From: owner-glencook-fans-digest@lists.xmission.com (glencook-fans-digest) To: glencook-fans-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: glencook-fans-digest V1 #21 Reply-To: glencook-fans-digest Sender: owner-glencook-fans-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-glencook-fans-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk glencook-fans-digest Tuesday, August 22 2000 Volume 01 : Number 021 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:34:14 EDT From: CookReader@aol.com Subject: (glencook-fans) Literary Crit (was Enough on Jordan!) In a message dated 8/18/00 4:19:10 PM, jammers@netzero.net writes: >When exactly did this change to a semantics and etymology discussion list? It's always been a semantics list. Most of the best discussion has centered around a minute point in the text or a new way to view an old passage. >I'm not one to complain about off-topic stuff usually, in fact, it is >ordinarily enjoyable to a degree, but this seemed to push even my >boundaries. I don't think that discussion was off topic at all. Pretty hard to claim it was off topic when Cook's characters and books were mentioned in just about every paragraph (I would point out it was more on-topic than a post complaining that it wasn't). And to keep this post on-topic: >And, yes, the use of cycle is appropriate in this case... not that it really >matters. Perhaps you misread what I wrote. I wasn't challenging the appropriatness of the usage, but rather requesting a definition. I was only trying to clarify a minor point and to insure the word "cycle" wasn't being used in the context of "a really long series of books," or some other meaning. One of the reasons I like Cook is that the majority of his books can actually support literary criticism or prolonged discussion. In fact, I can only think of one of his books that, in my mind, doesn't stand up (and no, I don't own Swap Academy). I would have to agree with you that deconstructing the text is no where near as fun as reading the books, but after you've exhausted the "I Liked/Disliked X Book," and the "Who Would Win in a Fight," threads sometimes you're left with actually having to resort to a serious thread. Besides, I only did it because I'd been accused of ignoring the previous post. (So really, the LitCrit wasn't my fault, I didn't start it). I actually wish there were more such posts on this list. Etymology isn't a bad word. One of the projects I've wanted to start for a long time was to break down the influences in Cook's BC book. Identify the real world religions and myths that went into the books, pick out the various military sayings and attribute them to the original authors, same with the colorful slang sayings that are obviously "imported" from our world to Cook's world. Of course I never find the time to even read. christopher.... ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:01:47 -0500 From: "Lich" Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Favorite Black Company Villian(s) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C00C1F.FC0B6AA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I love the Limper and his two-dimensional aggressiveness. Frequently in = fantasy, evil characters make stupid mistakes that allow the inferior = heroes to win. With the villains making such mistakes, the reader is = forced to suspend his disbelief even more than the fanatsy genre = requires normally. How could this sorcerer have become so powerful in = the first place if he's this stupid? It quickly becomes obvious that = the writer simply isn't good enough to be able to get the plot to go = where he wants, without making the villain of the piece into a = caricature. Unlike the villains above, Limper doesn't stand around spouting all his = secret plans to anyone who will listen, nor does he give his opponents = any "extra chances" to amuse himself. He just "destroys them where he = finds them" and moves on with ruthless efficiency. However, clever = writer that he is, Cook writes about how the Limper's smash everything = in his path mentality allows weaker opponents to prevail against him, = without requiring the character to be blatantly stupid. Instead of the = Limper's weakness being stupidity, he is a vitctim of his own power, and = centuries of no one being powerful enough to stand against him. It much = easier to believe in a character that has lost the capacity for subtle = trickery after centuries of simply being able to