SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Sometimes a book series is so important that you want people to put everything aside and just read it. I'm not the only one who feels this way about N.K. Jemisin's Broken Earth trilogy. The first and second novels in Jemisin's trilogy, The Fifth Season and The Obelisk Gate won the prestigious Hugo Award for the past two years in a row—the first time this has happened since Ender's Game and its sequel Speaker for the Dead won sequential Hugos in 1986 and 87. Now the final Broken Earth book, The Stone Sky, is out. You can gobble up the whole series without interruption.
There are a lot of reasons why this series has been hailed as a masterpiece. There are unexpected twists which, in retrospect, you realize have been carefully plotted, skillfully hinted at, and well-earned. There are characters who feel like human beings, with problems that range from the mundane (raising kids in a risky world) to the extraordinary (learning to control earthquakes with your mind). The main characters are called orogenes, and they have the ability to control geophysics with their minds, quelling and starting earthquakes. Somehow the orogenes are connected with the lost technologies of a dead civilization, whose machines still orbit the planet in the form of mysterious giant crystals called obelisks. To most people on the planet, the orogenes are known by the derogatory term "rogga," and they're the victims of vicious prejudice.
But Jemisin is hardly retelling The X-men, only with orogenes instead of mutants. She's created a sociologically complex world, and the more we read, the more we understand how the orogenes fit into it. As we travel with our protagonists across the planet's single megacontinent, we discover the place is full of many cultures, often at odds with one another. The brown urbanites from the tropics think the pale, rural people of the poles are ugly idiots; the coastal people aren't too sure about the inland people; and of course everybody hates the orogenes. These tensions are part of a long and complex history that we learn more about as the series develops. There are a number of mysteries to unravel in this series, but one of them is understanding the devastating origin of prejudice against orogenes.
[...] The Broken Earth is exciting, full of incredible technology, and powered by a dark historical mystery. It's something you can read to escape, or to ponder philosophical questions in our own world. In short, it's that rare series that appeals to a love of adventure, and to the urge to reflect on the unseen forces that drive our civilizations.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Monday September 18 2017, @04:19PM (22 children)
Is it me, or does this sound a lot like a rip-off of GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire? A fictional world, with a bunch of different cultures at odds with each other (the various feudal houses of Westeros, plus the Dothraki and various other cultures from Essos), a long and complex history (the First Men, the building of the Wall, dragons, Valeryans, etc.), one megacontinent vs. two (Westeros & Essos), a number of mysteries to unravel (the White Walkers and the Army of the Dead, Dragonglass, the stuff that happened to Bran, various religions including the Lord of Fire that brings people back from the dead, etc.), old technological relics left over from the ancients (Valeryan steel, Wildfire). GRRM's first book in the series was out back in 90s, so this honestly feels like this author basically copied some of these concepts, but amping up the old technological relics bit, and perhaps not copying so many elements from medieval Europe.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 18 2017, @04:30PM (8 children)
There are no new stories, just new ways of telling them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 18 2017, @06:27PM (7 children)
*BBZZZT* wrong
you're just falling for the same problem we all experience as we get older. We see the underlying patterns and realize SO MUCH is not overly new. There are still new stories, but harder to tell the "new" sometimes when its built on familiar patterns. Even then, there still are original stories.
I see you still like to operate from an absolutist perspective, how's the whole "no censorship" thing going? Seems to be failing, I had to ADD a sentence to pass your shitty filter. Same text before, new text after, should still trigger it...
Ya done fucked up boy!
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday September 18 2017, @07:55PM (6 children)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Basic_Plots [wikipedia.org]
or maybe 9: http://www.how-to-write-a-book-now.com/basic-plots.html [how-to-write-a-book-now.com]
Yes, there are many ways to present the plots -- as many ways as books in the world -- the question I guess is whether the plot is the story, or the way the characters are developed and run through the plot.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday September 18 2017, @08:05PM (1 child)
The story is in the telling. The plot is just the vehicle.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 18 2017, @08:43PM
Finally, a car analogy! Now I get it. Thank you.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 18 2017, @08:27PM (3 children)
This list is interesting and sounds comprehensive... until you realize it isn't. For example, they don't have:
1) Survival stories (such as "The Martian")
2) Slice of Life stories (such as "Yokohama Kaidashi Kiko")
3) Philosophical plot-twisting stories (like "I Am Legend" the book, not the movie/etc)
4) Satire/commentary (such as "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies")
5) Mysteries (including but not limited to Detective stories)
And that was just with 60 seconds of thinking.
