You know who I miss?

[Joshkdmw]

David Eddings.

He was one of the first fantasy authors I read, and he resonated with me from an early age. Even into adulthood, I always held a special place in my heart for Eddings' work due to the snppy dialogue and memorable quips, coupled with the mix of archaic and modern diction had a sense of flow all its own.

Not only this, but Eddings' books always had a very strong sense of immediacy. Like the things happening had a special gravitas all their own. Kind of contrary to Tolkien. Don't get me wrong, I loved lord of the rings, but the events in the book seemed a bit remote, and obtuse at times. Eddings presented more believable characters, and as such I was able to emotionally invest myself in their struggles.

My favorite Eddings' character? Silk, with Althalus a close runner-up, followed by Talen. I've always thought Eddings wrote excellent thief characters, and Silk was deliciously amoral and snide throughout the book. He seemed to delight in the misery and corruption of the human condition.


Anyone else bumming over this loss of a literary hero? I started reading The Elenium again a few days ago in memoriam, myself.

[Lint of Death]

I often wish that Roger Zelazny, the best writer ever, could have lived longer. He clearly wanted to write more, but passed away too soon.

P.S. This should be moved to Screen, Page, and Song

[Chris_D]

I liked him as a kid but I had difficulty eventually with the morale choices of his characters. They were portrayed as good, but were often doing despicable things. And, not in that the characters were deep or shades of grey, just I realised that I disagreed with Eddings on general good and evil.

Apart from that, I eventually realised that David Gemmell writes much better simple heroic fantasy. So if I want to enjoy some fantasy with my brain switched off I'll read his stuff these days.

[Wolvie]

David Eddings is the man! The Belgariad was awesome.

I always loved how his characters relentlessly ripped on one another, like the times when Silk and Barak made fun of Belgarath's age. And Garion's aunt Polgara was written so well you can really tell Eddings wife helped him out with the book.

On a side note, Polgara is my favorite character, I like her temper and sharp tongue. Silk is a close second. He's a lovable slim bag, but quick witted and one slick crafty bastard... Come to think of it, I should go grab my copy of Pawn of Prophecy from the Sister-in-law and read it again.

[BigJonno]

I've just finished the Diamond Throne for the second time, having picked it up randomly in a sale. As soon as I have some book fundage, I'll be getting the next one.

Personally, I miss David Gemmell. I love the Drenai series and read the last one earlier this year.

[Joshkdmw]

I liked him as a kid but I had difficulty eventually with the morale choices of his characters. They were portrayed as good, but were often doing despicable things. .

I'd argue that point. They're certainly the protagonists, but I think several time, Eddings goes out of his way that there's no real evil - just perspective.

For my two bits, he doesn't write storybook heroes. He writes real people. People who ultimately have good intentions, but sometimes have to get a bit dirty along the way. Seems pretty believable to me.

[Karak]

Anyone else bumming over this loss of a literary hero? I started reading The Elenium again a few days ago in memoriam, myself.

David Gemmell for me. Flawed hero's(not antiheroes) are my fav and that dude could write them in spades. It was a total change to my idea of fantasy when I read the Shannow Series and then Waylander. I loved the first 4 pages of Waylander so much...it just made me fall in love with his writing.
I have also never read someone who wrote about "falling out of love" But the Shannow books are full of..."Where does love go when it's gone" kind of things. Heart wrenching at times.
And of course the first book I read with a proper ending.

[torrefaction]

I miss IrishWhiskey.

[ClannerDelta]

I miss IrishWhiskey.

What about Schnoogs?

[Khrymsyn]

What about Schnoogs?

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d114/bozd/1_laff.gif



god I hope posting that pic isn't bannable.. lol

[OrangePulp]

*snip*



god I hope posting that pic isn't bannable.. lol

Perfect response.

I'll have to check these writers out, always on the lookout for good fantasy; so much of it is just drivel.

[Hawkzombie]

Know who I miss?

John Candy. God the man was brilliant.

[Chris_D]

I'd argue that point. They're certainly the protagonists, but I think several time, Eddings goes out of his way that there's no real evil - just perspective.

For my two bits, he doesn't write storybook heroes. He writes real people. People who ultimately have good intentions, but sometimes have to get a bit dirty along the way. Seems pretty believable to me.

For me they often went far beyond a bit dirty.

