Would I have been just as lost, only with more words in my head?
February 11, 2021 9:11 AM Subscribe
In Sequel Rights: A Review of Locus Reviews, Foz Meadows critiques a review written by Katharine Coldiron of The Ikessar Falcon by K.S. Villoso in the latest issue of Locus Magazine. Unfortunately, Coldiron had not read the first book of the series, The Wolf of Oren-Yaro. Meadows also examines the reviewer's body of work in general, and how reviewers use othering language about and hold authors of color to different standards (Coldiron is white; Villoso identifies as Filipino). Locus posted a short apology.
I used to write the occasional totally unpaid review for a local free publication and the badness of Coldiron's reviews is really shocking to me. Like, I loved/hated writing reviews because it was so much work - read the book, read up on the author, sometimes read some other reviews to make sure you're not overlooking major aspects of the book, poke around on the internet for genre-, style- and culture-relevant information, then try to say something both meaningful and original. It was hard!
It's just shocking to me to read someone who is getting paid just roll up with the whole "this book is confusing, I shouldn't be confused by a sequel, it's bad" and "this book [set in a world modeled on the Phillipines ] is set in a mock-pre-Norman Conquest England" thing. Like, didn't she read anything about the books before she read them?
I could just barely see myself reviewing the second book in a series without having read the first one - if it were very topical and I really, really liked it and I'd maybe read it in an airport when I didn't have access to the first book.
I understand that there is a lot more to unpack than these things, but wow is that not normal book-reviewing as I understood it. And she was getting paid, right? I never got paid and about half the time I had to buy my own books!.
But at the same time, the editors should really, really be ashamed. Like, there are tons and tons and tons of fans who are decent enough writers and who are themselves BIPOC or who at least have a sustained and specialized interest in fantasy and science fiction by writers of color and who could do a good job, but they're never going to get a crack at it because of the way our media system is allowed to operate.
posted by Frowner at 10:15 AM on February 11, 2021 [11 favorites]
It's just shocking to me to read someone who is getting paid just roll up with the whole "this book is confusing, I shouldn't be confused by a sequel, it's bad" and "this book [set in a world modeled on the Phillipines ] is set in a mock-pre-Norman Conquest England" thing. Like, didn't she read anything about the books before she read them?
I could just barely see myself reviewing the second book in a series without having read the first one - if it were very topical and I really, really liked it and I'd maybe read it in an airport when I didn't have access to the first book.
I understand that there is a lot more to unpack than these things, but wow is that not normal book-reviewing as I understood it. And she was getting paid, right? I never got paid and about half the time I had to buy my own books!.
But at the same time, the editors should really, really be ashamed. Like, there are tons and tons and tons of fans who are decent enough writers and who are themselves BIPOC or who at least have a sustained and specialized interest in fantasy and science fiction by writers of color and who could do a good job, but they're never going to get a crack at it because of the way our media system is allowed to operate.
posted by Frowner at 10:15 AM on February 11, 2021 [11 favorites]
Yeah, I think there's a reasonable discussion to be had about whether sequels should be able to stand on their own. It'll also depend heavily on genre conventions and what the publisher wants. I'm sure many readers are familiar with the clunky exposition/catch-you-up first chapter, like in mega-series such as The Babysitters Club.
But in the case of epic fantasy, especially with the same main characters as the previous books, that's not the norm. Then the only useful information you can get out of the review is "do I have to read book 1 to understand book 2?" Add the privilege dynamics and this review is a huge mess.
posted by j.r at 10:18 AM on February 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
But in the case of epic fantasy, especially with the same main characters as the previous books, that's not the norm. Then the only useful information you can get out of the review is "do I have to read book 1 to understand book 2?" Add the privilege dynamics and this review is a huge mess.
posted by j.r at 10:18 AM on February 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
I've been watching this play out on Twitter for the past 24 hours, and like. Let's be clear. As the Meadows article talks about, not only had Coldiron failed to read the first book of the series, she consistently mis-spells the name of the main character in the review and mistakes the clear, explicit setting of the book in the Philippines before colonization as pre-Norman England.
That's right.
MISTAKING THE PHILIPPINES FOR ENGLAND.
And this is before getting into the goddamn endless racial microaggressions in other articles, including some really stupid, patronizing commentary. And Coldiron being initially defensive in now-deleted tweets on Twitter that included the fateful phrase, "I didn't know how to say, without being racist..."