This list reminds me of those people who say "Hollywood never makes anything new." Then, when confronted with a list of new innovative movies Hollywood has done, abruptly changes the goalposts saying that "those don't count" and "I was talking about blockbuster movies."
What have those Romans done for us, anyway?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 18 2017, @08:32PM
The aqueducts!
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday September 18 2017, @08:48PM
I'm not familiar with the references in 2-4, but wouldn't a survival story just be a monster story where nature is the monster?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Monday September 18 2017, @10:53PM
Overcoming the Monster, Voyage and Return, Rebirth, The Quest, Comedy.
Voyage and Return, Rebirth, Comedy, Tragedy
Overcoming the Monster, Rebirth, Tragedy
Comedy
Overcoming the Monster, Tragedy, Comedy
I assure you I spent about as much time thinking the above responses.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Monday September 18 2017, @05:59PM
That sounds like a good description of every book I have ever enjoyed.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Monday September 18 2017, @06:57PM (1 child)
Isn't by the same standard A Song of Ice and Fire just a rip-off of Lord of the Rings?
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday September 18 2017, @07:52PM
Yeah, after I wrote this, I started comparing ASoIaF to LotR and Dune and it does seem there's similarities. But there's some differences too (note that I haven't read the books that are the subject of today's article; I also haven't read ASoIaF, I've only seen the TV show):
In Dune and LotR, the plot is written entirely from the PoV of the protagonists, whoever they may be. In LotR, it's all about the Fellowship and their adventures. In the first book, they're mostly a single group and travel together, then in the later books they get separated so the story switches between the few groups (Sam/Frodo, Pippin/Merry, the rest). You never hear the story as told by any other groups not in the company of the Fellowship members, and certainly not by the orcs. In Dune, I seem to remember that it's from the PoV of Paul and his buddies, and later his descendants, then in the later books from the Bene Gesserit and their ally Miles Teg IIRC (it's been a long time). I don't recall any scenes where, for instance, it gets deep into what the Harkonnen are thinking as they plot against the Atreides; it does have scenes where, for instance, the Harkonnen are interacting with Leto Atreides or Doctor Suk. In GoT, on the other hand, there's plenty of scenes where you get to see the "villians" (Lannisters) at length, even though there's none of the protagonists (Starks) around, and you learn a lot about their psychology and motivations. Also, the line between who's a "villain" and who isn't is pretty blurry at times: are Jaime and Bron protagonists or not? Jaime starts out as a definite villain, but then becomes much more sympathetic, but now in season 7 is directly fighting against our protagonists again.
Also, GoT is a bit unique with the sheer number of important characters that you have to keep track of. It's a bit like the Silmarillion that way, except with an actual detailed plot rather than basically being a banal history book. And in GoT, major characters get killed off fairly regularly.
But overall, I guess most fantasy fiction is going to have a lot of similarities to either.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by vux984 on Monday September 18 2017, @07:42PM (4 children)
You said it was a rip off of GRRM's... but then everything you said was in Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit.
Men, Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Goblins, Dragons, Eagles, Ents ... Sauron
Lost Tales, Similiarilian, ...
the First Men ==> the First Men
the building of the Wall ==> Minas Tirith (city of Gondor, holding back Sauron's forces)
dragons ==> dragons + balrogs
Valeryans ==> Valar although any number of Tolkien civilizations could take the place; i just picked that one for the phonetic similiarity.
Westoros ==> Middle earth (aka the 'the west')
Essos ==> 'the east' (where from the Easterners in Sauron's army hail)
the White Walkers ==> Ring Wraiths aka "Black Riders" (LOL when you start lining them up it starts looking ridiculous.)
the Army of the Dead ==> well... I guess that lines up with "the Army of the Dead" (Dead Men of Dunharrow)
Dragonglass ==> Sting maybe, or mithril.
valeryan steel ==> elvish swords (Glamdring, Orcrist, Sting, the Barrow blades, Narsil, ...)
wildfire ==> Saruman's bomb at Helm's deep
And LotR was half a century before that.