[Karak]

For me they often went far beyond a bit dirty.

I liked Eddings.
But, and this is not to cause a argument, I found the characters in most the Gemmell stories to be of a more believable ilk. To have a particular something within them that when they needed to act, they did and when they needed to get mean they did. And yet their was surprise, chaos, random murders and intrigue.
I so love his stories.
Another I miss is George Carlin:9

[pomeroy]

The original doctor of journalism.

As a species we are lesser since his passing.

[Joshkdmw]

For me they often went far beyond a bit dirty.

I've been puzzling over this for a few days, and I'm having a tough time thinking of an example of Edding's characters doing anything particularly despicable.

[Chris_D]

Sparhawk and cronies sent a guy to an eternal dimension where they would suffer the pain of burning alive for eternity. Nice guys. What ever happened to just putting someone out of their misery?

[Joshkdmw]

Sparhawk and cronies sent a guy to an eternal dimension where they would suffer the pain of burning alive for eternity. Nice guys. What ever happened to just putting someone out of their misery?

Well, you've got to remember that at that point there were more or less acting as agents of other deities, and a deity's whole bag is sending people to eternal fire.

Regardless, I think a lot of people would send others into eternal fire, given the right opportunity. It's definitely not a noble act, but I don't think it was a particularly ignoble, either.

[Chris_D]

Then their gods are assholes. Anyway, I seem to remember
that particular satisfaction was taken in the act such that even my 15 year old brain was a bit put off. These days I would just stop reading. There were similar things with Polgara too.

Anyway, we may have differing opinions of what is acceptable behaviour from our good characters.

[ClannerDelta]

Anyone who would willingly condemn another person to an eternity of torment is no longer a good person.

There has never been a human being on this planet who deserved such a fate.

[Chris_D]

I couldn't agree more.

[Joshkdmw]

Anyone who would willingly condemn another person to an eternity of torment is no longer a good person.

There has never been a human being on this planet who deserved such a fate.

Really? Not one, ever? In the history of man? I can think of a few obvious examples.

I have to ask - Clanner, Chris, are you among those who disagree with any form of retributive justice? If so, we may as well drop the discussion because we're obviously not going to agree.

[Chris_D]

Really? Not one, ever? In the history of man? I can think of a few obvious examples.

I have to ask - Clanner, Chris, are you among those who disagree with any form of retributive justice? If so, we may as well drop the discussion because we're obviously not going to agree.

I don't recall anyone in history who's had the power to condemn someone else to eternal anguish (thankfully). And I don't agree with torture. I have some qualms about the death penalty although that's mostly due to the fact that innocents are sometimes executed (no take backs).

Btw, disagreeing with eternal anguish as a morally just punishment is pretty far from being against all forms of retributive justice. :confused:

[ShivaX]

I don't recall anyone in history who's had the power to condemn someone else to eternal anguish (thankfully). And I don't agree with torture. I have some qualms about the death penalty although that's mostly due to the fact that innocents are sometimes executed (no take backs).

Btw, disagreeing with eternal anguish as a morally just punishment is pretty far from being against all forms of retributive justice. :confused:

Well it depends on what you believe. The Pope has that power if you're Catholic and they've used it quite a few times. When you're talking about Dieties its a pretty common occurance or penalty (note I haven't read the books so I don't know the context).

[Chris_D]

I'm not religious.

[rein]

I thought this was going to be a Johan tribute thread. :D

[Joshkdmw]

I'm not religious.

Maybe so, but all of the characters in the book were - church knights, almost to a man. Hellfire and divinity and such were sort of the theme of the book.

[RandoM51]

I thought this was going to be a Johan tribute thread. :D

I was thinking Grinr. :)

[Chris_D]

Maybe so, but all of the characters in the book were - church knights, almost to a man. Hellfire and divinity and such were sort of the theme of the book.

The point is that I don't agree with the concept on moral grounds rather than whether I believe it is possible or not in real life. Also, those characters took entirely too much pleasure in it, different to I presume how the Pope would have behaved.

[Nameless]

I thought this was going to be a Johan tribute thread. :D

Man, where did he go, anyway?

[ShivaX]

The point is that I don't agree with the concept on moral grounds rather than whether I believe it is possible or not in real life. Also, those characters took entirely too much pleasure in it, different to I presume how the Pope would have behaved.