obliterate anyone who = stood in his way through sheer power. It is this lack of subtlety, not = intelligence that makes Limper entertaining, rather than obnoxious. = This characteristic is brilliantly displayed in Limper's return to the = North in the Silver Spike - after abandoning his pursuit of the Lady = South. He knows that he's being manipulated and steered, yet each time = he thinks he's in a position where he can just bull his way through, and = crush the puny insects how seek to oppose him. Each time the "puny = insects" blind-side him, putting him in a position where he's helpless = to use the awesome power for destruction at his disposal. The Dominator = seems much the same, although we don't know him as well. =20 Harden was fun to read about, just because he was such a bad-ass. First-trilogy Soulcatcher was great because of the dichotomy between her = human side, and the mantle of being one of the Ten Who Were Taken. I'd love to know more about the proto-dominator under the tree. Also, I = really like Nameless. Both of these two I like for the simple reason = that we know so little about them, and I feel that there's a fascinating = story to be told for each. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Lee Childs=20 To: Glen Cook Fans=20 Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 8:04 PM Subject: (glencook-fans) Favorite Black Company Villian(s) Folks:=20 I would be interested in knowing what everyone's favorite villains are = from the Black Company series. For myself, I liked Soulcatcher, Lady, = Whisper, Feather, Howler, and Mogaba.=20 Opinions? Please itemize the names at the top of the email and follow = the list with your reasons.=20 Lee Childs=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C00C1F.FC0B6AA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I love the Limper and his = two-dimensional=20 aggressiveness.  Frequently in fantasy, evil characters make stupid = mistakes that allow the inferior heroes to win.  With the villains = making=20 such mistakes, the reader is forced to suspend his disbelief even more = than the=20 fanatsy genre requires normally.  How could this sorcerer have = become so=20 powerful in the first place if he's this stupid?  It quickly = becomes=20 obvious that the writer simply isn't good enough to be able to get the = plot to=20 go where he wants, without making the villain of the piece into a=20 caricature.
 
Unlike the villains above, Limper = doesn't stand=20 around spouting all his secret plans to anyone who will listen, nor does = he give=20 his opponents any "extra chances" to amuse himself.  He just = "destroys them=20 where he finds them" and moves on with ruthless efficiency.  = However,=20 clever writer that he is, Cook writes about how the Limper's smash = everything in=20 his path mentality allows weaker opponents to prevail against him, = without=20 requiring the character to be blatantly stupid.  Instead of the = Limper's=20 weakness being stupidity, he is a vitctim of his own power, and = centuries of no=20 one being powerful enough to stand against him.  It much easier to = believe=20 in a character that has lost the capacity for subtle trickery after = centuries of=20 simply being able to obliterate anyone who stood in his way through = sheer=20 power.  It is this lack of subtlety, not intelligence that makes = Limper=20 entertaining, rather than obnoxious.  This characteristic is = brilliantly=20 displayed in Limper's return to the North in the Silver Spike - after = abandoning=20 his pursuit of the Lady South.  He knows that he's being = manipulated and=20 steered, yet each time he thinks he's in a position where he can just = bull his=20 way through, and crush the puny insects how seek to oppose him.  = Each time=20 the "puny insects" blind-side him, putting him in a position where he's = helpless=20 to use the awesome power for destruction at his disposal.  The = Dominator=20 seems much the same, although we don't know him as well.  =
 
Harden was fun to read about, just = because he was=20 such a bad-ass.
 
First-trilogy Soulcatcher was great = because of the=20 dichotomy between her human side, and the mantle of being one of the Ten = Who=20 Were Taken.
 
I'd love to know more about the = proto-dominator=20 under the tree.  Also, I really like Nameless.  Both of these = two I=20 like for the simple reason that we know so little about them, and I feel = that=20 there's a fascinating story to be told for each.
