Kate Elliott's Crown of Stars

Sorry bout the no spoiler tag.

Post, all fantasy is filled with stuff that's not essential. She could have cut out lots of the detail but then it wouldn't feel the same. Her writing style is er umm dense(best word I could come up with) and has been throughout the series though less so in the first two books. For me books 3-5 had lots more non essential stuff than Ruins and i'm suprised that anyone who made it through those is complaining about this half book being slow.
 
Hi all! I'm new to the board.
I don't know much about publishing or how much power an author has, about the number of books or splitting the last book to milk the series for more money, but I do know what I like. I have read the first three books in this series several times, my copys are well worn and much loved. My faith wavered some in Child of Flame, then I'm afraid I lost it all together in The Gathering Storm, and while I paid full hardback cover price for both of those books, I will wait for In the Ruins & Crown of Stars to be available in my public library.
 
cgw said:
The Elliott series was just good enough to keep me interested to read the first 5 a couple months ago. So I will read the last two.
I started Erickson a while ago and could not get into it at the time (I did not get very far). I have always figured I would try again later. The question is - what do you mean by the above quote?
Click to expand...

Well after awhile Crown of Stars has some pretty wild stuff happening of the supernatural sort. This is also true of Erickson but he just swamps you with so much of it that it starts to lose impact after awhile.
 
ChrisW said:
Post, all fantasy is filled with stuff that's not essential. She could have cut out lots of the detail but then it wouldn't feel the same. Her writing style is er umm dense(best word I could come up with) and has been throughout the series though less so in the first two books. For me books 3-5 had lots more non essential stuff than Ruins and i'm suprised that anyone who made it through those is complaining about this half book being slow.
Click to expand...

But there is no fun in that, now is there? It does seem rather odd the rise in self-involvement in readership though. The idea growing that a series should serve a reader's purpose instead of taking them on a journey of discovery and imagination. Maybe it is the hazard of reading series as they are written. But more and more I see complaints about books that stem more from the book not delivering exactly what the reader wanted in terms of content of plot and character direction. Oh well. I was happy with the book. Quite happy. I thought it was trim and spare and fast paced and really a tight entry into the last and final chapter. Too bad for the ones that took all tha time and effort and ended up with sad little faces. I'd feel sorry for you if it actually impacted me in any way. How about this? Good luck on your next reading endeavor.
 
JohnH said:
But there is no fun in that, now is there? It does seem rather odd the rise in self-involvement in readership though. The idea growing that a series should serve a reader's purpose instead of taking them on a journey of discovery and imagination.
Click to expand...
Maybe it has somethng to do with Eco's premise that the reader completes the text.

Or another way of putting it: Readers evaluate and judge authors. And should.

There is a tendancy of literati to reify authorship and deify authors (which, I suppose, can lead to the holier-than-thou tenor present in the rest of your post), but I think it silly to claim writing is all art and no craft and cannot be judged wanted.

What amazes me is the perspective that readers must give binary approval/disapproval. I can be positive about Elliott's style, world building, and characters while negative about the pseudo-gestalt of her last effort.

You say I should be happy when I am taken on "journey of discovery and imagination" to which I agree. Where we disagree is whether In the Ruins accomplishes that, or to what degree. In short, my thesis is that little is discovered and less is imagined in this book. "Show me the money" if you think Elliott delivered, but I'd rather you didn't waste bandwith on strawmen or soapboxes.
 
ChrisW said:
Post, all fantasy is filled with stuff that's not essential. She could have cut out lots of the detail but then it wouldn't feel the same. Her writing style is er umm dense(best word I could come up with) and has been throughout the series though less so in the first two books. For me books 3-5 had lots more non essential stuff than Ruins and i'm suprised that anyone who made it through those is complaining about this half book being slow.
Click to expand...
Yep, me too.

I relish writers who can bring depth to their stories, and am perfectly ok with dense prose: fish-in-water thing for me.

So again, I ask, what did Elliott accompish with this 10 rpm volume in a series that started at 100? My contention is not enough to justify a hardcover contribution.

