The original version of this page can be found at : http://forum.sfreader.com/default.aspx?f=5&m=5483
| Posted By : jonesha - 7/12/2005 3:03 AM | You can find it here:
http://www.tangentonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=506&Itemid=267
There are some supportive comments from Dave Truesdale in the comments section following the article.
Managing Editor
www.swordandsorcery.org
Flashing Swords E-Zine |
| Posted By : Kuroboshii - 7/12/2005 4:41 AM | I guess the reviewer did make one point I've been wondering about a little...one of your criteria for the New Edge was hardboiled, terse prose. That struck me as a little odd--when I was reading the Solomon Kane stories, one thing that struck me about them was how lush the prose was, and the F&GM stories I tried didn't seem particularly hardboiled to me. So...is this one area where you're trying to move away from the old style, or am I mistaken about old-time S&S?
Just curious...
Sean T. M. Stiennon (AKA Suuran Songforge)
For information about me, see my author page at www.sfreader.com/authors/seanstiennon. |
| Posted By : Supr - 7/12/2005 4:54 AM | Quite negative, huh?
Let me tell you my comment obout Bruce Durhams story I read. (The first one, because i’m not so fast reading with dictionary in my hand). It's great story, with emotions and fast action.
Of course the reviewer critisized it. But:
1) He forgot to mention among other things the interesting magic used by Bruce.
2) And to the games: I do like playing D&D computer games. I do also watch movies. I read comics. These are all great medias.
Although the literature is for me the highest thing I’m not ashame to tell, that all those things also inspire me to write. I don’t think that it’s something negative. I think it’s the sign of our times and i’d be a foul not to use it.
|
| Posted By : joe5mc - 7/12/2005 5:26 AM | Actually, Howard calls for hardboiled "Tone," which is not exactly the same thing as prose. I think the Solomon Kane stories definately have a hardboiled tone. "Grim man of a somber race," one of my favorite little lines from one of the Solomon Kane poems.
That said, I think this point is definately open to debate. I don't think I would have used the term "hardboiled" as this is so closely associated with one wing of mystery writing.
For myself, I believe that S&S should always have a grimness and gritiness, a darkness to it. Just a little dash of horror. The prose itself doesn't have to be. Fritz Leiber in many of his S&S tales had a writing style that I would almost consider fairytale lyrical, but the tone itself was still somehow dark. (man what a good writer he was).
Joe |
| Posted By : Daniel - 7/12/2005 5:46 AM | I was wondering when Big Dave Truesdale would weigh in. Thanks Dave T. for keeping perspective on this entire issue of "movements."
It's commendable of Howard Jones to sound the "clarion" call -- no pun intended -- but it is always risky pronouncing the existence of a literary movement and trying to consciously guide or direct its evolution.
On the other hand, the movement existed before anyone named it and it will continue to exist no matter how many object to its present designation or name.
I'd agree, though, with the idea that heroic fantasy and S&S is quite compatible with more excessive (or ornate) narrative writing styles; what Howard is trying to avoid is "style over substance," and that's an affectation spreading like a wildfire throughout much of the "slipstream" or spec-lit community.
It is important for good storytelling that narrative style and plot run harmoniously and do not fight for mirror-time, as is the case in many overtly literary works.
Daniel
www.pitchblackbooks.com |
| Posted By : RyanHarvey - 7/12/2005 5:52 AM | I think the assessments made in the review are fair, even if I don't always agree with them. It shows a much better understanding of the genre than the last review that Tangent gave us for Flashing Swords. I was glad to see "Pale Web of Venom" get the praise it deserves, but not so happy with the critcisms of Bruce's story, which I enjoyed (even in an earlier draft that Bruce graciously allowed me to read). Well, very few anthologies please everybody with every story, I guess.
Ryan Harvey
Associate Editor at www.swordandsorcery.org
www.RealmOfRyan.com |
| Posted By : PaulMc - 7/12/2005 6:50 AM | quote:
Originally posted by RyanHarvey
I think the assessments made in the review are fair, even if I don't always agree with them. It shows a much better understanding of the genre than the last review that Tangent gave us for Flashing Swords. I was glad to see "Pale Web of Venom" get the praise it deserves, but not so happy with the critcisms of Bruce's story, which I enjoyed (even in an earlier draft that Bruce graciously allowed me to read). Well, very few anthologies please everybody with every story, I guess.
I agree with you, Ryan. I think the review was better, because she had the 'guidelines' to go against. I, too, was surprised at the leveling of Bruce's tale, though. I think it was stronger than "Marsh God" and inventive. I don't know why she thought "dungeon master", I didn't feel that at all - and I've read lots of R A Salvatore's stuff!
