Kindle Million Club - George R.R. Martin

[afa]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I guess the time spent "learning" allomancy and "burning metals" just didn't do anything for me.

As with HarryT, this is one of the aspects of Mistborn (or any of Sanderson's novels, really) that I do enjoy. Everyone has different tastes and interests, of course, and for me the idea that the magic in his world has rules and limitations, is almost logical (again, if such a term can be used for something as inherently illogical as magic) does, indeed, help me suspend my disbelief.

One of the reasons for this is, simply, that without such rules, what is to stop magic from being a boundless power capable of anything and everything? Alternatively, if the magic is not explained, if it's process of functioning and related limitations are not clear, then characters suddenly hitting a brick wall when attempting a level of magic seems to make less sense. It feels almost forced, like the author just realised that he certainly can't have the protagonist achieve his goals that easily, so maybe we'll throw in Arbitrary Limitation X.

As I said, Sanderson's seems more logical, in that way. I know that is likely a poor choice of words, but I can't think of a better alternative at the moment.

And for reference, I don't really consider Abercrombie to be barebones when it comes to world building (although he's a step in the right direction for me). So Joe would represent my personal middle-ground when it comes to world-building.

Hmmm... Interesting. I can't recall reading a Fantasy series that had less detailed world-building than Abercrombie; then again, it's pretty clear you're more well-read in the genre than I am. So if Abercrombie really does represent the middle for you, I assume that implies there are others who you do think are barebones? Who would that be?

I like the passages you quoted by Lawrence. I've seen him around on a couple of forums, as well, and he seems like a really cool dude. I especially agree with this part:

In truth a reader doesn't always want what they think they want.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by afa

Hmmm... Interesting. I can't recall reading a Fantasy series that had less detailed world-building than Abercrombie; then again, it's pretty clear you're more well-read in the genre than I am. So if Abercrombie really does represent the middle for you, I assume that implies there are others who you do think are barebones? Who would that be?

Just more "widely-read" probably.

Barebones is really what I prefer, so the three works I mentioned previously would be representative of my definition of it.

Read Lawrence's Prince of Thorns, Polansky's Low Town, and Huso's The Last Page if you're interested in getting an idea of the level of "world-building" I'm comfortable with.

**NOTE: by sparse world-building, I don't mean to suggest that those authors haven't created vivid worlds. They just don't spoon-feed those worlds to me. They tend take the approach of "sink or swim." The details of those worlds are right there in between all the words, but it's up to me, the reader, to do the heavy lifting and "build" them.