P. S.: Yay and Grrr!
Aug. 27th, 2005 10:54 amI'm loving this weather. I spent some time in the hammock last night with a book and lots of candles, taking time out to gaze at the flickering light on the windchimes and the bottom of the upstairs deck. Then this morning I lay in bed with more candles and some incense and listened to the rain; it's divine. Tea and toast; the gentle drizzle of rain; cool breezes through my window. I'm thrilled!
Not so thrilled with Mercedes Lackey's "The Serpent's Shadow"; got it off a book sale for $1 and not sure I got my money's worth. I'm giving up about halfway through because I'm really bored and annyoed by writers who (1) rail against sterotypes while employing them (e.g., "men suck because none of them respect women" anyone see the irony there?) and (2) steal other people's characters.
Not borrow, steal. Laurie King got in trouble with the Dorothy Sayers estate for borrowing Lord Peter Wimsey and having him appear in a scene or two of one of her novels. So what does Lackey do? She has a "Lord Peter Almsley" character appear in her novel (a young, handsome, bolnd noblemen with a silly manner that covers a discerning mind, has a pet reformed burglar "bapatized in the Blood of the Lamb", and who was a famous cricketer at his Oxford college). Lackey's character is half words lifted right out of Sayers and half caricature--she doesn't have Sayers' (or King's) knack for actually creating or developing character. She's employed no imagination, simply stolen a character out of someone else's work, changed just enough detail that the action couldn't be prosecuted, and plumped him down, totally out of place, in a setting 20-30 years away from where he should be, presumably because she wants to be thought "cute" and because she hasn't the imagination to write her own characters (as the rest of the book demonstrates). By contrast, King can create her own characters quite well, borrowed Wimsey for perfectly sensible reasons that had to do with plot and character, inserted him breifly into a setting that was wholly in keeping with him as Sayers developed him, and was able to write a scene or two of dialogue that revealed more about him and used language that was consistent without simply duplicating. Ms. Lackey has lost a reader for good.
Not so thrilled with Mercedes Lackey's "The Serpent's Shadow"; got it off a book sale for $1 and not sure I got my money's worth. I'm giving up about halfway through because I'm really bored and annyoed by writers who (1) rail against sterotypes while employing them (e.g., "men suck because none of them respect women" anyone see the irony there?) and (2) steal other people's characters.
Not borrow, steal. Laurie King got in trouble with the Dorothy Sayers estate for borrowing Lord Peter Wimsey and having him appear in a scene or two of one of her novels. So what does Lackey do? She has a "Lord Peter Almsley" character appear in her novel (a young, handsome, bolnd noblemen with a silly manner that covers a discerning mind, has a pet reformed burglar "bapatized in the Blood of the Lamb", and who was a famous cricketer at his Oxford college). Lackey's character is half words lifted right out of Sayers and half caricature--she doesn't have Sayers' (or King's) knack for actually creating or developing character. She's employed no imagination, simply stolen a character out of someone else's work, changed just enough detail that the action couldn't be prosecuted, and plumped him down, totally out of place, in a setting 20-30 years away from where he should be, presumably because she wants to be thought "cute" and because she hasn't the imagination to write her own characters (as the rest of the book demonstrates). By contrast, King can create her own characters quite well, borrowed Wimsey for perfectly sensible reasons that had to do with plot and character, inserted him breifly into a setting that was wholly in keeping with him as Sayers developed him, and was able to write a scene or two of dialogue that revealed more about him and used language that was consistent without simply duplicating. Ms. Lackey has lost a reader for good.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-27 04:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-28 03:02 am (UTC)And you know, any time you'd like someone who *doesn't* have hooves to nuzzle your ears, I'd be happy to volunteer...
no subject
Date: 2005-08-27 05:19 pm (UTC)Sounds like heaven to me!
no subject
Date: 2005-08-28 02:59 am (UTC)I really have to thank my ex for introducing me to hammocks; they're another of those things that somehow passed me by earlier in life (I really need to learn how to ride a bike one of these days...) but I toally love them now.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-27 06:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-28 02:56 am (UTC)I'm constantly amused by the synchronicity of Alurie King's novels about Mary Russell, whihc I've come to quite enjoy, and the novels of my sometime friend and mentor Mary (Doria) Russell, which I also love, but in a wholly different way.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-28 07:46 am (UTC)Ah, you are friends with Mary Doria Russell? I loved The Sparrow, and your post has reminded me I'm behind on reading her books. Thank you!
no subject
Date: 2005-08-28 02:10 pm (UTC)[MDR] We used to be friends; we had a long correspondence based on my praising The Sparrow on a Dorothy Dunnett mailing list that one of her friends read. Unfortunately, we had a difference of opinion about religious/social issues that led to our falling out. We correspond occasionally, but we seem to have lost the friendship that held us together before. :-(
What a lovely picture to be part of ...
Date: 2005-08-27 06:57 pm (UTC)Re: What a lovely picture to be part of ...
Date: 2005-08-28 02:41 am (UTC)Re: What a lovely picture to be part of ...
Date: 2005-08-28 03:15 am (UTC)*wink*
Quite possible though.
Re: What a lovely picture to be part of ...
Date: 2005-08-28 03:19 am (UTC)But I purposely got a hammock large enough to share, with the hopes that one of these days I would. :-)
Re: What a lovely picture to be part of ...
Date: 2005-08-28 04:26 am (UTC)That is very generous of you. And I'll tell you that I've never swung in a hammock. I used to try and string up bed sheets between two trees as a child. It didn't work of course. Is it the "yarn" style or the flat sheet style hammock (not knowing the technical names for the two). Although I have sampled the cozy delights of hammock chairs, they are most definitely made for one. I now know a shop at faire, should I get you there, that you would enjoy.
G'night!
Re: What a lovely picture to be part of ...
Date: 2005-08-30 12:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-27 07:21 pm (UTC):-(
no subject
Date: 2005-08-28 02:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-28 12:35 am (UTC)I do also agree with the naffness of Mercedes Lackey, my wife was a big fan of hers, and because I was bored once I decided to read Bardic Voices (I think it was called that anyway)...like you I wish I hadn't have bothered.
no subject
Date: 2005-08-28 02:39 am (UTC)