throwawaffleaway

throwawaffleaway t1_j1mqdf9 wrote

I tend to be seasonal. More fantasy and YA in winter when my brain is sad and I need an escape. More nonfic in summer when I’m active and interested in learning about subjects related to my activities (I love to hike so primarily nature books and memoirs). Though I do have a tendency to get into British and Viking history in early winter too.

1

throwawaffleaway t1_j0u9jpx wrote

I’m in university, and luckily my professors love when I cite relevant ideas from books I’ve read (fic and nonfic). Wrote a paper on surveillance— The Circle by Dave Eggers. Wrote a paper on predicting the future using the past— The Good Earth by Pearl S Buck. Wrote a paper on GPS data— On Trails by Robert Moor. Wrote a paper on double binds (specifically for women)— Jane Eyre.

I’m specifically trying to get a literature oriented career, and my professors know this. So possibly I’m just lucky. Also ofc these are not my only sources, just adding these in to illustrate the broader ideas better.

2

throwawaffleaway t1_iy9r1ut wrote

I loved this book because of WHEN I read it. Looking back I can see how it doesn’t really reflect my tastes. It’s extremely “tell, don’t show” in my opinion, and if you’re as low as Nora you might need something like that. I don’t necessarily think this is Haig’s intention, I’ve read some of his other stuff and don’t find him particularly genius, but it’s good that it’s worked for some people. I really liked one of the later “lives” Nora fell into and what she does with it in her “real life” at the end. If you’re a fast reader who can handle being a bit noncommittal from the story, I’d encourage you to finish it for that, but if you prefer to be drawn deeply in, I don’t think it would be worth it for you then.

21

throwawaffleaway t1_ixx1nx2 wrote

I think a huge detail in the book that’s easy to lose is the MC’s childhood behavior. Those events are described so quickly at the very beginning (I finished the whole book in like 3-4 hours) that I closed it and remembered “ohhh yeah… that’s what the context is for her needing a place so badly…” it is extremely eerie, even if that WASN’T part of her backstory

1

throwawaffleaway OP t1_ix1eox6 wrote

Oh, look into it if you like, but it’s not fantasy. It’s a “portrait of a marriage”, more like a portrait of everyone and their third cousin lol.

Yeah, I feel like multiple POV is standard in epics for a reason, and lots of fantasy/sci-fi have complex worlds that need to be explained to the reader. Providing multiple POV probably helps grasp that better, with everyone taking part in some event and the setting being perceived according to that event and the characters role.

I’m thinking for literary fiction, such as this, it’s not working very well depending on how long the masthead is and how relevant each person actually is to the story.

Thanks for getting in the weeds with me!

1

throwawaffleaway OP t1_ix1b0fh wrote

I have only read the first GOT book, but I watched the show and at least the perspective changing there MOSTLY contributed to the audience understanding how the fight for the throne unfolded throughout the whole country. Being such a long series and having complex political families, even if it’s tiresome, most of it makes sense. However, this is why I don’t read a lot of fantasy, because it IS a lot to keep track of.

I have encountered the bystander perspective before and done right, it can reveal so much. It’s sort of like breaking the fourth wall, reminding the audience that there’s so many other lives being lived besides the ones you’re reading about.

I like the rule of odds quite a bit. 1,3, or 5 seems like a decent amount of POV. The only book I can think of off the top of my head that had 2 perspectives (unless you count the very beginning before MC Lotto was born) was Fates and Furies, which I hated tbh.

2