|
Geeze. Seems that I again am forgetting that I often am older than the average in some fandoms. I'm 39. Anyway, I also find detailed sex scenes distracting from the plot in most novels I read. However, I didn't think that Butcher is really spending all that much time on this aspect. Compared to everything else in his novels, it is miniscule, unless he is making a plot point with, like with Maeve in book four.
I agree that it's not an issue of page count being stolen from the story. It's just that in the middle of a fast paced read that flows naturally from scene to scene with a generally economic use of words, everything comes to a screeching halt when you encounter a page and a half describing what some lady is wearing to every excruciating last detail. It gets in the way, and whenever it happens (about 2 - 3 times per book so far) I just find it distracting.
Example from Summer Knight: (description of Mab)
she stood by my desk with her arms folded, facing the door, hips cocked to one side, her expression skeptical. She had white hair. Not white-blond, not platinum. White as snow, white as the finest marble, bound up like a captured cloud to bare the line of her slender throat. I don't know how her skin managed to look pale beside that hair, but it did. Her lips were the color of frozen mulberries, almost shocking in a smooth and lovely face, and her oblique eyes were a deep green that tinted to blue when she tilted her head and looked me over. She wasn't old. Wasn't young. Wasn't anything buy stunning.
I tried to keep my jaw from hitting the floor and forced my brain to start doing something by taking stock of her wardrobe. She wore a woman's suit of charcoal grey, the cut immaculate. The skirt showed exactly enough leg to make it hard not to look, and her dark pumps and heels just high enough to give you ideas. She wore a bone-white V-neck beneath her jacket, the neckline dipping just low enough to make me want to be watching if she took a deep breath. Opals set in silver fleshed on her ears, , at her throat, glittering through an array of colors I wouldn't have expected from opals - too many scarlets and violets and deep blues. Her nails had somehow been lacquered in the same opalescence.
I caught sense of her perfume, something wild and rich, heavy and sweet, like orchids...
Since Mab is also a supernatural creature and not just a woman one could claim that Butcher just really wanted us to understand how special the look was. But, compare this with the first time an Ogre is described later in the book:
...He wore a loincloth of some kind of leather - and nothing more. His skin was dark russet, layered with muscle and curling dark hair. His ears stood out from the sides of his head like satellite dishes, and his features have flattened, becoming more bestial, nearly like those of a gorilla. He was also better than 12 feet tall.
I think the difference is evident. Despite the ogre having an appearance at least as unique as Mab's, Butcher somehow found it within himself to describe the monster in one short paragraph that didn't even stop the flow of an action scene that was just happening, and created a perfect mental image. With Mab, the description was so long and filled with pointless details that it jarred me out of the book.
Anyway, this is not a big deal, just a quibble that I have with Butcher's style. It seems immature to me.
I think the difference is evident. Despite the ogre having an appearance at least as unique as Mab's, Butcher somehow found it within himself to describe the monster in one short paragraph that didn't even stop the flow of an action scene that was just happening, and created a perfect mental image. With Mab, the description was so long and filled with pointless details that it jarred me out of the book.
Given the importance Mab has throughout the entire rest of the series vs. what the Ogre dude has going after this book (i.e. nothing), it kinda makes sense.
Again, even descriptions of this kind get noticeably less prurient in later books, unless he is making a point about a character.
I think a better comparison would be to line up Mab's description with that of another recurring character with a unique appearance. Say, Vadderung, or Leanansidhe, or any of the Denarians when they get their demon on, especially Tessa or Dierdre.
Or heck, his description of Marcone in the first book was fairly sizable, at least most of one page in paperback.
Harry Dresdin even acknowledges the first time he opens the door for her that it irritates the hell out of her" but yet he does it anyway. She (Murphy) wants to be treated like this and he does it anyway.
That's not a gentlemen, that's a jerk.
In classic noir style all the ladies are sex objects first and women second. God, even Molly got the treatment later in the series.