Not sure I'm going so far as to call GRRM's GoT a 'ripoff' here, but I don't think we can hold him up as the pinnacle of originality either, and saying another novelist ripped off GRRM sort of rings a bit ridiculous.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday September 18 2017, @07:59PM (3 children)
fictional world, with a bunch of different cultures at odds with each other
Men, Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Goblins, Dragons, Eagles, Ents ... Sauron
One big difference I see here between LotR and ASoIaF is that in LotR, the different cultures aren't actively warring against each other, they're divided into 2 camps, along with some that are more-or-less neutral. The Men, Elves, Dwarves, and Hobbits are all allied, with some help from the Ents and Eagles, and Sauron and the Orcs and Uruk-Hai are allied, with a little help from a cave troll and a balrog (though it didn't seem the balrog or cave troll were working for Sauron, they were just attacking some intruders into their domain for the sake of evil AFAICT). In GoT, the different groups are actively fighting each other, with alliances changing over time, and there frequently isn't a clear "good" or "evil" side as there is in LotR.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by vux984 on Monday September 18 2017, @09:05PM (2 children)
"One big difference I see here between LotR and ASoIaF is that in LotR the different cultures aren't actively warring against each other"
Yes and no.
The lord of the rings events leads up to a final showdown with Sauron, but until he rose and threatened *everybody*, they were NOT allies.
There is some pretty clear animosity between the elves and dwarves, and some strong bad blood between them. Elsewhere, the battle of five armies in the hobbit started out as a battle between: Humans vs Dwarves vs Elves. Treebeard the Ent answered what side he was on, was that he wasn't on anybodies side, because nobody was on his side. Further by the time of the events in LotR, the elves had more or less retreated into isolationism and had a pretty low opinion of man, and i expect did not tolerate most of them in their territories perhaps except the Rangers. The LotR history though is pretty bloody - they formed up as allies to fight morgoth and later Sauron, but the elves waged some pretty brutal wars against even their own kind in the Silmarillion.
I agree with you though that LotR was definitely more arch-typical with usually clear 'good' and clear 'evil' and a few more tragic figures caught in-between changing sides (Saruman, Gollum, and Boromir for example). However, GoT is pretty black and white too; he's just trying to be a lot more coy with who is who; and he has a lot more 'Boromir' where people change, and he isn't afraid to kill off a few 'lawful good' types. And it worked really well at the start... but now its starting to wear thin, with lots of StarTrek 'redshirts' in one camp, and "Jesus Snow" & co in the other.
So that's what... LotR with what, medieval england politics with a bunch of flawed nobles of varied wealth, power, status, and inbreeding vying for influence and the throne. :p
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday September 18 2017, @09:34PM
So that's what... LotR with what, medieval england politics with a bunch of flawed nobles of varied wealth, power, status, and inbreeding vying for influence and the throne. :p
I am really curious how it's going to wrap up. Obviously, they're pitching this new romance (with some inbreeding) between dragon-girl and Jon Snow as the ultimate union to stand against Cersei and the Army of the Dead, but Cersei has plans to stab her in the back, and now with the dead having their own dragon, things are looking pretty murky. I'm kinda hoping that Cersei's treachery will end up causing the living to lose. It'll be a nice lesson in how we stupid humans can't recognize the existential threat we face until it's much too late and too many of our leaders are greedy assholes leading us to ruin.
(Score: 2) by bart9h on Tuesday September 19 2017, @03:00AM
As I interpreted it, Boromir never changed sides.
He was just not strong enough to resist the power of the ring. When he "attacked" Frodo, it was the the ring itself (or Sauron) that was really acting.
See, when he went after Frodo he was not thinking about getting the ring. That occurred only when he got near to it. Just as, after Frodo ran away with the ring, he immediately came to his senses again.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday September 18 2017, @07:56PM (3 children)
The whole ancient technology bit gets really old, and is often over used. Especially when said tech is somehow carried through secret history, known to only a few, or found in some cave on earth, or something similar.
The appeal to ancient technology lost to modern science is so pervasive in Sifi and poorly educated people.
More plausible are the found tech on other worlds (Alien, Prometheus etc). Still the same problems though. Where did the original owners go? How good was their tech if we keep finding them dead among their surviving tech.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Grishnakh on Monday September 18 2017, @08:11PM (2 children)
The whole ancient technology bit gets really old, and is often over used. Especially when said tech is somehow carried through secret history, known to only a few, or found in some cave on earth, or something similar.
You act like the entire idea is ridiculous. Why? You seem to be assuming that good tech couldn't possibly be lost somehow, or that cultures don't regress, stagnate, or disappear.
