Re: I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise."
Werthead Send a noteboard - 19/09/2009 08:04:53 PM
I think you would be hard-pressed to argue, though, that writing three books in a series is not an implied promise to write the whole series. I don't think I've ever heard of an author who wrote two books in a series with no intention of ever completing the storyline. Or leaving all of the main story threads unresolved, and then leaning back and saying "Alright, now it's time for my ten-year hiatus, just as planned."
Well, David Gerrold has done this with his CHTORR series. So has David Brin. Brin in fact said when he started his popular UPLIFT series he would take long breaks to write other books. At the moment it's been ten years since the last UPLIFT book came out (which did not resolve the oustanding storylines) and his current plan is to write some prequels before getting back to the main series. Thirty years and six books after the series began, we still have no idea what the crew of the starship found on the alien wrecks (which is what started the whole saga in the first place), and the author is in no hurry to get there.
It wasn't planned, but Melanie Rawn's CAPITAL'S TOWER trilogy has also taken a ten-year break between the second and third books, and Rawn seems to be extremely hesitant and half-hearted about finishing the series (although there are other reasons for that relating to the death of a family member).
Don't get me wrong, I don't really give a crap about the legal debate from up above. I just feel like some Martin defenders like to trot out the "he never promised anybody anything" without seeming to understand why that argument is wholly unsatisfactory.
I understand that perfectly, but this is where the rest of the argument starts to look shaky because it is based on the precept that Martin has 1) taken lengthy sabbaticals from writing ADWD to work on other projects, which is not and never has been the case or 2) if the book had come out faster it would not have sucked, which is definitely not the case either.
The whole argument comes down to people wanting a rushed, crappy book rather than a decent one. Especially coming after the mixed-reception AFFC, this seems to be a rather odd thing to want for a fan of the series.
Now I understand why everyone has been bitching about a Dance of Dragons....
18/09/2009 12:36:21 AM
- 1219 Views
It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two.
18/09/2009 03:10:35 AM
- 519 Views
Re: It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two. *NM*
18/09/2009 04:04:06 AM
- 426 Views
Titles
18/09/2009 04:15:24 AM
- 483 Views
Ok, Martin is published by Bantam...replace "Tor" with "Bantam"
18/09/2009 05:43:51 PM
- 517 Views
Nope, still doesn't work.
18/09/2009 08:49:09 PM
- 476 Views
I would recommend you re-read my post - you're confusing me with someone else
18/09/2009 10:24:24 PM
- 442 Views
Remember what The Neil said: "GRRM is not your bitch!" *NM*
18/09/2009 07:32:47 AM
- 389 Views
I don't give a shit what Neil Gaiman thinks
18/09/2009 05:35:54 PM
- 398 Views
Gaiman = The Most Overrated Author of the New Milennium. *NM*
20/09/2009 12:33:10 AM
- 366 Views
In your opinion, of course. *NM*
20/09/2009 01:28:33 AM
- 356 Views
Yes, and this entire thread deals with opinions.
20/09/2009 01:52:21 AM
- 351 Views
I see the reason in that.
20/09/2009 02:13:46 AM
- 536 Views
I haven't even finished reading A Clash of Kings and I'm a touch annoyed by Martin already
20/09/2009 02:35:32 AM
- 463 Views
I can see my rule of not reading series that have not been finished is paying off.
18/09/2009 11:00:37 AM
- 383 Views
Sometimes ...
18/09/2009 05:07:18 AM
- 442 Views
Sometimes...Neil Gaiman should be thrown into a meat grinder.
18/09/2009 05:49:56 PM
- 478 Views
You paid for a product. You got a product. That is the end of the matter in its entirety.
18/09/2009 09:03:05 PM
- 441 Views
Was this well out of line, by any chance?
18/09/2009 10:25:57 PM
- 479 Views
damn you are rude *NM*
18/09/2009 10:51:19 PM
- 350 Views
Gosh. This is pretty tiring.
18/09/2009 11:25:51 PM
- 491 Views
So this guy still hasn't been banned yet, why exactly?
19/09/2009 04:13:05 PM
- 450 Views
Get off your high horse. Someone disagrees with you. Deal with it. *NM*
20/09/2009 12:35:24 AM
- 336 Views
No, this guy is breaching the forum rules on attacks and insults.
20/09/2009 02:57:20 AM
- 383 Views
Oh please. Grow some thicker skin.
20/09/2009 03:26:33 AM
- 380 Views
You think this behaviour would have been tolerated on Wotmania? It definitely would not have been.
20/09/2009 03:31:20 AM
- 413 Views
"It" would have been. "It" was.
20/09/2009 05:45:14 AM
- 416 Views
Nope, I'm someone simply a hell of a lot better informed about the situation then you. Deal with it. *NM*
19/09/2009 02:40:07 AM
- 366 Views
I'd agree with you except for the fact that there was the 'promise'. *NM*
19/09/2009 05:59:21 PM
- 313 Views
Gaiman would just turn the episode into an amazing graphic novel as he died. *NM*
19/09/2009 01:06:30 PM
- 362 Views
That's the most valid point of the argument.
18/09/2009 11:54:26 PM
- 414 Views
Agreed.
19/09/2009 03:02:48 AM
- 403 Views
Now to me that supports Tom's point about 'reliance theory'.
19/09/2009 05:55:28 PM
- 418 Views
But a promise was never made.
19/09/2009 06:04:55 PM
- 406 Views
I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise."
19/09/2009 07:14:30 PM
- 379 Views
Who is GGK and where is his article? + my opinion on Martin
19/09/2009 07:55:01 PM
- 426 Views
This is where the great divide comes into play
19/09/2009 08:10:09 PM
- 403 Views
I think he should take a page out of RJ's book
19/09/2009 08:36:55 PM
- 442 Views
Re: I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise."
19/09/2009 08:04:53 PM
- 385 Views
Exceptions prove the rule...
19/09/2009 08:42:39 PM
- 371 Views