April '06 Fantasy BOTM: Dusk by Tim Lebbon

[Erfael]

Hi everyone. Time to get this discussion started.

Since a few people expressed an interest in having a little more direction to the discussions, we've put together a few discussion bits as jumping-off points.

From Jack, who nominated the book:

1. Use of magic as deus ex machina.

A lot of my questions surrounding Dusk can be brought back to this point, and are vitally based on Lebbon's mindset when he was writing the book. Was he writing it as a sort of ode to the fantasy epic, and thus transgressions like the above are forgivable? Is he aware of the insane overuse of the fantasy stereotype of a group of travellers seemingly coming together by destiny to head somewhere so that magic could unleash itself and destroy the bad guys?

2. Use of drugs in a fantasy setting.

I can't seem to remember all the names right now, I'd have to look them up, but basically there is rotwine, fledge, and then the sex drug (methamphetamine, basically). I got mighty tired of hearing about the awesome powers of fledge/yellow drug, and our guy transporting himself to go see things or whatever, literally "expanding his consciousness". This mechanism seems tired to me, but I might be biased.

And here's a little one from Hobbit, who reviewed the book (Hobbit's review here) and interviewed Mr. Lebbon (Tim Lebbon interview here)

Tim is normally known for his Horror books. Is the fantasy world of Noreela a logical step therefore? Is DUSK a Fantasy Horror book or a Fantasy book with Horror overtones?

I understand the author may stop by later in the month, but I haven't heard anything official about it in a while, so we shall see.

 

[starry-eyed]

Dusk had such a dark sense of misery/decay. The visual imagery of despair when we are introduced to the town of Pavisse was nicely done. Trey’s flight from home and corresponding tragic degeneration into a drug addict were convincing and blended well with the overall ambiance. His character seemed totally believable, and as a result I cared what about the character’s fate. My favorite character was Kosar. The thief who’s had a hard life but wants to believe in idealism. From his unhealing wounds (great symbolism there, huh,) to his continued attempts to find idealism in the world around him, I’d call him the main protagonist. The bleeding fingers were a nice touch- very dark and a fitting reminder that Kosar is a product as much as he is a victim of his society.

I don’t read a lot of horror. Was this novel supposed to be horror? Cuz there was a lot of gratuitous violence that seemed overdone. Maybe this is typical of the genre?

Other incongruous elements that detracted from the novel: Rafe’s innocence doesn’t seem believable when contrasted with Trengborne’s drug (rhellim etc) use, prostitution, and violence as implied by a militia presence. I mean, I can buy some “babe in the woods” behavior, but the extent of Rafe’s naiveté seemed bizarre. It was supposed to be a teeny village so how’d he miss all that? Later when Rafe gets more sinister the other characters are shocked; these scenes felt all out of whack for similar reasons.

Same problem when it came to Hope. Trey senses that she’s mad. Yet her behavior and thinking up until this point, while paranoid and obsessed, don’t seem insane. It’s not until she relives an old murder she committed that we see any hint of insanity- and that’s still dubious. Maybe Trey’s comments were supposed to be foreshadowing, or maybe I just didn’t pick up on other crazy behavior. Anyway totally couldn’t empathize with Hope, as the characterization seemed either inconsistent or underdeveloped.

I'll have to address the talking points later- this is what I jotted while I was reading...

 

[Hobbit]

Thanks, Erf.

One of the difficulties with my question is that if you are not careful you can fall into the trap of Genre labelling and branding. A book doesn't have to be horror or Fantasy or anything else, but a good read.

Nevertheless, one of the comments that seem to be around is that it's a Horror writer writing Fantasy. I'm fairly sure Tim didn't see it that way.

Never mind whether it's Fantasy or Horror or any other genre categorisation - is it a good read?

Interested in what others think.