Anyways, a short Twitter thread about this, with this key quote:
That's right.
MISTAKING THE PHILIPPINES FOR ENGLAND.
And this is before getting into the goddamn endless racial microaggressions in other articles, including some really stupid, patronizing commentary. And Coldiron being initially defensive in now-deleted tweets on Twitter that included the fateful phrase, "I didn't know how to say, without being racist..."
Anyways, a short Twitter thread about this, with this key quote:
If your only frame of reference for epic fantasy novels is a Western one, it is worth asking how that frame of reference was developed, and the historical erasure that plays into that singular perspective.posted by joyceanmachine at 10:24 AM on February 11, 2021 [8 favorites]
Without defending this review in particular or Coldiron's reviews in general, I would assert that it is possible to review a sequel without having read the previous books. It's even useful to the large number of people out there who read books out of order in part because publishers often try to downplay the fact a book is part of a series. e.g. the publisher's page for this book only implicitly says its in a series https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/k-s-villoso/the-ikessar-falcon/9780316532716/ and the cover is just as bad on that front.
posted by 3j0hn at 11:09 AM on February 11, 2021
posted by 3j0hn at 11:09 AM on February 11, 2021
The last paragraph of Meadows' essay is the clincher for me:
posted by spamandkimchi at 11:28 AM on February 11, 2021 [9 favorites]
Because that’s the other thing that stands out in Coldiron’s reviews: how frequently she reviews diverse authors, and how she is, on some level, really, genuinely trying to support them. It’s just that having a rote understanding of diversity isn’t the same thing as actively confronting and working through your own biases, and in the apparent absence of sensible editorial oversight, Coldiron has been left to stagnate – and in that stagnation, it’s authors of colour who’ve suffered.I hope Coldiron and other white reviewers don't respond to these criticisms by saying "oh well, white people can never get it right so why bother" but rather, "I will miss things and misinterpret things and I want to learn from my mistakes, because it is important to try."
posted by spamandkimchi at 11:28 AM on February 11, 2021 [9 favorites]
Authors generally don't choose their own covers or marketing. They may have input but my impression is that for most publishers/authors that input is low.
I don't like to read this kind of serialized epic fantasy until it's all finished, and I appreciate warnings in reviews that you can't jump in anywhere in a particular series. But that's not the problem with Coldiron's review(s). She clearly has an axe to grind with the genre. In another quoted review of a second book in a series, she expresses disappointment with a cliffhanger ending and wishes it was resolved at the end of the book. That's like complaining a murder mystery ends with a reveal of the murderer.
posted by muddgirl at 11:31 AM on February 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
I don't like to read this kind of serialized epic fantasy until it's all finished, and I appreciate warnings in reviews that you can't jump in anywhere in a particular series. But that's not the problem with Coldiron's review(s). She clearly has an axe to grind with the genre. In another quoted review of a second book in a series, she expresses disappointment with a cliffhanger ending and wishes it was resolved at the end of the book. That's like complaining a murder mystery ends with a reveal of the murderer.
posted by muddgirl at 11:31 AM on February 11, 2021 [5 favorites]
I would assert that it is possible to review a sequel without having read the previous books
Vehemently disagree. Actually, I assert that it impossible to read the latest book in a series, without refreshing via a re-read of all previous books. (And for me, that happens with every new sequel)
And - that - is - for - pleasure...
posted by rozcakj at 11:50 AM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
Vehemently disagree. Actually, I assert that it impossible to read the latest book in a series, without refreshing via a re-read of all previous books. (And for me, that happens with every new sequel)
And - that - is - for - pleasure...
posted by rozcakj at 11:50 AM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
Wow. The critique was very interesting, in part because reviews of reviews are unusual. I got a handful of books to look for too, since what the first reviewer was complaining about sounded fairly interesting.
posted by mersen at 12:05 PM on February 11, 2021
posted by mersen at 12:05 PM on February 11, 2021
Actually, I assert that it impossible to read the latest book in a series, without refreshing via a re-read of all previous books.I read a lot of SFF series (both ongoing and 3-5 book series) as they come out, and I consider it a huge failure by both author and editor if I cannot pick up the new book without having to reread the previous one(s). Adding subtle (or even ham-fisted) reminders of the important who and what of earlier books is just part of good series-craft.
posted by 3j0hn at 12:58 PM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
Or writers have different intentions and some see their books as volumes of a single story, not episodes. It's not a genre I like, but it's a genre.
posted by muddgirl at 1:21 PM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by muddgirl at 1:21 PM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
e.g. the publisher's page for this book only implicitly says its in a series
There are three review quotes. One is praise for the previous book (implication that this is a sequel). The second states that it builds on the first, and is the middle book of a trilogy. The third explicitly states that this is a sequel.
