Curiouser & Curiouser

Deliberate Disregard?

Quite often in literature, the introduction throws readers into a situation that the have no knowledge of. Let’s face it. If you read a fantasy novel that immediately told you everything you needed to know, it would be boring, and you would wonder what the point of it was. Literature can also give information that is relevant, without starting the actual story that they have written. Lords of the Rings starts with information about Hobbits, for example. Others begin describing cities (The Darkness that Comes Before, R. Scott Bakker), some with shock scenarios involving characters that haven’t been introduced (Ink Blood Sister Scribe, Emma Torzs) you get the idea. Openings that “drop the reader” into such situations are referred to as ‘media res,’ which literally translates to “in the middle of things.”

Erikson utilises this style in much of Gardens of the Moon.

It can get confusing at times and is similar to a jigsaw puzzle of sorts – with the reader having to put pieces together throughout the story, and the author bringing everything together at the conclusion of the story/book. It can also be very effective, especially where different plot lines, arcs, or character viewpoints come together in a crescendo. Just because this style may be confusing or disconcerting for some readers, does not mean that it is not a valid way to begin a story, as long as the author has the ability to bring all the threads together eventually. As a reader, I enjoy putting the pieces together, coming up with theories and guesses – especially in the thriller/suspense/horror and crime/mystery genres. In fantasy, it can and does work, but as I said, the writer must have the ability to bring everything together in the end, so that the “payoff” for the readers patience is rewarding. In this next part of the article, Chris discusses disorientation, and why she believes it is a problem in the prologue of Gardens of the Moon.

Watch For Disorientation in Your Opening Paragraphs

CW:Alright, we’re finally past the intro stuff. Really, I swear. That means it’s time for the first sentence! Oh boy.

The stains of rust seemed to map blood seas on the black, pocked surface of Mock’s Vane.

CW:I have no idea what’s happening here. There is no context for this description with knowing what Mock’s Vane is. On top of that, “seemed to” is a terrible phrase for an opening line. Besides its frequent appearance as needless clutter, “seemed to” makes the reader second-guess what’s going on. Since readers are already clueless during the opening line, this is a quick recipe for disorientation.

If you want anything to be mysterious, you have to give readers their bearings first. That way, they have some means of comparing the known with the unknown.

At least the line is atmospheric. I’ll give it 1.5 out of 5 stars.

Since it’s a proper noun, I’m guessing “Mock’s Vane” is a strange blackened place, maybe one that has a lot of iron ore.”

Why would a reader expect context for a description in the first, opening line? Especially a short one? This is not a valid representation of disorientation because the sentence does not stand alone as a paragraph.

If the opening line was a paragraph of its own, I could see the possibility for the reader to be confused, or disoriented, but it isn’t.  I think the main issue here is that Chris hasn’t analysed the whole paragraph, and this seems deliberate to make a point. It falls flat, because it’s not in context.

CW:On top of that, “seemed to” is a terrible phrase for an opening line. Besides its frequent appearance as needless clutter, “seemed to” makes the reader second-guess what’s going on”

The use of ‘seemed to’ in this sentence is like the author using the ‘appeared to.’ It’s something that isn’t fixed. It’s like saying ‘the moon seemed to smile down at me’ – the moon doesn’t smile any more than the vane has maps of blood seas painted onto it – but it appears that it does. The imagery of ‘blood seas’ creates an atmosphere, and again, if it was just one line as a paragraph, it would seem out of place and leave the reader confused, but it isn’t a paragraph on its own.

I also think that as a lesson in writing, any potential author should be relatively aware of the level of comprehension of their target audience. The comment that the CW:readers are already clueless” and that there is CW:no context for the description without knowing what ‘Mock’s Vane’ is,” is moot, because more context follows. I say more, because there has already been slight context, because we know it’s a “vane” – and while this depends on the comprehension of the reader, the use of a proper noun (as Chris noticed) along with the spelling, gives the reader the knowledge that Chris says is missing. There aren’t that many ways of spelling the word, and each spelling is specific to its use, as with most similar sounding words. It’s not that difficult to figure out that it’s a weathervane that it being talked about here. After the next sentence, it’s even more obvious:

A century old, it squatted on the point of an old pike that had been bolted to the outer top of the Hold’s wall.

Yet still, Chris asks:

CW:Wait – it’s just an item someone has stuck on the top of a pike?

Monstrous and misshapen, it had been cold-hammered into the form of a winged demon, teeth bared in a leering grin, and was tugged and buffeted in squealing protest with every gust of wind.

CW:It’s just a weather vane? Why does it have a formal title? Also, is this weather vane so important that it’s worth spending the whole opening paragraph on? While it adds some atmosphere, it would be more effective to spend fewer words on the vane and more on painting a picture of what’s around it. In particular, this vane monster could be leering at something.

So, Erikson used a proper noun to give the vane a formal title. Why does it have a formal title? Well, it’s called Mock’s Vane, which means it belongs somewhere – specifically somewhere with the name Mock. The rust looks like blood seas (the shape of a sea as seen in a map, coloured blood red from people who have died in it) and it’s old (over a century and pock-marked) it’s set on an old spike (pointy metal stick) bolted onto the Hold’s wall. The Hold is also a specific place, because it is capitalised. The reason for giving a formal title to the vane, is also because it is something that people use to identify the location.