Mark / Hobbit

 

[Jack]

So we have this group of travellers, each with their own special powers or abilities - they each bring something to the group; a reluctant fellowship if it pleases you. They are all travelling for a destination, whilst trying to protect the one frail, innocent person who very well might hold the key to saving the world within himself. It's a scene that is familiar to all of us who are fantasy readers.

Then when they finally reach the machine graveyard, thus being thrown into a completely hopeless situation, you know that the deus ex machina is about to come out full force, baby. Lower the god into the Greek amphitheatre, here comes magic.

Now let me tell you what was really cool about this scene. Rafe...

Spoiler

the mages get Rafe and eat his brain!

Definitely not a fantasy stereotype there (I'm picturing an alternate ending for Lord of the Rings where Frodo doesn't quite make it back to the Shire... )

I did enjoy Tim's book. It was an entertaining, quick read, and I look forward to checking out Dawn (thats what the sequel is called, right?) when it is released next year. I did like the monks, I thought they were cool and suitably scary. I liked that I could empathize will all the parties involved, and thus there is no clear way this thing is going to end.

starry-eyed, I concur with your thoughts on the impossible innocence of Rafe. I never thought about it until you said something.

 

[firqoret]

Since I wasn't allowed to post this in the other Dusk thread, I thought I would give it another shot here:

Did anyone read John Clute's review of Dusk?
I don't think it's really fair; Clute is just a bit too fond of forcing the book into the critical framework he developed for The Encyclopedia of Fantasy for it to sound convincing (IMHO, Clute jumped the shark quite a while ago). There is some interesting stuff in there though: does anyone feel that he has a point about modern epic fantasy being sexually sanitized to sell better? Spontaneously, I would say that there is a fair bit of sex in the genre (see ASoIaF for instance), but he may be right that there is a pressure from the publishers to keep to keep away the biggest excesses. Then again, most writers might just not be interested in writing another Tides of Lust.
The accusations that Lebbon is just writing product are also interesting. It's of course possible that Lebbon mainly wrote the book to make a buck, and had he been financially independent he would have written something fairly different and commerically less viable, but without hearing it from him it's impossible to tell. I think that Clute in some ways lack the critical apparatus to engage with epic fantasy. He tried to develop one in The Encyclopedia of Fantasy, but while I think he (well, they actually) did a good job for other types of fantasy, I don't think it fits that well for epic fantasy, in that it fails to recognize the elements that the fans of the genre will look for and that set
different books apart from one another.

Thoughts?

 

[FicusFan]

I am still reading this, and after a week am only about half-way through. The writing is much too wordy almost tedious, and it jumps around so much that just when you get a flow going, and a feeling for a character, the scene changes.

The character Rafe, is just really badly done IMO. He started the book and I almost gave up after his chapter. They way it starts with the kids on the bridge playing, and going up to the Red Monk, they seemed maybe 10-12 in age. After the slaughter Rafe is reflecting that he saw his parents and his friends killed (so he seemed the same age). Then toward the end of the chapter he is referred to as not really a kid but a young man. So I was completely blown out of the story because I thought he was about 12, and I felt bad for him being alone. But if he is 16-18 then the reaction is different because he is old enough, in those types of quasi-medieval societies, to be on his own.

He also at some point on his long journey to his uncle's town has these long reflections on being and non-being, on death and the hereafter, and it was totally bogus. He wouldn't have been having such complicated or deep thoughts at that point. He would have been in shock, and either hysterical or numb. Certainly at some later point it would be OK, but not right then. It seemed to me to be a case of the author breaking through the story and forcing the character to spout his doctrine.

Finally the way Rafe says that the deaths felt right, made him seem odious. I lost any type of feeling for him at that point. Its fine to say he isn't surprised by what happened, and he is confused or upset by that feeling or lack thereof, but to say it was supposed to happen and by extension was right, and not much to worry about just pissed me off.

Strangely though I kind of like the book, at least in many other places.