It could easily have been converted into an issue of a 'Conan' comic.
And she doesn't even like the name Dalacroy? Why? Not "barbaric" sounding or something?
And, yes, kudos to Dave T. for giving kudos where due. Maybe "Flashing Swords" isn't perfect, but it's got alot of heart and it's headed in the correct direction, I think.
-- Paul McNamee
http://writer.paulmcnamee.net
http://www.dorancoyle.net |
| Posted By : Daniel - 7/12/2005 6:55 AM | agree with you, Ryan. I think the review was better, because she had the 'guidelines' to go against. I, too, was surprised at the leveling of Bruce's tale, though. I think it was stronger than "Marsh God" and inventive. I don't know why she thought "dungeon master", I didn't feel that at all - and I've read lots of R A Salvatore's stuff!
It could easily have been converted into an issue of a 'Conan' comic.
And she doesn't even like the name Dalacroy? Why? Not "barbaric" sounding or something?
***
Tangent probably needs to find another reviewer for heroic fantasy stuff. Somebody should poke their head in over there and volunteer....
Daniel
www.pitchblackbooks.com |
| Posted By : Kuroboshii - 7/12/2005 12:20 PM | No slight intended, Bruce--I think you're a skilled wordsmith--but the Dalacroy stories didn't particularly amaze me. I guess they just struck me as a little shallow in some way. They were fun to read, but...there wasn't a lot for me beyond the action. What makes Dalacroy different from the dozens of other barbarian swordsmen in fantasy? What makes his companions interesting when compared with other women and scholars like them? I think the Tangent reviewer was too harsh, but I did agree with some of her points.
I've only read Salvatore's The Crystal Shard, and I thought it was good light reading--partially because of the action, but also because I found Drizzt himself, and, to a lesser extent, Wulfgar and Bruenor, to be interesting, fun characters. I don't get that from Dalacroy or his companions.
This is just my opinion...
Sean T. M. Stiennon (AKA Suuran Songforge)
For information about me, see my author page at www.sfreader.com/authors/seanstiennon. |
| Posted By : J Harper - 7/12/2005 7:46 PM | I haven't read the entire review as of yet, since I haven't read Flashing Swords 3 completely yet, and do not wish to be spoiled. However, comments like this make me wonder if Miss Tilton has ever read any Howard whatsoever.
quote:
In my opinion, the notion of a hardboiled tone for sword-and-sorcery fiction is wrong-headed. This is the genre of Conan, not Sam Spade.
No, Conan isn't Sam Spade, but R.E. Howard was to fantasy what Hammett and Chandler were to detective fiction. Moorcock has pointed that out. So has Don Herron, one of the leading figures in Howard studies. Howard's prose does not read anything like Hammett's or Chandler's, but is similar in spirit. He does not couch his action and plots in a genteel style - he is as direct and straight as a sword's blade. His writing and descriptions can be beautiful and haunting, but unlike Dunsany, or Peake, or his great friend and contemporary Clark Ashton Smith, he does not try to dazzle you with word-witchery. His way, to quote Stephen King, is to pull on his combat boots and assault your senses. This is what I feel Howard Jones meant by wanting stories with a hard-boiled style.
Once again, I'm having a hard time taking Miss Tilton seriously as a reviewer.
Cheers,
Jeremy Harper
I am staunch and black and have one mood, and this - to defend my masters and their green earth.
Tintaggon
The Coming of the Sea by Lord Dunsany
|
| Posted By : Supr - 7/12/2005 10:23 PM | quote:
Originally posted by J Harper
However, comments like this make me wonder if Miss Tilton has ever read any Howard whatsoever.
Jeremy, the answer is yes. She has read Howard. Howard A. Jones.
She's always citing the New Edge principles. It may be a compliment for Howard but I'd except that the S&S reviewer would know more about the Sword&Sorcery genre. From her statements follows that she knows just fantasy quite well.
To be honest, her whole review is just comparison to Howards New Edge rules. |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/12/2005 10:45 PM | Well, I haven't finished Flashing Swords #3 but I had read Bruces story, so when I read the thread above I was concerned. Then I clicked on the link and found the review was by Lois Tilton.
Tilton has butted heads with several authors of my aquaintance over the past few years, most notably Eric Flint who coincedentally bought the first story I ever wrote. I have never had anything favorable to say about her, her opinions or her work. Basically I would consider a bad review from her high praise indeed and Bruce is in good company.
