But Why?

Since posting this article on the communities I haunt on reddit, I’ve had a fair few people ask why I bothered writing a response to the Mythcreants article at all. I’ve also seen plenty of responses where people have considered the article similar to a troll post, and even some who initially thought that the article was satirical – and said they wouldn’t waste their time, so why would I waste mine, in fact, what makes Ms. Winkle’s opinion so valuable to me?

So I’ll make it clear here. Chris’s opinion isn’t valuable to me, not with regards to the text that she evaluated but it could be valuable to any potential readers of the Malazan series, and it could be valuable to any potential authors who specifically look towards Mythcreants for advice.

I’ve said it throughout my response and I’ll say it here again – what frustrated me about the article when I first read it, and frustrates me still (enough that I felt I should write a response) is that it is framed/presented as a teaching article – Lessons From Bad Writing – yet it is not. That Ms. Winkle criticises the text, and in most cases does so in a dismissive, contemptuous, incorrect or assumptive nature is fine – she is perfectly entitled to do that in a subjective, opinion piece that is presented as such.

This is the main issue for me – as I have said before.

I love literature and everything to do with it, the good and the bad, I love that there is always something to learn. I also love teaching about literature, whenever I get the opportunity – to present arguments related to relevant text and give the ‘whys and wherefores’ and see someone piece something together in their head, and have a positive response. I also love to participate in discussions about personal opinions and feelings that have been evoked by various pieces of literature. Literature is an amazing gift and to misrepresent all of those things, to me (and this is very much my personal opinion) feels like a little bit of a tragedy.

The other issue that I have with the article is the wider misrepresentation. Not just in the case of the author or the particular piece, as I highlight above, but from a much larger perspective. Chris misrepresents, not just her article, but also what Mythcreants as a community is about. You can see the organisations principles HERE. The people who run Mythcreants (Ms. Winkle being Founder and Editor in Chief) not only write articles-a-plenty that are freely accessed on their website, but they actively charge writers for their services. These services include, but are not limited to content editing, something that is suggested in their FAQ as the best choice if a writer is asking for a critique of their work. A list of the services Mythcreants provide is HERE

I have never used the organisation for any services. I’ve skimmed a few other articles and looked at a few other topics listed, but that’s as far as I have gone, and would ever go. Nevertheless, based on just this experience, and given what I have seen (as per my response) I would not recommend or suggest Mythcreants as a professional service. To anyone.

Thank you for reading!

If you’ve got anything you’d like to say or ask, you know where to find me!

It’s All Just A Case of History Repeating

We are nearly at the end of Chris’s teaching article, and she’s evaluating the “opening overall,” as well as providing a lead in for Chapter One. I’ve numbered again, instead of bulleting.

CW: “Clearly, this prologue has many issues.

1. Erikson’s information management is abysmal. He overwhelms readers with unnecessary details and bores them with dry exposition while simultaneously denying them the information they need to know

2. The characters are all flat clichés, from the naive boy who wants to be a hero, to the seasoned soldier, to the cold, imperious villain. I’m not saying you shouldn’t depict a naive child or seasoned soldier, but please do something to make them a little more interesting.

3.Most of all, Erikson’s scene design needs serious work. A series should not open with characters standing around talking about events happening somewhere else. Scenes should feature the story’s most important events. Put an important character where they need to be for that to happen.

My best guess is that despite the length of the series, it’s still overburdened with more information that it can handle. Simply telling readers about the death of Dassem, the burning Mouse Quarter, and Laseen’s plans allows Erikson to stuff in more world events than he could cover if he featured an exciting scene with Dassem’s death by angry god, Ganoes getting trapped in the Mouse Quarter during a riot, or Laseen assassinating the emperor. The only cost is everything that could have been good about this scene.“

I’m not going to refer you back to everything I’ve said, but I believe my previous responses answered these issues. To be perfectly honest, I am posting this only so that anyone reading gets a complete picture of the article and how it was presented.

Chris then goes on to give the readers an opening for Chapter One, which is actually a “snippet” prior to the chapter. Given that the snippets for the prologue were considered insignificant “additions,” it’s surprising that Chris quoted this as an opening teaser. As per her previous examples, the snippet is taken out of context, and also misrepresented. So where are the lessons for budding writers? What part of this article is teaching?

Maybe, Ms. Winkle will let me know.

My final thoughts are here.

Edited to add: I posted the link to my blog response as a comment on the original article at the same time as I posted to both a reddit community and a discord community (6th August.) Comments on the post have to be approved. Mine, which explained that due to length I had provided a link, has not been approved and I have had no response from Chris thus far. Not that I expect nor need or require one. I just thought it was quite interesting.