I'd really have to go home and get my books but the novels are ripe with chauvinism. An it's not toned down later in the books. Yes the women eventually kick ass but they all start with him having to save them in some way shape or form.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think I am not going to pursue this particular discussion, because it will end in tears, since our definitions of chauvinism are extremely different.
|
|
I think the difference is evident. Despite the ogre having an appearance at least as unique as Mab's, Butcher somehow found it within himself to describe the monster in one short paragraph that didn't even stop the flow of an action scene that was just happening, and created a perfect mental image. With Mab, the description was so long and filled with pointless details that it jarred me out of the book.Given the importance Mab has throughout the entire rest of the series vs. what the Ogre dude has going after this book (i.e. nothing), it kinda makes sense.
Again, even descriptions of this kind get noticeably less prurient in later books, unless he is making a point about a character.
I see the flaw you pointed out in my comparison. But the main point is that for most characters, locations, creatures and events in the book the descriptions are closer to that of the Ogre - short and efficient. With beautiful women they are long, flowery, detailed, and ultimately annoying to me. I remember the female client and the vampire from the first book getting similarly long descriptions, for example.
As I said, it gets less noticeable in later books, unless to make a point.
I think I am not going to pursue this particular discussion, because it will end in tears, since our definitions of chauvinism are extremely different.
No tears, I'll drop this line of conversation since I am offending fans of Jim Butcher..
And count me as a fan Mag. I've read the entire Dresdin series and gone to two speaking engagements with Jim. Despite several misgivings about the content in his books I greatly enjoy the Dresdin Series. They are one of my guilty pleasures. When I loan them out I always give a caveat and say they are not particularly well written, they might be a tad sexist, but good luck putting them down. They are crack.
You can claim Harry's a chauvinist all you want, but given that it is repeatedly and consistently acknowledged that Harry's attitude is very old fashioned and perhaps a bit rude to people like Murphy who don't welcome old fashioned politeness, I'd tread lightly when calling Butcher himself a chauvinist.
You can claim Harry's a chauvinist all you want, but given that it is repeatedly and consistently acknowledged that Harry's attitude is very old fashioned and perhaps a bit rude to people like Murphy who don't welcome old fashioned politeness, I'd tread lightly when calling Butcher himself a chauvinist.
Fair point Rynjin
But keep in mind the Dresdin books are written from the 1st person perspective of Harry Dresdin. We read Harry's thoughts and the narrative follows him through the books. This gives the writer the ability to deflect any criticism in the direction of his characters.
So rather than saying Jim Butcher is a chauvinist (witch you are correct is entirely unfair), I'll just say feel think the Dresden book series is a bit chauvinist.
And this is coming from a fan of the Ian Fleming James bond novels so maybe this says more about me as a consumer than Jim Butcher lol.
-MD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Dresden Chronicles are one of the few series I still actively follow, and purchase in hardcover the day they came out. So obviously I am a fan, and I think I would rank him as one of the funnest authors to read.
I think you have chauvinist and chivalrous mixed up, man. Seriously.
I think you have chauvinist and chivalrous mixed up, man. Seriously.
I didn't challenge it since by SJW logic they're the same thing.
Ok, makes sense then. Carry on.
|
|
No, you people are going too far. Harry is most definitely in possession of some sexist world views - I recall an inner monologue he had at some point where he explains how women magic wielders are so much more dangerous than men because of how seductive and manipulative women are.
There are some moments in the series that are certainly a bit cringe worthy. However, I am capable of separating character from author and I think the sexism is mostly Harry.
|
|
I agree that it's not an issue of page count being stolen from the story. It's just that in the middle of a fast paced read that flows naturally from scene to scene with a generally economic use of words, everything comes to a screeching halt when you encounter a page and a half describing what some lady is wearing to every excruciating last detail. It gets in the way, and whenever it happens (about 2 - 3 times per book so far) I just find it distracting.
Example from Summer Knight: (description of Mab).....
Bear in mind, there is a degree of genre cross-over with the Dresden books, especially early on when the Private Investigator aspect is more important. That was probably more a conscious apeing of Raymond Chandler rather than Butcher being a bit of a slobberer.
