![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
rowana.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
queensthiefDH found this link a while ago:
http://yhlee.livejournal.com/591123.html?#cutid1
It's interesting, as one of the few negative reviews I've ever seen about The Thief.
One thing that I found was that a lot of the points about the book that the reviewer objected to were the things I liked best. For example, the lack of a strict historical background, whilst elements of various times could be found (I thought). In terms of window glass and gunpowder existing along with fibula pins.
I just wondered what everyone else made of some of the points the reviewer raised. :)
http://yhlee.livejournal.com/591123.html?#cutid1
It's interesting, as one of the few negative reviews I've ever seen about The Thief.
One thing that I found was that a lot of the points about the book that the reviewer objected to were the things I liked best. For example, the lack of a strict historical background, whilst elements of various times could be found (I thought). In terms of window glass and gunpowder existing along with fibula pins.
I just wondered what everyone else made of some of the points the reviewer raised. :)
One of the more tactful negative reviews, as I seem to recall...
Date: 6/2/06 10:59 am (UTC)I think they just haven't read the book enough to really realize all of the sneaky hints and foreshadowing that's really there. I have to agree a little, though; you get really into this small story, about the character development, the fantastic dialogue between the five travelers...it sucks you in, and you take it for granted that this is a typical adventure story. So when it hits you that, no, the entire thing is part of something way way bigger that unravels all at once in your hands once they cross that bridge and make it into Eddis, it is, admittedly, a little wacky. Most young adult novels don't require you to think (or, for that matter, feel, which was my initial problem with the sequel), so, yes, I agree, it's a terrible shock :) Homie needs to get off their high horse of not trusting authors and give the book another shot.
*end ramble*
:D
Date: 6/2/06 11:31 am (UTC)Maybe it's another part of the idea that you only grow to love the books when you re-read them? I guess I'd agree that the shift is pretty different - but um, I did a terrible thing on my first reading and read some of the ending before the middle so I knew that something was coming. :D So I was anticipating something whilst I was reading the middle.
I dunno, could you call it a story in two parts almost? No one seems to get the lovely hints on the first reading, and Gen's double meanings only become noticable (and fun) the second time around. I guess the ending could seem a bit random, I just don't remember finding it that way.
But I'm rambling now too. :) *shuts up*
Re: :D
Date: 6/2/06 11:46 am (UTC)Really? It's pretty infamous, as I recall.
Re: :D
Date: 6/2/06 11:47 am (UTC)Re: :D
Date: 6/2/06 11:53 am (UTC)Re: :D
Date: 6/2/06 12:01 pm (UTC)That doesn't count though. Reverted reviewers are exempted. I'm curious though - and feel free not to answer this - was your reason for being upset with QoA just that Gen's hand had been cut off? Um, I mean, was it partly that you weren't expecting it - as the reviewer above also seems to have not been expecting the end of the thief?
Re: :D
Date: 6/2/06 12:07 pm (UTC)Re: :D
Date: 6/2/06 12:11 pm (UTC)Re: :D
Date: 6/2/06 01:06 pm (UTC)That makes sense actually. I agree with what you said before - a lot of YA stories don't require you to think or feel too much.
Re: :D
Date: 6/4/06 02:52 am (UTC)Re: :D
Date: 6/4/06 02:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/2/06 04:44 pm (UTC):) Bad Ro.
I think The Thief is a book that doesn't reveal all its cleverness and intricacies until it is reread. Like Gen, it is so much more than it first appears. In a way, it surprises me that it won a Newbery Honor because those committee members are so inundated with books to read that it was probably difficult to reread anything and I wonder that they were able to take it all in with just one reading. King is like that, too, and it's good that the book came out early in the year so people on this year's committee have time to let it sink in and possibly reread. I know my appreciation for it increases the more I think about it.
I read QoA first, so the shock of Gen's hand wasn't as big for me, because I didn't "know" him yet. I can understand Bear feeling, well, betrayed by what happened. Everyone was used to seeing Gen as the carefree trickster and then suddenly the tone of his adventures changed completely. QoA is a bigger, deeper story, more YA and less kids'.
I remember my first reaction to the myths was that they were stopping the action too much. After a couple, though, I began to see that they were helping us understand the setting as well as the interactions between the characters. And then once Gen actually met up with the gods, it all made sense to me. If we hadn't been listening to the characters tell the stories, we wouldn't have been familiar with the gods and goddesses when they appeared and we wouldn't have understood that it was a life-changing event for Gen.
And although you all know I get frustrated at times by not immediately understanding everything that's going on, I'm glad Megan respects her readers enough, and trusts us enough, to let us figure things out on our own. Even though she makes us work very hard. :)
Wow, long post. We need more discussion questions, this is fun. Back to work!
no subject
Date: 6/2/06 05:18 pm (UTC)I know, I know. :)
I read QoA first, so the shock of Gen's hand wasn't as big for me, because I didn't "know" him yet. I can understand Bear feeling, well, betrayed by what happened. Everyone was used to seeing Gen as the carefree trickster and then suddenly the tone of his adventures changed completely. QoA is a bigger, deeper story, more YA and less kids'.