Then some stuff to get you jazzed about the book.
Then a listing of The Chronicles of the Bitch Queen, in which this is listed second.
The only way it could be more clear on this page is if it had a big red seal like games might: "this is not a standalonegame book! It is the expansion sequel!"
posted by explosion at 2:14 PM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
There are three review quotes. One is praise for the previous book (implication that this is a sequel). The second states that it builds on the first, and is the middle book of a trilogy. The third explicitly states that this is a sequel.
Then some stuff to get you jazzed about the book.
Then a listing of The Chronicles of the Bitch Queen, in which this is listed second.
The only way it could be more clear on this page is if it had a big red seal like games might: "this is not a standalone
posted by explosion at 2:14 PM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
I would assert that it is possible to review a sequel without having read the previous books
It is possible but for some types of series it’s not really fair to say much more than this is not a good entry point into a series. Pulling out Jo Walton’s series classification, I’d say it’s fine to review a sequel for type 3 & 4, and possibly borderline for type 2. (Though even there I’d expect a certain amount of leeway on the type of things that were being faulted in the review.)
And Coldiron being initially defensive in now-deleted tweets on Twitter that included the fateful phrase, "I didn't know how to say, without being racist..."
Her defense seems to be basically “If I hadn’t reviewed it, nobody would have”, which may be true, but I’m not really sure that her review would be better than none. (Possibly in this case it was - I’m sure I’m not the only one who’s ended up planning to read The Wolf of Oren-Yaro thanks to this debacle.) It also seems really odd to try and claim that it wouldn’t have been possible to find any one else better qualified to review it. (Someone who had read the first book for example.)
Locus seems to have deleted some of the reviews too - at the very least the one for Tasha Suri’s Empire of Sand. (Link is to Tasha Suri’s tweets about the review being removed - she’s a bit conflicted about the removal.)
posted by scorbet at 2:41 PM on February 11, 2021 [4 favorites]
It is possible but for some types of series it’s not really fair to say much more than this is not a good entry point into a series. Pulling out Jo Walton’s series classification, I’d say it’s fine to review a sequel for type 3 & 4, and possibly borderline for type 2. (Though even there I’d expect a certain amount of leeway on the type of things that were being faulted in the review.)
And Coldiron being initially defensive in now-deleted tweets on Twitter that included the fateful phrase, "I didn't know how to say, without being racist..."
Her defense seems to be basically “If I hadn’t reviewed it, nobody would have”, which may be true, but I’m not really sure that her review would be better than none. (Possibly in this case it was - I’m sure I’m not the only one who’s ended up planning to read The Wolf of Oren-Yaro thanks to this debacle.) It also seems really odd to try and claim that it wouldn’t have been possible to find any one else better qualified to review it. (Someone who had read the first book for example.)
Locus seems to have deleted some of the reviews too - at the very least the one for Tasha Suri’s Empire of Sand. (Link is to Tasha Suri’s tweets about the review being removed - she’s a bit conflicted about the removal.)
posted by scorbet at 2:41 PM on February 11, 2021 [4 favorites]
And digging out the ol' wayback machine, Sarah Monette wrote about this exact catch-22 with regards to her novels in the Doctrine of Labyrinths series: marketers don't want fantasy novels to be labeled as a series (because readers are less likely to buy something labeled book 2), then reviewers and readers get mad when it ends on a cliffhanger or they have no idea what's going on.
posted by muddgirl at 2:56 PM on February 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by muddgirl at 2:56 PM on February 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
This was written over 10 years ago and yet here we are.
posted by muddgirl at 2:56 PM on February 11, 2021
posted by muddgirl at 2:56 PM on February 11, 2021
Thank you muddgirl for the link on Jo Walton's series classifications! It's interesting to me because I've been sometimes annoyed by the proliferations of series in sci fi/fantasy. Now I'm wondering if it's because I've started a bunch without knowing what kind I was getting into--sometimes even reading a whole book without realizing it was book 1 of a series. That's possibly a fault of marketing and the market, and not the fault of authors.