And Mab is an important character. I personally think that it's a good thing when an author gives you lots of good description, especially about characters, so you can see what the author is seeing in their head. It beats, "This blonde chick was sitting in my office. Nice t!ts."
|
|
No, you people are going too far. Harry is most definitely in possession of some sexist world views - I recall an inner monologue he had at some point where he explains how women magic wielders are so much more dangerous than men because of how seductive and manipulative women are.
There are some moments in the series that are certainly a bit cringe worthy. However, I am capable of separating character from author and I think the sexism is mostly Harry.
I'm not an American, and Butcher is a very American author. Even in the Codex Alera, the characters feel very American. The way I see Dresden is as having old world courtesy of a Midwestern variety (based on what I've seen of people based in and around Lansing, Michigan, which I've visited a few times). In comes out in the way he treats his mentor and foster father (name escapes me), calling him "Sir" (I've never called my dad Sir) and generally being very polite. The treatment of women under that code could be seen as chivalrous or condescending, depending on your viewpoint. It's probably both. The extent to which this is separate from Butcher is moot since the authorial voice, and Tavi's attitudes, in the Codex Alera wasn't really very different at all from Harry's. Butcher is, of course, from the Midwest, like Harry.
<shrug> You'll be amazed how much women are happy to be condescended to when you are giving up your seat to them in a crowded train. So I find it hard to take this too seriously. It might be a bit antedeluvian but there are much worse ways for sexism to manifest than overt politeness to half the population. There are also a large number of powerful female characters - both good, bad and ambiguous - in the Dresden books. Compare with Tolkien, where they barely exist, or something ghastly like Piers Anthony's Bio of a Space Tyrant, where the pirate queen can't orgasm except in a rape scenario.
|
|
I agree that it's not an issue of page count being stolen from the story. It's just that in the middle of a fast paced read that flows naturally from scene to scene with a generally economic use of words, everything comes to a screeching halt when you encounter a page and a half describing what some lady is wearing to every excruciating last detail. It gets in the way, and whenever it happens (about 2 - 3 times per book so far) I just find it distracting.
Example from Summer Knight: (description of Mab).....
Bear in mind, there is a degree of genre cross-over with the Dresden books, especially early on when the Private Investigator aspect is more important. That was probably more a conscious apeing of Raymond Chandler rather than Butcher being a bit of a slobberer.
And Mab is an important character. I personally think that it's a good thing when an author gives you lots of good description, especially about characters, so you can see what the author is seeing in their head. It beats, "This blonde chick was sitting in my office. Nice t!ts."
Point is, I think the second description I quoted there, of the Ogre, was better than that of Mab's. It didn't have an overabundance of details and it created a strong mental image of what the Ogre must look like. And that style of description is the most common one in the books, a rule that is usually only broken to describe the pretty ladies.
But I'm going to take a back seat on this discussion until I read farther books in the series. You are not the first to point out to me that the style shifts somewhat later in the series, and so I guess I should read more of the books before taking a stronger stance. As it is, all that I said is only relevant to the first 4 books.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Debatable about the ogre being better. I'd completely forgotten about the ogre, I still remember Harry's first meeting with Mab in his office. Mab is supposed to be beautiful. It's show, don't tell. "She was beautiful" is pretty lame. And she's also a super-powerful fey and an ongoing character. I think that demands air-time.
|
|
This reminds me of the Game of Thrones books. I've not spoilered it, as it has been in the series now as well as the books from years back, but in case you are bothered, you have been warned.
In the books, there are quite a lot of sex scenes involving Tyrion and his girlfriend Shae. Pretty explicit ones, and since the relationship covers two-and-a-half books, in the end I was thinking "Do I really needs all this dwarf sex?" - it all felt a bit gratuitous. However, it actually made sense in the end, because what those scenes were doing was demonstrating how enamoured Tyrion is with Shae and how he really wanted and needed her. So in the final denouement at the end of Book 3, when he finds her in his father's chambers and she's simply swapped her alliegance, it makes perfect sense that his sense of jealousy and betrayal led him to throttle her to death and, indeed, to go on a kill his father. So what seemed a bit like gratuitous sex was in fact setting up for this big scene at the end, and making sense of it from Tyrion's viewpoint (not to condone - murder is BAD, kids - don't do it!).