If a reader of this prologue looks at the relevant additions at the beginning of the book – the dramatis personae, the maps, the poems, etc, or even the title of the series, or the blurb of the book, they will know that this is the story of a fallen empire, with campaigns (see maps) which infer war, which infers dead people. From ‘empire,’ we can also infer that there are cities and cities usually have castles or places that have “holds” or “keeps” which are usually the strongest part of said structures where people gather in case of a siege or attack. If the reader has not done this, then Erikson, by way of a character tells the reader this in the following paragraphs. Just as he also continues to paint a picture of what is around it.

Monstrous and misshapen, it had been cold-hammered into the form of a winged demon, teeth bared in a leering grin, and was tugged and buffeted in squealing protest with every gust of wind.

CW:The last part of that sentence, starting with “and was tugged” could also use some revision. First, the clause gains no benefit from continuing a sentence that’s already long. Second, its in passive voice, using a form such as “it was tugged” rather than “the wind tugged it.” Passive voice is useful in many circumstances, but it softens the effect, so you need a reason to choose it over active phrasing. Finally, Erikson has described the weather vane as a black, leering monster with blood seas on it. Saying it squeals in protest is breaking the mood a bit.

Erikson uses passive voice, but the use of the word ‘buffeted’ stops the effect from softening because it implies, as it its intention, that the weathervane is violently battered from side to side by the wind and weather. Erikson has chosen to use passive voice instead of active phrasing because he’s using lyrical imagery to describe the weathervane. Making the vane “squeal” is Erikson choosing to add another sensory experience, rather than just sight. It squeals because it is old and rusted and has moved an awful lot over a century.

Don’t forget, this is just the first paragraph. We are still in the “scene setting” stage here.

The winds were contrary the day the columns of smoke rose over the Mouse Quarter of Malaz City. The Vane’s silence announced the sudden falling-off of the sea breeze that came clambering over the ragged walls of Mock’s Hold, then it creaked back into life as the hot, spark-scattered and smoke-filled breath of the Mouse Quarter reached across the city to sweep the promontory’s heights.’

CW:Continuing his trend of being disorienting, Erikson next mentions a specific quarter of a specific city in passing. That wouldn’t be so bad if Erikson was stating the location of “Mock’s Vane,” but we have no idea where this Mouse Quarter is in relation to where we started. After reading the entire paragraph, we can probably conclude the hold is in the city somewhere. Erikson has some nice description of this wind, but it isn’t worth shoving aside everything the reader actually needs to know.

If you want to open with a small piece of a bigger picture, you need to carefully zoom out or add new items to the scene by describing where they are relative to what you’ve already described. For example, Erikson could say the monstrous vane is leering down from the wall at Mouse Quarter. Don’t mention several things that are somewhere in an undefined space; that makes it difficult to piece a picture together.

The paragraph stated that the breeze clambered over the walls of the Hold (Mock’s Hold) and then the smoke followed when the weathervane indicated a change of wind direction. This infers that it is close to where we started seeing as how the weathervane is attached to said Hold. Also, why would Erikson say that the vane was leering down from the wall at Mouse Quarter when the reader already knows that Mock’s Vane is squatting (precariously – it’s got an old bolt) on top of a pike that is attached to Mock’s Hold? We are given this information so that we can picture it. If the vane was leering, the author would have told us that it was leering.

It is inferred by Chris that in any writing, unless the reader is told where everything is in relation to everything else they’ll never figure out how to piece the picture together, so it’s better, as a writer, to add items to scenes by describing where they are relative to what has already been described. Again, I appreciate that some readers may struggle with lyrical imagery, but this assumption is unfounded.

The next paragraphs introduce us to our first character.

Ganoes Stabro Paran of the House Paran stood on tiptoe to see over the merlon. Behind him rose Mock’s Hold, once capital of the Empire but now, since the mainland had been conquered, relegated once more to a Fist’s holding. To his left rose the pike and its wayward trophy.

CW: “We have a character, and we actually know where he is in relation to our preeminent weather vane! I had to look up what a merlon is; I believe it’s the classic jagged railing of a fortified castle wall. Ganoes is on tiptoe, so maybe he’s short? How tall is a merlon anyway? Declaring Mock’s Hold is a “Fist’s holding” is also not helpful because I don’t know what that means, and Erikson is not providing the context to figure it out.”

Again, the context is provided in the next paragraphs. Continuously taking things out of context will cause confusion, and Chris’s responses are such because of the misrepresentation of the text. Chris’s questions are clearly answered in the following paragraph, yet this is not acknowledged.

For Ganoes, the ancient fortification overlooking the city was too familiar to be of interest. This visit was his third in as many years; he’d long ago explored the courtyard with its heaved cobblestones, the Old Keep – now a stable, its upper floor home to pigeons and swallows and bats – and the citadel where even now his father negotiated the island export tithe with the harbour officials. In the last instance, of course, a goodly portion was out of bounds, even for a son of a noble house; for it was in the citadel that the Fist had his residence, and in the inner chambers that such affairs of the Empire as concerned this island were conducted.

CW:That’s only three sentences. Erikson is definitely one of those writers who makes his sentences too long in an effort to stuff in as much information as he can get away with. In this case, he’s stuffing in unnecessary world exposition.Erikson gave us a whole paragraph about some weather vane and another mostly focused on the wind. If he wanted to describe the hold, that would have been a great time to do it – not after he’s introduced a character that has no interest in the hold and is looking away from it. Don’t get me wrong, this is omniscient narration, so it’s not messing up the viewpoint. But if the only character present thinks the hold is boring, that tells readers they have nothing to be excited about.”

