Dislike Kingkiller Chronicles?

[Rob B]

And here I thought this thread was going to be for people to rant about why they don't like the books. As it turns it, I see mostly the fans of the books.

But the few handful of us that really dig KKC get the fanboi label and all that jazz. Kinda odd. Kinda strange. *shrugs*

...I am going to represent the community of KKC fans as well. Because we are the minority here.

I'd say there's more than just a handful of people who "really dig KKC."

The Name of the Wind was SFFWorld's second favorite book of 2007 (behind Joe Abercrombie's Before They Are Hanged by a small margin), and had 1/3 more votes than the third favorite novel of 2007. Because of the way our rules are set up (allowing for the mass market paperback release to be considered rather than only the initial hardcover release) Name of the Wind tied Last Argument of Kings (there's Joe Abercrombie again) for #1 favorite book of 2008. I'll put money down that The Wise Man's Fear will likely be in the top five this year as well.*

Even after we had a lengthy (and still very active with over 1,000 posts) discussion about The Name of the Wind, people still wanted to discuss it at length in our Book Club (July 2008). The Wise Man's Fear, even it didn't get universal 5-star praise, is still recognized on the whole as an excellent novel - a standout for 2011.

The above is the long way around to saying that Patrick Rothfuss's Kingkiller Chronicle is one of the most popular and well-liked authors/book series here at SFFWorld. I really don't understand why you've got the perception that the membership here doesn't like his books, when in fact Pat and his novels are liked a great deal. Granted, few people love the books as much as you 3rdI, but that's no reason to think SFFWorld on the whole doesn't like them. It's almost like you're preaching to the choir or if you're trying to defend Terry Goodkind's work here (an author who is on the complete opposite end of the stick in that the majority of SFFWorld doesn't like his fiction).

*The qualification of top five being a new book by George R.R. Martin, a new book by Brandon Sanderson, a new Joe Abercrombie novel (three authors who have very strong fanbases here at SFFWorld), two very well-received books by Daniel Abraham, and a very well-received debut by Mark Lawrence. That having been said, I can easily see The Wise Man's Fear grabbing the top 2 or 3 spot. I'll check back in this thread once all the votes are tallied and posted to remind myself of my prediction

 

[ArtNJ]

"Doing well" does not in any way preclude the possibility of irrational brand loyalty. Consider Coke vs. Pepsi, for instance.

Or, to put it another way -- Terry Goodkind's books also sell quite a few copies. He's a NYT #1 bestselling author. Does that mean his books are any good?

The whole idea of "irrational" loyalty to a new book that isnt being marketed by Oprah, isnt the subject of water cooler talk or said by many to be a "classic" is fairly silly. Its one thing to talk about irrational loyalty to books that many/influential others are saying that you "should" love, where folks could potentially have been influenced into thinking they should like merely because others say they are the greatest, but I fail to see how KKC fits into that. At least for myself, I saw a couple of posts and decided to read it - nothing more. If I liked it, how could that possibly be "irrational loyalty" unless I'm irrational? Its just my tastes, not yours, no one "sold me" on the book.

 

[Contrarius]

Huh? The Princes Bride was written by Goldman. The earlier version, which was not fantasy, was not what was being listed on that poll.

ROFLMAO!!

There WAS no "earlier version". The whole thing was a joke.

Do we really want to go there? Would you like to use critical review as your metric? Because for every one poor review you can find (most of which are not from credible sources) I can provide 50 that are glowing. Reviews from respected professionals, authors, etc.

I'm just trying to point out to you that "doing well" is not at all the same thing as "high quality". And, if we want to push the point, there are lots of "glowing" reviews and blurbs out there from "respected professionals" that get slapped on mighty poor books.

 

[Contrarius]

I fail to see how KKC fits into that.

I don't know whether KKC fits into the "irrational brand loyalty" category or not. But when somebody claims high quality for a book, I want to see specifics -- what did you like about it? Where did the plot thrill you? What phrasing captured your fancy? What characters touched your heart, and why? How was the book's structure innovative or admirable? What profound symbolism did you ponder? I want specifics. When one only offers up sales numbers or general claims of success, I am thoroughly unimpressed.

 

[3rdI]

ROFLMAO!!