Likewise, Mab is a very significant character in Harry's world - he now works for her (well, OK, I'm waiting for the next book to come out in papaerback, but as of the last book he did) - so her entrance is a big deal. Her sexiness and danger are quite important, in that context - if she was just written briefly, that might not make so much sense.
Similarly, there's only ever been, to my recollection, a single sex scene in the Dresden books. And that served a purpose, since it was when he and Susan conceived their daughter. Likewise, there's a lot of attention paid to Molly, but then she's a very significant character too with lots of stuff going on there. And Murphy and so on. Even the female vampire was a recurring character up to book 3, and her attractiveness was in contrast to her horrific real appearance. And Harry's brother usually gets his clothing and haircut mentioned.
So some of this stuff can be seen as prefiguring. Characters develop from the early books. Butcher's writing develops too - much less of the Chandler pastiche as things go on. And it seems to me that at least some of it is authorial strategy with significant characters and subsequent payoff.
I agree that it's not an issue of page count being stolen from the story. It's just that in the middle of a fast paced read that flows naturally from scene to scene with a generally economic use of words, everything comes to a screeching halt when you encounter a page and a half describing what some lady is wearing to every excruciating last detail. It gets in the way, and whenever it happens (about 2 - 3 times per book so far) I just find it distracting.
Example from Summer Knight: (description of Mab).....
Bear in mind, there is a degree of genre cross-over with the Dresden books, especially early on when the Private Investigator aspect is more important. That was probably more a conscious apeing of Raymond Chandler rather than Butcher being a bit of a slobberer.
And Mab is an important character. I personally think that it's a good thing when an author gives you lots of good description, especially about characters, so you can see what the author is seeing in their head. It beats, "This blonde chick was sitting in my office. Nice t!ts."
Point is, I think the second description I quoted there, of the Ogre, was better than that of Mab's. It didn't have an overabundance of details and it created a strong mental image of what the Ogre must look like. And that style of description is the most common one in the books, a rule that is usually only broken to describe the pretty ladies.
But I'm going to take a back seat on this discussion until I read farther books in the series. You are not the first to point out to me that the style shifts somewhat later in the series, and so I guess I should read more of the books before taking a stronger stance. As it is, all that I said is only relevant to the first 4 books.
This might be a matter of taste, as well. In my opinion, like Aubrey, Mab's description made much more of a mark on my memory, and I am far, far, far more in favor of over-description than under. I honestly wish Butcher would use that style more, myself. But if that doesn't appeal to you, I can see why you might be a bit irked by its use.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not an American, and Butcher is a very American author. Even in the Codex Alera, the characters feel very American. The way I see Dresden is as having old world courtesy of a Midwestern variety (based on what I've seen of people based in and around Lansing, Michigan, which I've visited a few times). In comes out in the way he treats his mentor and foster father (name escapes me), calling him "Sir" (I've never called my dad Sir) and generally being very polite. The treatment of women under that code could be seen as chivalrous or condescending, depending on your viewpoint. It's probably both. The extent to which this is separate from Butcher is moot since the authorial voice, and Tavi's attitudes, in the Codex Alera wasn't really very different at all from Harry's. Butcher is, of course, from the Midwest, like Harry.No, you people are going too far. Harry is most definitely in possession of some sexist world views - I recall an inner monologue he had at some point where he explains how women magic wielders are so much more dangerous than men because of how seductive and manipulative women are.
There are some moments in the series that are certainly a bit cringe worthy. However, I am capable of separating character from author and I think the sexism is mostly Harry.