Mock’s Hold forgotten behind him, Ganoes’ attention was on the tattered city below, and the riots that ran through its poorest quarter. Mock’s Hold stood atop a cliff. The higher land of the pinnacle was reached by a switchback staircase carved into the limestone of the cliff wall. The drop to the city below was eighty armspans or more, with the Hold’s battered wall adding another six.

CW:Erikson, why couldn’t you tell us this earlier? We now have a much clearer picture of a weather vane on a tall wall on a clifftop, overlooking the city. We also know the Mouse Quarter is the poorest quarter. The name is even somewhat intuitive.”

Everything that the reader needs to know has been said. The criticisms are no longer relevant after this point. Erikson didn’t need to tell us this information earlier, because we didn’t need it. The information is produced as and when the reader needs to know and as the author moves through the scene. The “it’s disorientating because the reader doesn’t know where X is in relation to Y” argument doesn’t work anymore because the reader is given the information in due time. However, Chris then picks up on more issues after this next paragraph.

The Mouse was at the city’s inland edge, an uneven spreading of hovels and overgrown tiers cut in half by the silt-heavy river that crawled towards the harbour. With most of Malaz City between Ganoes’ position and the riots, it was hard to make out any detail, beyond the growing pillars of black smoke.

CW:Telling readers that this quarter is on the inland edge is not helpful, because we don’t know whether the hold is on the inland side or ocean side of the city. For me, it also meant adding a big ocean to the picture for the first time, which was itself disorienting. Erikson has dropped hints that this is a coastal city. He mentioned a sea breeze in his wind paragraph and referred to the area as an island in his hold paragraph. But there are two reasons that wasn’t enough.

1. He’s drowning his readers in disorienting details. This is where the basic principle of cognitive load or comprehension scarcity comes into play. people can only absorb so much information at a time. I’m not going to notice a sea breeze when I’m trying to figure out what the Mouse Quarter is.

2. He’s only mentioned it indirectly or in passing. The manner in which you give readers information really does matter. When you refer to something in passing, it signals to readers that the information isn’t important, and therefore that they don’t need to pay much attention to it or remember it.

Now, I kind of understand this, because all of the points made make sense, but, as Chris said, Erikson drops hints – the fact that they then go on to say the hints are not enough is simply untrue, because Chris noticed them! Again, Chris makes assumptions about reader comprehension levels, and if we were six chapters in and the writing was extremely complicated, I could possibly support that argument – but it’s been six paragraphs! Six! Still, I think that’s a wildly unfair assumption about readership in general. The things that were “mentioned in passing” were used as descriptors in visual imagery. This response from Chris makes me think that she’s specifically thinking about readers who do not have an affinity for lyrical style, because otherwise this doesn’t make sense, but there’s no confirmation or denial of that in the article.

What follows is how Chris ends this section which, just to remind you, was titled ‘Watch for Disorientation in Your Opening Paragraphs‘ –  let’s not forget that this is a critical analysis illustrating what you shouldn’t do if you’re a writer seeking to get published. The list below is originally bullet-pointed, but for clarity of my responses, I’ve numbered them.

CW:I’ve been focusing on the disorientation in this opening because without fixing that, it’s hard to do anything else. But after six meaty paragraphs, it’s worth taking a step back to see if this opening has accomplished anything.

1. We know very little about the only character, Ganoes. There’s nothing interesting about him.
2. Ganoes is doing nothing but standing on a wall looking at the city.
3. The city and world so far have no novelty. It’s just a generic fantasy city.
4. Most of the text is dull exposition that is not particularly relevant to the scene at hand
5. I guess there’s a riot somewhere across the city, involving people who we don’t know, resulting in no significant consequences to speak of.

Even if the disorientation were taken care of, this would not be a good opening. So far, posturing seems to be the only thing The Malazan Book of the Fallen has.”

It was midday, but the flash and thundering concussion of magery made the air seem dark and heavy.

CW: “There’s magic! Flashy and noisy magic. At least that’s clear.

Again, the tone of the article shifts from objective and informative, to subjective, and Chris seems to have not taken in any of the information from the six paragraphs that she has read and deconstructed so far.

So let me step back and see if this opening has accomplished anything. Bear in mind that there have only been six paragraphs to this point.

1: Ganoes has only just been introduced. We’re six paragraphs in. We know that Ganoes is from a ‘noble’ house and is visiting the city with his father, who is there negotiating export costs with the harbour officials, as he has done before at least three times in the last three years, because that’s how many times Ganoes has visited the old capital. We also know that Ganoes pretty much has a free reign there, given the things he has previously discovered. There are, of course, places that he cannot access – that are out of bounds to him even though he has ‘noble’ status.

2 & 3: Ganoes is not interested in the Hold as he usually would be because there is something else capturing his attention in the city. This does not mean that Ganoes finds the Hold boring, it just isn’t what he’s focusing on this time. The city is described as tattered, and the fact he is watching the riots that are happening below show that this is not a normal occurrence. The reader knows that the city is far below because we are told that Mock’s Hold is on a cliff and the drop to the city from that cliff is some 80/86 arm spans (around 400/450 feet, which research shows is standard.) We also know that the city is between Ganoes and the riots in the quarter – and that the fact that there are riots means that this isn’t a standard generic fantasy city – something is happening here.