I thought the Tumbling Window was really an interesting idea on capital punishment. The Library was cool, and had echos of the one at Unseen University in DiscWorld. I liked the idea of magic being tied to machinery and that both were needed to have technology. I really wonder if the there isn't a message about our culture and its possible decline, since the fall of Noreela was pretty well detailed, with danger points along the way that people should have noticed.

I liked the underground miners, their warrens, culture and history. I thought it was cool how they used fledge actually. Though it was a drug, they used it for an almost religious/cultural rituals, as opposed to the topsiders who abused it. I thought the danger of the Nax was interesting too. I liked how it could move through the cracks and the 'spiritual ether' of the mine.

I thought the lady in the Library, forget her name, was OK in Noreela. I thought her traveling alone in the lawless land was not believable. I think she would have been robbed, and raped and murdered the first night out.

I like the strange life: Rollers, and Spiders, and several types of birds.

I thought the idea of Red Monks was interesting, but that they can survive such violence and destruction, just based on madness and willpower is not believable. I don't care much for the brooding, non-corporeal evil presence, nor the fighter for the Mages. I am at only page 150, so those two have just entered the story.

I too got the sense of a rag-tag group banding together to go on some quest that was needed to save the world. It seems to be pretty predictable and tired, though some of the details he uses are interesting, and well done.

I also liked Kosar and thought the idea of his brand and the fact it didn't heal was a nice touch. Not sure about A'Meer yet, she may be too powerful and perfect. I have also seen too little yet of Hope to have an opinion, but a hooker with a heart of gold, and a secret witch waiting for Rafe's birth also is too perfect and too easy.

The Deus ex Machina so far seems to be in how people are meeting up, and how they have just the right training, and skills to survive, and then they all know about the idea of someone like Rafe, so they automatically believe and fall into the idea of the quest.

 

[JJ_99uk]

Some thoughts: an interesting little book with some nice touches, I thought, but overall it fell a bit flat.

The bits I liked: the miners' culture, the various species- tumblers, hawks, etc, the mages, and definately the ending with Rafe...

but, the writing was, IMO, not particularly good. Right at the start of the book, Kosar watches the Red Monk ride up to the bridge. One sentence describes the monk as galloping, the next as dismounting from his horse next to the kids. Did the horse just screech to a halt? Didn't the kids do anything?
(haven't got the book with me for exact references) I can't remember any other scenes off the top of my head, but I had quite a hard time getting caught up in the story.

(btw, did anyone else think that the scene breaks were too fast and frequent?)

Apparently Tim Lebbon is mainly a horror writer, but although Dusk was full of violence, I didn't feel very much suspense - I haven't read much horror, but Dusk lacked this suspense I'd associate with the genre. I couldn't really identify with any of "our heroes" (and I only had a very vague sense of what they looked like, other than Hope), and I didn't really understand what Rafe's magic actually was - but it was fairly obvious it would produce a deus ex machina as and when required by Lebbon.

Oh - and two fairly minor points, firstly a coherent naming scheme would be nice - I got the feeling that the names had just been pulled out of a hat - most obvious with the two mages - "Angel" and something unpronouncable with an apostrophe.... (Oh and Kang Kang? the "Red monks"? Sound like the stories you used to write at school...)
secondly the map: it was blatently obvious that the "machine's graveyard" would play a part, and I was wating for them to get there. Given that just about every named place on the map featured in the text (and those that didn't will no doubt feature in the sequal - three guesses where the finale will take place?) it struck me that Lebbon probably didn't spend much time on worldbuilding....

JJ

 

[Katya]

I'm about three quarter's through. I like the book so far, however it might not be one that I'd pick up again. I've been reading it for about two weeks... I've been busy, but I haven't had the burning desire to pick this one up, though. Still, I will say that it's not bad, just not my favourite.

I won't comment too deeply on what I think of the story line at this point. I like the miner's culture, and what happened underground, even though I started to hum the theme to "Fragglerock" while it was being described! I like the library, and I liked the scene's at Hope's house, and in the bar with Kosar and A'Meer.

