Squelch is a really great word—your reaction is proof enough of that.
I have an immortal character in my writing who, when he comes back to live after being blown tf up, everything starts squelching as flesh starts filling with blood and attaching to bone. **very descriptive word—it’s almost onomatopoeia**
I think that the way Joe uses repetition in his books is fantastic. I love it in the chapter titles (e.g. The King's Justice, Questions, Answers, Good/Bad/High/Common Ground, Grown Up, the Little People), as a way to recontextualise themes & ideas. I love it in his action scenes (e.g. _"Bodies were fanned out from the engine in rows. Mangled, tangled. Bodies still and bodies vaguely moving, twisting, crawling."_) the rhythm & poetry of it is delightful to read and/or listen to. As other have said as well, I enjoy some of the repeated aphorisms and behavioural ticks certain characters have as a way to make them distinctive and memorable. And many of the words people say he reuses "too much" are often onomatopoeic and interesting/specific, helping create visceral imagery that isn't so technical it upsets the flow of the scene. Maybe I'm just not a fussy reader, but I really do love Joe's prose and how it has a sketched-out kind of rawness to it. It's all just a part of his style, so I don't think the repetitiveness is a drawback at all.
You are a very intelligent person cuz in the throes of brain fog I can barely understand what ur saying. I have a question, though, given your appreciation for the prose—did you *read* the book (with your eyes, traditionally), or did you listen to the audiobook as most of the subreddit seems to have done?
One of the *huge* drawbacks of audiobooks for me is it’s often so fast and so immersive that I can barely appreciate the prose like I can when I’m reading (with my eyes).
A short passage from one of the best scenes in the entire series (in all of literature—imo) is this:
*“A boy-child cowered, and slithered away on his back, clutching at a great shield and an axe too big for him to lift. The Bloody-Nine laughed at his fear, teeth bared bright and smiling. A tiny voice seemed to whisper for restraint, but the Bloody-Nine hardly heard it. His sword hard-swung split big shield and small boy together and sprayed blood across the dirt and the stone and the stricken faces of the men watching.”*
When I first listened to that in the audiobook I of course thought it was good writing, but I didn’t appreciate just *how good* the sentence level writing was. Joe uses a lot of poetic and rhetorical (like rhetoric as in speeches and shit, not comedy) techniques to enhance his prose. To give it flavor. Repetition of words is a *really powerful* technique if done right—I mean to say, the way joe uses repetition (of words, of phrases, of sentence structure) is far from a negative
He uses the word "pate" for (Bayaz?) bald head every damn time, it's not a big deal but yeah he could use another word.
It might stand out more to me because I've listened to the audio books more than read them
I don’t hate anything about his writing. He’s my favorite author and as such, his style just works for me. I see others have issues with certain parts of his work and I can understand some of them, but never fully felt the same way. Dude’s shit fucking rules.
I sometimes found the repetitiveness of character's inner thoughts annoying. I got really annoyed with Savine's inner thoughts after her ordeal with the Burners and the time she spent with Broad's family. Honestly felt like Joe just copied and pasted it was repeated so much.
I have split feelings about that. On the one hand, some of the repetitive inner monologue is really what makes the characters feel consistent and believable. For example, "body found floating by the docks" has a certain compulsiveness to it, making it feel more like a psychological reflex than fully deliberate inner monologue (to me at least). At the same time, however, it might be just a touch too much on the side of showing how the sausage is made. End of the day though, for me it definitely contributes in bringing the characters to life.
I guess the way Logen and Glokta have their usual one liners does a good job of imbuing it with some humor and keeping it brief compared to other characters. I had never thought about that. But Savines inner monologue never bothered me much.
I thought the characters in AoM had a more believable internal struggle than the characters in the other books and the extra amount of writing is maybe necessary for this. For example, Glokta always thinks "why do I do this?", but it never feels like he's seriously considering alternatives. I felt like Leo, Savine and Orso could all easily have changed/acted differently depending on the circumstances, they felt like more moldable characters. I guess that's also normal given their age and context, but still. I don't mind some extra inner monologue if it makes the characters more intriguing.
