I will have to say that I have always loved Fiest's works. Even though at some points they have been dull, there has always been points to where his writing has gotten me back into the book. As to where readers go if you fight for to much description or not enough, lets fight both points,
To much description; As to some readers they love to lose themselves inside a world that they have all the surrounding "pictated" for them so that they can get a real feel for the world/environment that the author has brought them into. Some authors do understand their targeted audience and have taken a writing class something that you do have to understand in a fiction story that you are writing which ever sub class of fiction it may be, you are telling all these people a lie so there for you have have to give them enough detail to help them believe in this lie that you are conveying to them in said story. No enough description; Some authors either one know their target audience, which may be very slim as most fiction readers love enough detail to engulf them into the story, doesn't like detail and prefers more dialog apposed to anything else, or to fallow up on that the author may not know much about writing detail so therefore sticks to writing what he knows best which sales for him/her. Not sure if that helped you much in regards to actually understanding why Ray, writes the way he does. And as for the claims that you have made about things being predictable in his books, that is great that you have the mind set that Ray does and are able to easily guess his next move in his writings. But unless you get through the whole rift ware saga, I don't think that you should critique his work. As I do understand that everyone has their own oppinion and is entitled to it, you should be careful on coming on to a fan site/blog/batch emails, and slam an author around a bunch of fans, you will be slammed by everyone else when you post your own work because you think it's "good". Another thing you have to understand about writing practically EVERYTHING has been done when it comes to Fiction fantasy, as Tolkien started most if not all of it, and writers have been pretty much grabbing at ideas from that author to branching of with similar ideas......sorry just a little rant there don't really know where I was going. Now let me critique your work, as I did click on your link to go read it, you have some flaws, as I am not a master at writing nor dare I say good, but I am attempting to write my own book. I know its not good and I know it does not flow as well as I want, however your work is a bit choppy from what you have posted so far. Maybe your mind is a bit jumbled and makes since to you, but as I am sure most of us readers here, we want things thought through and in clear thought so we get a better understanding of what is actually going on or is going to go on in the book before we turn the first page. So please before you come bashing on one of many peoples favorite author check your own work before you critique and actual published authors work. Since you are not published there is obviously something wrong with it. On one final note, as every author will have dull moments in their books or not enough description where we want more or to much when we just want to get to better part of a dialog, if you do not like something do not read/watch it and then complain about it to people that actually like it, because we could care less about your opinion because it is far from what we have. Hope some of this may have helped you, god bless and have a wonderful year. On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 2:12 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > Hi, > I approached your site, making some challenging questions, all I see > hear on the whole is people jealously defending Feists work... > > Which is a usually a sign of a poor argument!!! > > No one, and do not get me wrong, has challenged my points* rationally* - > you've just stuck Feist on this proverbial pedestal, and worshipped him > from afar, and to me - as none of you seem to have addressed my points, it > seems absolutely unjustifiable - particularly in light of many of your > responses! > > As I said I *wanted *to enjoy Feists works, I did not wish to find these > flaws. Can I suggest if many of you are so aggrieved with what I saying, > you address my points *sensibly?* > > Or take up these flaws with Feitst himself, but as I said, the first signs > that someone unfortunately is not sure of their argument, and the ground > they stand on, is to resort to personal put-downs! > > I came to the sight to pose challenging questions, I am not about to > apologise for not being sycophantic and worshiping the wholly pedestal that > is Feists work, without due criticism where I see genuine flaws. > > I am going to go through the rest of these emails, briefly, and see if > anyone actually makes any rational sensible points instead of* > blindly*defending > * *Raymond's Feists work, without rhyme or reason, then I'd be pleased to > know. > > But, again I have to say vehemently and viciously defending Feists work, > not being open to criticism, it hardly endears me - at all... *if being > a fan means, you have to be closed minded, and* *aggressively defend your > stance.* > > Personally, in my own work, I am always open to criticism and improvement, > but perhaps I regard my own work as stronger? > > Nevertheless, I expected and hoped for reasoned balanced argument, I see > unfortunately little of that! To the contrary, it re-affirmed my > convictions, that people are readers are perhaps not discerning enough as > to the flaws, and do not care. > > As I said, I approached this forum with a balanced and open mind, it is a > shame that this was not similarly reciprocated. > > How do I submit to the forum itself please, instead of these > emails? Also, if people have got nothing worthwhile to say, and as I said > if they are just going to resort to petty personal put-downs, because > perhaps you cannot accept the fact Feist is not infallable, then please do > not bother! > > Reasoned sensible argument, I am prepared to listen to? > > > > In a message dated 28/01/2012 00:22:23 GMT Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: > > I only decided to have a look once I was sure it wasn't a nasty virus > link... I think I would now prefer a virus then what I just read. > > Personally I think he needs to put the thesaurus down and to choose an > adjective instead of putting down all that come to mind.. > > > Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:18:06 +0000 > > Subject: Re: Possible answer > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > > > Wow, against advice I went to his blog and read the first paragraph > > there before my head exploded... > > > > "Recently, I - for my sins… the sacrifices we have to make for the > > sake of our penmanship and promotion, yes I did it – no not murder – > > an only admittedly a slightly less misdemeanour - invested myself in > > Facebook and Twitter, but I struggle greatly to see the appeal! On > > Facebook, you seem to get bombarded with other people messages, which > > at times verge on the on your own page, which are often at times – I > > gotta say, about > > > > Nevertheless, it sticks in the proverbial claw to be frank…" > > > > Umm...what? > > > > Unless he's going for the "stream of thought / consciousness" approach > > of Joyce, that's got to be some of the worst structure I've ever read. > > > > > >