One thing that seemed really incongruent was the language. I felt that a society such as there's wouldn't refer to sex as "screwing", and other slang that is used in our culture today. It jarred me out of the setting, and made me think about the author, rather than the story, which seems very counteractive to what the author should be doing.

I also felt like I kept trying to draw parallels between our world and theirs. The year looks like a future year of ours (being in the 2200's, I believe), so I kept trying to draw paralells between the "magic" and the machines, and our lives today. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I found it distracting. My own hang-up, though.

I really liked the Red Monks, as unbelievable as they may be. I seem to be really good at suspending belief, as I never even questioned their drive, and how they seem to be able to fight on forever.

 

[starry-eyed]

Like JJ I found the novel neither suspenseful nor scary. The only horror element seems to be the unrelenting goriness.

I did like the opening scenes with the Red Monk. I thought the brutality helped create a depressing atmosphere and set up the theme of a decaying civilization. The problem is that the violence gets so repetitive that it soon loses any impact. By the end I was just turned off by it. (The ending would probably have been better if Rafe's character had seemed more genuine.)

Overall I did not find the writing to be poor. Just inconsistent. Some characters seemed far more fleshed out than others (Kosar vs. Rafe), some passages would create an almost Meiville-like sense of decay while others would feel like filler (Kosar cuts off his own fingers vs. Rafe goes to town or librarian leaves town).

 

[Katya]

I'm officially done Dusk now. It took me a lot longer than I had anticipated to read, but in the end I think that it was worth it. I don't know if I will rush and buy the sequel when it comes out. I will probably get it and read it, if for no other reason then I am a completist.

I enjoyed the spoiler that Jack pointed out. It definitely departed from your typical fantasy expectations, however, it was kind of odd to me, like it didn't quite fit with the rest of the book. I didn't see much "horror" in the book, it felt more like a fantasy novel that had some pretty ugly fight scenes.

I thought that the Nax could have been played up more, or explained more. I am sure that we will see them again in part two, but I felt like they were a great unknown.

I am a little cheesed at the use of magic as deus ex machina. It's like in a certain vampire hunter series where whenever there is an unsurmountable problem, the protagonist randomly gains a new power. I find it frustrating, and it seems like weak writing to me (as a reader). I will point out here that I am not a writer (even though I dabble in it, I wouldn't say that I "write"), and this is entirely from a reader's perspective. I just felt a little ripped off, that magic just came in and saved the day. Obviously the story isn't done, so it will be interesting to see what further development with magic the author will do.

The drug usage in the book didn't bother me. I didn't get the full image of how they harvested Rhellium (sex drug) from the fur bats, and at first I didn't understand the fledge drug until we met Trey. I thought that the fledge was a little over-used, but it didn't really irritate me or stand out among the other things. I didn't like how Trey kept whining (internally) about the stale fledge, but that might be because I can't stand it when people whine instead of doing something about it. It was entirely within his character, though.

I don't see Dusk as either a fantasy with horror, or a horror in a fantasy settings. I didn't find it scarey, or all that suspenseful, which is usually what I like about horror (my favourite horror book is The Infernal by Kim Wilkins). I saw it as more of a dark fantasy, or a fantasy about a decaying culture.

I haven't completely written this book/author off. I liked Dusk for what it was, even thought my expectations were different. Maybe I wasn't in the mood for what it was, either, but I did enjoy it. I didn't love it, and I don't need to read it over and over and over again, but it was still pretty good, and I would recommend it to my friends.

 

[Jack]

The drug usage in the book didn't bother me. I didn't get the full image of how they harvested Rhellium (sex drug) from the fur bats, and at first I didn't understand the fledge drug until we met Trey. I thought that the fledge was a little over-used, but it didn't really irritate me or stand out among the other things. I didn't like how Trey kept whining (internally) about the stale fledge, but that might be because I can't stand it when people whine instead of doing something about it. It was entirely within his character, though.

