S.M. Stirling


He be ok!

>>By Mooch   (Friday, 4 Jul 2003 02:34)

The devil's in the details. That's the saying. An author who writes the complex stories that Stirling attempts is walking a razors edge between being detailed and being pedantic.

I find that Stirling often, especially with the more complex stories like Conquistador, falls on the side of pedantry. Not offensively so, but noticably so. The details sometimes take over, affecting the pacing so that I find myself skimming, not reading half pages at a time, and looking for the story to move on again.

Finally, I think that Stirling should keep more control over his books, calling conquistador an "Alternate History" novel is somewhat (if not completely) misleading. An alternate history is mentioned, but only as a device to tell the story of a revolution in a modern aristocratic society.

I do think that Stirling does his best work when he is writing in someone else's universe, where the details are already laid out, such as his contribution(s) to Nivens Man Kzin wars and to McCaffrey's The Ship That Sang universe.


>>By Ook DaLibrarian   (Wednesday, 19 May 2004 17:43)

The discussion board is currently closed.