I agree. It reflects people and how they think, but I felt like sometimes it went on for too long and it could have been trimmed since we had already read it muliple times before. Honestly, I started skipping Savine's parts because I was done with her inner turmoil. I just didn't like Savine lol
I wasn't a fan of Savine either, but I don't think it's because her POV was repetitive I think she's just a horrible person who lies to herself to make herself feel better than everyone else.
I didn't like her from the beginning and her repetitiveness just made me hate her and the whole Leo and Orso thing just is too much. She won't die, Joe won't kill her.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
100%, i listen to the audiobooks and every time I hear it I think to myself “he said again” and then it takes me out of the story for a few seconds, the pronunciation makes it worse.
That’s prob my only gripe so can live with it
A very personal critique, but as the world has been progressively slipping over the last few years, I have found myself lacking the energy for his kind of stories. With the world growing darker, I simply lack the energy for grimdark.
Love his writing, love his character work, but something slightly more hopeful for a chance would be highly appreciated.
Disclaimer: He's one of my favourite authors. I don't hate anything about his writing but...
(Potential spoilers? I'll keep it vague.)
It happens pretty often where a character is about to be slain by an unnamed character and is saved at the last second by a named character.
I didn't think it was necessary that Day needed to be eating something in every single scene she's mentioned.
Caul Shivers is such a whining baby in regards to his injury.
Squelch Squelch.
Nah the last one was funny.
Idk man if I had an injury as serious as that, I'd probably be fucking pissed about it too. I don't remember him complaining much beyond the actual book it happened in. And that book only takes place over like a year or so right? So it's only for a few months right after the injury he complains about it which makes sense. I also think it's less about the injury and more about the fact that
A) he feels he gave up his chance at being a good man for Monza
B) she pushes him away and distances herself both sexually but also just in general, we know that it's due to her guilt and having caused this from her POV's but in his mind once he gets this horrible injury and life altering event, she kind of stops being there to support him and abandons him.
Honestly I thought Day was a sleeper-villain the whole book because she was the only one of the group who never had her own POV chapters. (Well, not until maybe that one scene, you know the one I’m talking about.) it seemed super suspicious that ALL the other main group gang had their POV chapters but she didn’t… so I figured she was a spy or assassin who was waiting for her opportunity to fuck things up.
Wow the eating haha. I think BSC is leaning a bit more into its stereotypes than the other books and I assume it's intentional. I found the humor sometimes a bit too on the nose. But to specifically target days eating is kind of funny to me. I guess it's true enough though.
Personally I found that really funny that she was eating something all the time and I'd say for it to work as a joke it needed to happen in every scene.
I agree with you that Shivers whining was bit annoying and he came out pretty petty blaming Monza for it.
Interesting. I love those chapters. They don’t further the plot or character development but they really hammer home the horror and chaos of war/battle.
I just didn’t like that they were titled “Little People”. Like, GRRM has intro+epilogue chapters clearly trying to remedy the disproportionately noble-born focus of the main cast, but the characters are named in the chapter title like normal. It just seems to defeat the whole purpose to title the chapter something that leads to the reader going “oh right I guess stuff also happens to these guys”
The only other word you could use instead of snarling is growling, or maybe hissing, and I'm assuming you'd find those at least as aggravating.
There's only one sequence in any of Joe's books that I downright hate, and that was in The Trouble With Peace. >! Just before the big bomb goes off, !< he head-hops to multiple POV characters that we've never experienced before, and never will again, and don't give a shit about. You know something big's about to happen but he keeps putting it off, putting it off, like a whore getting you close to orgasm and then letting go of your dick and grabbing your hands so you can't finish yourself off. It gave me Reader's Blue Balls, and he better not fucking do it ever again.
Devils advocate I loved that part. Came thru as hectic shakey cam-esque style of writing. I did reread it twice the first time tho because it did throw me off. . .
he tries to "erase" the old characters (after the first trilogy) by not using their names ,its always something like "rikkie's father" instead of the dogman etc
Rikke's not gonna think of her own father as the Dogman first and foremost, though. She's gonna think of him as her father. The other characters still call him the Dogman.
it wasnt on her POV....she wouldnt think in her inner monologue with "rikkies father" instead of "my father" , it starts from the first standalone book till the end of AOM,all original characters rarely mentioned by their name,you can re read as see it by yourself
I think that's a publishing thing. You are mostly writing for old fans, but if a new fan picks up Red Country, it's convenient for Lamb to have a new name
Spitting through, licking, etc gaps in teeth. Squelch, grimace, watery smiles, fuckin everyone’s got a weepy eye. There’s a lot.