4 & 5: Erikson has painted a clear picture of Mock’s Hold, which has a weathervane on it – Mock’s Vane – and the surrounding scenery by showing the reader Ganoes’ experiences with the Old Keep – so we know that the Hold is in a state of disrepair, but also that it wasn’t always like that. We are made aware that there are riots in Mouse Quarter, which we now know is the poorest quarter in the city. In real-life, riots are started and continued by people; therefore, we can ascertain that the people in the riots are the people of Mouse Quarter. We know that there is smoke and fire, because Ganoes can’t make out details of what happening because the smoke is affecting his view. As a general point, we also know, or should, that where there’s smoke there’s fire (usually) and that fire is bad and dangerous.

This is not dull exposition – this is Erikson building the scene for the reader in a descriptive and engaging way. In fact, he even writes it in a relatively straight forward and orderly structure:

1) defining feature of the landmark with imagery
2) showing locations close to the structure with imagery
3) a character introduction and their position/location in the structure
4) character experiences at the structure including memories from the past
5) character witnessing what is happening in the present described with imagery
6) character location in relation to the dangerous scenario that he is watching, complete with imagery.

Also, Erikson provides a time frame for the events, using the dates at the opening of the prologue – it is the year the emperor was killed – so the reader can rightfully assume that it is likely that the events in the city are connected to this.

Look how much is there! It’s chock-full of relevant information for the reader!

CW: “There’s magic! Flashy and noisy magic. At least that’s clear.

Yes, let’s not forget the flashy, noisy magic. While this may be an unexpected way to introduce the idea of magic to the book, it is still an introduction that magic is something to be aware of. That the mention of it includes imagery of a dark, heavy atmosphere gives the reader an expectation of what is to come where magic is involved.

CW:I’ve been focusing on the disorientation in this opening because without fixing that, it’s hard to do anything else” and “Even if the disorientation were taken care of, this would not be a good opening.”

I think that the argument regarding disorientation could be skewed by personal preference. The objectivity of the article, or lack thereof, is one of the reasons that some of the presented arguments fall flat.

We’re about halfway through the original article and it’s becoming clearer that Chris is not finding anything positive or interesting about the prologue. At this point, it feels like she has already made up her mind that this is an extremely badly written prologue/book.

Most fans of the book and series probably viewed this article as “shit-posting” when it was originally published. However, it is a “lesson” post, a “teaching” post, and as I’ve said before, it’s apparent that many readers do have problems engaging with the text. Had the tone of the article remained objective throughout, I believe that this would have resulted in less negative feedback and comments (not none-at-all, die-hard fans are, after all, die-hard fans.)

However, I have to re-iterate that as a critical “teaching” analysis, Chris should have provided an objective, rather than a subjective opinion on the text presented and the latter is beginning to take over.

That is not to say that Chris is not entitled to her opinion – she most assuredly is – it’s just that in the context of the “lesson” it shouldn’t be the presented argument, which in this case, it is.

Arguments presented as one thing and being another can unfairly influence potential readers.

Next up: Scenes Should Highlight the Action

Stigmas & Supposition

Purpose and Predisposition

CW: “It’s the storyteller’s job to communicate, not the reader’s job to figure things out.”

As a reader, and an avid one at that, I don’t completely agree with this sentiment. I believe that it is the storyteller’s job to engage the reader’s imagination. To immerse them in the world they have created. If this means that they do this in an unconventional manner, then so be it; but better that reader engages than not. I don’t believe that any reader goes into a book either believing or expecting that they’ll know absolutely everything they need to know about it within the first few pages. I also think that literature would suffer if that was the case.

Having said that, it’s often stated by readers of Erikson that the Malazan series as a whole and particularly the first book, is difficult and complicated. Gardens of the Moon is not a straightforward book in terms of its structure, but the whole series has a “stigma” attached to it that it is one of the most difficult, confusing, complicated series ever written – and this comes from fans. It’s almost a pre-requisite that when you start reading the series you go in expecting to have difficulty, to need a dictionary, to have to look things up on the Malazan wiki to understand what’s happening, as opposed to, in most cases, just being able to breeze through a book without any problems. Phrases like “Erikson doesn’t hold your hand,” and “these books were written with the intention to be re-read” as well as “you need to pay attention to everything or you’ll miss something” are prominent in most discussions of the series, and again, this feels off-putting to many.  This sounds like a criticism, and it is, but not because of the book itself: because of the stigma attached to it. You can read The Malazan Book of the Fallen without all the hassle and enjoy it. More importantly, you can also understand it. Yet this “stigma” has an increasingly problematic and psychological side-effect that comes with it – the idea of a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you believe it will be complicated and difficult, you will more than likely find it to be so.

In literary analysis, this is where objectivity should come into play. That is, there should be no bias for or against the text. Especially where many views are opposites, like with Malazan. It’s the Marmite effect – you love it or hate it. From a reader’s perspective, such analysis should help them to understand any difficulties they may find with the text, style, structure etc. In a teaching context, especially lessons on teaching aspiring writers what to avoid goes hand in hand with this: if a book is difficult or complicated, then analysis of the text will show potential authors what these errors are and how to avoid them.

This is the purpose of the original article.

So, let’s begin.

A Book Should Speak for Itself

CW:If the elaborate name of the series – The Malazan Book of The Fallen – wasn’t a big enough hint as to how seriously this book takes itself, just look at the opening appendixes.

It starts with three maps, which I certainly won’t complain about, and then includes a section titled ‘Dramatis Personae.’ This is a list of names characters of which there are 92!
If you are a regular reader of Mythcreants I hope you know that this is far more named characters than readers can handle in a novel-length work. Perhaps some of them are only introduced in later books.