I'll give you one real-world example of actual ancient technology that's now mostly lost: Roman concrete. It's better than the concrete we have now (doesn't degrade in saltwater, quite the opposite in fact), and, for about 1000 years, we didn't have any concrete at all, between the fall of Rome and the invention of Portland cement. We still can't quite make concrete as good as the Romans, though in recent years we've mostly figured it out, but we don't bother really trying to re-create it because we're cheap and lazy and we don't care if stuff falls apart in 50 years as long as it costs less, because the managers who made the decision will be long gone by then.
There's other stuff that's clearly inferior to older technology: computer keyboards for one. Show me a brand-new laptop with a keyboard as good as the Thinkpads had in the early 00s; you won't find one. Desktop UIs are another: they all were much better in the mid-00s. OS UIs (e.g., Windows 8/10) have gone down the tubes, and website UIs are unbelievably bad now for the most part.
How about electric streetcars? We used to have those decades ago, but they were killed off because the automakers wanted everyone to drive cars.
Of course, the idea that the ancients had anti-gravity tech or something like that seems pretty ridiculous. But I think the idea of a story about some alien civilization with lost technology isn't so far-fetched at all; we have clear examples on our own world of civilizations collapsing and losing technology. Technology isn't perfect and won't prevent its makers from being killed by things
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday September 18 2017, @11:38PM (1 child)
You need to check your facts.
Roman Concrete is neither unique. Its structure was well known for as long as concrete was made. It wasn't lost knowledge.
It was merely the unavailability of two ingredients.
Volcanic Ash and Sea Water located close enough together to make concrete economically.
Then you turn a discussion of Lost Ancient Technology to keyboards. WTF!!???
Again Nothing has been lost. If you want to pay $200 for a keyboard there are several to choose from. If you want to pay $15 there are even more to choose from.
So again I ask, what is a "clear example" on our own world of civilians collapsing and losing technology?
Pyramids? Nope. Slavery combined with any of a dozen methods.
Stone Henge? Nope again. Serfdom, religious zealotry, and stone axes
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Grishnakh on Tuesday September 19 2017, @01:17AM
Its structure was well known for as long as concrete was made. It wasn't lost knowledge. It was merely the unavailability of two ingredients.
Oh bullshit. If the knowledge wasn't lost, they would have continued building concrete structures throughout the Dark and Middle Ages, but they didn't. They've only recently figured out how it was really made.
https://www.nature.com/news/seawater-is-the-secret-to-long-lasting-roman-concrete-1.22231 [nature.com]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/roman-concrete-mystery-solved-scientists-a7824011.html [independent.co.uk]
Again Nothing has been lost. If you want to pay $200 for a keyboard there are several to choose from. If you want to pay $15 there are even more to choose from.
Bullshit. Prove it. There are no laptop keyboards made today that match those in the Thinkpad circa 2001. If you disagree, prove it or STFU. You can't buy a laptop keyboard off-the-shelf.
So again I ask, what is a "clear example" on our own world of civilians collapsing and losing technology?
I already pointed it out, you idiot: Roman technology, including concrete, roads, buildings, etc. After the empire fell, no one built anything like that for over 1000 years. All the practical knowledge was lost while Europe was mired in feudalism and Christianity. No one's still made anything that matches the Pantheon (the largest unreinforced concrete dome in the world). You can also look at the Aztecs, Incans, etc. They made astronomical discoveries that were lost after their civilizations collapsed.
Here's a quick article [toptenz.net] listing a bunch of lost technologies, including the fairly recent Apollo program moon lander (we couldn't build a copy today if we wanted to; the design docs are gone and all the people involved dead or close to it).
It doesn't take that much to lose technology: just a loss of interest by the people who know how to do it, a loss of any documentation, and a little bit of time so the people who knew how to do it are all gone.
Pyramids? Nope. Slavery combined with any of a dozen methods.
Stone Henge? Nope again. Serfdom, religious zealotry, and stone axes
Wrong again: these technologies were also lost. People forgot how to do them, and never did them again. Hint: if you can't very quickly repeat making or doing something, then you've lost that technology. We still don't know exactly how those things were built, though we do have very good ideas now, after thousands of years, including plenty of time for archaeologists to analyze them with the benefit of modern technology. But the civilizations that built those things lost the technology, as proven by the fact that they never built things like them again.
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Tuesday September 19 2017, @02:10AM
Hah, that's nothing.
Read The Fellowship of the Ring [goodreads.com] (first half) then read The Sword of Shannara [goodreads.com] and ask yourself why Terry Brooks wasn't sued into oblivion for plagiarism.