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Lee=20 Childs
To: Glen Cook Fans
Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 = 8:04=20 PM
Subject: (glencook-fans) = Favorite Black=20 Company Villian(s)

Folks:
I would be interested in knowing what = everyone's=20 favorite villains are from the Black Company series.  For myself, = I liked=20 Soulcatcher, Lady, Whisper, Feather, Howler, and Mogaba.=20

Opinions?  Please itemize the names at the top of the email = and follow=20 the list with your reasons.=20

Lee Childs

- ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C00C1F.FC0B6AA0-- ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:43:22 -0500 From: Stacey Harris Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Literary Crit (was Enough on Jordan!) Hi, all, Christopher's request for more lit-crit type of posts prompts this thought from me (not really lit-crit, maybe, but a bit more in-depth than, say "Would Bomanz have made a good Taken"): Is there an underlying similarity among the military portions of Cook's writing? the Black Company, Passage at Arms, Dragon Never Sleeps, Dread Empire? I'm thinking in terms of making the reader appreciate a feel for sneakery, for tactics of deception--or, at any rate, cleverness. Been a while since I've read the non-BC books, but I seem to recall feeling something of the same in several of them. Which begs the question--is it really cleverness? Or are we just *told* "we were realy sneaky in our attack that day" and the like? Not as bald as that usually; but what, really, constitutes cleverness in a fictional tactician? The author is free to make the opposition unsuspecting, naive, never looking too far below the surface, just to make his hero's strategems succeed. What, then, inspires us to admire the story-telling ability of the author, to revel in a feeling that we have been in the presence of a tale worth the telling, not just because it was well told, but because it betrayed an intellectual depth we didn't anticipate? ***non-Cook digression*** A cinematic example (which is vivid enough to capture the spirit I am talking about): In my mind, the only truly brilliant piece of story-telling in the Star Wars movies is the opening adventure in the third one: Luke arrives, unarmed, in the camp of his enemy (Jabba's floating cruiser). He gives his enemy the chance to surrender, while appearing quite vulnerable. When the offer is rejected, he turns the tables, not primarily by means of Jedi magic, but by the sheer cleveness of having previously secreted his allies among the prisoners--mostly similarly unarmed and apparently vulnerable. It is Luke's ability to rely on the spontaneous invention of his allies--using the very chains of their captivity as make-shift weapons--that makes for great story-telling, that makes us (well, me) feel that there is far more here than super-human mystical powers (which none of us have), but ingenuity and pluck: things that are far more human-scaled, so they draw us into the characters much better. ***end digression*** We can't any of us direct sorcerous energies; but we can at least hope to be clever in the disposition of resources and skilled in the use of guile where force and persuasion are unavailable to us. And maybe that is why we respond so well to that method of derring-do in story telling--and one reason why Cook is so appealing. Is the Black Company *really* clever? Or the Guard in Dragon? Or Ragnarsson in Dread Empire? Or whoever-it-is in Passage? In what is that cleverness constituted? Does Cook out-think the reader, and not just the villain? And is that what constitutes admirable cleverness in a hero? Steve ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:34:07 EDT From: WinB@aol.com Subject: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? Just before the Battle of Charm, and after Croaker is injured, there is a discussion with the Captain about disassociating the Company from Soulcatcher. The Captain says something like "first you're injured, then one of the Taken goes zuzu. And there's that lime thread." Is this sentence out of order, did Cook miss a scene or did I miss something? As far as I can tell, no Taken goes zuzu between the time Croaker is injured and the conversation. (even though they are all a little zuzu anyway). Win ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 08:53:19 -0500 From: "PrimalChrome" Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? I thought he was referring to Limper's actions.... - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 8:34 AM Subject: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? Just before the Battle of Charm, and after Croaker is injured, there is a discussion with the Captain about disassociating the Company from Soulcatcher. The Captain says something like "first you're injured, then one of the Taken goes zuzu. And there's that lime thread." Is this sentence out of order, did Cook miss a scene or did I miss something? As far as I can tell, no Taken goes zuzu between the time Croaker is injured and the conversation. (even though they are all a little zuzu anyway). Win ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:33:59 EDT From: WinB@aol.com Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? The Limper's "treason" would be the best guess, if the sentence order hadn't had the comment after Croaker's injury. It would have been months since Limper was subdued. Win ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 09:48:50 -0500 (CDT) From: Changeling Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? Is this sentence before or after Croaker comes out of the tower? - -Changeling On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 WinB@aol.com wrote: > The Limper's "treason" would be the best guess, if the sentence order hadn't had the comment after Croaker's injury. It would have been months since Limper was subdued. > > Win > > ======================================================================= > To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, > visit . > ************************************************************************** * "If hostility to men causes Lesbianism, then it seems to me that in a * * male-dominated society, Lesbianism is a sign of mental health." * * -- Martha Shelley, Notes of a * * Radical Lesbian (1969) * ************************************************************************** ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:29:09 EDT From: WinB@aol.com Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? After. And after he learns that Darling thwarted the attack on Raven. ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:43:28 -0500 (CDT) From: Changeling Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? Well, if it's after Croaker left the Tower then the Taken going zuzu would refer to the attack on Croaker by the shadowy form that he shot with the bow that Lady gave him, wouldn't it? - -Changeling On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 WinB@aol.com wrote: > After. And after he learns that Darling thwarted the attack on Raven. > > ======================================================================= > To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, > visit . > ************************************************************************** * "If hostility to men causes Lesbianism, then it seems to me that in a * * male-dominated society, Lesbianism is a sign of mental health." * * -- Martha Shelley, Notes of a * * Radical Lesbian (1969) * ************************************************************************** ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 11:53:20 EDT From: WinB@aol.com Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? I'm not sure, since I don't have the book in front of me, but I believe the sentence was "first the attack on Croaker, then one of the Taken goes zuzu." Win ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 14:54:49 +0000 From: Rich Kim Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? On Tuesday, August 22 2000, 15:34:07 WinB@aol.com wrote: >Is this sentence out of order, did Cook miss a scene or did I miss something? >As far as I can tell, no Taken goes zuzu between the time Croaker is injured >and the conversation. (even though they are all a little zuzu anyway). > The quote goes like this "What happened in the hills. No accident, eh? The Lady summons you and half an hour later, one of the Taken goes zuzu. Then there's your accident in the Tower...." Croaker was summoned by Lady before the carpet went to pick them up from the raid, and it took about half an hour for the anonymous Taken to show up on the carpet with the accidental green mist. This is before he went to see Lady and before the accident in the tower. ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 16:13:15 EDT From: WinB@aol.com Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Continuity Error in BC? Thanks for clearing this up. I was sure someone would look up the passage before I got home. Win ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 17:04 -0400 From: "Mark Debes" Subject: RE: Re: (glencook-fans) Favorite Black Comp From the Books of the North, Soulcatcher was definitely my favorite villain. She very rarely showed the powers that made her one of the Taken, she used her vast understanding of the human psyche to manipulate her opponents into doing what she wanted. The way she orchestrated the takedown of Raker, and manipulated the Limper into a position where Lady had to take him out of the game was fascinating. An interesting point on how the Limper, with no one to oppose him, lost the ability for subtlety and went for pure strength to carry him through. Soulcatcher exhibited many of the same characteristics in the last two books of the South. I'm not sure who my favorite villain is in the South. -----Original Message----- From: glencook-fans [mailto:glencook-fans@lists.xmission.