (I know Damen's too honourable and all that to realize but at a certain point come on!)
Yeah, I was wondering the same thing. The writer keeps hinting at it. I kept waiting for it to be revealed, was expecting it to be revealed in the chapter where they discuss Nicaise death. Why Damen hasn't figured it out yet - I've no idea. He may not want to see it? Because Laurent has basically done everything but come out and say it or paint a picture.
I want to tell the writer. Yes, we all figured out that Laurent was sexually molested by the Regent, can we move on now? LOL!
no subject
Date: 2013-04-03 12:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-03 01:33 am (UTC)I kept forgetting Kastor's name. He really does sort of disappear from the second book a bit. You never really meet him, you meet Jokaste.
In a way Laurent's relationship and betrayal by the Regent is similar to Damanios by his brother. Damianos trusted and worshipped his brother, wanting his respect and love in return - so didn't see it coming. Laurent clearly loved his uncle and wanted his uncle's respect and love in return. Both are blind-sided by the realization that Kastor and the Regent crave power more and resent their existence.
Curious to see how Damianos and Laurent deal with Jokaste...who is actually the puppeteer behind Kastor.
Pacat does have a tendency to dwell on certain items too long, or hammer you over the head with it. But her development of Laurent and Damen and the tension between them has been well done and compelling.
Straight-forward heroes and manipulative heroes are not easy to write well.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 02:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-04-02 09:50 pm (UTC)They are actually fairly useful - in regards to the types of exams you often get. Teacher's are rather lazy in this regard. Instead of making people write a paper or book report, which actually is a better exercise and shows how much they learned, they give a short answer/multiple choice test - which doesn't really tell much of anything except that the kid has a great memory or is really good at cheating (again good memory).