I have strong preference for type one or two, will sometimes dabble in type three, and try to avoid type four. For me it's like the difference between traditional sitcoms or episodic shows with a monster of the week, and modern "prestige TV" that has a strong throughline arc and character development. I want the throughline, and a satisfying conclusion; I also like it if book 2 of a trilogy rewards readers of book 1 while still being satisfying in its own right and not just a way for an author to bridge the first book to their epic final climax in book 3. I'm automatically hesitant to start a series that's much longer than a trilogy, because they tend to fall into type 3-4.
So there could be a lot of use for reviews that talk about whether you absolutely must remember book one as though you read it yesterday, whether you can jump right in to book two, or somewhere in between. Most of the time I don't reread but will occasionally look at plot synopses to jog my memory, so I'm find with someone not holding my hand. I just like to be prepared.
However, this review is so very much not that. I would have much preferred to read a review from someone who read and appreciated book one, who could comment on how satisfactorily the sequel continued the story further. Someone who has not only the context of the story itself, but did more digging into the cultural context too. As a white, western reader I'm trying to do more digging myself into how non-western stories work, so I can better appreciate the ones that I've encountered--here's an interesting tweet thread from Vida Cruz, another author, that delves into that. I also liked this thread from Adri Joy, who writes both amateur and professional reviews, which uses this situation to talk about overcoming your own biases to review responsibly. And it's hard work! Unfortunately in the reviewer's initial apology it's clear she hasn't yet done the work.
Btw, the review about Tasha Suri's book was apparently removed by mistake and it's back up on Locus. Suri's points still stand, though. And writers of color deserve more choices than 1) be reviewed incompetently and with racist microaggressions, or 2) don't get reviewed in Locus at all.
posted by j.r at 3:40 PM on February 11, 2021
I have strong preference for type one or two, will sometimes dabble in type three, and try to avoid type four. For me it's like the difference between traditional sitcoms or episodic shows with a monster of the week, and modern "prestige TV" that has a strong throughline arc and character development. I want the throughline, and a satisfying conclusion; I also like it if book 2 of a trilogy rewards readers of book 1 while still being satisfying in its own right and not just a way for an author to bridge the first book to their epic final climax in book 3. I'm automatically hesitant to start a series that's much longer than a trilogy, because they tend to fall into type 3-4.
So there could be a lot of use for reviews that talk about whether you absolutely must remember book one as though you read it yesterday, whether you can jump right in to book two, or somewhere in between. Most of the time I don't reread but will occasionally look at plot synopses to jog my memory, so I'm find with someone not holding my hand. I just like to be prepared.
However, this review is so very much not that. I would have much preferred to read a review from someone who read and appreciated book one, who could comment on how satisfactorily the sequel continued the story further. Someone who has not only the context of the story itself, but did more digging into the cultural context too. As a white, western reader I'm trying to do more digging myself into how non-western stories work, so I can better appreciate the ones that I've encountered--here's an interesting tweet thread from Vida Cruz, another author, that delves into that. I also liked this thread from Adri Joy, who writes both amateur and professional reviews, which uses this situation to talk about overcoming your own biases to review responsibly. And it's hard work! Unfortunately in the reviewer's initial apology it's clear she hasn't yet done the work.
Btw, the review about Tasha Suri's book was apparently removed by mistake and it's back up on Locus. Suri's points still stand, though. And writers of color deserve more choices than 1) be reviewed incompetently and with racist microaggressions, or 2) don't get reviewed in Locus at all.
posted by j.r at 3:40 PM on February 11, 2021
I, on the other hand, dislike series type 1 (unless it is made very, very clear that is what it is; it's usually advertised as type 2), and like 2/3/4 in different ways and will read any of them.
I think that a review of a sequel without book 1 is fine, as long as it's clear about that and does it well. Obviously it's hardest with series type 1, but that's ok, it can be useful to read those reviews if they're well done. The problem was this wasn't.
Some authors of books which heavily depend on earlier ones in the series write up what happened in earlier books -- it's why I picked up book two of Baru Cormorant after having forgotten book one, and why I didn't pick up book two of the Foundryside books.
posted by jeather at 3:56 PM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
I think that a review of a sequel without book 1 is fine, as long as it's clear about that and does it well. Obviously it's hardest with series type 1, but that's ok, it can be useful to read those reviews if they're well done. The problem was this wasn't.