Well the Popes are poor examples since they used it against everyone and anyone who didn't do everything they told them to. As far as it as a punishment its pretty standard fare for every religion out there if you don't agree with them.

[ClannerDelta]

Really? Not one, ever? In the history of man? I can think of a few obvious examples.

I have to ask - Clanner, Chris, are you among those who disagree with any form of retributive justice? If so, we may as well drop the discussion because we're obviously not going to agree.

I'm all for retributive justice.

That said, I don't think you have a real understanding of just how LONG eternity is.

At most a human might be able to pull off 100 years of horrors. Killing, raping, eating babies.

100 years... compared to eternity. The punishment is vastly disproportionate to the crime. Even in the case of someone like Hitler or Stalin. Mass murders, killed millions of people, still wouldn't deserve an eternity of torment.

[ShivaX]

100 years... compared to eternity. The punishment is vastly disproportionate to the crime. Even in the case of someone like Hitler or Stalin. Mass murders, killed millions of people, still wouldn't deserve an eternity of torment.

This is the only part I kind of disagree with. I don't think that a year or two of torture for every person you were responsible for would be out of line and that would mean effective eternities for those two. Then again I don't really buy the whole hell concept since I'm pretty sure I've never met someone who wasn't going there, even counting the "Faithful".

[ClannerDelta]

This is the only part I kind of disagree with. I don't think that a year or two of torture for every person you were responsible for would be out of line and that would mean effective eternities for those two. Then again I don't really buy the whole hell concept since I'm pretty sure I've never met someone who wasn't going there, even counting the "Faithful".

Honestly? Even a lifetime of torment for every person they killed wouldn't come close.

I'm all for them burning for the next half a billion years or so.

[ShivaX]

Honestly? Even a lifetime of torment for every person they killed wouldn't come close.

I'm all for them burning for the next half a billion years or so.

I think after the first million years you'd probably be used to it. :)

[Disgustipated]

Man, where did he go, anyway?

God, who cares? Johan is nothing but trouble.

I was thinking Grinr. :)

I miss GrinR a lot. I should go visit him this summer when I go to the Bay Area...

[ClannerDelta]

I think after the first million years you'd probably be used to it. :)

Yeah, but then you'd contend with 999 million years of boredom.

[Chris_D]

Well the Popes are poor examples since they used it against everyone and anyone who didn't do everything they told them to. As far as it as a punishment its pretty standard fare for every religion out there if you don't agree with them.

Yeah the Pope, or other religious figureheads are a funny case for me. I don't believe in the existence of a "hell" so I don't believe that a Pope has performed that act in the post. However, if a Pope performed some action, either a ceremony or just in prayer, which they believed would put someone in eternal torment, well I would consider that an evil act regardless of whether it was true or not.

[Chris_D]

Man, where did he go, anyway?

He'll be back when he wants to let off steam again.

[Joshkdmw]

That said, I don't think you have a real understanding of just how LONG eternity is.


Oh, and you do? Nobody in the world understands how long eternity is - except in a very abstract sense. Time itself is an abstract concept, and we can only ascribe as much meaning to it as we have experienced. A hundred years sure sounds like a long time, but I've got no idea of the reality of it. So I think it's safe to say that nobody ever could relate to us even the barest feeling of eternity, as it by definition never ends.

What would you propose, then? Sparhawk sends him off for a hundred years to burn in agony, and then he gets to hang out on clouds with people who never so much as hurt a fly? I'm all for letting the punishment fit the crime, but as far as damnation goes, it's eternal or bust.

This is getting a bit far afield, though. And that's partially my fault.


So! Eddings. Miss that guy.

[Chris_D]

I'm all for letting the punishment fit the crime, but as far as damnation goes, it's eternal or bust.

This is getting a bit far afield, though. And that's partially my fault.


How do you feel about the show of satisfaction, or should I even say, gloating, that his characters do. At the very least, I would like there to be a sense of regret at committing eternal soul to damnation (assuming as you say, there is no choice). Also, I can't remember the specifics of Edding's mythology in the Sparhawk series but I don't see what would be wrong with cutting the guys throat and letting the gods deal with it.

[Joshkdmw]

How do you feel about the show of satisfaction, or should I even say, gloating, that his characters do. At the very least, I would like there to be a sense of regret at committing eternal soul to damnation (assuming as you say, there is no choice). Also, I can't remember the specifics of Edding's mythology in the Sparhawk series but I don't see what would be wrong with cutting the guys throat and letting the gods deal with it.