Villains Don’t Have to Look Villainous

I’m just jumping straight into this one, because I can’t really think of an appropriate introduction.

A new voice spoke behind them, a woman’s, imperious and cold. “Commander.”

CW: “Her voice is imperious and cold so she must be a villain. As soon as people commit their first unspeakable act, their voice starts to sound like that. It’s just science.”

This appears to be a more generalised comment, rather than specific to the text. However, it is an assumption that Chris makes without there being any evidence in the text to corroborate it.

Assumptions that are not supported by the text are one of my main issues with this article, and unfortunately, they are a frequent occurrence. You can “read into” the text and glean information or even develop theories from it, but assuming something can cause all sort of problems, both in reading and in writing – it’s misrepresentation.

The article is not supposed to be an opinion piece and is not represented as one – this is a lesson for writers in what not to do – and basing a lot of the criticism on unfounded assumptions isn’t useful or helpful. It also doesn’t support the point of the article which is to highlight errors for writers to learn from.

Both soldiers turned, but without haste. The commander said to his companion, “The new company needs help down there. Send Dujek and a wing, and get some sappers to contain the fires – wouldn’t do to have the whole city burn.”

The soldier nodded, marched away, sparing the woman not a single glance.

She stood with two bodyguards near the portal in the citadel’s square tower. Her dusky blue skin marked her as Napan, but she was otherwise plain, wearing a saltstained grey robe, her mousy hair cut short like a soldier’s, her features thin and unmemorable. It was, however, her bodyguards that sent a shiver through Ganoes. They flanked her: tall, swathed in black, hands hidden in sleeves, hoods shadowing their faces.

Ganoes had never seen a Claw before, but he instinctively knew these creatures to be acolytes of the cult. Which meant the woman was…

CW: “I like that Laseen has a distinctive look that isn’t sexy or repulsive. Even so, Erikson has given her an attractiveness rating. When he described the commander’s scars and the soldier’s pock marks, it was refreshingly without any value judgement. Once the first female character walks in, Erikson wants to clarify that she’s plain. I’ve seen far worse, but there’s room for improvement.”

I don’t think that this was the intention, as I read the “plain” to mean lack of colour, given that the previous comment was referring to her being blue skinned, but it could be interpreted as an attractiveness rating.

The commander said, “It’s your mess, Surly. Seems I’ll have to clean it up.”

Ganoes was shocked at the absence of fear – the near-contempt in the soldier’s voice. Surly had created the Claw, making it a power rivalled only by the Emperor himself.

CW: “What do you do when you have a precocious child sitting around, but you’re done expositing? Why, have him gawk in awe at your super-cool hero, of course! How will readers know how very brave this rugged commander is without a child fawning over him?Instead of fawning, it’s better to give the readers some context so they understand the risks characters are taking. Erikson is making a minor attempt at this too, but what in the world does he mean? Is the Claw the power only rivaled by the emperor? If so, what does Laseen creating it have to do with that? Or is it supposed to be “making her power rivaled only…” ? Even if this were clear, we don’t know how powerful the emperor is or how essential magical power is to maintaining his political power.”

This is an example of reading into the text that doesn’t work. There is no magic mentioned in the text – so the suggestion that Chris makes here about how essential magical power is to maintaining the emperor’s political power has not come from the quoted section. In fact, it hasn’t come from any of the text in the prologue so far. Magic has been mentioned, as have mages, but there is no mention anywhere of magical power and its importance.

Surly had created the Claw, making it a power rivalled only by the Emperor himself.

The confusion over this sentence is unnecessary. It’s self-explanatory unless you add in assumptions about what kind of “power” is being spoken about.

“That’s no longer my name, Commander.”

The man grimaced. “So I’ve heard. You must be feeling confident in the Emperor’s absence. He’s not the only one who remembers you as nothing more than a serving-wench down in the Old Quarter. I take it the gratitude’s washed off long since.”

CW: “Wow, this commander is apparently classist and sexist. Plus, Laseen has gained a sympathetic backstory about working her way out of poverty. I’m now on Team Laseen!”

More assumptions. The commander said she was serving wench. There is no mention of her circumstances other than that.

CW: “It doesn’t help that this rudeness toward Laseen, which Erikson clearly intended to be heroes showing bravery, can easily be reinterpreted as a good ol’ boys’ club demeaning a woman who managed to break in. I don’t know how many powerful women there are in this setting, but she is the only woman among our first four characters, and high fantasy doesn’t have a great track record.”