Some authors of books which heavily depend on earlier ones in the series write up what happened in earlier books -- it's why I picked up book two of Baru Cormorant after having forgotten book one, and why I didn't pick up book two of the Foundryside books.
posted by jeather at 3:56 PM on February 11, 2021 [1 favorite]
Goodness gracious, in the reviewer's initial apology she still gets the main character's name wrong when she writes "(I also apologize about the Rayyan/Rayyel thing - I truly do not know how I messed that up, and am deeply embarrassed.)" Meadows has it as Rayyal.
posted by heatherlogan at 4:20 PM on February 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by heatherlogan at 4:20 PM on February 11, 2021 [2 favorites]
"Tasha Suri’s Empire of Sand"
One of the best fantasies I've read in the last 5 years, btw. I have an author alert on her on amazon and pre-order all her books now, which I only do for one other author, that's how much I loved Empire of Sand!
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:24 PM on February 11, 2021
One of the best fantasies I've read in the last 5 years, btw. I have an author alert on her on amazon and pre-order all her books now, which I only do for one other author, that's how much I loved Empire of Sand!
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:24 PM on February 11, 2021
She still gets the main character's name wrong when she writes
Meadows got it wrong, too. Downloaded the book and it's spelled Rayyel.
Being Filipino, I was piqued by the idea that it was supposed to be based in a Filipino-like precolonial culture, and it's... nothing of the sort.
What am I to make of a book claiming an imaginative grounding in my culture when there's little to none to speak of?
posted by micketymoc at 12:15 AM on February 12, 2021 [4 favorites]
Meadows got it wrong, too. Downloaded the book and it's spelled Rayyel.
Being Filipino, I was piqued by the idea that it was supposed to be based in a Filipino-like precolonial culture, and it's... nothing of the sort.
What am I to make of a book claiming an imaginative grounding in my culture when there's little to none to speak of?
posted by micketymoc at 12:15 AM on February 12, 2021 [4 favorites]
From Locus "We apologize unreservedly to any authors we harmed and to the SF community as a whole". Does anyone, ever, apologize in any other way but unreservedly? Cliché questions sincerity.
posted by BobTheScientist at 2:04 AM on February 12, 2021
posted by BobTheScientist at 2:04 AM on February 12, 2021
I read science fiction almost entirely because I enjoy being confused and figuring it out.
posted by srboisvert at 3:00 AM on February 12, 2021 [5 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 3:00 AM on February 12, 2021 [5 favorites]
Does anyone, ever, apologize in any other way but unreservedly?
I understand your point but I do think those apologies that go something like "I apologize to those that were offended and here are the 17 reasons you shouldn't have actually been mad" are basically apologizing reservedly?
I thought this was a pretty good apology from Locus under the circumstances, although only if they follow through.
posted by joannemerriam at 7:02 AM on February 12, 2021 [1 favorite]
I understand your point but I do think those apologies that go something like "I apologize to those that were offended and here are the 17 reasons you shouldn't have actually been mad" are basically apologizing reservedly?
I thought this was a pretty good apology from Locus under the circumstances, although only if they follow through.
posted by joannemerriam at 7:02 AM on February 12, 2021 [1 favorite]
Speaking of reading comprehension issues, Coldiron posted her initial response to the wrong person
posted by cheshyre at 7:35 AM on February 12, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by cheshyre at 7:35 AM on February 12, 2021 [1 favorite]
(I also realized I should thank scorbet for the Jo Walton where I mistakenly said muddgirl. Although muddgirl's link was cool too and worth a read; but while we're on the topic of reading comprehension and getting names right...)
posted by j.r at 7:42 AM on February 12, 2021 [2 favorites]
posted by j.r at 7:42 AM on February 12, 2021 [2 favorites]
It'll take a lot for Locus to rebuild trust with authors of color. Foz Meadows's article lines up a pretty damning pattern that goes for a while, so Locus will have to make pretty significant changes to how it does reviews in addition to this apology. I subscribed to them for the first time last June, and I'll be watching pretty closely while I decide whether to renew this year.
