Hacker News Reader

Comment by mundo | Hacker News Reader

> I recently spent a couple of months writing and reading as badly as possible, a practice I now recommend.

Reminds me of author Jim Butcher's claim that he wrote the first volume of the _Dresden Files_, "as if I was some kind of formulaic, genre writing drone, just to prove to (his writing teacher) how awful it would be".

source: A Conversation With Jim Butcher: http://www.sfsite.com/08b/jb182.htm

View on HN

I haven't read any of them, so my questions come from a place of ignorance, but isn't the Dresden Files series considered good, at least by the standards of pop sci-fi / fantasy? It's at least popular enough to have generated 15 books. So I guess my questions are: is it actually considered good? If so, is the first book bad? How did it become popular if the first book is bad?

> How did it become popular if the first book is bad?

(Speaking as someone who also has not read the books)

This reminds me of disumbrationist[0] art. I wonder if something like that could be at play.

[0] http://hoaxes.org/archive/permalink/the_disumbrationist_scho...

I read one in the series because of that good reputation. I can confirm that it wasn't good -- formulaic and kind of boring. In retrospect it almost felt like a parody of the genre. (I was reminded of the prolific fantasy author character in Neal Stephenson's REAMDE.)

It gets better as time goes on.

I read the first one and thought it was dull. I would not have read the second, but I had it on hand. It started to perk my attention. Enjoyed it. After three, I was hooked.

I didn't care for it much - it seemed like something aimed towards young adult readers more than adults - but it's light-hearted, has magic spells and PG sex scenes, and you can easily read it on a plane flight.

What's wrong with light-hearted easy reading for adults?

Nothing! But I was surprised that _Dresden Files_ was aimed at adults. I thought the first Harry Potter book was more complex, both in plot and writing style.

How far in did you read? It get better as you go, although it's still simple fantasy at heart.

The first few books were not all that good, and I'd say the series really hits its stride around Death Masks, and gets better from there.

If you're looking for something a bit heavier and more complex, might I recommend Charles Stross's The Laundry Files? I'd say they're The Dresden Files' darker cousin. In fact, the protagonist of the former is a confirmed fan of the ladder.

Just the one book, I had heard the series improves, but there's too much other good stuff out there.

Also, I really didn't like the protagonist, he seems too obviously to be a thinly-veiled idealized version of the author. He might as well have named the main character Bim Jutcher.

Harry isn't perfect, but sometimes he could do with a few more flaws. I never saw him as an idealization of the author, but it's not an invalid idea.

All of these issues are especially apparent in the early books.

Once again, I recommend The Laundry Files, if you're looking for something a bit darker, and a bit stronger written (it still starts a bit weak, but not to the same degree...).

Well, it's not as bad as _The Cat Who Could Walk Through Walls_ by Heinlein. That book's protagonist is a gruff-yet-lovable aging sci-fi writer who, despite his advanced age, has hand-to-hand combat training, a hot young wife, and a huge dick. I kid you not, like with specific numbers, in centimeters.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll check out the Laundry Files. I have read one book by Stross (Accelerando) and liked it well enough.

Huh, I'd have thought Heinlein would have known better. Writing yourself is a hard trick to pull off, as you can't be too perfect, nor too flawed. One of the few I think could have pullled it off was the late, great Terry Pratchett (I didn't reccomend his books to you already, as I assume you've already read him). He has the sense of humor to make it work.

A slight warning: the first Laundry Files novel is kind of in-jokey. Not that the others aren't (it is about a programmer/magician (there isn't really much difference, in-universe) stuck inside a government bureau whose job is to fight Lovecraftian horrors from another dimension, after all), but the in the first book they can be kind of grating, even for us, the intended audience.

So if the offhand references to Symbolics, Alan Turing formalizing magic, in part by disproving the Church-Turing thesis (but that may have been retconned?), Volume 4 of Knuth, and other geeky in-jokes sound like nails on a chalkboard to you, don't worry, it gets better (by the end of the book, actually. The jokes pretty much disappear once you reach The Archives).

Thanks, sounds like good fun and I will check it out! And in return, I presume you've probably read Diamond Age and Snowcrash, but if not, get thee hence, they're both great.

Of course! Who do you take me for?

Well, I haven't finished Diamond Age yet...

But I will, really soon!

It's bubble gum pop, the sort of thing that is immensely popular across all media, but not the best, and easy to sneer at. Quite different from "awful", which would be something like Eragon.

Everything's easy to sneer at if you've got enough of a lip.

It's not paint-by-numbers in the later books, it actually has effort put into it, and it's quite a fun read.

Then again, I liked Eragon when I read it. Then again, then again, I was in third grade at the time, so I think I've got an excuse.

They're great fun, but not great literature. Big explosions, chases, larger-than-life characters with interesting quirks but little nuance (although he gets better), edge-of-your-seat world-in-peril type stuff. I know plenty of people who love them, including myself.

They suffer fairly badly from Lensman Arms Race, so by about two-thirds of the way through the series Dresden and his friends are now so ridiculously powerful that you can tell Butcher's having a hard time coming up with decent a threats for them to vanquish in the each book.

Basically: above average pulp urban fantasy.

Edit: There's a TV series, fairly loosely based on the first few books. I rather liked it. I know plenty of people who didn't.

Exactly. And totally Lensman Arms Race. Although it takes on an interesting tone around Changes. Not enough to stop it from being a problem, but enough to keep things interesting until there's an inevitable solution (unless there isn't).

As for the TV series, I liked it, but I wish they'd kept some of the characters from the books: They significantly altered Bob's personality (although that's understandable), and totally cut Thomas, as well as Michael and the rest of the Carpenters. I also wish we'd been able to see Nick and The Nickelheads (I'm deliberately speaking in references, so as not to spoil), although the fact that we didn't is understandable.

But seriously, what happened to Thomas? As of Backup, I'd almost say he was my favorite character.

> So I guess my questions are: is it actually considered good?

By no means. Quite formulaic. Weak writing.

> If so, is the first book bad? How did it become popular if the first book is bad?

Um, anybody remember "Twilight" or "50 Shades of Grey"? It's possible to be quite popular and yet suck very badly.

And, Dresden Files is far from bad. It sets up an interesting set of characters and an interesting universe. Just go into it expecting a swashbuckle rather than high literature, and you will be fine.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com