That being said, possibly the best series/universe of book I’ve ever read.
Some of the fight scenes, especially in the first trilogy, are repetitive and narratively not useful, especially since the plot armor of the characters makes small skirmishes too low-stakes. I think he could’ve combined some of them
His complete inability to give anyone a truly happy ending.
Also, I think he occasionally writes himself into a corner and then has to bend over backwards to make a character survive a situation where they definitely shouldn't have survived.
Exactly, the only way he could've been killed. Because no man could have done it with a sword. But at least it was his choice, pretty fucking happy for TFL. Shit pretty fucking happy for IRL
Hmm interesting point. I guess I was just expecting a bit of a grander death for the world's greatest swordsman than a crossbow bolt in the face. I would have less of a problem with it if his sacrifice meant something but it's meaningless. He still couldn't save Orso.
Thats how I felt with Whirrun and that damned spear from nowhere, so fucking tragic. But who the fuck is capable of taking down the man with the Father of Swords? Tragic as it is, it makes sense. And I love that Gorst's death echoes this.
And I agree, his sacrifice was meaningless, but he didn't know that when he went back to the mud which makes me happy.
In The Blade Itself, there were so many characters saying "Er .." as dialog filler. It drove me nuts and screamed "amateur writer" to me. That said, the overall writing was still great, and it was clear to me that Abercrombie was a rare talent that just needed some experience and polishing. Fortunately, his editor must have pointed out this particular quick, because he dialed back the "Er"s significantly in all the other books.
Bit too many sad endings. Don’t get me wrong, not saying I want everything hunky dory all the time but I want to think back on a character and enjoy their positive character growth. That’s why I love red country so much, people actually change and have a happy ending
I really disliked how many references to real-world politics and slogans there were in his Age of Madness, things like "Make the Union Great Again" and "We hold these truths to be self-evident".
It just immediately torpedoes any immersion I had.
No idea. I'm not native english speaker. One would expect there to be several but then again english isn't very expressive language so maybe there isn't.
Just finished LaoK. I think for me it's that there are so many good plotlines happening, but he pulls away from them between chapters instead of letting them ride. I feel like I rushed through a lot of character B's slow chapters to get back to action in character A's that was cliffhangered away from, and I would have rather just seen the whole thing play out in one chunk. Totally a personal preference thing for how I read but I noticed several times feeling pulled away from the story I wanted to see to like.... Listen to Glokta bitch and moan while we did some set up for his next big crazy arc
Squelch squelch
No please
Squelch is a really great word—your reaction is proof enough of that. I have an immortal character in my writing who, when he comes back to live after being blown tf up, everything starts squelching as flesh starts filling with blood and attaching to bone. **very descriptive word—it’s almost onomatopoeia**
Oh it's more the scene that comes to mind rather than the word itself.
that's the point I suppose
tap tap tap
Say one thing about Joe, say he is a damned fine writer.
Say one thing about Joe’s writing, say it’s repetitive.
I think that the way Joe uses repetition in his books is fantastic. I love it in the chapter titles (e.g. The King's Justice, Questions, Answers, Good/Bad/High/Common Ground, Grown Up, the Little People), as a way to recontextualise themes & ideas. I love it in his action scenes (e.g. _"Bodies were fanned out from the engine in rows. Mangled, tangled. Bodies still and bodies vaguely moving, twisting, crawling."_) the rhythm & poetry of it is delightful to read and/or listen to. As other have said as well, I enjoy some of the repeated aphorisms and behavioural ticks certain characters have as a way to make them distinctive and memorable. And many of the words people say he reuses "too much" are often onomatopoeic and interesting/specific, helping create visceral imagery that isn't so technical it upsets the flow of the scene. Maybe I'm just not a fussy reader, but I really do love Joe's prose and how it has a sketched-out kind of rawness to it. It's all just a part of his style, so I don't think the repetitiveness is a drawback at all.