I don't see Dusk as either a fantasy with horror, or a horror in a fantasy settings. I didn't find it scarey, or all that suspenseful, which is usually what I like about horror (my favourite horror book is The Infernal by Kim Wilkins). I saw it as more of a dark fantasy, or a fantasy about a decaying culture.

A problem I always have in the book club is when I attempt to respond to every point everybody makes. Three times yesterday I tried to quote Ficus's entire post and respond to each of the points. Three times yesterday I failed. So I'm just going to respond to one point in this post.

I can relate to what you said about not completely understanding how they harvested the rhellim (=speed) from the fur bats, and that got me to thinking. How would this book be if it was written by Susanna Clarke (Jon Strange)? What I'm picking up from the forumers here is that we really liked a lot of the elements in the book; there were a lot of cool ideas. So what if we gave Dusk and its world the "fat" treatment, complete with a full 900 page, three part book just filled with endless footnotes and individual histories for various people and procedures that have no real pertinence to the plot other then to enrich the reader's experience in the world?

I think I'd just be tickled to death, is what I'd be!

And as far as Trey whining about the fledge getting stale and him running out. Do I beat a dog for barking? No, because thats what dogs do. And I can't complain about a drug addict whining about his drug of choice, because thats what drug addicts do . Knowing that, however, doesn't make it any less annoying or tiresome.

 

[Katya]

Yeah... I find people who constantly whine annoying, so that's why I pointed it out! But no issue, it's just me, and I'm aware of that.


I read Jon Strange, and honestly, didn't read half of the footnotes because I just couldn't bring myself to do it. It felt like reading a text book. I know that I probably missed half of the story, but I guess I am a finiky reader. I would have loved to see Dusk fleshed out a bit more, maybe closer to 600 pages then 900 I just wanted to know a little more about what happened, like what are the tumblers? There was a comment about how they thought that they were just animal, but they're actually not... and no explanation of what else they might be! Also, I could not get a clear image of the hawks - I kept thinking about flying octopi with bird heads! After a while, I started to figure that they were like large bats, or dragons... but I still couldn't stop sniggering about them... flying octopus!

I don't really want to know every detail about the fur bats, but just a little more information would have been helpful. I got the feeling that they didn't kill the bats to get the drug, so I am assuming that it was a secretion of some sort. That's fine and well, but I just felt at the time that it was a bit of missing information about something that kept getting talked about.

I think that it would have been a better book with a little bit more detail. I felt that I didn't really know the characters or the world that Mr. Lebbon created due to the lack of description. I think that I would have found it more suspenseful or captivating if I had been more connected to it. I don't think it was poorly done, I just think that I would have done it differently

I also think that more will (hopefully) be explained in Dawn. I sincerely hope that Mr. Lebbon will draw me further into his world and his characters. I kept reminding myself when I desired more character development that if each character was perfectly fleshed out in the first book, they have less room to grow in the second.

I am very excited to read about Alicia in the next book. I have an idea of what is happening to her, but I still can't wait to read it, and see how things continue to pan out!

 

[JJ_99uk]

...
How would this book be if it was written by Susanna Clarke (Jon Strange)? What I'm picking up from the forumers here is that we really liked a lot of the elements in the book; there were a lot of cool ideas. So what if we gave Dusk and its world the "fat" treatment, complete with a full 900 page, three part book just filled with endless footnotes and individual histories for various people and procedures that have no real pertinence to the plot other then to enrich the reader's experience in the world?

That would be cool, but what I'd really like is not the Clarke treatment, but the China Mieville treatment - like Katya above I couldn't get a clear picture of the hawks and tumblers. The bit where Trey and Alicia see the whirlpool in the rock struck me as showing potential - if Lebbon had just worked a bit more on painting a clearer picture of the world, I might have got a bit more caught up in it...

