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
- 1203 Views
It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two.
18/09/2009 03:10:35 AM
- 500 Views
Re: It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two. *NM*
18/09/2009 04:04:06 AM
- 409 Views
Titles
18/09/2009 04:15:24 AM
- 469 Views
Ok, Martin is published by Bantam...replace "Tor" with "Bantam"
18/09/2009 05:43:51 PM
- 490 Views
Nope, still doesn't work.
18/09/2009 08:49:09 PM
- 462 Views
I would recommend you re-read my post - you're confusing me with someone else
18/09/2009 10:24:24 PM
- 426 Views
Remember what The Neil said: "GRRM is not your bitch!" *NM*
18/09/2009 07:32:47 AM
- 374 Views
I don't give a shit what Neil Gaiman thinks
18/09/2009 05:35:54 PM
- 382 Views
Gaiman = The Most Overrated Author of the New Milennium. *NM*
20/09/2009 12:33:10 AM
- 350 Views
In your opinion, of course. *NM*
20/09/2009 01:28:33 AM
- 341 Views
Yes, and this entire thread deals with opinions.
20/09/2009 01:52:21 AM
- 336 Views
I see the reason in that.
20/09/2009 02:13:46 AM
- 521 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
- 449 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
- 366 Views
Sometimes ...
18/09/2009 05:07:18 AM
- 426 Views
Sometimes...Neil Gaiman should be thrown into a meat grinder.
18/09/2009 05:49:56 PM
- 463 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
- 422 Views
Was this well out of line, by any chance?
18/09/2009 10:25:57 PM
- 459 Views
damn you are rude *NM*
18/09/2009 10:51:19 PM
- 333 Views
Gosh. This is pretty tiring.
18/09/2009 11:25:51 PM
- 476 Views
So this guy still hasn't been banned yet, why exactly?
19/09/2009 04:13:05 PM
- 430 Views
Get off your high horse. Someone disagrees with you. Deal with it. *NM*
20/09/2009 12:35:24 AM
- 323 Views
No, this guy is breaching the forum rules on attacks and insults.
20/09/2009 02:57:20 AM
- 368 Views
Oh please. Grow some thicker skin.
20/09/2009 03:26:33 AM
- 365 Views
You think this behaviour would have been tolerated on Wotmania? It definitely would not have been.
20/09/2009 03:31:20 AM
- 394 Views
"It" would have been. "It" was.
20/09/2009 05:45:14 AM
- 399 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
- 349 Views
I'd agree with you except for the fact that there was the 'promise'. *NM*
19/09/2009 05:59:21 PM
- 280 Views
Gaiman would just turn the episode into an amazing graphic novel as he died. *NM*
19/09/2009 01:06:30 PM
- 345 Views
That's the most valid point of the argument.
18/09/2009 11:54:26 PM
- 400 Views
Agreed.
19/09/2009 03:02:48 AM
- 381 Views
Now to me that supports Tom's point about 'reliance theory'.
19/09/2009 05:55:28 PM
- 401 Views
But a promise was never made.
19/09/2009 06:04:55 PM
- 393 Views
I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise."
19/09/2009 07:14:30 PM
- 364 Views
Who is GGK and where is his article? + my opinion on Martin
19/09/2009 07:55:01 PM
- 408 Views
This is where the great divide comes into play
19/09/2009 08:10:09 PM
- 390 Views
I think he should take a page out of RJ's book
19/09/2009 08:36:55 PM
- 425 Views
Re: I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise."
19/09/2009 08:04:53 PM
- 371 Views
Exceptions prove the rule...
19/09/2009 08:42:39 PM
- 355 Views