Free: Wool (Part 1) by Hugh Howey

[Blue Tyson]

Originally Posted by afv011

I found it an interesting read, quite a page turner actually, though a bit predictable on what the end would be. Could you be more specific about what you didn't like about it?

"The children were playing while Holston climbed to his death; he could hear them squealing as only happy children do. While they thundered about frantically above, Holston took his time, each step methodical and ponderous, as he wound his way around and around the spiral staircase, old boots ringing out on metal treads."


It is pretty stupid from the first sentence.

Only happy children squeal? Wrong. Do children generally thunder? Nope. Above where? Above him? Wound his way? On a staircase? Around and Around would mean you ended up back where you started from. Boots ring on a _surface_ not on their own treads. Because of whatever the staircase might be made from and the composition of their soles. There is no indication of the staircase surface - or does he mean the treads are the staircase, not the boots? The latter being what people would assume as who talks about staircase treads? A terrible mangled sentence. Unclear, hamhanded and lacking.

[Fluribus]

Originally Posted by Blue Tyson

"The children were playing while Holston climbed to his death; he could hear them squealing as only happy children do. While they thundered about frantically above, Holston took his time, each step methodical and ponderous, as he wound his way around and around the spiral staircase, old boots ringing out on metal treads."


It is pretty stupid from the first sentence.

Only happy children squeal? Wrong. Do children generally thunder? Nope. Above where? Above him? Wound his way? On a staircase? Around and Around would mean you ended up back where you started from. Boots ring on a _surface_ not on their own treads. Because of whatever the staircase might be made from and the composition of their soles. There is no indication of the staircase surface - or does he mean the treads are the staircase, not the boots? The latter being what people would assume as who talks about staircase treads? A terrible mangled sentence. Unclear, hamhanded and lacking.

Spiral staircases do, indeed, go around and around. Always either up or down.

Industrial staircases are often made of metal and have open treads. The treads reduce the likelihood of slippage. The openings allow debris to fall down rather than build up on the stairs. (Of course, I've never seen a spiraling industrial staircase.)

If the stairs and walkways are metal. The sound of the children running around could easily thunder.

Unhappy children might squeal, but probably not in the same fashion as happy children.

(I did not like Wool 1 well enough to pay for the rest of it.)

[Iphinome]

Why don't we argue the point in reading recommendations?

[afv011]

Originally Posted by Blue Tyson

"The children were playing while Holston climbed to his death; he could hear them squealing as only happy children do. While they thundered about frantically above, Holston took his time, each step methodical and ponderous, as he wound his way around and around the spiral staircase, old boots ringing out on metal treads."


It is pretty stupid from the first sentence.

Only happy children squeal? Wrong. Do children generally thunder? Nope. Above where? Above him? Wound his way? On a staircase? Around and Around would mean you ended up back where you started from. Boots ring on a _surface_ not on their own treads. Because of whatever the staircase might be made from and the composition of their soles. There is no indication of the staircase surface - or does he mean the treads are the staircase, not the boots? The latter being what people would assume as who talks about staircase treads? A terrible mangled sentence. Unclear, hamhanded and lacking.

You are overthinking it; "as only happy children do" does not imply that children squeal only when they're happy, but that this kind of squeal happens only when children are happy. Anyway, t's a novel, not a technical document that needs to be over analysed and scrutinized. I can see no pleasure in reading the way you do.

[koland]

Originally Posted by Blue Tyson

"The children were playing while Holston climbed to his death; he could hear them squealing as only happy children do. While they thundered about frantically above, Holston took his time, each step methodical and ponderous, as he wound his way around and around the spiral staircase, old boots ringing out on metal treads."

It is pretty stupid from the first sentence.

Only happy children squeal? Wrong. Do children generally thunder? Nope. Above where? Above him? Wound his way? On a staircase? Around and Around would mean you ended up back where you started from. Boots ring on a _surface_ not on their own treads. Because of whatever the staircase might be made from and the composition of their soles. There is no indication of the staircase surface - or does he mean the treads are the staircase, not the boots? The latter being what people would assume as who talks about staircase treads? A terrible mangled sentence. Unclear, hamhanded and lacking.

I've actually climbed that staircase (although it is much quieter when raining, it is much, much more treacherous). It, however, was outside and there wasn't a lot of playing room at the top end of it.

Odd that he is apparently climbing up and that's where the children are playing (thus, they went up earlier? or he is from "below" and the kids kill him when he gets to the top)?