JJ

 

[FicusFan]

One of the things I forgot to mention in my first post was the Fodders, the people who had been bred for food, and who had no rights or position in society other than food or victim. That was quite horrifying in its reality and its implications.

Though there is an air of fallen glory to the previous civilization it really can't have been too uplifting if it in fact bred 'humans' for food. So the aura of decadence may belong to both societies pre and post failure of magic.

In the book they are referred to 'as used to be bred for food'. Now food never goes out of style or demand, so was it the use of magic that made it possible to breed them, which doesn't seem right, perhaps it was the magic that allowed the previous society to consume them, or kept them docile as a large herd ?

It makes the idea of who are the good guys and who are the bad guys a bit blurrier. Will the triumph of Rafe and the gang, and the return of magic also mean the resumption of eating people ? I had assumed that the characters in the story were the 'human' equivalent on Noreela, but are they something else, so that eating people is just like us eating a cow ?

 

[Katya]

One of the things I forgot to mention in my first post was the Fodders, the people who had been bred for food, and who had no rights or position in society other than food or victim. That was quite horrifying in its reality and its implications.

Though there is an air of fallen glory to the previous civilization it really can't have been too uplifting if it in fact bred 'humans' for food. So the aura of decadence may belong to both societies pre and post failure of magic.

In the book they are referred to 'as used to be bred for food'. Now food never goes out of style or demand, so was it the use of magic that made it possible to breed them, which doesn't seem right, perhaps it was the magic that allowed the previous society to consume them, or kept them docile as a large herd ?

It makes the idea of who are the good guys and who are the bad guys a bit blurrier. Will the triumph of Rafe and the gang, and the return of magic also mean the resumption of eating people ? I had assumed that the characters in the story were the 'human' equivalent on Noreela, but are they something else, so that eating people is just like us eating a cow ?

I think I must have blocked that part out. I remember reading about "fodder", but I failed to really recognize what it was.

That makes me think about their society in a completely different light. I hope that Mr. Lebbon addresses this in Dawn, as I'd like to have an answer to your question, FF, about whether they are less than human.

 

[Erfael]

I'll try to deal with Jack and Hobbit's issues first, then see what kind of time and energy I have after that:

1. Use of magic as deus ex machina.

A lot of my questions surrounding Dusk can be brought back to this point, and are vitally based on Lebbon's mindset when he was writing the book. Was he writing it as a sort of ode to the fantasy epic, and thus transgressions like the above are forgivable? Is he aware of the insane overuse of the fantasy stereotype of a group of travellers seemingly coming together by destiny to head somewhere so that magic could unleash itself and destroy the bad guys?

I'm a little torn on how I see this aspect of the book. On one hand, everything seemed to happen a little too easily. As someone mentioned above, all the right people ran into each other and got going in the same direction in order to bring about magic's return to the world, the Red Monks showed up on the scene at just the right time at the graveyard in order to compel Rafe's abilities to bloom into magic, and so forth. That seems just a little too pat for my tastes.

But I can see that a case could be made that it's not so much a mechanic of the author as a mechanic of the world. Is there something about Noreela itself that puts all of this into motion in particular ways? If magic is semi-conscious (as it appears to be based on how it operates in Rafe) it's possible that it's pulling strings, waking up the Nax to get *fledge-guy* to the surface, getting the Red Monks out there to stir up Kosar and Rafe, etc. In that case it's not so much a deus ex as it is fundamental to the world. Granted, at this point one needs to take some license to see it this way...it would depend heavily on what happened in the next book.

Purely from a storytelling angle, I just didn't want to read about another group of misfits making the journey to save the world. I feel that to really serve as an ode to the fantasy epic, there needs to be some other layer added that sort of winks at the reader, that says to us, "Yes, YOU know and I know this looks like the same old on the surface, but THIS is what I'm really doing." I didn't feel the wink. But maybe I missed it.