At least this scenario has also highlighted some great books I need to check out. Empire of Sand is part of an already-completed duology, and Eyebrows has given it a full endorsement? I had seen Tasha Suri at a Fiyahcon
panel so she was vaguely on my radar in the fall, but now she has my full attention.
posted by j.r at 8:03 AM on February 12, 2021
At least this scenario has also highlighted some great books I need to check out. Empire of Sand is part of an already-completed duology, and Eyebrows has given it a full endorsement? I had seen Tasha Suri at a Fiyahcon
panel so she was vaguely on my radar in the fall, but now she has my full attention.
posted by j.r at 8:03 AM on February 12, 2021
Well, that settles it. For the last month or so, I've been meaning to trek out to the SF&F (& Mystery/Crime) bookstore and grab the first book. They were going to have the author in for the release (of the reviewed book), but covid put paid to that.
I already bought it once as as an x-mas gift for an in-law who likes fantasy and whose life path seems fairly similar (from Manila area but now lives in the Salish Sea region of BC) to the author's. The comment about the book having little to no grounding in Filipino culture is a little concerning, but I bought it more for the "diaspora" and support the local talent reasons.
posted by house-goblin at 2:08 PM on February 12, 2021
I already bought it once as as an x-mas gift for an in-law who likes fantasy and whose life path seems fairly similar (from Manila area but now lives in the Salish Sea region of BC) to the author's. The comment about the book having little to no grounding in Filipino culture is a little concerning, but I bought it more for the "diaspora" and support the local talent reasons.
posted by house-goblin at 2:08 PM on February 12, 2021
What am I to make of a book claiming an imaginative grounding in my culture when there's little to none to speak of?
It feels like a bait and switch when that happens. I’m not sure here how much is actually coming from the author and how much is people reading more into it than she said. I got the impression that she was more taking inspiration from Filipino culture than explicitly basing it on the precolonial Philippines, but either way it’s frustrating when something toted as being about your culture is not at all recognizable to you. (I’m Irish, so it’s not quite the same, but I’ve encountered enough media either set in an unrecognizable Ireland or based on “ancient Irish myths” to at least have an inkling of what it feels like.)
I feel like there’s a conversation to be had about how well these books succeed as being recognizably Filipino inspired. But I’d like that conversation to be adjacent to the one about whether they are good fantasy books. Unfortunately, I’m fairly sure that “authenticity” would instead become a further criterion for non-Western based fantasy, while European based fantasy continues to get a pass on it.
the link on Jo Walton's series classifications! It's interesting to me because I've been sometimes annoyed by the proliferations of series in sci fi/fantasy
I really wish that the classification became more official, because it is extremely difficult to tell sometimes what type of series something is. At this stage I generally prefer types 2&3, mainly because I’ve been burnt a bit by type 1 series that end up taking forever to finish. However, I have noticed that a lot of longer series tend to move closer to type 1 with time (mainly through weight of backstory).
Empire of Sand Is part of a duology, but they’re closer to type 3-4 than type 1. The first book stands on its own pretty much. (I would also agree that they’re excellent.)
posted by scorbet at 5:50 AM on February 13, 2021 [2 favorites]
It feels like a bait and switch when that happens. I’m not sure here how much is actually coming from the author and how much is people reading more into it than she said. I got the impression that she was more taking inspiration from Filipino culture than explicitly basing it on the precolonial Philippines, but either way it’s frustrating when something toted as being about your culture is not at all recognizable to you. (I’m Irish, so it’s not quite the same, but I’ve encountered enough media either set in an unrecognizable Ireland or based on “ancient Irish myths” to at least have an inkling of what it feels like.)
I feel like there’s a conversation to be had about how well these books succeed as being recognizably Filipino inspired. But I’d like that conversation to be adjacent to the one about whether they are good fantasy books. Unfortunately, I’m fairly sure that “authenticity” would instead become a further criterion for non-Western based fantasy, while European based fantasy continues to get a pass on it.
the link on Jo Walton's series classifications! It's interesting to me because I've been sometimes annoyed by the proliferations of series in sci fi/fantasy
I really wish that the classification became more official, because it is extremely difficult to tell sometimes what type of series something is. At this stage I generally prefer types 2&3, mainly because I’ve been burnt a bit by type 1 series that end up taking forever to finish. However, I have noticed that a lot of longer series tend to move closer to type 1 with time (mainly through weight of backstory).
Empire of Sand Is part of a duology, but they’re closer to type 3-4 than type 1. The first book stands on its own pretty much. (I would also agree that they’re excellent.)
posted by scorbet at 5:50 AM on February 13, 2021 [2 favorites]
« Older Inside Baseball | What does it condition us to see? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by GuyZero at 9:30 AM on February 11, 2021 [4 favorites]