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 11:01 AM To: Mark Debes; glencook-fans Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Favorite Black Comp << File: body.htm >> I love the Limper and his two-dimensional aggressiveness. Frequently in fantasy, evil characters make stupid mistakes that allow the inferior heroes to win. With the villains making such mistakes, the reader is forced to suspend his disbelief even more than the fanatsy genre requires normally. How could this sorcerer have become so powerful in the first place if he's this stupid? It quickly becomes obvious that the writer simply isn't good enough to be able to get the plot to go where he wants, without making the villain of the piece into a caricature. Unlike the villains above, Limper doesn't stand around spouting all his secret plans to anyone who will listen, nor does he give his opponents any "extra chances" to amuse himself. He just "destroys them where he finds them" and moves on with ruthless efficiency. However, clever writer that he is, Cook writes about how the Limper's smash everything in his path mentality allows weaker opponents to prevail against him, without requiring the character to be blatantly stupid. Instead of the Limper's weakness being stupidity, he is a vitctim of his own power, and centuries of no one being powerful enough to stand against him. It much easier to believe in a character that has lost the capacity for subtle trickery after centuries of simply being able to obliterate anyone who stood in his way through sheer power. It is this lack of subtlety, not intelligence that makes Limper entertaining, rather than obnoxious. This characteristic is brilliantly displayed in Limper's return to the North in the Silver Spike - after abandoning his pursuit of the Lady South. He knows that he's being manipulated and steered, yet each time he thinks he's in a position where he can just bull his way through, and crush the puny insects how seek to oppose him. Each time the "puny insects" blind-side him, putting him in a position where he's helpless to use the awesome power for destruction at his disposal. The Dominator seems much the same, although we don't know him as well. Harden was fun to read about, just because he was such a bad-ass. First-trilogy Soulcatcher was great because of the dichotomy between her human side, and the mantle of being one of the Ten Who Were Taken. I'd love to know more about the proto-dominator under the tree. Also, I really like Nameless. Both of these two I like for the simple reason that we know so little about them, and I feel that there's a fascinating story to be told for each. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lee Childs To: Glen Cook Fans Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 8:04 PM Subject: (glencook-fans) Favorite Black Company Villian(s) Folks: I would be interested in knowing what everyone's favorite villains are from the Black Company series. For myself, I liked Soulcatcher, Lady, Whisper, Feather, Howler, and Mogaba. Opinions? Please itemize the names at the top of the email and follow the list with your reasons. Lee Childs ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 21:10:32 -0700 From: Lee Childs Subject: (glencook-fans) The attacks on Croaker Croaker was attacked twice. One of the large tower weapons fell on him. = Later, a sorcerer masked in a cloud of darkness struck at him. I always belived t= hat Soulcatcher had a hand in this. THE BLACK COMPANY page 244 "The Captain shook his head. 'Hang on to that sense of humor. The Lady = wants to see you. Personally.'" "My mind hurtled around like a herd of mice fleeing a cat. In seconds I = was soaked with sweat." THE BLACK COMPANY page 248 "Men shouted below. I turned to look=85Threw up an arm. Slam! Impact t= hrew me a dozen feet, spinning. My guard guide yelled. The Tower roof came up to = meet me. Men shouted and ran away." "I rolled, tried to get up, slipped in a slick of blood. Blood! My bloo= d!" THE BLACK COMPANY page 249 "[The Guard Captain said,] 'Hold him down. Foster. What happened?'' "[Foster said,] 'One of the weapons fell of the upper tier. It went off = when it fell.'" "[Croaker said,] 'Wasn't no accident. Somebody wanted to kill me.'" THE BLACK COMPANY page 282 "[The Lady said,] 'That evil tried to kill you three times, physician. T= wice for fear of your knowledge, once for fear of your future.'" "That woke me up. 'My future?'" "[The Lady said,] 'The Taken sometimes glimpse the future. Perhaps this conversation was foreseen.'" "A quarter way up the ramp I got a funny feeling. Halfway there I realiz= ed what it was. One-Eye's amulet! My wrist was burning=85Taken! Danger!" "A cloud of darkness reared out of the night, from some imperfection in t= he side of the pyramid. It spread like the sail of a ship, flat, and moved towar= d me. I responded the only way I could. With an arrow." "And a long wail surrounded me, filled me more with surprise than rage, m= ore despair than agony. The sheet of darkness shredded. Something manshaped= scuttled across the slope." Rich Kim wrote: > On Tuesday, August 22 2000, 15:34:07 WinB@aol.com wrote: > > >Is this sentence out of order, did Cook miss a scene or did I miss som= ething? > >As far as I can tell, no Taken goes zuzu between the time Croaker is i= njured > >and the conversation. (even though they are all a little zuzu anyway). ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit . ------------------------------ End of glencook-fans-digest V1 #21 ********************************** ======================================================================= To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list, visit .