Did you think:

"ahh, NOW I understand what elves are in this world!" or

"That bastard, Hugh, I never thought he'd be so dispicable!" or

"So that's how Sanglant's mother feels!"

I had no moment of wonder, or sense of appreciation of the human condition, or other epiphany (great or small) in this last book.

I suppose, as some are arguing, I should be happy that Elliott extended my stay in her world that much longer. Yet I can't help feeling like the tour guide just pointed to a bunch of rabbits with antlers tied on and declaimed: "Behold, the wonderous Jackalope!" Sure, fun to see at a side carnival, but not sure I'd be content to pay Disney prices for such a "tour".
 
I for one really love Elliott's work. People are just lazy and do not care for long books, which I love to read. Yes I maybe a bookworm, but I do not care what others say. I hate how people just say that they did not like a book because it is too long, too much detail, etc. It you do not like reading long, detailed books, than do not read them. Leave them for someone who does and just shut up about it.
 
What a fun little pissing contest this has turned into. For the record I don't think anyone should do anything within their own reading. The ironic thing is that my comments were about others actually demanding that writers do and write in particular expository manner. Apparently that was missed. Too bad. Holier-than-thou? Not at all. Smug at the whining about people not liking the book when I did? Of course. Schadenfreude is in my bones. Never deny that. I'm not making any claims to be better. Just satsified with the book. Very. And looking forward to February for the last book. That's all on the matter for me. My sides still hurt at the use of "faux-gestalt" too much to continue and I'm not sure giggling madly each time I access the thread will serve any clarity in response or comment on my part.

Just don't try to play the righteous indignation card when I state my opinion on the matter and then turn around and try and do the same. Okay? Thanks so much for your cooperation.
 
Huh, John get a grip man! :p

Post, so are you saying that since kate had to chop the book in half to get it published she should have rewritten it to make it a better stand alone book?
 
ChrisW,

I'm saying Kate had a choice when the final volume came in too large for a single volume: cut or split. My previous posts in the thread offer reasons for a split, although I'm sure others can come up with more, but I didn't see justification for it based on In the Ruins.

The simplest way I can think to put it is that if a book doesn't have the merit to stand alone why publish it? I guess it comes down to whether you see it as cliffhanger or placeholder.

To me it was one of those scenes in a b-movie when, inch-by-inch the hero is pushed to the cliff’s edge. His progress is steady, inexorable, and, just as he’s about to topple, the camera cuts away to the agony on his lover’s face. Based on the momentum established up till now, he should be plummeting to his death, but somehow, when the camera returns to him, not only is he still standing, struggling, facing the same inexorable pressure, but he’s a good foot further back from the edge when we last saw him.

Great suspense, cheap trick.
 
JohnH said:
My sides still hurt at the use of "faux-gestalt".
Click to expand...
Yeah, I liked that one too, although I used "pseudo" rather than "faux". Actually, faux is much better for not only does it allude to failed or faked, it collides two languages and their often at-odds literary theorists when positioned with gestalt.

Gestalt I thought appropriate, as those who liked the latest book have generally defended it as something that contributes to the greater whole and need not have individual merit, or at least its need for individual merit is not a necessary characteristic (whereas I'm claiming it is both necessary and sufficient).

This has not been your approach, howerer. I didn't comment on the one sentance you actually gave to evaluting the book rather than the thread ("I thought it was trim and spare and fast paced and really a tight entry into the last and final chapter."), letting your opinion of the book stand alone. I disagree, but understand the reasoning behind it enough to not really have anything more to say about it.
 
Katmandew said:
I for one really love Elliott's work. People are just lazy and do not care for long books, which I love to read. Yes I maybe a bookworm, but I do not care what others say. I hate how people just say that they did not like a book because it is too long, too much detail, etc. It you do not like reading long, detailed books, than do not read them. Leave them for someone who does and just shut up about it.
Click to expand...
Well, let's just say for the sake of argument, that someone who likes long, detailed books didn't like the latest Elliott installment. Should they shut up about it?
 
I'm about a third of the way through this book, and just thought I'd put up this note, which appears on Kate's website and in the front of In The Ruins:
As all of my readers know, this has been a long and complicated series, with a long and complicated plot. Indeed, after a certain point in writing this series, there was simply no way to turn back.