[booklover6]

Originally Posted by koland

I've actually climbed that staircase (although it is much quieter when raining, it is much, much more treacherous). It, however, was outside and there wasn't a lot of playing room at the top end of it.

Odd that he is apparently climbing up and that's where the children are playing (thus, they went up earlier? or he is from "below" and the kids kill him when he gets to the top)?

No....not at all. You just have to read it. The Omnibus was Really Good. (1-5) I haven't read any others, yet.

[jhempel24]

Originally Posted by Blue Tyson

"The children were playing while Holston climbed to his death; he could hear them squealing as only happy children do. While they thundered about frantically above, Holston took his time, each step methodical and ponderous, as he wound his way around and around the spiral staircase, old boots ringing out on metal treads."


It is pretty stupid from the first sentence.

Only happy children squeal? Wrong. Do children generally thunder? Nope. Above where? Above him? Wound his way? On a staircase? Around and Around would mean you ended up back where you started from. Boots ring on a _surface_ not on their own treads. Because of whatever the staircase might be made from and the composition of their soles. There is no indication of the staircase surface - or does he mean the treads are the staircase, not the boots? The latter being what people would assume as who talks about staircase treads? A terrible mangled sentence. Unclear, hamhanded and lacking.

I think somebody is of the "it's popular so it's rubbish" persuasion

Over analyzing things never really gets you anywhere in fiction.

Here's what I got from it:

He's winding up to the top of a spiral staircase, listening to the children playing down below. Squealing, like with laughter and screams of fun and happiness....they could squeal because they are being tortured like pigs, but then they wouldn't be happy would they?

It was a perfect first sentence. It set the tone of the entire story, and was perfectly readable and understandable.

I think I should take my avatar's advice though.

[Blue Tyson]

Originally Posted by jhempel24

I think somebody is of the "it's popular so it's rubbish" persuasion

-- No. It is entirely possible I have read hundreds or thousands more popular books than you. Stephen King and Agatha Christie never wrote a sentence that terrible, certainly.

Over analyzing things never really gets you anywhere in fiction.

-- This is rubbish, too.

It was a perfect first sentence. It set the tone of the entire story, and was perfectly readable and understandable.

-- If he was capable of perfection, I am sure someone would have mentioned it.

If it set the tone for the entire story then it is all about happy noisy children and a guy that dies on an indeterminate staircase?

[booklover6]

He doesn't die on the staircase! Just give it up, if you aren't going to read it before you make your derogatory comments.

[jhempel24]

The tone being he climbed to his death while children were playing.

Being that people do this all the time, so the kids don't really take any notice of it. Sounds like a really bleak place if climbing to ones death in the silo is common place to me.

[koland]

I still think the kids killed them. They are obviously monster children and dancing on the bones of their other victims, which he is climbing up to investigate (after all, the quoted section says they are ABOVE him, not playing below - that would be sick, if he leapt to his death and landed amongst their happy play).

[afv011]

Originally Posted by jhempel24

I think somebody is of the "it's popular so it's rubbish" persuasion

Over analyzing things never really gets you anywhere in fiction.

Here's what I got from it:

He's winding up to the top of a spiral staircase, listening to the children playing down below. Squealing, like with laughter and screams of fun and happiness....they could squeal because they are being tortured like pigs, but then they wouldn't be happy would they?

It was a perfect first sentence. It set the tone of the entire story, and was perfectly readable and understandable.

I think I should take my avatar's advice though.

Agreed, there's nothing wrong with the sentence, in my eyes. But if someone doesn't like it, simply move on and read something else. I think the comment about the first sentence was way too harsh.

[HappyMartin]

Thought the series a very good read. Do not take up the offer of the freebie unless you are prepared to spend a lot more time on the rest of the series. I found it quite compelling.

[Gronk]

Originally Posted by HappyMartin

Thought the series a very good read. Do not take up the offer of the freebie unless you are prepared to spend a lot more time on the rest of the series. I found it quite compelling.

I've read Wool 1 twice and I'm trying to decide if I want to continue the series. While I thought the writing was good I'm not really a SF reader so the story didn't grab me. (The overall sense of unending gloom and hopelessness is a bit of a turnoff for me.) However if I can knock down some of my TBR list I'll probably read more of the series because of the many great reviews.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by Gronk

I've read Wool 1 twice and I'm trying to decide if I want to continue the series. While I thought the writing was good I'm not really a SF reader so the story didn't grab me. (The overall sense of unending gloom and hopelessness is a bit of a turnoff for me.) However if I can knock down some of my TBR list I'll probably read more of the series because of the many great reviews.

They're are short stories, so there's really no reason not to give it a try.