As far as the show of satisfaction:

The characters are humans, like us. They just defeated an enemy. Humans typically gloat in that sort of situation. I don't see it as inherently good or evil. Just inherent to the human condition.

Now, the gods were more or less directly involved with the damnation. Sparhawk, was, after all, acting more or less under orders from Aphrael. The thing to remember in any Eddings mythology is that the gods aren't typically all that remote - they take direct action in a lot of situations, and they prefer to either work with humans, or send them as agents - the most notable example being pretty much any book with Belgarath. So while just killing the guy was definitely an option (one they excercised judiciously with all the other villains, I might add), the guy was gonna burn anyways, so they skipped the middle man and dispatched him themselves.

[Chris_D]

As far as the show of satisfaction:

The characters are humans, like us. They just defeated an enemy. Humans typically gloat in that sort of situation. I don't see it as inherently good or evil. Just inherent to the human condition.


It's not really directly comparable but there are times in Gemmell's books where the "good" guys are "forced" to torture a bad guy (Gemmell doesn't do the same kind of mythology, heaven/hell thing), and I never get the feeling that they feel particular pleasure in it. More so, either regret, or a feeling of duty. Anyway, that's just the why I like my good guys to be. So, Edding's characters most definitely crossed that line.

note: sorry for the overuse of quotes

[Joshkdmw]

It's not really directly comparable but there are times in Gemmell's books where the "good" guys are "forced" to torture a bad guy (Gemmell doesn't do the same kind of mythology, heaven/hell thing), and I never get the feeling that they feel particular pleasure in it. More so, either regret, or a feeling of duty. Anyway, that's just the why I like my good guys to be. So, Edding's characters most definitely crossed that line.

note: sorry for the overuse of quotes

For what it's worth, they have that when killing several characters. When Sparhawk Killed Martel, he felt sorry for him. When Garion killed Torak, he and all of the other gods felt sorry for him.

I think it's nice that they feel bad, but how they feel is sophistry, in my opinion. Let's look at this logically.

If someone shot your parents in the head, but they felt very sorry about it, would that make you feel better? They take the actions knowing full well their consequences and what it means to torture. If the moral impetus they felt towards it was strong enough, they wouldn't do it. So, their desire to acquire information is stronger than their desire to spare somebody the pain of torture.

Likewise, Sparhawk and company's desire to reshape the Eosian continent to better suit their own needs was stronger than their desire to spare someone the pain of hellfire.

I'd conclude that one could interpret that both sets of characters are evil in their own special way. Essentially the only thing that separates them is scale.

[Lint of Death]

I was thinking Grinr. :)

I was thinking Bad Buddha... :confused:

[Joshkdmw]

I was thinking Bad Buddha... :confused:

Did all of those guys leave, or something? I thought something was up, as I moved ahead in the post quality section. And it wasn't through my own merit.

[cawblen]

Know who I miss?

John Candy. God the man was brilliant.

Couldn't have agreed with you more:
- Planes, Trains and Automobiles
- The Great Outdoors
- Uncle Buck
- Canadian Bacon
- Cool Runnings

[pomeroy]

He'll be back when he wants to let off steam again.

Well, he's probably out for the summer since he's a teacher. I always thought it was odd how often he could post during the school day.

[Disgustipated]

Well, he's probably out for the summer since he's a teacher. I always thought it was odd how often he could post during the school day.

I'm convinced Johan is a John Wayne Gacy clone.

Edit: Bad Buddha is gone? What happened to him?

[Johan]

Hi guys. I've been around a little bit, but not much. By choice. I've had an epiphany of sorts; long story, for real life. It would be boring on the Internet.

Johan is nothing but trouble.

IRL, not at all true. On the Intertubes? Too often true, I admit it.

He'll be back when he wants to let off steam again.

No. No, I won't.

Well, he's probably out for the summer since he's a teacher. I always thought it was odd how often he could post during the school day.

I think it is odd how much time some of us, myself included, spend online. That's a small part of my epiphany.

I'm convinced Johan is a John Wayne Gacy clone.

I prefer the song. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Send_in_the_Clowns)

Take care, guys. You'll probably see me around once in a while; or maybe not. It's all good. All the best!

:)