For what its worth, Bruce, after I finished FS#2 I rushed to read your story first. I was in no way disappointed. Perhaps because I'd just finished the first story I found your bridging scenes to be a delight. I read the encounter at the oasis aloud to my wife, who loved it. I hope you have a Dalacroy story in each edition of Flashing Swords as it will certainly keep me coming back. After twenty five or so episodes it would be prudent to string them together and go shopping at a mass market publishers. This is good stuff! Maybe not high 'literature' but I'm reading "Flashing Swords" not "James Joyce literary review".
Really the high standard of someone who make their living writing media tie ins and insulting the works of better writers is not worth loosing sleep over.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : Bruce Durham - 7/15/2005 12:10 PM | quote:
Originally posted by erazmus
Tilton has butted heads with several authors of my aquaintance over the past few years, most notably Eric Flint who coincedentally bought the first story I ever wrote. I have never had anything favorable to say about her, her opinions or her work. Basically I would consider a bad review from her high praise indeed and Bruce is in good company.
For what its worth, Bruce, after I finished FS#2 I rushed to read your story first. I was in no way disappointed. Perhaps because I'd just finished the first story I found your bridging scenes to be a delight. I read the encounter at the oasis aloud to my wife, who loved it. I hope you have a Dalacroy story in each edition of Flashing Swords as it will certainly keep me coming back. After twenty five or so episodes it would be prudent to string them together and go shopping at a mass market publishers. This is good stuff! Maybe not high 'literature' but I'm reading "Flashing Swords" not "James Joyce literary review".
Really the high standard of someone who make their living writing media tie ins and insulting the works of better writers is not worth loosing sleep over.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com
I've slept on this for the past few days before responding. I wasn't going to rant, and perhaps I shouldn't, but frankly, I felt was a dealt an incredible misjustice. First and foremost, thanks to Mike and the others who came to my defense. I've directed all of the people I know from the various sites I deal with to Tangent for a look see, and the common refrain appears to be one of 'too personal, unprofessional, and an axe to grind.' I find those sentiments rather mollifying, along with Mike's comment 'Basically I would consider a bad review from her high praise indeed and Bruce is in good company.' I think I'll wear that as a badge of honour.
At 51 years of age my influences are not D&D and Dungeon Master. They are Howard, Wagner, Leiber, Carter and others of that era. If my work is to be misconstrued and pigeon-holed, then there's nothing I can do about it. I write what I want to write, plain and simple. There's a third Dalacroy story coming. If the reviewer didn't like this one, she'll loath the third, I'm sure. I'm not writing for the Pulitzer, I'm writing to entertain. And I've received tons of positive feedback from various sites that leads me to believe they like what they're reading. That's good enough for me. [:)]
Hey, the story's not perfect. I read it on-line and cringed in several spots. I'm sure we all have at one time or another. But the thing that really irks me is that I don't know this reviewer from Adam. So, what gives her the right to be so mean-spirited and vindictive?
-------------------------
Admin: Community Forums for the Official Site of Conan the Barbarian
Contributing Editor for Flashing Swords. The leading edge in fantasy: Guaranteed Oprah Free!
Moderator for Paradox Interactive Games AAR and Fanfiction Forums
|
| Posted By : Jay Stevol - 7/15/2005 5:04 PM | | I was rather surprised at the D&D remark as well. The story read more like a typical Conan-esque adventure, which is very much a good thing. I think you can safely discard this particular review, Bruce. |
| Posted By : Dragon Angel - 7/15/2005 7:14 PM | | Look on the plus side, you're getting reviews. People are reading your work. I've yet to see someone I don't know personally mention any of my stories anywhere. |
| Posted By : RyanHarvey - 7/15/2005 8:45 PM | I was just re-reading the review, and man—the attacks on Bruce’s story are damned mean! Maybe I skimmed the review a bit too much the first time because I didn’t want to dwell on somebody criticizing a story of a friend (and a story that I had done a bit of critiquing on and thought it pretty much was damned fine mostly the way it was).
Okay, a bit of soul-searching here. I also review books. And sometimes I dislike material, and I'm not shy about saying it (look at my review of Blood of Wolves and you'll see what I mean). But I always make sure there is constructive and positive slant on what I say that is negative. That sounds strange, but unless the material is actually completely and utterly offensive in some deep way, I feel my job is to point out very specifically what I don't like so the reader of my review can decide for him or herself if what I perceive as problems might not bother them. I don't write reviews to prove myself somehow "better" than the material I'm reviewing—that's not my job. I'm passing along opinion for the benefit of a potential reader. Tilton's review is mostly postive on FS, but it feels as if the reviewer wanted to lash out at somebody, and Bruce got in the way somehow.