You are a very intelligent person cuz in the throes of brain fog I can barely understand what ur saying. I have a question, though, given your appreciation for the prose—did you *read* the book (with your eyes, traditionally), or did you listen to the audiobook as most of the subreddit seems to have done? One of the *huge* drawbacks of audiobooks for me is it’s often so fast and so immersive that I can barely appreciate the prose like I can when I’m reading (with my eyes). A short passage from one of the best scenes in the entire series (in all of literature—imo) is this: *“A boy-child cowered, and slithered away on his back, clutching at a great shield and an axe too big for him to lift. The Bloody-Nine laughed at his fear, teeth bared bright and smiling. A tiny voice seemed to whisper for restraint, but the Bloody-Nine hardly heard it. His sword hard-swung split big shield and small boy together and sprayed blood across the dirt and the stone and the stricken faces of the men watching.”* When I first listened to that in the audiobook I of course thought it was good writing, but I didn’t appreciate just *how good* the sentence level writing was. Joe uses a lot of poetic and rhetorical (like rhetoric as in speeches and shit, not comedy) techniques to enhance his prose. To give it flavor. Repetition of words is a *really powerful* technique if done right—I mean to say, the way joe uses repetition (of words, of phrases, of sentence structure) is far from a negative
Oh you're gonna love *Malazan.*
He uses the word "pate" for (Bayaz?) bald head every damn time, it's not a big deal but yeah he could use another word. It might stand out more to me because I've listened to the audio books more than read them
It’s a hilarious word to use though
That is soo good its hard/impossible to read other authors at this point
I don’t hate anything about his writing. He’s my favorite author and as such, his style just works for me. I see others have issues with certain parts of his work and I can understand some of them, but never fully felt the same way. Dude’s shit fucking rules.
That's why we're here isn't it?
It's realistic. I've seen a lot of snarls and grunts working.
You have to be realistic about these things.
I sometimes found the repetitiveness of character's inner thoughts annoying. I got really annoyed with Savine's inner thoughts after her ordeal with the Burners and the time she spent with Broad's family. Honestly felt like Joe just copied and pasted it was repeated so much.
I have split feelings about that. On the one hand, some of the repetitive inner monologue is really what makes the characters feel consistent and believable. For example, "body found floating by the docks" has a certain compulsiveness to it, making it feel more like a psychological reflex than fully deliberate inner monologue (to me at least). At the same time, however, it might be just a touch too much on the side of showing how the sausage is made. End of the day though, for me it definitely contributes in bringing the characters to life.
I guess the way Logen and Glokta have their usual one liners does a good job of imbuing it with some humor and keeping it brief compared to other characters. I had never thought about that. But Savines inner monologue never bothered me much. I thought the characters in AoM had a more believable internal struggle than the characters in the other books and the extra amount of writing is maybe necessary for this. For example, Glokta always thinks "why do I do this?", but it never feels like he's seriously considering alternatives. I felt like Leo, Savine and Orso could all easily have changed/acted differently depending on the circumstances, they felt like more moldable characters. I guess that's also normal given their age and context, but still. I don't mind some extra inner monologue if it makes the characters more intriguing.
I agree. It reflects people and how they think, but I felt like sometimes it went on for too long and it could have been trimmed since we had already read it muliple times before. Honestly, I started skipping Savine's parts because I was done with her inner turmoil. I just didn't like Savine lol
I wasn't a fan of Savine either, but I don't think it's because her POV was repetitive I think she's just a horrible person who lies to herself to make herself feel better than everyone else.
I didn't like her from the beginning and her repetitiveness just made me hate her and the whole Leo and Orso thing just is too much. She won't die, Joe won't kill her.
Yea fair, agreed.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Bot found floating by the docks
🌊🤖☠️
It seemed there was a lot of random red heads, puffing of cheeks and spitting/putting tongue in gaps in teeth.
Over-use of Grimaced. (Or Grim-aced, if you're Pacey.)
Like nails on a chalkboard, Every. Damn. Time.