Three maps and a Dramatis Personae does not a novel make. Chris makes a massive point of this. And I agree – 92 characters (her count) is a bit of overkill, but it’s hardly “far more named characters than readers can handle.” This is where I was headed when I was talking about objectivity: the critic must be neutral. There shouldn’t be assumptions about anything unless they are based on fact.

CW: “A number of these entries are also pointless. A simple list of names won’t help anyone; readers need descriptive information that jogs the memory. For instance, a good one is ‘Mammot, a high priest of D’riss and eminent scholar, uncle to Crokus.’ We have some notable traits of Mammot and are also reminded if his most important relationship with another character. But there are also seven entries with ‘The Hound [Name], a Hound of Shadow.’ If they’re called ‘The Hound X’ every time, I can guess they’re a hound of shadow for myself. Then, listed under the regulars of an inn, there’s ‘Irilta, a regular.’ Thanks, good to know?

I’m left wondering if many of these characters are so minor, readers don’t actually need to remember them. But then why list them? I’ll tell you why: with each new addition to the list, The Malazan Book of The Fallen gains +1 Seriousness.”

While I agree to an extent that descriptors are useful, a Dramatis Personae is quite literally, just a list of characters. Having extra information about them that may well appear in the book later seems to defeat the purpose. However, they do have a purpose. If a reader looks at the Dramatis Personae, while later reading the book, names will seem familiar – and that is the point. It’s the readers’ choice. You can skip it, it’s not essential, although it can be helpful. The maps are the same: they’re not necessary, but useful if the reader considers them so. After all, the author decided to include them, which gives them relevance.

CW:The bottom line is that if readers need a list of characters to reference, you have too many named people in your story. In these cases, the appendix is better than nothing, but the real solution is to simplify.

Not all books need these additions, and they can be seen as unnecessary complications to the text by readers, so from a writing perspective, the lesson here is that as a writer, these additions are not necessary, but if you think they will aid the reader, then by all means, use them. If they are important enough to include, they are not pointless. Neither of these additions add levels of seriousness to any novel. Simplifying the list, if you have a lot of characters, won’t necessarily help either, especially if all the characters are in some way significant to the book (which they should be.)

CW:After all that coverage of the Dramatis Personae, you might guess it’s finally time to get to the book’s opening. But no, there are also two poems about how cool this book is…

My point above as to relevance is the same here with the introductory poems – of which there are two – that serve as an opening to the whole series (poem one) and to the book itself (poem two.) They are not gratuitous. They are not there to make the book look cool, and they are certainly not abouthow cool this book is.” They are included to give context, which, as we all know, is very important when reading, or writing any story.

Context is key, and it’s this that is the crux of the argument regarding the poetic introductions. In the article, Chris takes two selected lines from the opening poem of the book, and this is not adequate to gain context. The complete poetic introduction is. When the stanza, or verse, is read it its entirety, the reader is told the purpose of the series. It gives the reader the context that what follows in the series are recollections of history.

Now these ashes have grown cold, we open the old book. These oil-stained pages recount the tales of the Fallen, a frayed empire, words without warmth.

CW:Naturally, this Very Serious Book must be dark, or it can’t be serious. However, ‘words without warmth’ doesn’t make it sound good. Dark or not, it’ll get monotonous if there’s no warmth anywhere.

I do not understand how the only take-away from these lines is “Dark or not, it’ll get monotonous if there’s no warmth.” I mean, essentially the comment is true – something without any warmth whatsoever will become monotonous – but it’s simply not applicable here.

Let’s look at an analysis of the first lines that Chris used.

“Now these ashes have grown cold,” – it’s been a long time since these events occurred.
“we open the old book.“- there’s an old book.
‘These oil-stained pages recount the tales of the Fallen,’“- the book has stories in  it about Malazan (the book of the Fallen)
“a frayed empire” – an empire that was not as ‘perfect’ as it once was – it was fragmented
“words without warmth.” – this isn’t about warmth, it’s about honesty – a blunt and harsh reality of the truth of what really happened.

The whole purpose of the books in the series is encapsulated in the remaining lines, which are not referenced in the article. Here is the entire poem in the original format and structure:

Now these ashes have grown cold, we open the old book.        
These oil-stained pages recount the tales of the Fallen,
a frayed empire, words without warmth. The hearth
has ebbed, its gleam and life’s sparks are but memories
against dimming eyes – what cast my mind, what hue my
thoughts as I open the Book of the Fallen
and breathe deep the scent of history?
Listen, then, to these words carried on that breath.
These tales are the tales of us all, again yet again.
We are history relived and that is all, without end that is all
.

This clearly shows the reader what the series is about and ensures that readers know that what they are about to read is part of that historical recollection. “Words without warmth” doesn’t make it sound good? No, not out of context it doesn’t. As I’ve said above, context is important, this is the lesson that a writer should take away from this.

CW: The second poem declares that the emperor is dead. I neither know who this emperor is, nor care that he’s dead, so let’s get to the opening.”

This article is a presentation of what not to do as a writer. One thing that a writer should do is put into the text, people, places, scenarios and things that are important for the reader to know. This is what the second poem does.

Ironically, the opening that Chris is looking for, is in fact, the second of the poems that she has dismissed as unimportant. Although, to be completely honest I can see how placing it as a prelude to the first chapter, rather than the prologue may work better to highlight its relevance. Regardless, it is extremely significant as an introduction to the context of the book. To dismiss this as something uncared for is obtuse as well as unfair to the author. The second poem is something that is significant enough that it is ‘set apart’ from the general text of the following chapter, or prologue in this case. To dismiss it is folly.