2. Use of drugs in a fantasy setting.

I can't seem to remember all the names right now, I'd have to look them up, but basically there is rotwine, fledge, and then the sex drug (methamphetamine, basically). I got mighty tired of hearing about the awesome powers of fledge/yellow drug, and our guy transporting himself to go see things or whatever, literally "expanding his consciousness". This mechanism seems tired to me, but I might be biased.

This didn't bother me in the slightest. In fact, didn't even register that it might be overused/tired/whatever. It seemed to fit for me, and I actually found it quite interesting that in the state he not only could see things outside that were far away, but he could journey into other people's subconscious and see the internal landscape. Maybe it's been done elsewhere, but not in anything I've read. Thinking back on it, this is something I would have liked to have seen more of the story interact with this idea. I see some really interesting possibilities that could come from this.

One of the difficulties with my question is that if you are not careful you can fall into the trap of Genre labelling and branding. A book doesn't have to be horror or Fantasy or anything else, but a good read.

Nevertheless, one of the comments that seem to be around is that it's a Horror writer writing Fantasy. I'm fairly sure Tim didn't see it that way.

Never mind whether it's Fantasy or Horror or any other genre categorisation - is it a good read?

I agree that it's very easy to fall into that trap of genre labeling, but there is also something to be said for understanding the medium an author is working in. Sometimes the enjoyment can come from the context as much as the content.

You know, these days I don't really know what horror writing is supposed to be. I always think of horror as extremely suspenseful writing in which the reader is brought down to the level of mortal peril that the main characters are usually in (to add to that, I usually see it as containing some fantastic elements). It seems more often than not, horror as a classification doesn't so much mean scary as it does gory any more, though. That's just my perception, from someone who doesn't read all that much horror these days.

From that background, I never really felt that there was anything too horrific about the book. As some people pointed out the tumblers and fodder and the tumbling window and skull ravens, these all seem like they COULD be really horrific things. If you really think about some of them, they're pretty nasty. But the characters don't really ever come into close contact with these things in any really frightening way. Even the Red Monks, I feel that since everyone knows what they are and we're told all of the details about how and why and such that they can keep fighting, they lose some of their impact. So I feel that these things are just a little too far off stage to really consider them horrific.


Is it a good read? Not sure the best way for me to answer this. I don't feel like the book got my best effort. The week I read it I had a bunch of extra rehearsals and such and just didn't have time to read more than about thirty pages a day. I always find that I enjoy books more and they hold my attention more if I'm reading in larger chunks than that. So I did have some disconnect from the book, but I'm not willing to say it was the author's problem. I'll certainly try to find the time to reapproach this book as Dawn come nearer and take the two of them together and see what I think.

Re: The Full Fantasy treatment:

I'm almost never in favor of this. No 900 pages for this one. What I WOULD have liked to have seen is just a little more depth spent in one of two areas: Either in bringing it down to a more personal, horrific level OR just fleshing out the world A LITTLE. Without going all encyclopaedic on our rears, I would have liked to have seen more about tumblers and skull ravens and such in a way that incorporated them into the story. (Too many fantasy authors just put junk there to put it there....don't encourage the ones who don't do that to do so....)

Fiqoret, I'll try to have some thoughts later. I ran out of time this go-round.

 

[Tim Lebbon]

Dusk

Thanks to everyone for posting their thoughts on my novel DUSK. It's received mixed reaction, elsewhere as well as here, but mostly I'm pleased by what people are saying about it. I always knews it would attract some sort of debate ...

The questions of whether it's a horror disguised as fantasy, or vice versa - I always had troubled recognising the relevance of this. It's a novel. It tells a story. It has some fantasy elements, some horror, some science fiction, and I can't apologise to those who are annoyed that it is not easily labelled. I write the story I want to write, and try not to get trapped by preconceived notions of genre.