There WAS no "earlier version". The whole thing was a joke.

Okay you got me on that one. I completely forget about the fictional work.

 

[Contrarius]

Yes I am aware of this. Should have worded that more succinctly. The earlier work was entirely contrived and was used as part of the story. Morgenstern was made up I know this. Calm down and have a cookie.

Oh sure. Go ahead and revise history to your heart's content.

 

[3rdI]

And here I thought this thread was going to be for people to rant about why they don't like the books. As it turns it, I see mostly the fans of the books.

I'd say there's more than just a handful of people who "really dig KKC."

The Name of the Wind was SFFWorld's second favorite book of 2007 (behind Joe Abercrombie's Before They Are Hanged by a small margin), and had 1/3 more votes than the third favorite novel of 2007. Because of the way our rules are set up (allowing for the mass market paperback release to be considered rather than only the initial hardcover release) Name of the Wind tied Last Argument of Kings (there's Joe Abercrombie again) for #1 favorite book of 2008. I'll put money down that The Wise Man's Fear will likely be in the top five this year as well.*

Even after we had a lengthy (and still very active with over 1,000 posts) discussion about The Name of the Wind, people still wanted to discuss it at length in our Book Club (July 2008). The Wise Man's Fear, even it didn't get universal 5-star praise, is still recognized on the whole as an excellent novel - a standout for 2011.

The above is the long way around to saying that Patrick Rothfuss's Kingkiller Chronicle is one of the most popular and well-liked authors/book series here at SFFWorld. I really don't understand why you've got the perception that the membership here doesn't like his books, when in fact Pat and his novels are liked a great deal. Granted, few people love the books as much as you 3rdI, but that's no reason to think SFFWorld on the whole doesn't like them. It's almost like you're preaching to the choir or if you're trying to defend Terry Goodkind's work here (an author who is on the complete opposite end of the stick in that the majority of SFFWorld doesn't like his fiction).

*The qualification of top five being a new book by George R.R. Martin, a new book by Brandon Sanderson, a new Joe Abercrombie novel (three authors who have very strong fanbases here at SFFWorld), two very well-received books by Daniel Abraham, and a very well-received debut by Mark Lawrence. That having been said, I can easily see The Wise Man's Fear grabbing the top 2 or 3 spot. I'll check back in this thread once all the votes are tallied and posted to remind myself of my prediction

I will bow to your judgment in this matter. From my personal experience, it seems as if they are not many fans of the books here. But you have the numbers and I cannot argue against them.

 

[3rdI]

Oh sure. Go ahead and revise history to your heart's content.

guilty as charged

 

[Contrarius]

*shrugs* Think what you want dude.

I usually do. But there ain't no "dude" on this end of the keyboard.

And now that we've got that settled -- tell me specifically what is so wonderful about either one of these books. I don't want generalities. Gimme specifics. Quote to me wonderful prose passages. Detail to me profound symbolism. Outline to me stunning plot devices. Show me the beef.

 

[n0ak]

I've read The Name of the Wind but not A Wise Man's Fear (it's sitting on my kindle waiting though...) and I found myself wondering what the fuss was about at first. As I kept reading I found myself wanting to know what was going to happen. Then I found myself staying up late at night reading. How does the intro tie into the flashbacks? How did the protagonist come to his reputation? What's really going on here?

I am not a strong supporter of the works, but despite myself I ended up liking it. It was fun and I felt for the protagonist as he went through his ordeals. I don't think I could read it twice, but I am interested to see where the story goes.

I am surprised the series is as popular as it is, I never would have expected it to be this popular had I read it first (without the hype). Seems like one of those books that just meshes with a lot of people--for this era. I am also surprised at some of my friends unwillingness to give it a chance too. It's definitely worth a read, even if I don't rate it up there with my favorites.

 

[3rdI]

I'm just trying to point out to you that "doing well" is not at all the same thing as "high quality". And, if we want to push the point, there are lots of "glowing" reviews and blurbs out there from "respected professionals" that get slapped on mighty poor books.

You still have not proven a thing. I gave metrics, listed reviews, gave solid supporting arguments. Anyone who can honestly say The Kingkiller Chronicles has not been a massive success is simply wrong. The article and discussion that followed had nothing to do with like vs. dislike.

