Jun-30-2009, 04:41 PM (UTC)
(This post was last modified: Jun-30-2009, 04:42 PM (UTC) by Seventh.)
I've just finished it - definitely a page-turner for me! Now I'm already wishing the second one is out soon!
A general comment: just before Dragon Keeper came out, I reread the whole three trilogies to get myself back into that world, and I noticed that as the trilogies have progressed, the tendency to use the first book as an introduction [which, i suppose, is perfectly fair as that's exactly what it is] seems to have become more marked from the Assassin trilogy to the latest book.
I mean to say that, taken separately the third book of a trilogy reads with significantly more action, emotion and tension than the first - not that the first is by any means sub-par. Obviously it's a natural part of writing a story that spans three whole books, rather than just one, with the first used to introduce the setting, the second building the plot and the third reaching the climax of the action. To me, this was quite marked with the Soldier Son books - I found Shaman's Crossing on the verge of being disappointing as so little actually seemed to HAPPEN in the book. But by the end I was utterly hooked.
While I utterly adored Dragon Keeper [I REALLY wanted to have a 'closer look' at the Rain Wilds!] I can't help feeling that a slow-burn start that takes a whole book might perhaps hinder attracting new readers? I know several people who weren't sufficiently taken by Shaman's Crossing to bother to read the following two. Though perhaps the book just wasn't to their taste.
I'm rambling, sorry. Basically - has anyone else noticed this slow-start effect, or is it all in my head?
PS: I always thought that it didn't matter whether you used single or double speech marks, as long as you were consistent throughout the piece. And that you use the opposite mark to denote a quote within speech.
A general comment: just before Dragon Keeper came out, I reread the whole three trilogies to get myself back into that world, and I noticed that as the trilogies have progressed, the tendency to use the first book as an introduction [which, i suppose, is perfectly fair as that's exactly what it is] seems to have become more marked from the Assassin trilogy to the latest book.
I mean to say that, taken separately the third book of a trilogy reads with significantly more action, emotion and tension than the first - not that the first is by any means sub-par. Obviously it's a natural part of writing a story that spans three whole books, rather than just one, with the first used to introduce the setting, the second building the plot and the third reaching the climax of the action. To me, this was quite marked with the Soldier Son books - I found Shaman's Crossing on the verge of being disappointing as so little actually seemed to HAPPEN in the book. But by the end I was utterly hooked.
While I utterly adored Dragon Keeper [I REALLY wanted to have a 'closer look' at the Rain Wilds!] I can't help feeling that a slow-burn start that takes a whole book might perhaps hinder attracting new readers? I know several people who weren't sufficiently taken by Shaman's Crossing to bother to read the following two. Though perhaps the book just wasn't to their taste.
I'm rambling, sorry. Basically - has anyone else noticed this slow-start effect, or is it all in my head?
PS: I always thought that it didn't matter whether you used single or double speech marks, as long as you were consistent throughout the piece. And that you use the opposite mark to denote a quote within speech.
Facebook
Google
Reddit
Twitter
Blogger
Tumblr
Pinterest