Except Mickey the Sorcerer's Apprentice would waste HP easily. And he has houses on three continents...
Nick A On Dec 21, 2011 8:17 PM, "Raymond E. Feist" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:50 PM, Graham Watson wrote: > > I am with you on the Harry Potter issue. He certainly did seem to be in > over his head and always came out on top by pure luck, or by someone else > bigger and stronger stepping in, not my idea of a hero. And the wand trick > did not do much for me either. Power should always come from within and if > you are going to use a wand, then it should be merely an extension of your > own power. I think JK came up with a really cool concept, but her writing > made it a bit bland for me.**** > ** ** > But on your description of Magician and Silverthorn I am not there with > you. I loved both of them, and I thought they were excellent books with > enough in them to keep me going and going. Magician was an awesome > introduction to Midkemia. And Silverthorn, I just loved the hopelessness > felt by the characters. That for me was what made it the best. The > characters felt overwhelmed, over matched and hopeless, and yet they > continued to strive and win through. But Darkness was definitely the > ultimate end to that adventure. I know I will be really sad when Pugs story > comes to an end. Just to make it last a bit longer I have went back and am > rereading Magician. Am about half way through. But I wanted to read them > all again so that everything was fresh when I finally picked up crown > imperiled.**** > ** ** > Graham Watson**** > ** ** > ** ** > > > I have no idea why you're emails are coming in such monster large type > fonts. > > Anyway, you may fairly criticize any writer on how well/poorly he/she did > the job. That's what taste is about as well as your tolerance of/enjoyment > of/disapproval of various styles, tropes, genre's, etc. > > IMHO, you are not entitled to criticize an artists because they view the > world differently than you. That's what art is about, sharing a > perspective with others. Saying that a work is flawed because a magician > uses a wand is like saying Elvis Presley was a lousy singer because he > didn't sing opera. If you don't care for a certain trope, that's fine. Boy > with a wand is hardly original with J.K. Rowling. It wasn't original with > Walt Disney when he did Sorcerer's Apprentice, either. But it's a fair > choice. > > Best, R.E.F. > ---- > www.crydee.com > > Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by > stupidity. > > > > > >