I was just thinking about this - and was The Thief really that light? I mean, Gen did go to prison, the very real threats of disease, his hunger, and exhaustion were all pointed out if not emphasised in the book, I thought. Losing a hand isn't on the same level I suppose - and that it happened to Gen the thief was so much the worse because I started thinking 'He's going to change now!'. I guess you're right. :)
And although you all know I get frustrated at times by not immediately understanding everything that's going on, I'm glad Megan respects her readers enough, and trusts us enough, to let us figure things out on our own. Even though she makes us work very hard. :)
:D Oh yes. Part of the fun is in figuring stuff out though.
no subject
Date: 6/2/06 06:21 pm (UTC)You are absolutely right - it's not. Plus Gen was hurt very seriously and almost died. In fact, if he hadn't been wearing Hiamiathes' Gift, he would have died, right? It just seemed lighter because of the overall tone of the book, I think.
no subject
Date: 6/2/06 06:28 pm (UTC)*nosd* I think having the story told by Gen contributed to that. And we could also assume that as the narrator, he would be all right in the end.
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 01:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/3/06 09:52 am (UTC)I'd agree with that. :) A lot of the clues really are only noticable and enjoyable the second time around. I think another interesting point is the way a lot of people who were unsatisfied with The Thief love QoA, and perhaps vice versa. Does anyone here prefer one or the other?
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 04:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/4/06 12:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/4/06 01:30 am (UTC)Then we could do graphs and charts to compile all the data. Put it in a spreadsheet.
I'm kidding about the graphs, of course. Math! *cringes* The questions, however, WOULD be interesting.
no subject
Date: 6/4/06 08:40 am (UTC)But you could definitely post the questions on the main page. :) I'd be interested to see the answers.
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 01:53 am (UTC)I love the sudden widening of the story at the end to include the political matters and so on - it's such a clever way to tell the story, rather than just being a straightforward political drama from the start. And it's not like the myths didn't clue you in that this wasn't just a simple story about a few people. But I guess some readers don't like being surprised by changes in story telling techniques.
Finally, I never got the impresssion MWT was trying to set up a replica of Earth past that had to be accurate - I wonder why the reviewer did?
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 02:48 am (UTC)I remember one time I picked up an sf novel called, iirc, Floating Cities. And the further I got into it, the more confused and irritated I felt.
Like, "Waitaminnit, waitaminnit... They live in hollow spheres in orbit, OK, and so they're in freefall (aka zero-G), fine... and they set up a marketplace stall by plunking down a 'gravity mat' on the inner surface and bingo, they've got gravity?!! No other gravity tech? Uh..."
And I just felt lost, because even though the book was presented as sf the author wasn't following any of the sf conventions I unconsciously expected. She was doing something, though, following some conventions I didn't recognize at all. She was, so to speak, writing in some other language than sf.
Till about 2/3 of the way through, I had a revelation: "Oh! This isn't sf at all, it's ROMANCE!" With the accent on the first syllable, as in "this month's Harlequin Romance". And so it was. Romance with an sf false nose. And although I'd never read a romance, I guess I had read enough about the genre, and enough bits of parody, to recognize it.
So, as I was saying: maybe this reviewer was expecting historical fiction, and just didn't know what to make of fantasy.
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 02:55 am (UTC)But I'm still glad I've gotten that rant off my chest, even if it is off topic. Hint to that author: Setting a romance in space doesn't make it sf. It may just make it simultaneously suffocate and explode. If you want to see it done right, read Shards of Honor.
no subject
Date: 6/4/06 05:03 am (UTC)But maybe this person just wasn't aware that this book was fantasy, even if she had read others. I am feeling very charitable today.
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 05:03 am (UTC)Well said...it can ruin the best coffee when you were expecting sugar instead of salt.
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 03:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/3/06 09:15 pm (UTC)But I guess some readers don't like being surprised by changes in story telling techniques.
I guess that must be it. It's interesting that some people on the list weren't too surprised the first time around. I guess it ties in the reviewer maybe feeling a particular historical background had to be established - perhaps it's about convention. People expect a particular kind of book, I guess, like thnidu said. The books certainly aren't entirely conventional. :)
no subject
Date: 6/4/06 03:14 am (UTC)The whole "what the fuck" moment when the story changes from just being an adventure story to a political intrigue is what makes the difference from an "excellent story" that you buy for your bookshelf but may never read again, and a timeless classic worthy of awards that no matter how many times you reread it you can find something you didn't see the first time.
Though when the guns appeared I did do an "argh" but the complexity of the story made up for the guns and then when I reread it the second time I realized there were lots of hints the story was on a parallel universe like Pullman's and there were lots of hints - like whoever mentioned the walls being destroyed by cannon and the whole not wearing of togas.
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 02:13 pm (UTC)Amen, sista.
I think another interesting point is the way a lot of people who were unsatisfied with The Thief love QoA, and perhaps vice versa. Does anyone here prefer one or the other?
I forced someone (sorry Megan, encouraged, urged) to read all the books (well, twice actually), and on the first reading she liked Thief better than Queen. On the second reading she liked Queen better. I think it has to do with taking the time to "get" all that's going on, and that's hard to do in one reading. Still working on her to reread King.
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 07:03 pm (UTC)Amen, bro.
My sincerest apologies,
*smacks self upside head in magus-like way*
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 07:48 pm (UTC)*shakes head* Librarians. :)
I think it has to do with taking the time to "get" all that's going on, and that's hard to do in one reading. Still working on her to reread King.
That makes sense. There is a lot to digest and some of the really poignant bits only make sense the second time around when you get what's actually going on. Like at the end of QoA.
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 03:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/3/06 03:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/3/06 04:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/3/06 04:48 pm (UTC)If anyone knows of anything...
no subject
Date: 6/3/06 05:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 6/3/06 07:49 pm (UTC)