The entire point of this discussion was whether or not the article thirsty posted applied in this instance. Thirsty posted an article about fanboism. The article's main point, was that a certain type of personality will call something good even if that thing performs poorly. By every rational, logical metric KKC has performed extremely well. Therefore the argument does not apply in this case.

 

[Contrarius]

You still have not proven a thing.

I'm not trying to prove anything, so that's okay with me. I'm simply pointing out the flaws in your claims.

And now that we've got that settled -- tell me specifically what is so wonderful about either one of these books. I don't want generalities. Gimme specifics. Quote to me wonderful prose passages. Detail to me profound symbolism. Outline to me stunning plot devices. Show me the beef.

 

[3rdI]

I'm not trying to prove anything, so that's okay with me. I'm simply pointing out the flaws in your claims.

And now that we've got that settled -- tell me specifically what is so wonderful about either one of these books. I don't want generalities. Gimme specifics. Quote to me wonderful prose passages. Detail to me profound symbolism. Outline to me stunning plot devices. Show me the beef.

There are no flaws in my claims. The article specifically stated that a specific personality type would defend a thing even if said thing's performance was poor. I simply proved that by all standard metrics of performance, the books have done exceptionally well.

Very simple. As for the rest, you mistake my intent greatly. You make the assumption that I care whether or not you like the book. I simply do not care. If you want feel free to go back through the KKC threads where I have given detailed review and analysis on a number of occasions. I am not interested in repeating myself.

Furthermore, I am on two strikes so I have to be extremely careful as to what I say and how I say it. And today is not the day I feel like getting banned.

@teahupoo - I was thinking of another song. Maybe some Four Corners hip hop

 

[Contrarius]

There are no flaws in my claims.

Now I see why you like the books so much. Your attitude reminds me of Kvothe.

The article specifically stated that a specific personality type would defend a thing even if said thing's performance was poor. I simply proved that by all standard metrics of performance, the books have done exceptionally well.

"Performance" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as "popularity". "Performance" can also refer to "quality". You haven't proven a single thing about the quality of these books.

Furthermore, I am on two strikes so I have to be extremely careful as to what I say and how I say it. And today is not the day I feel like getting banned.

Now you seem to be saying that you are incapable of analyzing a favored book in a civil tone. Surely that can't be the case?

 

[Loerwyn]

Talking of civil tones, could we tone down the attitudes, please? It seems to me that we're getting a little on the personal side.

 

[Contrarius]

Talking of civil tones, could we tone down the attitudes, please? It seems to me that we're getting a little on the personal side.

You're right, I shouldn't have used the word "arrogance". I'll edit my post.

 

[3rdI]

Rambles about cut flower sounds and a stoned draccus

 

[Contrarius]

For me, it is the perfect combination of every element that makes a good book.

That sounds like a pretty good description of "irrational brand loyalty" to me. All subjective and amorphous feeling, no discrete points of concrete rationality in evidence.

edited to add -- btw, I'm on chapter 8 of my reread right now. I really do like most of the first intro section, IF I can take it seriously and not conclude that Rothfuss is using it as parody of epic fantasy set-ups. It's got some good atmosphere and some good prose as I pointed out before, and interesting hints at things not yet seen. OTOH it's also got some inconsistencies, like Kote being so adamant about not revealing his identity to the first traveler that recognizes him, then instantly caving to Chronicler without even putting up much of an effort. But I'm willing to forgive that. But once we get to Kvothe's early life, I start seeing problems -- like we're supposed to believe that he has learned all about regional law at age 8, and that he's memorized all the plays by age 11. This very quickly gets into Gary Stu territory for me, at which point I get very annoyed.

 

[3rdI]

That sounds like a pretty good description of "irrational brand loyalty" to me. All subjective and amorphous feeling, no discrete points of concrete rationality in evidence.

As I said feel free to read through any of the NOTW or WMF threads. You will find all my analysis there. If you would like to discuss this further after that pm me.

 

[Rob B]

That sounds like a pretty good description of "irrational brand loyalty" to me. All subjective and amorphous feeling, no discrete points of concrete rationality in evidence.

True, if you discount what 3rdI said leading up to that statement. 3rdI has gone on about what specifically he likes about the books in other threads.