I think this may be because—and Bruce, you understand that this isn't criticism, certainly not coming from me—the story is the most purely pulpy in that issue of Flashing Swords. Bruce makes no attempt to deliver a groundbreaking genre-bending emotional masterpiece of angst and ennui. He delivers a cool monster and a creepy setting and gave me a breezy half hour of fun reading. Maybe that's mediocre to some people, but how often are we given the opportunity to read something like that? The story is very retro, which is just what it's supposed to be. Should everything be freakin' "cutting edge"? Blah! Sometimes I just want my damn monster and the guy with the sword and brawn and a bit a brain and a buxom wench and writer with the writing skill to run me through it and give me some fun. Just give me my damn monster.
In fact, that's my new motto: just give me my damn monster.
Ryan Harvey
Associate Editor at www.swordandsorcery.org
www.RealmOfRyan.com |
| Posted By : Supr - 7/15/2005 11:50 PM | Bruce, it was me who wrote about D&D influences according critic on your story. I should add to my opinion "even if it were your influences that's not an argument in discussion". Because I meant that for me the games (mostly crpg) are really fascinating.
On the other hand I do really admire your attitude, Bruce. 10 years ago I went to an editorial office of a polish fantasy magazine with my S&S story and became nothing but unconstructive critic. I gave up writing for some time.
Maybe it was because of good weather friends who laughed at me on my back.
But I see you're not an easy guy to break!
Btw, I'm a little rougher now too.
Let's show that the literature isn't just pseudointellectual masturbatic scribble.
|
| Posted By : CharlesR - 7/16/2005 5:04 AM | Raymond Chandler said he had three rules for writing. Never take advice, never discuss a work in progress, and never answer a critic. Ray didn't always stick to those and neither do I, but I do for the most part. Especially number three. There's just no point in debating or arguing with a review. No matter how wrong they are you won't come off looking good no matter what you say. Some people will like your work and others won't. I try not to take the pans any more seriously than I take the praise. Just some thoughts...
Charles R |
| Posted By : jonesha - 7/16/2005 8:13 AM | <<China Mieville>>
Grand, "sense of wonder" fiction. NOT sword and sorcery. He seems more like a descendant of Dunsany than Robert E. Howard, although even that's a stretch.
Anyway.
Live and let live. With civility.
best,
Howard
Managing Editor
www.swordandsorcery.org
Flashing Swords E-Zine |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/16/2005 8:10 PM | Bruce,
I've got to add one thing.
At least you got a review! Any publicity is better than none. I know for a fact that this is true because my mass market publisher told me so[:D].
A review means people will know about your work and that its available and where. Even a bad review will generate interest, often more interest than a good one. Some people will come read your story to see if its as bad as all that, some will come because they know that they can rely on a particular reviewer to be wrong. (I use Roger Ebert this way on movies I'm unsure about). The important thing is that they come. Once they have your story infront of them every single one will make up their own minds. Some of them will like it and some won't. Same as everyone else who reads it, just now more people read it. The worst feeling I've ever had in a review was when a book I had a story in got reviewed and I wasn't mentioned, even negativly. I have had several of them. It's hell. Of course sometimes its commercial, Harry Turtledove's story gets mentioned and not mine because damn few people are going to buy the book for my story and lots are for Harry's. That's okay cause we get the same royalty pro rata off every sale so he's kind of doing me a favor but its still a little frustrating. I still get a kick seeing my name in print and I'm pretty sure Harry could care less anymore.
Frankly if I were you I'd hope L.T. reviews the next issue and loathes a story by you and tells everyone so. That's good publicity, even if it stings a little. Just do what you can to keep legitamate criticism down to a minimal and go at it. It's better a thousand critics sound an alarm than no one hears about your work.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : Dragon Angel - 7/16/2005 8:19 PM | | I would go even so far as saying a single reviewer that absolutely detests everything you write could be good for your career. Keeps people talking about your work. Of course, if everyone detests it, you're in trouble. |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/16/2005 8:38 PM | quote:
Originally posted by davidolson22
I would go even so far as saying a single reviewer that absolutely detests everything you write could be good for your career. Keeps people talking about your work. Of course, if everyone detests it, you're in trouble.
Maybe, unless they keep buying it to revile it. That happens sometimes, I can remember buying a later "Gor" book just to see if it was as bad as everyone was saying(It was.). In general though you write and send out the best you have, some people like it and some don't. If no one does like it at all soon no one will publish it and you reevaluate what it is you are doing in your work (and perhaps adopt a pen-name). If someone reacts so strongly to your work as to publicly revile it then it must have a power to it to cause so strong a reaction. Others will see that power in it, and like, even love it. Anonmitity alone is a writer's peril.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
|