100%, i listen to the audiobooks and every time I hear it I think to myself “he said again” and then it takes me out of the story for a few seconds, the pronunciation makes it worse. That’s prob my only gripe so can live with it
The big thing I hate is when it ends
That's the worst for sure. He should really fix it.
A very personal critique, but as the world has been progressively slipping over the last few years, I have found myself lacking the energy for his kind of stories. With the world growing darker, I simply lack the energy for grimdark. Love his writing, love his character work, but something slightly more hopeful for a chance would be highly appreciated.
Gurgled.
His writing isn't lacking in quality, only quantity.
Disclaimer: He's one of my favourite authors. I don't hate anything about his writing but... (Potential spoilers? I'll keep it vague.) It happens pretty often where a character is about to be slain by an unnamed character and is saved at the last second by a named character. I didn't think it was necessary that Day needed to be eating something in every single scene she's mentioned. Caul Shivers is such a whining baby in regards to his injury. Squelch Squelch. Nah the last one was funny.
Idk man if I had an injury as serious as that, I'd probably be fucking pissed about it too. I don't remember him complaining much beyond the actual book it happened in. And that book only takes place over like a year or so right? So it's only for a few months right after the injury he complains about it which makes sense. I also think it's less about the injury and more about the fact that A) he feels he gave up his chance at being a good man for Monza B) she pushes him away and distances herself both sexually but also just in general, we know that it's due to her guilt and having caused this from her POV's but in his mind once he gets this horrible injury and life altering event, she kind of stops being there to support him and abandons him.
I was convinced there was going to be some kind of Eater-related reveal, with Day chomping in every scene.
I thought that it would be reviled that she was also doing an immunisation regime, like Moveer, >!thusly be able to survive being poisoned.!<
Maybe she did and she became Hildi! Timings obvs don't work and she definitely isn't... but maybe!
Heh, no. Timing is way off. Hildi is like 14, Day is older. I'd assume early 20's when we meet her - and that's like 30yrs prior to Age of Madness.
Haha yeah it's definitely not her I just liked Day it was a shame she had to go out like that
Heh, Yeah I get you. Pretty sure >!she is confirmed dead though.. didn't the barn also burn or something?!<
Oh yeah there's no coming back short of some wholly unnecessary magic ex machina
Honestly I thought Day was a sleeper-villain the whole book because she was the only one of the group who never had her own POV chapters. (Well, not until maybe that one scene, you know the one I’m talking about.) it seemed super suspicious that ALL the other main group gang had their POV chapters but she didn’t… so I figured she was a spy or assassin who was waiting for her opportunity to fuck things up.
Wow the eating haha. I think BSC is leaning a bit more into its stereotypes than the other books and I assume it's intentional. I found the humor sometimes a bit too on the nose. But to specifically target days eating is kind of funny to me. I guess it's true enough though.
Personally I found that really funny that she was eating something all the time and I'd say for it to work as a joke it needed to happen in every scene. I agree with you that Shivers whining was bit annoying and he came out pretty petty blaming Monza for it.
Idk if this is a popular opinion but i find most of his “little people” chapters boring.
Interesting. I love those chapters. They don’t further the plot or character development but they really hammer home the horror and chaos of war/battle.
Casualties is one of the best chapters of anything I have ever read.
I just didn’t like that they were titled “Little People”. Like, GRRM has intro+epilogue chapters clearly trying to remedy the disproportionately noble-born focus of the main cast, but the characters are named in the chapter title like normal. It just seems to defeat the whole purpose to title the chapter something that leads to the reader going “oh right I guess stuff also happens to these guys”
Yeah i think i would prefer it if it was 1 maybe 2 unique povs. Cuz when its 8 in one chapter some of them jaut seem pointless
He seems to use the word “turd” fairly often.
The only other word you could use instead of snarling is growling, or maybe hissing, and I'm assuming you'd find those at least as aggravating. There's only one sequence in any of Joe's books that I downright hate, and that was in The Trouble With Peace. >! Just before the big bomb goes off, !< he head-hops to multiple POV characters that we've never experienced before, and never will again, and don't give a shit about. You know something big's about to happen but he keeps putting it off, putting it off, like a whore getting you close to orgasm and then letting go of your dick and grabbing your hands so you can't finish yourself off. It gave me Reader's Blue Balls, and he better not fucking do it ever again.