For reference, here is the second poem:

The Emperor is dead!
So too his right hand – now cold, now severed!
But mark these dying shadows,
twinned and flowing bloody and beaten,
down and away from mortal sight…
From sceptre’s rule dismissed,
from gild candelabra the light now fled,
from a hearth ringed in hard jewels,
seven years this warmth has bled…

The Emperor is dead.
So too his master’d companion – the rope cut clean.
But mark this burgeoning return –
faltering dark, the tattered shroud –
embracing children in the Empire’s dying light.
Hear now the dirge faint reprised,
before the sun’s fall, this day spills red
on buckled earth, and in obsidian eyes
vengeance chimes seven times…

There may be reasons that Chris doesn’t want to  look at this section, or considers it to un-important, but there is no explanation given other than that she doesn’t care. Which would be fine, if the poem was just something added in that didn’t really tell the reader anything, or that the writer didn’t really consider significant to the plot or story. If the lesson is that the book or story should speak for itself, then why dismiss it as something irrelevant?

Where the first poem gave us context for the series, the second provides context for the book. The emperor is dead, as is his right-hand man, – his protector, or trusted companion. We also know that this happened seven years ago and a promise for vengeance has been made, which will occur on the seventh year after his death. This gives the reader relevant information and leads to the prologue.

CW:Obviously, there’s a prologue, as befits a Serious TM work such as The Malazan Book of the Fallen… How could The Malazan Book of the Fallen be Serious without some fancy dates to mark the momentous occasion?

This is where the tone of the critique shifts. I talked about objectivity earlier, and about the stigma of the series and how it might affect would be readers. The apparent mockery and sarcasm, both in the above, and the next parts of the analysis are probably part of the reason why this review garnered such a vehement response from fans of the book series. The word serious has been capitalised to evoke contempt for the work and has already been used several times including in the above quote. The trademark sign adds a sense of disdain to this comment. Further mocking of the dates that serve as an introduction to the time frame of the prologue don’t do Chris any favours at being taken seriously here. If the intention is to be tongue-in-cheek and light-hearted, then the article should not have been posted under lessons, as an analysis, but under reviews. I have not quoted Chris’s comments, but they are available in the full article.

The dates are used because they are significant to the setting of the prologue. They are as follows:

1154th Year of Burn’s Sleep.
96th Year of the Malazan Empire.
The Last Year of Emperor Kellanved’s Reign.

CW:Credit where credit is due: This last date is easy to remember and actually means something.

On the contrary, all the dates mean something. There are three dates, because they denote different things. They give the reader some knowledge of timeframes and provoke questions as well as providing answers. The second poem, had it been referenced, would have been a perfect opportunity for Chris to link events together, and note this as a positive in the critique. The dates also give the reader a chance to ask some more questions, such as what the significance of Burn’s Sleep is. Readers are given the knowledge that the Malazan Empire has existed for 96 years, that the emperor’s name was Kellanved and that what follows in the prologue happens in the year of his death, so is set before the opening poem. This means the prologue is some sort of flashback, which is important, otherwise the author wouldn’t have written it! Repeating myself but – if it’s significant enough for the author to put in, it’s significant enough for a reader to take away! Anyway, I digress. Chris then continues:

CW:Gardens of the Moon is not the first book I’ve accused of being pretentious with it’s opening pages. The stuff before the first line, whether that’s maps, lists, poems, epistolary snippets, or quotes, is not the story. It’s more like meta commentary about the story. When it’s overdone, it looks like the storyteller is going on about how very cool and important their work is.

If you let the story speak for itself, you don’t have to worry about saying something that sounds overly pompous.”

Now, I have to say, I’m not surprised that this isn’t Chris’s first rodeo of pretentiousness, and I agree that in some cases, some authors do think that maps/lists/glossaries and dramatis personae style introductions will elevate their work, and that sometimes those extras are not necessary. For the most part, I don’t think that “stuff before the first line” really qualifies as meta-commentary, although I can see how poetry and epistolary snippets can direct the reader’s attention towards purpose in what follows – but in most cases, poems and epistolary snippets are intended as first lines and not reference materials, which is the category that the majority of “stuff before the first line” falls into.

The excerpts and poetry prior to the prologue in GotM (and indeed the rest of the book) are there as part of the story, not in addition to it. For the majority, they add to the reading experience. As an aside, though, I can understand why they could be seen as something that can be skipped over or not given much thought, particularly in later chapters, but not at the very beginning of the novel where they serve as introductions.

It is also true that letting the story speak for itself is a good tactic, but looking at the poetry with an objective viewpoint, readers can see (as demonstrated) that they do actually bring something to the story being told.

Of course, if a reader has a personal preference regarding poetical form, this could skew in one direction or another – negative or positive. Which is why, as a “lesson” that could be learned from this for an aspiring writer, I would have suggested that they ‘balance out’ any introductory/pre-chapter poems/snippets within the story itself where there is relevance, so that readers who choose not to engage with that format, don’t ‘miss out.’

Next up, Chris discusses disorientation.

Critiquing a Critique

Mythcreants and Malazan

When I began expanding my experiences of reading in the genre of fantasy in 2023, joining groups on Reddit, discovering new authors and ending up with far too many recommendations; re-igniting my passion for literature and adding to my now ever-increasing “to be read” lists, it was inevitable that I would end up hearing about The Malazan Book of the Fallen.

