Sharp Claw wrote:I am not criticizing the craftsmanship as you are still my current favorite author and greatly appreciate the effort and the 14 hour days to get your work to your readers ASAP after the schedule slipped. I think the disappointment, such as it is and what there is of it, is due to the fact that the last three books have all ended at basically the same point in time and we really wanted the story to move forward.
I believe you had said that you had wanted to consolidate the various story lines, like Torch and the shadow series, into the main honorverse story. You clearly believed that the plot needed to be thickened and all the back stories of the various characters filled in before you could move forward and that is the source of the self indulgent comment. I had really wanted the story to move forward and didn't think so much back filling of so many minor characters, like Damien Harahap was really
Necessary.
BTW, I resent the implication that I am some anonymous internet troll just trying to upset you and get a reaction. My real name and email are known to you and your mods and my criticisms are my real opinions and I would say the same things FTF.
I never implied that anyone was trying to "troll" me. In fact, my remarks about the intnernet and civility in discourse were --- clearly, I thought -- a "while we're on the subject" follow on to my comments about why longtime readers, because of their long investment in the series, got rather more of a pass from me if their language waxed less than fully temperate. Not a single word I said was untrue or inaccurate of the general population on the net, however.
I do think --- as I said, quite clearly, I thought -- that people sometimes (in fact, fairly frequently) do not choose the same words in written discourse (electronic or dead tree) that they might choose in a face-to-face conversation where the other party to the conversation's reaction an be immediately seen and factored into the communication. There's less bandwidth, if you will, which means that the ability to interpolate and adapt is much more limited. And I do think that's tended to contribute to a decline in the civility of conversation --- and especially of argument and disagreement (note the dictionary definition difference between "argue" and "quarrel") --- in general.
Is there some way in which any of the above are inaccurate propositions?