(no subject)

[naath]

Hugo nominated novels wot I have read :


Ancillary Justice by Ann Leckie (Orbit US / Orbit UK)
I really like this. The setting, the characters, the plot. Interesting choice to use "she" throughout as translation for an assumed gender neutral 3rd person pronoun, I think I might have preferred "they" but certainly "she" is an improvement on "he" (as in Left Hand of Darkness). (2)

Neptune's Brood by Charles Stross (Ace / Orbit UK)
Like the Saturn's Children (to which this is a very loose sequel) I felt this was entertaining, but came to a rather abrupt stop; also economics just really isn't that interesting to me. (4)

Parasite by Mira Grant (Orbit US / Orbit UK)
Certainly entertaining and hard-to-put-down but the main character spends rather too much time Swimming In Egypt (or holding the stupid ball, not sure which) for my taste. (3)

Warbound, Book III of the Grimnoir Chronicles by Larry Correia (Baen Books)
Look, it's volume III of a series I'll almost certainly hate. At least Baen have given us I and II to hate first? I have yet to read this, might do so later. (6)

The Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan and Brandon Sanderson (Tor Books / Orbit UK)
WoT is a long standing obsession of mine (that might just be what happens when you spend years waiting for the next book...), obviously I think *everyone* should read *all of it* *right now*, except not, because probably some people will hate it, and blah. Anyway I think it really is very awesome, it is now really and truly finished (there may be a "world of" type book at some point, but it is not to have New Story in it) with a proper ending and everything, and certainly well worth at least *starting* for anyone who likes seriously long-form story telling. (1)

Comments

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

That's pretty much what I thought. I've not read Parasite or Neptune's Brood yet -- I'm a lot more interested in economics, and have heard some positive things about the book, but I'm not confident that Charlie's interesting ideas about economics translate to fiction well enough. So I'm not sure if I'd swap those two or not.

I am tending to put WoT first, but lots of people whose taste I respect really really hate that idea, so I feel I need to understand their criticisms better.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

I think Correia is more to my taste than that of most people I know, but I somewhat resent the way it was brought to my attention, and I don't think it's that good, so I can't decide if I'll read it or not.

[naath.livejournal.com]

I think I'm broadly OK with voting for something I like that other people hate.

[andrewducker]

I sadly bounced off of Saturn's Children. Charlie's sense of humour is not mine, and so I mostly just found it silly and annoying rather than good.

Which is a shame, having loved some of his writing.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

I think that's basically right: vote for what you think is the best, and let the voting determine the winner. But people seem to think it's not just that they're bad books, it's cheating to have them on the ballot at all because it's a whole series and because it's already successful and because of the risk a devoted fanbase who aren't worldcon regulars might swing the vote. And I think those objections *sorts* of objections are valid, but I'm not sure they apply to WoT. And I feel a bit defensive that "serious" sci-fi fans seem to think I'm stupid for liking WoT, but many people I actively trust the taste of said the same thing, so I want to understand what I'm missing. But I'm also worried I'm just giving in to vehemence.

[naath.livejournal.com]

Uhhuh. Well, if it shouldn't have been allowed people should blame the Hugo committee who let the nomination stand... Devoted Fans Of X getting supporting memberships to Vote For X is something that gets moaned about with *depressing regularity*, and is not unique to WoT.