I don't entirely get some of your objections here...count_fenringMarch 28 2010, 18:00:58 UTC
I'm going to deal with these point-by-point: PLEASE don't take this as dismissive or intended as an attack (I know it can come off that way).
I think this is actually explained, but I'm forgetting.
It is, in the sense that Jack is shown to be able to sense the child's position with his Jack powers, and is operating on a prophecy. I mean, the magic explains itself pretty thoroughly here, and the "narrow escape from supernatural family-murderer" is not really something open to question; it's a trope, and has been for centuries. It shows up in Roman stuff.
If it's the former, why kill the WHOLE family instead of just the boy?
Because parents can have more children? And/or the prophecy is unspecific as to which child? And/or the parents and sibling would be witnesses? And or cruelty/completionism on the part of Jack?
If it's the latter, that leads into my next question: how did they target families? Because it's not like they wiped out an entire generation of kids. Bod met others his age, you know? So what made certain families a
( ... )
Re: I don't entirely get some of your objections here...calico_reactionMarch 28 2010, 19:29:14 UTC
PLEASE don't take this as dismissive or intended as an attack (I know it can come off that way).Thanks for clarifying, because I probably would have
( ... )
Re: I don't entirely get some of your objections here...count_fenringMarch 28 2010, 20:17:13 UTC
I guess all I'm saying is that it's not plot holes, it's a matter of taste; it sounds like you don't much care for prophecy plots, Gaiman's short work or his children's books, which is perfectly reasonable, but not really a reflection on the works themselves, which is how the original statement came across to me.
I don't think Gaiman is "limiting himself to the tradition;" he's using it as a background element in a story. This happens all the time, and every single fantasy author does it. The prophecy isn't elaborated much, because it's a structural element; it's not what the book is about.
An example to illustrate this: fairies. There's no reason that an author should have to rewrite half of English folklore any time they want to put a fairy in a story - they simply put the fairy in, trusting that people "get" the concept of fairy. If the story is ABOUT fairies, they probably change them and detail these changes... but if the book just happens to include a fairy or two, not so much.
Personally, I really liked The Graveyard Book
( ... )
Re: I don't entirely get some of your objections here...calico_reactionMarch 28 2010, 23:12:33 UTC
We'll have to agree to disagree then. I don't expect radical changes, but I'm not going to rely on tradition to make the story more satisfying for me. I enjoyed it okay, but I find it could've been stronger. :)
But see, you say you love SMOKE AND MIRRORS, and that was the book that turned me away from Gaiman. So we definitely have to agree to disagree. :)
Have you read AMERICAN GODS? Or his Sandman collection?
I actually really liked this one, but I must admit that I didn't physically read the book. Rather, I watched the Book Tour and listened to Gaiman's reading of his own story while I knit. I think a great deal of my enjoyment was for his storytelling style - voices, inflection, etc. - and I agree that, while I very much enjoyed the story for what it was, I was left with an empty feeling lingering off to the side. I had the same reaction after reading Coraline; absolutely loved it, yet felt there was just something missing that I couldn't quite put my finger on. (Have American Gods and Neverwhere on my to-read pile, just haven't gotten around to them.)
I'm not sure if you could find a list of all books eligible for the Hugo's last year, but here's a list of nominations. The only other one on that list that I read was Little Brother by Cory Doctorow, which I quite liked and has earned itself at least three other awards. He has it and all of his other work available as free ebooks on his site under the Creative Commons license along
( ... )
I can see how listening to it would vastly change your way of experiencing the story. His language is lovely, and I imagine it lends itself quite well to reading-aloud. :)
I was aware of the other nominees (the only other one I've read on the list was ZOE'S TALE, but while I loved it, I'm not sure it stands alone without the rest of the series backing it up), but I'm thinking more of the books that DIDN'T get nominated. I remember seeing last's years list and thinking, "Of COURSE it's them! Names that have been nominated over and over."