Being from the south US (Texas, Arizona, Tennessee, Georgia), this sort of thing is very heavily built into our culture here as well. Anyone older than you (especially older relatives such as parents, grandparents, aunts/uncles, etc.) or in a more senior position is Sir or Ma'am, that's just common courtesy; if you're actually wanting to be completely polite, everyone is Sir or Ma'am. I've known people, generally older folks, who even refer to kids as Sir or Ma'am and rarely address you by your first name, preferring to say "Mister" or "Miss" (insert surname here). My sister-in-law's father is that way, and he was a high school teacher; it used to drive some of his kids nuts. The only people he refers to by first name are family members.
I lost count of the number of conversations I had as a kid that went something like:
Me: "Yes/No." (Or more often "Yeah/Nah.")
Parent: "Yes/No what?"
Me: "Yes/No Sir/Ma'am."
I'm one of those people who boggled a bit when I learned this behavior is considered downright rude in other parts of the world; around here it's considered very rude to NOT do so. It severely cut down on my desire to travel, if nothing else.
A lot of Harry's behavior is drawn right out of our culture as well, though in my experience deference to age is first, deference to gender second. So in the train example a younger gentleman would, to be polite, be expected to give his seat up for a younger woman; however, politeness would also generally expect her to give up her seat for an elderly person, regardless of gender.
Likewise I've held doors open for people (of both genders) ever since I was strong enough to do so (I'm nearly thirty now), and if I got a response at all, it ALWAYS was some variant of "Thank you". I have never, not once, gotten the indignant "I can do it myself"/"I don't need you to open things for me" response many people on the internet seem to consider standard, and was honestly downright perplexed and a little horrified that people would actually think that politely holding something open for them was an action implying they were incapable of doing so themselves.
It was very familiar for me when I started reading the series, reminding me a lot of my own upbringing, and helped establish the character very strongly and very quickly.
Yeah... profanity is pretty heavily frowned on over here, at least in professional settings; in some places it's just plain not acceptable at all in anywhere but perhaps one's own home. And my family didn't even accept it there, and what my family considered profanity was euphemisms as mild as "gosh", "darn", "heck", etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"jeez" was usually met with a stern look as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's Butcher's lengthy description of Mab...
then there's Stephen King using several pages of a chapter to describe a character's menstrual cycle.
I'll take Butcher.
"jeez" was usually met with a stern look as well.
Yep.
Basically anything that was a euphemism for a harsher word ("Jeez" - "Jesus", "Gosh/Golly" - "God", "Dang/Darn" - "Damn", "Heck" - "Hell", etc. etc. etc.) was treated with the full severity of the harsher profanity.
|
|
This might be a matter of taste, as well. In my opinion, like Aubrey, Mab's description made much more of a mark on my memory, and I am far, far, far more in favor of over-description than under. I honestly wish Butcher would use that style more, myself. But if that doesn't appeal to you, I can see why you might be a bit irked by its use.
Over-description is something like Gormenghast. The Dresden novels are nothing like that.
|
|
This reminds me of the Game of Thrones books. I've not spoilered it, as it has been in the series now as well as the books from years back, but in case you are bothered, you have been warned.
In the books, there are quite a lot of sex scenes involving Tyrion and his girlfriend Shae. Pretty explicit ones, and since the relationship covers two-and-a-half books, in the end I was thinking "Do I really needs all this dwarf sex?" - it all felt a bit gratuitous. However, it actually made sense in the end, because what those scenes were doing was demonstrating how enamoured Tyrion is with Shae and how he really wanted and needed her. So in the final denouement at the end of Book 3, when he finds her in his father's chambers and she's simply swapped her alliegance, it makes perfect sense that his sense of jealousy and betrayal led him to throttle her to death and, indeed, to go on a kill his father. So what seemed a bit like gratuitous sex was in fact setting up for this big scene at the end, and making sense of it from Tyrion's viewpoint (not to condone - murder is BAD, kids - don't do it!).
Likewise, Mab is a very significant character in Harry's world - he now works for her (well, OK, I'm waiting for the next book to come out in papaerback, but as of the last book he did) - so her entrance is a big deal. Her sexiness and danger are quite important, in that context - if she was just written briefly, that might not make so much sense.