This isn't the place for me to reply to individual comments, of course, but I'd like to say thanks for taking a chance with DUSK, and I hope you'll buy DAWN next year. Lots more will be explained, lots more revealed, and following on from DAWN there will be new novels set in the same world of Noreela.

Thanks!

Tim

 

[Erfael]

This isn't the place for me to reply to individual comments, of course, but I'd like to say thanks for taking a chance with DUSK, and I hope you'll buy DAWN next year. Lots more will be explained, lots more revealed, and following on from DAWN there will be new novels set in the same world of Noreela.

Actually, we don't mind if you pick on us. After all, we got free rein to pick on your book. So if there's anything you want to reply to, please do. Also, if you're willing to stick around a little, I'm sure people would have some questions for you.

And thanks so much for stopping by. Erf.

 

[Katya]

and I hope you'll buy DAWN next year. Lots more will be explained, lots more revealed, and following on from DAWN there will be new novels set in the same world of Noreela.

Hurrah! I am pleased to hear this, as I did enjoy the world, but I wanted to know more.

I went back and re-read my posts, and realized that they may read a little more negative then I had intended. I enjoyed Dusk. I thought that it was worth the time I put in to it. Even if I didn't like the ending, personally, I realize that it is the first part of a series, and that all authors don't cater to me! Shocking, I know.

I have a couple of questions for you, Mr. Lebbon, if you are willing to answer individual questions. What was the hardest part about writing this story? What was the easiest part of writing this story?

I haven't read any of your other books, but I am always looking for something new to read. What, of your works, would you recommend?

This seems like a lame question, but which of your characters is your favourite? I know it seems like a grade five question, but I find it insightful and I love to hear a little bit about the author's opinion.

Thanks for stopping by to chat with us, Mr. Lebbon!

 

[Tim Lebbon]

Thanks Katya ... and please, it's Tim. 'Mr' is for politicians and gangster warlords, and I'm neither.

The easiest part of writing the story was the world-building. I had eight millions ideas about people, cultures, histories, animals, legends, myths etc etc, many of which I managed to weave into the novel, and many I did not. I hope the varied hints at Noreela's history make the land seem much more real and believable ... they certainly helped me to view the world I've created as more of a three-dimensional place. And indeed, some of these histories will be expanded upon in future novels (the proposals for which I'm writing right now).

The hardest part was probably keeping track of timelines. I had several POV characters, and keeping tabs on how much time had passed for each of them was pretty difficult. They wanted to go off and do their own things, damn them, and they never told me what time they were coming back!

As for recommending my own work, that's not an easy one. I write a lot of novellas, and they're gathered in two collections called WHITE AND OTHER TALES OF RUIN and FEARS UNNAMED. Either of those books will give you a real feel of the types of fiction I write (and they're both available from Amazon). As for novels, I'm very proud of my recent horror novel BERSERK, and before that was DESOLATION, a novel that has been described as .... different.

And favourite characters: from DUSK I think I'd have to choose A'Meer. As well as being strong and defiant, she isn't afraid of being afraid. Of course, it doesn't hurt that she's also very hot. And a curious thing about A'Meer ... for some reason I decided not to make her a POV character. She's as involved in the story as anyone else, and yet she's viewed purely from other's viewpoints. Don't ask me why that happened, I don't know.

And while I'm here, I'll chat about one other aspect to DUSK that several people have commented on: ambiguity, and the lack of description. I've never been one to accurately describe my characters physically unless - as with Kosar's sliced fingertips - it's necessary to the story. Why? Because I think reading a book is a creative endeavour in itself. Each reader will view/imagine characters differently, and I'm more than happy to let that happen. Readers should have an imaginative input into any story to enjoy it to its full - I always do when I'm reading. And sometimes, leaving something to readers' imaginations is, I believe, beneficial.

Besides ... if you do want to learn more about the Nax, tumblers, and those dead, rotten machines ... read DAWN.