In the two years it took me to write the final volume, I considered only the needs of the characters and the story in order to write as strong an ending as possible to CROWN OF STARS. I am satisfied that I did my best and, as much as I could, achieved the ending I envisioned.

However, at approximately 430,000 words, the manuscript I turned in to my publishers is simply too long to bind as a single volume. I was left with a choice. I could cut several hundred pages out of the book -- and weaken the end of the series by leaving plot threads and character's fates unresolved -- or I could split the manuscript into two volumes, each of which would run about as long as PRINCE OF DOGS.

I spent a lot of time agonizing over length, wondering whether any book needs to be this long. In the end, however, I couldn't see a way to make the cuts without losing a significant amount of the story's impact, so I chose to make the split in order to preserve the story. This means that CROWN OF STARS will be published in seven volumes, rather than six.

In retrospect, I note that the number 'seven' echoes the mage's ladder, so perhaps in some way this was inevitable.

For those who welcome or are at least resigned to this development, thank you so much for your patience. For those who are understandably irritated by it, please accept my apologies. I had no idea what I was getting into when I started.
Click to expand...
 
I've recently finished reading In the Ruins. And I enjoyed it greatly. I agree with the comments made by ChrisW. This book was more of getting players in position. I have found all of Kate Elliott's books wordy, and 'In the Ruins' is no different. But that is her style of writing, and I have gotten used to it.

All I can say is, com'on Crown of Stars. Too bad its released one month after the USA release date in the UK. March(UK). Feb(US).

I'm actually doing a re-read of the series, as I had seemed to have forgotten stuff from the past books, as I read them so long ago.
 
So the kate elliot books, I got the new one from a friend who read them but i have yet to read the first 5...and after reading about them I'm hesitant to start...Its just sad to hear that an author starts off well and loses touch with what their writting about...or at least spend too much time trying to "get deep" and forget to pick up the plot a little. Why do some always strive for complexity more the qualtiy?
I mean, Wheel of Time did that, however Book 11, for me, finaly started to pick up again. I mean crossroads of twilight was a total downfall and i was hesitant to continue...I'm kinda glad I did though.
 
Illy, I would recommend reading the first in the series (King's Dragon), and let yourself be the judge whether its a series you'll enjoy or not. :)
 
It probably helps to read them in a row. I read the first 5 this summer. I am waiting for the next one to be released to read the next two together.
 
I finished this book around 2 or 3 weeks ago now and have to say I enjoyed it - it positioned things very well for the finale. I don't think substantial editing would have helped - I didn't feel there was as much wasted space in this book as my predecessors in this thread. I think it was one of the better BFF's I read last year, and a much more satisfying and well rounded half-book than another we saw last year.
 
Eventine said:
and a much more satisfying and well rounded half-book than another we saw last year.
Click to expand...
BA-ZING! Wow.

I read up to (I think) the 4th book in this series and liked it quite a bit. I decided I would wait until the series was finished before going back into it, but I'm looking forward to jumping back in.
 
When I started reading the series, was around when Child of Flame had just come out (year 2000 I think). I remember that I found the first couple of hundred pages in King's Dragon hard going, as Kate Elliot's writing style was too descriptive and wordy for my tastes and I thought about giving it up. But I continued on, and ended up loving the book. I got the next in the series Prince of Dogs and zoomed through that, and then the third and finally got the fourth in hardback, as I was eager to carry on reading.

I was totally engrossed in the series, the world and characters. As well as the mystery surrounding some of the characters.

Because it is a big series, with numerous characters its best to read the series without leaving a large gap between books, as the enchantment can wear off as you forget things that happened previously.

For those who have thought of starting the series, its probably a good time to start now, as the final book will be coming out in Feb(US), Mar(UK), and the series will be complete before you've caught up to the final book.

I'm doing a re-read of the first book and am enjoying it. Spotting things I didn't notice when I first read through it so many years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsors


We try to keep the forum as free of ads as possible, please consider supporting SFFWorld on Patreon


Your ad here.
Back
Top