Similarly, there's only ever been, to my recollection, a single sex scene in the Dresden books. And that served a purpose, since it was when he and Susan conceived their daughter. Likewise, there's a lot of attention paid to Molly, but then she's a very significant character too with lots of stuff going on there. And Murphy and so on. Even the female vampire was a recurring character up to book 3, and her attractiveness was in contrast to her horrific real appearance. And Harry's brother usually gets his clothing and haircut mentioned.
So some of this stuff can...
Unlike what most people think, I actually don't find the sex scenes in game of thrones to be gratuitous. Explicit, certainly, as in "they don't shy from describing the actual thing that's happening and genitalia is named", but overall it's not like the scenes are overly long or ridiculous. One of my main beefs with the HBO show is that they took the sex stuff and dialed them up to 11, to the point where they become juvenile and gratuitous.
I don't have a problem with sex as long as it fits naturally in the story and is handled well. It's a matter of taste, but I find Butcher's style in this regard to be weak. Another author I have a problem with is Dan Simmons - somehow his sex scenes always feel unpleasant and somehow violent.
With Martin, for example, sex is just one of the things that happen. He doesn't shy away from it but doesn't revel in it either. With Butcher I feel like the storyteller is taking a pause from the narrative and digress into this rambling speech of a teenager about how totally hot women are.
This might be a matter of taste, as well. In my opinion, like Aubrey, Mab's description made much more of a mark on my memory, and I am far, far, far more in favor of over-description than under. I honestly wish Butcher would use that style more, myself. But if that doesn't appeal to you, I can see why you might be a bit irked by its use.Over-description is something like Gormenghast. The Dresden novels are nothing like that.
I'm not familiar.
It's probably because of how prudish I am, but learning of the existence of the explicit sex descriptions were one of the main things that turned me off from ever reading SOIAF. The explicit violence/gore would be the other, I don't have the stomach for it. Third would be his fondness for killing off characters, it's a turn-off for me as much as it is a hook for many other people.
Probably one of the main reasons I prefer Butcher, his explicit scenes in the former are few and far between and can be skipped, and the latter not described in any excessive detail that I can recall.
Is this acceptable in the south?"jeez" was usually met with a stern look as well.Yep.
Basically anything that was a euphemism for a harsher word ("Jeez" - "Jesus", "Gosh/Golly" - "God", "Dang/Darn" - "Damn", "Heck" - "Hell", etc. etc. etc.) was treated with the full severity of the harsher profanity.
If my parents had known what it meant, they probably would have banned us from watching the show, yes.
My family was admittedly much stricter with language that even most of our surrounding peers, but that still didn't change the fact that in a situation that was at all formal (work, school, etc.) or in "polite company" one was expected to keep profanity to an absolute minimum in the name of social decorum.
Period!
Ouch. I did catch that pun. It had spikes.
==Aelryinth
|
|
I'm not familiar.This might be a matter of taste, as well. In my opinion, like Aubrey, Mab's description made much more of a mark on my memory, and I am far, far, far more in favor of over-description than under. I honestly wish Butcher would use that style more, myself. But if that doesn't appeal to you, I can see why you might be a bit irked by its use.Over-description is something like Gormenghast. The Dresden novels are nothing like that.
It's by Mervyn Peake, who was a British illustrator. Gormenghast is a huge castle occupied by a bunch of eccentrics and grotesques, and muder and skulduggery ensue. Nothing mch happens as Peake spends a lot of time describing people, describing the decor, and so on. There were three books - Gormenghast, Titus Groan and Titus Alone (I think). They came out in about the 1960s and were very influential at the time - for example, on Michael Moorcock - and there is a (fairly incoherent) BBC drama based on the first two books. I tried to like it, I really did, but just couldn't finish the first book.
|
|
Unlike what most people think, I actually don't find the sex scenes in game of thrones to be gratuitous.
My comments weren't an inference of you being a prude, more I was trying to find a situation I had where I found some stuff a bit gratuitous as an illustration.