The Hugos and I, we don't always see eye-to-eye. :)
OK, so I havent read the major threads here yet, but I will.
However, I really liked The Graveyard Book as well, so it kinda surprised me that you weren't impressed.
You bring up points that honestly, never really occurred to me.
Again, I do have to wonder if this has to do with the mediums that the book is consumed in. I listened to the book....I'm sure that causes me to focus on other aspects than I would if I was actually sitting down and reading it.
I think I really need to start writing up reviews on some of the books I read as well I think...
I think the medium definitely gives you a completely different experience. The focus of voice, the cadence of the story, it's easy to get swept up in if it's good.
And don't get me wrong, I liked it well enough, but I wasn't OMG-in-love with it. And my time in grad school scarred me when it comes to reading for enjoyment. I almost ALWAYS notice something to pick on. ;)
I agree. Especially about the short story thing and how Gaiman handles them. I started reading Fragile Things once and think I got about halfway before I finally just put it down and never picked it up again. And I *never* do that.
Comments 45
Reply
I think this is actually explained, but I'm forgetting.
It is, in the sense that Jack is shown to be able to sense the child's position with his Jack powers, and is operating on a prophecy. I mean, the magic explains itself pretty thoroughly here, and the "narrow escape from supernatural family-murderer" is not really something open to question; it's a trope, and has been for centuries. It shows up in Roman stuff.
If it's the former, why kill the WHOLE family instead of just the boy?
Because parents can have more children? And/or the prophecy is unspecific as to which child? And/or the parents and sibling would be witnesses? And or cruelty/completionism on the part of Jack?
If it's the latter, that leads into my next question: how did they target families? Because it's not like they wiped out an entire generation of kids. Bod met others his age, you know? So what made certain families a ( ... )
Reply
Reply
I don't think Gaiman is "limiting himself to the tradition;" he's using it as a background element in a story. This happens all the time, and every single fantasy author does it. The prophecy isn't elaborated much, because it's a structural element; it's not what the book is about.
An example to illustrate this: fairies. There's no reason that an author should have to rewrite half of English folklore any time they want to put a fairy in a story - they simply put the fairy in, trusting that people "get" the concept of fairy. If the story is ABOUT fairies, they probably change them and detail these changes... but if the book just happens to include a fairy or two, not so much.
Personally, I really liked The Graveyard Book ( ... )
Reply
But see, you say you love SMOKE AND MIRRORS, and that was the book that turned me away from Gaiman. So we definitely have to agree to disagree. :)
Have you read AMERICAN GODS? Or his Sandman collection?
Reply
I'm not sure if you could find a list of all books eligible for the Hugo's last year, but here's a list of nominations. The only other one on that list that I read was Little Brother by Cory Doctorow, which I quite liked and has earned itself at least three other awards. He has it and all of his other work available as free ebooks on his site under the Creative Commons license along ( ... )
Reply
I was aware of the other nominees (the only other one I've read on the list was ZOE'S TALE, but while I loved it, I'm not sure it stands alone without the rest of the series backing it up), but I'm thinking more of the books that DIDN'T get nominated. I remember seeing last's years list and thinking, "Of COURSE it's them! Names that have been nominated over and over."
The Hugos and I, we don't always see eye-to-eye. :)
Reply
However, I really liked The Graveyard Book as well, so it kinda surprised me that you weren't impressed.
You bring up points that honestly, never really occurred to me.
Again, I do have to wonder if this has to do with the mediums that the book is consumed in. I listened to the book....I'm sure that causes me to focus on other aspects than I would if I was actually sitting down and reading it.
I think I really need to start writing up reviews on some of the books I read as well I think...
Reply
And don't get me wrong, I liked it well enough, but I wasn't OMG-in-love with it. And my time in grad school scarred me when it comes to reading for enjoyment. I almost ALWAYS notice something to pick on. ;)
Reply
http://www0.epinions.com/review/Book_The_Graveyard_Book_Neil_Gaiman/content_523116121732
Reply
Leave a comment