{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/4263", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 4263, "subject": "More Mieville", "messages": 6, "voices": 4, "first": "2004-12-02T19:30:40+00:00", "last": "2004-12-03T12:41:26+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<039501c4d8e8$6f1d4ce0$d27cae44@akt>", "from": { "name": "Alice K. Turner", "address": "aturner6 at nyc.rr.com" }, "date": "2004-12-02T19:30:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) More Mieville", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, The Scar is a lot better than PSS (though it completely falls apart at \nthe end), and IC is hopeless (I think, though I've only ventured into it for \nthree chapters). I plead guilty to using the term \"hack,\" but I'll retract \nthat. He's not exactly a hack, since that implies churning the stuff out \nmindlessly. Mieville, I think really believes in what he is doing, but \nunfortunately (from my point of view) what he loves is pulp horror, mainly \ntaken from movies. You can tell that from the excerpted quotes that \nintrigued some of you. He has also been poorly edited, especially in PSS, \nwhich is nothing if not repetitive, with terribly clunky prose.\n\n-alga" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Mieville is worth reading. He is no hack, in my\nopinion, although he has clearly been influenced by\nhacks -- as has Gene Wolfe. I recommend The Scar as\nthe \"purest\" Mieville -- that's the book I feel has\ncome closest to showcasing his strengths. Perdido\nStreet Station will also give a fair appreciation of\nhis talents. I would avoid Iron Council, his latest.\nHe's not the tidiest of writers under the best of\ncircumstances, but IC is just plain sloppy.\n\nPaul" } ] }, { "message_id": "<01C4D925.94C9FFA0.blindenmuth@jkharris.com>", "from": { "name": "Brian Lindenmuth", "address": "blindenmuth at jkharris.com" }, "date": "2004-12-03T07:48:03+00:00", "subject": "(urth) More Mieville", "in_reply_to": "<039501c4d8e8$6f1d4ce0$d27cae44@akt>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I am behind on my Mieville. I have read PSS, started The Scar but not \nfinished it yet (Edward Whittemore has been distracting me) and I bought IC \nbut its not even on my radar screen yet in terms of reading it. I done \nthink he is a hack, but her is certainly a messy and unpolished writer. \n Maybe he would benefit from better editing. PSS was good though, if \nmessy, a bit slow at times and too long. It was what I like to call a \nkitchen sink novel. He was bursting with images and ideas and wanted to \nget them all out without a certain amount of control or cohesiveness. \n Again, not the best writer in the world, but definitely a good imagination \nand worth watching.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom:\tAlice K. Turner [SMTP:aturner6 at nyc.rr.com]\nSent:\tThursday, December 02, 2004 10:30 PM\nTo:\turth-urth.net at lists.urth.net\nSubject:\t(urth) More Mieville\n\nYes, The Scar is a lot better than PSS (though it completely falls apart at \nthe end), and IC is hopeless (I think, though I've only ventured into it \nfor\nthree chapters). I plead guilty to using the term \"hack,\" but I'll retract\nthat. He's not exactly a hack, since that implies churning the stuff out\nmindlessly. Mieville, I think really believes in what he is doing, but\nunfortunately (from my point of view) what he loves is pulp horror, mainly\ntaken from movies. You can tell that from the excerpted quotes that\nintrigued some of you. He has also been poorly edited, especially in PSS,\nwhich is nothing if not repetitive, with terribly clunky prose.\n\n-alga" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Mieville is worth reading. He is no hack, in my\nopinion, although he has clearly been influenced by\nhacks -- as has Gene Wolfe. I recommend The Scar as\nthe \"purest\" Mieville -- that's the book I feel has\ncome closest to showcasing his strengths. Perdido\nStreet Station will also give a fair appreciation of\nhis talents. I would avoid Iron Council, his latest.\nHe's not the tidiest of writers under the best of\ncircumstances, but IC is just plain sloppy.\n\nPaul" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f761737041203084249ea9a30@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2004-12-03T08:42:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) More Mieville", "in_reply_to": "<039501c4d8e8$6f1d4ce0$d27cae44@akt>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "A -\n\nI think you're probably right; if I had read _The Scar_ first I might well \nhave liked it better than _PSS_. Alas, the sheer grotesquerie which is\nCM's primary stock in trade is really only good for about one book, so\nI found _The Scar_ something of a slog, as it didn't have the \"Wow!\"\nfactor of the first encounter with CM.\n\nOf course, for anyone who's read all this discussion, there will probably\nbe almost no \"Wow!\" factor no matter _which_ book they begin with,\nbecause an expectation will have been built which won't be lived up to..