And yeah, the series is totally gratuitous. Though I found it ironic they left out Tyrion's sex scenes, and put in some that weren't in the book (in fact, inventing a whole character, Ros, pretty much for the sole purpose of having gratuitous sex).
It's by Mervyn Peake, who was a British illustrator. Gormenghast is a huge castle occupied by a bunch of eccentrics and grotesques, and muder and skulduggery ensue. Nothing mch happens as Peake spends a lot of time describing people, describing the decor, and so on.I'm not familiar.This might be a matter of taste, as well. In my opinion, like Aubrey, Mab's description made much more of a mark on my memory, and I am far, far, far more in favor of over-description than under. I honestly wish Butcher would use that style more, myself. But if that doesn't appeal to you, I can see why you might be a bit irked by its use.Over-description is something like Gormenghast. The Dresden novels are nothing like that.
Huh. I'm half tempted to check it out just to see if I like it.
Yeah I don't see an issue with descriptions of sex in books, as long as they are handled well and don't distract from the plot. I think that's true of SOIAF as well as Dresden.
When it interferes with the plot is where I have a problem. That is pretty much why I dropped the Anita Black series (sometime around the beginning of Narcissus in Chains), when the series became "Oh look, a werepanther, lets go have sex with it"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Going back to descriptions, I like the way Butcher does his. Sure, sometimes I wish there was a bit more, but I can't recall ever wishing for less.
As for spending more time on pretty females than other characters, sure. I'd have to got back to confirm, but I'd believe, and it doesn't bother me. First, it makes sense from a character standpoint, which as people have pointed out is the view point we have, but it also wouldn't bother me if it was just the author's preference/style. I like hearing what Mab looks like.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
. . . When it interferes with the plot is where I have a problem. That is pretty much why I dropped the Anita Black series (sometime around the beginning of Narcissus in Chains). . . .
I agree completely. In fact, as I've said before, Micah was the straw for me. The plot could be summed up as "Anita has sex with Micah and talks about her feelings, then gets shot."
That's literally the whole plot, which is none at all.
Butcher, on the other hand, I like across the board. I like his characters. I like the good guys. I like how the good guys interact. I like hating the bad guys. I like liking some of the bad guys. I like some of the goofy-as-all-get-out silliness, like the name of Hades' dog and Santa Claus and Harry being sold on ebay.
Yeah, Dresden is formulaic, but there is a reason you can draw parallels between a lot of myths... the human drama is the same stories told over and over. All one can do is put their own stamp on it.
Molly's pretty much the only character that I feel gets a bit of a "over the top" sexualized description in the Dresdenverse at. Well, I mean the White Court Vampires do as well, but given that House Raith feeds on lust, I give it a pass.
Can't say that I noticed that much anymore in the last books, aside from her "having won the genetic lottery" (or was that about Charity ^^) and "being build like a brickhouse"... although that last one normally wouldn't register as much of a compliment to me. ´:p It was a bit noticeable in some books, but again, there was a point to it.
The Dresdin books are akin to Harem Anime when you think about it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Dresdin books are akin to Harem Anime when you think about it.
I can only assume you watch pretty much no harem anime.
The Dresdin books are akin to Harem Anime when you think about it.I can only assume you watch pretty much no harem anime.
Harem, hāremumono (ハーレムもの?) (from harem), broadly, is an ambiguously-defined subgenre of anime and manga characterized by a protagonist surrounded, usually amorously, by three or more members of the opposing sex and/or love interests.[1] The most common and practically tantamount scenario is a male-oriented harem series where the main male character is surrounded by a group of females
run down the list of female characters who surround Harry
Karen Murphy - unrequented love interest
Molly Carpenter - Has a crush on Harry
Susan - um yeah
Anastasia Luccio - have "wild monkey sex", flirt a lot.
Mab wants Harry
There is probably more, it's been a few years since I read many of the books.
Of course it's his luck that he is literally cursed to never have true love.
I think that's a pretty good list for a Harem. But then again one can only assume I've never watched harem anime.