Of course, I didn’t know that at the time, but when I joined a reading group on Discord, Malazan was mentioned, so I got a copy of the first book from my local Waterstones, with the intent of reading it along with the group when they started. I searched my Reddit group (r/fantasy) just to see what it was all about and get the gist of it etc, and discovered that a lot of potential readers were “put off” about reading the series because of its complexity and many had decided not to read the series at all, purely based on the negative experiences of others having not enjoyed the first in the series, or having not being able to “understand” the books.

I took a sneaky peek at my copy. I didn’t get why people didn’t get it. I started looking for reviews and reasons as to why readers had issues with the series. Google, as always, is my friend. I focused my search on book one of the series, Gardens of the Moon and one of the first articles I found was on a site called Mythcreants.

Here’s what their website says:

“Mythcreants is an online publication for speculative fiction storytellers. To better understand and tell the stories we love, we analyze popular works, theorize on storytelling craft, and explore the technical aspects of writing and tabletop roleplaying. We’re here to educate you on the most effective ways of engaging your audience while providing entertainment, insight, and inspiration.”

There are hundreds and hundreds of articles on this site. The one I found is titled: Lessons From the Extremely Serious Writing of Malazan.

I love literature. I love literary analysis. I love discovering what works, what doesn’t work, and why. I love nuance and inflection and imagery and poetry and insight. I also love learning about literature, so this article seemed right up my alley.

I read the article, looked at the comments, joined the Malazan group on Reddit (r/Malazan was mentioned in the comments) and did a search, found more comments about the article there, and then went back to the article. This article was posted on Mythcreants in June 2023. It is still receiving comments now, and I’m not at all surprised. I’m also not surprised that some comments were deleted at some point as I can see how things may have become quite heated – I can also understand why, and I’ll get to that later, but I digress.

The article focuses on the prologue of the first book of the Malazan series, Gardens of the Moon. It’s written by a member of Mythcreants team, Chris Winkle, who is the Founder and Editor in Chief.

This is my response to that article, both as a reader and as someone who has studied and is interested in literary analysis and criticism.

I want to clarify here, that I was not offended by the article. My intent here is not to be disrespectful in any way to Chris, or anyone who shares the opinions she has of Steven Erikson’s work. The article is presented as a teaching article, and is tagged as analysis, writing, dialogue, lessons from bad writing, scenes. My responses are intended to give an alternative view/alternative analysis of the text, supported by evidence. My aim is to give an honest and fair representation, both of Erikson’s writing, and the article in respect of how I interpret the content of each. In some cases, it may even be a critique of the critique.

The original article is quite long, and although most of the text is repeated in these posts to give context to Chris Winkle’s analysis and my own responses, you may want to give it a look first. You can find it here.

Quotes from the book are formatted as such. Responses from the writer of the article are cited as CW: and are italicised. My own responses follow and are not labelled or italicised so that it’s less confusing.

I’ve split my response into sections that follow the structure of the original article, and because the whole response would be long. They are linked below.

My closing comments are here

Fat Bottomed Mages

You make the Malaz’ world go round

I am utterly in love with this story, and have completely fallen for Tattersail hook, line and sinker.

My feelings for this book are quite odd – by which I mean, unusual, in comparison to what I have read on the internet and various groups/reviews etc. I have always loved literature, and usually my choices are psychological thriller, police procedural (think Criminal Minds) and horror (namely Stephen King) or poetry (which I absolutely adore, and do not read anywhere enough of.) A very good friend introduced me to Roger Zelazny and the amazing Chronicles of Amber and then Brandon Sanderson’s Stormlight Archive in late 2022: I joined a few groups, my tbr list increased exponentially, and I found myself extremely enjoying the fantasy genre. In every other post I saw on a particular Facebook group, Malazan was recommended, so when the opportunity came up to read the series with a discussion group, I jumped at the chance. But I never imagined that it would be as good as it is. I have completely fallen in love with reading again. I’m getting excited about the next discussions, looking forward to being able to talk to people about my experiences and theories and just basically rambling about ideas and thoughts and everything that I think is amazing, or not as the case may be. I feel at home with this genre. That’s not to say that others are bad, or that I won’t go back to them, I just can’t believe how much I’m enjoying it and why it took me so long to get here!

At the time of posting, I’ve actually finished Gardens of the Moon – I got swept away with the narrative and just let the story lead me. I love it when that happens – when you’re so engaged with the story that continuing becomes the only thing you want to do; when you get pulled into a world so deeply that you feel like you know it, and the people who are in it. Erikson’s prose is engaging, the pace and plot progress well and I am really looking forward to the next book (in fact, it’s already on my shelf waiting for me to pick it up!

But I digress… Fat Bottomed Mages most definitely make Malazan more interesting – at least for me. Tattersail is one of the most intriguing characters in GotM and as of Chapter Three, we’ve not seen that much of her. I’m not going to go into the poetry in the epigraph, because I’m doing a separate post on that, and probably a separate section, because I think that they (the epigraphs) could prove to be integral to the overall plot of the series, so I’m revisiting them after completion of the book as a whole and including my initial thoughts on them in those posts.

And I’m waffling again. Apologies. Here follows my thoughts on the next couple of chapters which will complete Book One.