Chris is right, high fantasy does not have a great track record regarding powerful women, or women in general to be fair. However, the assumption that  the rudeness towards the female character was “clearly intended” by the author to make heroes look brave, is just that, an assumption. It can be re-interpreted as a good old boys club demeaning women, but this is not what is presented in the text. As a teaching point, it’s a valid exercise in advising writers to be aware that this could be something that could be wrongly interpreted, but there is no such advice stated.

CW: “While I’m not going to blame Erikson for doing this twenty years ago, I also strongly recommend against creating fictional scenarios in which ignoring a character’s name change is justified. If a character states what they want to be called, other characters – and the narration – should use that name. That is, unless you are fully prepared to take on sensitive topics like deadnaming, racism, etc.”

Chris’s recommendation here is very good advice, and I can understand this argument in the case of characters assuming a new name for identity purposes. However, in the case of Surly/Laseen this is a name she has taken that means “Thronemaster” – it is a name that reflects her status, not who she is – but what she does. The fact that the commander doesn’t use the name she has chosen for herself is because he doesn’t agree with what she is doing, not because of who she is.

The woman’s face betrayed no change of expression to mark if the man’s words had stung. “The command was a simple one,” she said. “It seems your new officers are unable to cope with the task.”

“It’s got out of hand,” the commander said. “They’re unseasoned -”

“Not my concern,” she snapped. “Nor am I particularly disappointed. Loss of control delivers its own lessons to those who oppose us.”

“Oppose? A handful of minor witches selling their meagre talents—to what sinister end? Finding the coraval schools on the shoals in the bay. Hood’s Breath, woman, hardly a threat to the Empire.”

“Unsanctioned. Defiant of the new laws – ”

“Your laws, Surly. They won’t work, and when the Emperor returns he’ll quash your prohibition of sorcery, you can be certain of that.”

CW: “Hey look – magic is outlawed, but not because the setting has oppressed mages! For anyone who hasn’t kept up with the hot gossip on Mythcreants, “oppressed mages” is a term we use when non-magical people oppress magic folks specifically because of their magic or magic-related traits. This trope misrepresents oppression by suggesting the vulnerable can oppress the powerful, when it’s always the other way around.

In this case, Laseen clearly has magic of her own, much more than these witches. It’s realistic that she’d want to further consolidate her power by eliminating magic workers who associate with her enemies.”

Chris makes the assumption that Laseen has magic of her own because she has combined a piece of information from the text (that magic is outlawed) with the assumption she previously made regarding magical power. The text does not state anywhere that Laseen clearly has magic of her own (emphasis mine) or is in any way magical. This is a misrepresentation of the text, caused by misinterpretation of the text. Or vice versa.

In the next section, there is a substantial part of the article where Chris notes several corrections to the text in the book. All of which were received positively, and I would imagine would have been suggestions that she would have made (and rightly so) in the critique. For continuity purposes, and to lead us into the final part of the prologue, here it is:

CW: “Fun fact: in the version of the book sold on Amazon, several great corrections have been made to the last two paragraphs here.

• Ganoes’s thoughts are italicized! Even with italics, it’s still a little strange, as we haven’t gotten any such thoughts until now.
• The word “Izine” has been swapped out for “wine.” Good choice, because that line looks racist otherwise. Using “wine” makes the work of this theoretical merchant sound much more decadent, too.
• Finally, a paragraph break was added after “merchant” and before the commander narrows his eyes. Hip hip hooray! The old “new paragraph when a new person speaks” rule is baloney. The commander is still responding to Ganoes with his body language, much like speaking.

The prologue is almost over. It can’t be over yet, though. There’s one more thing that Erikson has to cover before it ends.

Something very important.”

Mock’s Vane swung once more. Hot smoke rolled over the wall, engulfing them. A reek of burning cloth, scorched paint and stone, and now of something sweet. “An abattoir’s caught fire,” Ganoes said. “Pigs.”

The commander grimaced. After a long moment he sighed and leaned back down on the merlon. “As you say, boy, as you say.”

CW: “We can’t leave without saying goodbye to Mock’s Vane! Since the smoke is back, I’ll say that Ganoes’s choice to become a soldier leads to DOOM. I sure hope so. I won’t hazard a guess at what the burning slaughterhouse means or why Erikson decided to close with it.

That is the end of the prologue. But don’t worry, the first chapter reveals that our dear Laseen succeeded in her takeover of the empire. I’m sure she got rid of that classist and sexist commander who spouts life wisdom at any rich boys who happen to be nearby.”

I’m fairly sure when I originally read this ending, it was different, and I distinctly remember the confusion around the word abattoir and what it meant/why it was relevant. What I remember is alluded to in Chris’s final comments, but just for clarification, it’s not pigs that Ganoes can smell.

Once more unto the Finale