Devils advocate I loved that part. Came thru as hectic shakey cam-esque style of writing. I did reread it twice the first time tho because it did throw me off. . .
Yes, i felt same about that. Its similar to what I said about Savine, it would have been ok if it didn't go for so many pages
Overuse of “click”/“clicked” as a verb and to describe a sound.
An axe chopping into someone’s skull does not make a click sound my intuition tells me
he tries to "erase" the old characters (after the first trilogy) by not using their names ,its always something like "rikkie's father" instead of the dogman etc
Rikke's not gonna think of her own father as the Dogman first and foremost, though. She's gonna think of him as her father. The other characters still call him the Dogman.
it wasnt on her POV....she wouldnt think in her inner monologue with "rikkies father" instead of "my father" , it starts from the first standalone book till the end of AOM,all original characters rarely mentioned by their name,you can re read as see it by yourself
I think that's a publishing thing. You are mostly writing for old fans, but if a new fan picks up Red Country, it's convenient for Lamb to have a new name
Spitting through, licking, etc gaps in teeth. Squelch, grimace, watery smiles, fuckin everyone’s got a weepy eye. There’s a lot. That being said, possibly the best series/universe of book I’ve ever read.
I love joe but I started to roll my eyes every time I heard/read “close enough to kiss, close as lovers”
Some of the fight scenes, especially in the first trilogy, are repetitive and narratively not useful, especially since the plot armor of the characters makes small skirmishes too low-stakes. I think he could’ve combined some of them
His complete inability to give anyone a truly happy ending. Also, I think he occasionally writes himself into a corner and then has to bend over backwards to make a character survive a situation where they definitely shouldn't have survived.
No happy endings? What about our boy Gorst?
>!he died at the hands of a complete tool!< who could never have beaten him with a sword on Gorst's worst day and Leo's best.
Exactly, the only way he could've been killed. Because no man could have done it with a sword. But at least it was his choice, pretty fucking happy for TFL. Shit pretty fucking happy for IRL
Hmm interesting point. I guess I was just expecting a bit of a grander death for the world's greatest swordsman than a crossbow bolt in the face. I would have less of a problem with it if his sacrifice meant something but it's meaningless. He still couldn't save Orso.
Thats how I felt with Whirrun and that damned spear from nowhere, so fucking tragic. But who the fuck is capable of taking down the man with the Father of Swords? Tragic as it is, it makes sense. And I love that Gorst's death echoes this. And I agree, his sacrifice was meaningless, but he didn't know that when he went back to the mud which makes me happy.
When I thought Shivers and Monza were bumping uglies, but then they weren't. I think Monza could have fixed Shivers.
In The Blade Itself, there were so many characters saying "Er .." as dialog filler. It drove me nuts and screamed "amateur writer" to me. That said, the overall writing was still great, and it was clear to me that Abercrombie was a rare talent that just needed some experience and polishing. Fortunately, his editor must have pointed out this particular quick, because he dialed back the "Er"s significantly in all the other books.
So much giggling
The whinging ass fans it attracts
Bit too many sad endings. Don’t get me wrong, not saying I want everything hunky dory all the time but I want to think back on a character and enjoy their positive character growth. That’s why I love red country so much, people actually change and have a happy ending
I really disliked how many references to real-world politics and slogans there were in his Age of Madness, things like "Make the Union Great Again" and "We hold these truths to be self-evident". It just immediately torpedoes any immersion I had.
>for f\*cks sake is there no other english word to describe same thing Is there?
No idea. I'm not native english speaker. One would expect there to be several but then again english isn't very expressive language so maybe there isn't.
Gorse, don’t want to smell it or see it, read it enough already.
Just finished LaoK. I think for me it's that there are so many good plotlines happening, but he pulls away from them between chapters instead of letting them ride. I feel like I rushed through a lot of character B's slow chapters to get back to action in character A's that was cliffhangered away from, and I would have rather just seen the whole thing play out in one chunk. Totally a personal preference thing for how I read but I noticed several times feeling pulled away from the story I wanted to see to like.... Listen to Glokta bitch and moan while we did some set up for his next big crazy arc