I like AGT too....will watch episode 3 from season 2 tonight. (recorded). re Midkemia on TV. There is plenty of wars, magic, political intrigue, violence and sex and nudity too in Midkemia enough for many seasons on TV. My question is about the writing of the love/ sex scenes in the books. It is seems to me rather perfunctory, quick and behind closed doors. Is this a genre specific rule, regarded as a distraction to the main plot, or to allow the books to appeal to a younger readership? Bringing in more erotic descriptions without being too lurid may broaden the fan base particularly among female readers? ( it may also translate well to a TV series/ movie) with a few hot love scenes after battle?
Parks3 Not Sent from my iPad On 16/04/2012, at 8:04 AM, "Raymond E. Feist" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 15, 2012, at 12:16 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >> >> Ray, >> >> I was wondering if you were watching session two of aGT, I know you watched >> session one! >> >> We're starting to get into the heart of GRRM's story, which is complex and >> violent in the best of times, and as many know winter is coming! >> (Hahahahahahahaaaa...I love that line!) so yes at the moment we are ritualed >> in the "politics" of Westros, which seems all so petty! >> >> So anyway my question is when you're watching something like aGT on tv, do >> you ever imagine your world on TV? >> >> Shells >> > > > I was raised in the business. My father was a writer/producer/director, so I > tend to think in cinematic terms. So, in my head I see what it could look > like on TV. For the same reason, I realize if we ever did a series based on > Magician, it wouldn't look anything like I imagined; film/tv are > collaborative by nature. I'm sure the Production Designer, the brilliant > Gemma Jackson, came up with designs that had George's mouth dropping as he > saw things he never imagined, and that's a good thing. You want lots of > talented people to make you look good. > > Best, R.E.F. > ---- > www.crydee.com > > Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by > stupidity. > > > > > > >