Chapter Three: Legends

Ganoes Paran is now Captain, and we see how his mission has affected him because he’s pretty much a wreck – he’s questioning what he’s doing and even in front of the Claw, Topper, he’s wearing his feelings on his shirt sleeves, which might not be the best idea. Even though he’s taking everything in his stride, there’s a sense of uncertainty that surrounds him; from riding a Quorl to his memory of Whiskeyjack and his ruminations about the Empire and the Empress, Paran seems to be walking a fine line between conscience and duty.

Again, there’s another great section that’s full of uncertainty
– with the Mages, we see Tattersail trying to convince Bellurdan of the betrayal , but he’s having none of it.
– with the Bridgeburners, we see them trying to convince WhiskeyJack that the Empress wants them dead, but he’s not so sure or is unwilling to believe it, and he’s still not totally certain about what’s happening with Sorry.

If I had any doubt that Tattersail is more powerful that even she seems to know, it was thwarted with the next reading from the Deck of Dragons for Tayschrenn. I’m really intrigued about these cards and readings and wonder if they’ll play a major part as the story goes on. Also, it was interesting that there was the presence of an ‘Ascendant’ – we didn’t get that last time, unless I missed it. Lots of the the information that Tattersail was sharing from the Deck mirrored the plot, and I thought that was a brilliant way of tying things together without it being contrived. We also got insight into Tayschrenn’s power and his allegiance, and that led to a decision from Tattersail, which I think will prove significant.

‘Deliver, in person, this message to Sergeant WhiskeyJack, Bridgeburners. The fat lady with the spells wants to talk.’

– Tattersail to a young soldier

I was completely shocked at the ending of this chapter – I mean, I understand why Paran got stabbed – I just wasn’t expecting it happen – I knew that it was going to at some point, and I’m really interested in seeing how this goes. He hears the spinning coin after all. And if Tattersail’s reading is anywhere near accurate, which so far it is, I wouldn’t imagine that Oponn would let Ammanas and Cotillion get away with killing Paran, regardless of who they used to do it.

Other things of note:

  • Toc the Younger seems like he’s one to watch – he doesn’t seem to be the same type of Claw that we’ve seen so far – well, the only Claw we’ve seen so far, which is Topper. It’s interesting how much he knows and that he’s from the 2nd, like Tattersail.
Chapter Four: Insane Puppets & Angry Hounds

There’s so much crammed into this chapter it’s totally and utterly bonkers. Alliances are being forged and characters are developing amazingly because of that – Erikson’s ability to make characters feel ‘real’ so quickly is refreshing – I don’t know if it’s just because as a reader I’ve been thrown into the deep-end with them and so I’m more aware of their personalities, but there are only a handful of fantasy books that I’ve read where characters have been so deeply developed in such a short space of time that they feel like old friends – they feel familiar, but they are unique – they share their insights and thoughts in conversation with each other, and obviously these scenarios involve something I’ve seen called “expo-dumps” but at the same time, they’re not expo-dumps because it’s dialogue. Colour me confused, because I’ve seen readers of Malazan and other fantasy works say they dislike these sort of things – personally, I love being fed the little tidbits that leave you asking questions and watching for the answers. Maybe it’s just me.

I didn’t think that Oponn would get involved in the “death” of Paran that directly, but again, I loved that it gave us more insight into not only the Oponn twins, and especially Shadowthrone and his Hounds. Paran was very clever in his manipulation of the ‘god’ but I was left confused as to why he felt so hostile to the dogs – maybe it was because he realised that they were behind the massacre at Itko Kan.

The Deck of Dragons. Considering that Tattersail had avoided the Deck for a while prior to the Seige of Pale, she’s suddenly drawn to it – a lot – that in itself is intriguing, and this particular reading feeels like it’s significant. The ‘reading‘ she does in this chapter is exceptional: on the reader’s part it leaves a lot of things to look forward to, but for Tattersail herself, it’s overwhelming and kind of scary, especially with everything that’s happened so far. And it’s only chapter four!!!!

…She had chosen a spiral pattern, working her way through the entire Deck of Dragons and arriving with a final card, which could mark either an apex or an epiphany depending on how it placed itself…

Again, it feels like the cards themselves are alive. I love the imagery that Erikson uses; it just amplifies the intrigue.

The Knight’s sword reached a black, smoky streak towards the Hound at the spiral’s apex, and in this instance she knew its meaning. The future held a clash between the Knght and High House Shadow…It was rare to s ee such a clear and direct link between two Houses: the potential for devastation left her cold with worry. Blood spilled on such a high level of power cast aftershocks down through the world.

What she’s seeing here has extreme after effects and what she sees next is even more relevant to the next occurences. This element of foresight through the prose (and poetry) is one I’m absolutely loving. It just totally ramps up the tension, and keeps me on the edge of my seat.

The image sank once again into its viscid pool, but it left her changed. There would be no running away this time. Her eyes returned one last time to the Hound. The beast’s eyes seemed to burn with yellow fire, boring into her as if seeking to brand her soul.

  • Fiddler from the Bridgeburners seems to have some kind of foresight? He was spot on about the incident with the Hound happening, not the details mind, just the occurence.
  • I’m very interested in seeing what happens with the Black Moranth and the Quorl
  • The uncertainty regarding Sorry is rising, and her actions are even freaking out WhiskeyJack
  • Tattersail is more powerful that anyone believes
  • Hairlock is a nutter
  • How did Paran manage to injure the Hound with his sword?
  • Tattersail still hears the spinning coin

The next book in the book is Darujhistan. Our journey continues…