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 22:30:27 -0500, Alice K. Turner wrote:\nYes, The Scar is a lot better than PSS (though it completely falls apart at\nthe end), and IC is hopeless (I think, though I've only ventured into it for\nthree chapters). I plead guilty to using the term \"hack,\" but I'll retract\nthat. He's not exactly a hack, since that implies churning the stuff out\nmindlessly. Mieville, I think really believes in what he is doing, but\nunfortunately (from my point of view) what he loves is pulp horror, mainly\ntaken from movies. You can tell that from the excerpted quotes that\nintrigued some of you. He has also been poorly edited, especially in PSS,\nwhich is nothing if not repetitive, with terribly clunky prose.\n\n-alga" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Mieville is worth reading. He is no hack, in my\nopinion, although he has clearly been influenced by\nhacks -- as has Gene Wolfe. I recommend The Scar as\nthe \"purest\" Mieville -- that's the book I feel has\ncome closest to showcasing his strengths. Perdido\nStreet Station will also give a fair appreciation of\nhis talents. I would avoid Iron Council, his latest.\nHe's not the tidiest of writers under the best of\ncircumstances, but IC is just plain sloppy.\n\nPaul" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Chris", "address": "rasputin_ at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2004-12-03T10:08:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) More Mieville", "in_reply_to": "<01C4D925.94C9FFA0.blindenmuth@jkharris.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't deny that Mieville is creative, but I don't think the wealth of \nideas and images you're talking about is a sign of it... Mieville, by his \nown admission, borrows a lot of ideas from all over the place. The \nparticular synthesis is unique to him and I would agree is rather creative." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am behind on my Mieville. I have read PSS, started The Scar but not\nfinished it yet (Edward Whittemore has been distracting me) and I bought IC\nbut its not even on my radar screen yet in terms of reading it. I done\nthink he is a hack, but her is certainly a messy and unpolished writer.\n Maybe he would benefit from better editing. PSS was good though, if\nmessy, a bit slow at times and too long. It was what I like to call a\nkitchen sink novel. He was bursting with images and ideas and wanted to\nget them all out without a certain amount of control or cohesiveness.\n Again, not the best writer in the world, but definitely a good \nimagination\nand worth watching.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom:\tAlice K. Turner [SMTP:aturner6 at nyc.rr.com]\nSent:\tThursday, December 02, 2004 10:30 PM\nTo:\turth-urth.net at lists.urth.net\nSubject:\t(urth) More Mieville\n\nYes, The Scar is a lot better than PSS (though it completely falls apart at\nthe end), and IC is hopeless (I think, though I've only ventured into it\nfor\nthree chapters). I plead guilty to using the term \"hack,\" but I'll retract\nthat. He's not exactly a hack, since that implies churning the stuff out\nmindlessly. Mieville, I think really believes in what he is doing, but\nunfortunately (from my point of view) what he loves is pulp horror, mainly\ntaken from movies. You can tell that from the excerpted quotes that\nintrigued some of you. He has also been poorly edited, especially in PSS,\nwhich is nothing if not repetitive, with terribly clunky prose.\n\n-alga" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Mieville is worth reading. He is no hack, in my\nopinion, although he has clearly been influenced by\nhacks -- as has Gene Wolfe. I recommend The Scar as\nthe \"purest\" Mieville -- that's the book I feel has\ncome closest to showcasing his strengths. Perdido\nStreet Station will also give a fair appreciation of\nhis talents. I would avoid Iron Council, his latest.\nHe's not the tidiest of writers under the best of\ncircumstances, but IC is just plain sloppy.\n\nPaul" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<047f01c4d977$638e6af0$d27cae44@akt>", "from": { "name": "Alice K. Turner", "address": "aturner6 at nyc.rr.com" }, "date": "2004-12-03T12:34:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) More Mieville", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ah, but I read The Scar first, then went back to PSS. Which makes me \ncompletely agree with Dan'l about grotesquerie and the \"wow\" factor being \nonly good for one book. We simply started with different books. Though I \nstill applaud the Armada as a visual concept.\n\n-alga " } ] }, { "message_id": "<01C4D94E.948A8900.blindenmuth@jkharris.com>", "from": { "name": "Brian Lindenmuth", "address": "blindenmuth at jkharris.com" }, "date": "2004-12-03T12:41:26+00:00", "subject": "(urth) More Mieville", "in_reply_to": "<047f01c4d977$638e6af0$d27cae44@akt>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No need to elaborate, but I agree with the \"wow\" factor lasting for 1 book.\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom:\tAlice K. Turner [SMTP:aturner6 at nyc.rr.com]\nSent:\tFriday, December 03, 2004 3:34 PM\nTo:\turth-urth.net at lists.urth.net\nSubject:\t(urth) More Mieville\n\nAh, but I read The Scar first, then went back to PSS. Which makes me \ncompletely agree with Dan'l about grotesquerie and the \"wow\" factor being \nonly good for one book. We simply started with different books. Though I \nstill applaud the Armada as a visual concept.\n\n-alga " } ] } ] }