Of interest

NEW YORK, NY, March 28, 2014—Elizabeth Wollheim, President and Publisher of DAW Books, has acquired a companion novella to Patrick Rothfuss’s #1 New York Times  bestselling Kingkiller Chronicle novels from Matt Bialer of Greenburger Associates. The Slow Regard of Silent Thingswill be published in hardcover in November 2014.

Patrick Rothfuss has become a force within the fantasy community since his debut novel The Name of the Wind: Book One of The Kingkiller Chronicle was published in 2007. Joining the ranks of legendary bestselling fantasists like George R.R. Martin and Robert Jordan, Rothfuss has developed a phenomenal following of readers that reaches beyond the traditional genre market. His second novel, The Wise Man’s Fear went straight to #1 on The New York Times Hardcover Fiction bestseller list when it was published in 2011. Both books continue to sell strongly in both hardcover and paperback and Rothfuss is mobbed by fans at his bookstore appearances.

The Slow Regard of Silent Things is set at The University, where the brightest minds work to unravel the mysteries of enlightened sciences, such as artificing and alchemy. Auri, a former student (and a secondary but influential character from Rothfuss’s earlier novels) now lives alone beneath the sprawling campus in a maze of ancient and abandoned passageways. There in The Underthing, she feels her powers and learns to see the truths that science—and her former classmates—have overlooked.

With a beautiful package and small trim size, it is a perfect choice for holiday gifts.

# # #

The Slow Regard of Silent Things: A Kingkiller Chronicle Novella

Patrick Rothfuss
DAW Hardcover; $18.95
ISBN: 9780756410438
On Sale: November 4, 2014

Source

A Kvothe novella? About Moon Fey-chan? Sign me up!

Unfortunately this probably confirms we’re not getting Doors of stone this year, but on the other hand “novella” by Pat Rothfuss standards likely means it will be about 600 pages long.

 

Advertisements

37 thoughts on “Of interest

  1. Reveen

    Well, I guess the saving grace here is that he’s writing about the only significant (relatively speaking) female character who neither wants to screw Kvothe or is an object of his Lust disguised as romanticism.

    On the other hand, mental illness as written by Rothfuss in the first person. Oy vey.

    Reply
      1. Emily

        Oh no. Pleeeease no. I may cry. (Although–it seems like from the book description that this is before she meets Kvothe? It’d be so awesome to have a book without him in it at all.)

        Reply
      2. Austin H. Williams

        If Rothfuss isn’t going to have Kvothe in this book at all, that would indeed help it. But then we’re left with Rothfuss writing a POV that I’m not all that convinced he can pull off.

        Reply
        1. ronanwills Post author

          Given how insufferable Auri’s quirkiness is in her dialogue I expect narration by her to be be torture. For my own sanity I hope it’s third person.

          Reply
      3. Emily

        Austin, are you implying that Rothfuss is capable of writing Kvothe’s PoV? 😉

        Auri’s dialogue bothers me less than it probably should…

        Reply
      4. Austin H. Williams

        Austin, are you implying that Rothfuss is capable of writing Kvothe’s PoV? 😉

        I think the rabbinic principle of qal wa’homer might apply – if he can’t rightly depict his own Marty Stu power-fantasy insert, how much more will he screw up a psychologically wounded young girl?

        Reply
    1. rmric0

      Or if she’s just pretending to be crazy for the lulz, and it’s all just her and that other wacky guy making bets on how much stupid stuff they can get Kvothe to swallow.

      Reply
  2. Emily

    This is probably going to earn me some fully deserved mockery, but I actually like the Kingkiller Chronicler books (while duly acknowledging its many, many problems). Not for Kvothefuss–dear god, no–but for Denna. I’m mildly interested in seeing what Auri does without Kvothefuss being involved.

    Reply
    1. ronanwills Post author

      I continue to think that Denna could be an interesting character (and was, when she first appeared in The Name of The Wind) if only her designated role in the story wasn’t to be Kvothe’s love interest.

      Reply
      1. Emily

        See, the reason I probably like the books so much is that in my head (which sadly isn’t really supported by the text), Denna’s not actually interested in Kvothe at all, and she’s totally “friend zoned” him. She flirts with him because she knows that he’s crushing on her, and doesn’t want to be mean to him but also isn’t interested in a relationship with him. All of this means that Kvothe’s totally being a NiceGuy about it all.

        I might also be somewhat prejudiced because neckbeard fans persist in calling her a whore. I’m totally all about a girl who uses the -implied promise- of sex (that’s how all NiceGuys see lady friends, right?) to get by and make a living, at least in fiction. This holds especially true in this particular setting, given that she’d probably be raped if she didn’t disappear on the men, though I’m hesitant to give Rothfuss any credit for realizing this, as his only depictions of rape thus far have all been in either dark alleys or involving violent kidnapping. She’s also the one character that actually fights against patriarchy in any meaningful fashion. (The Adem don’t count. I don’t give a flying fuck what the book says, if sex ninjas exist to bone the hero, they’re a het male’s wish fantasy.)

        Reply
        1. ronanwills Post author

          “Denna’s not actually interested in Kvothe at all, and she’s totally “friend zoned” him”

          The possibility of this occurred to me early on, but then the Felurian bit in The Wise Man’s Fear made me convinced that Rothfuss has absolutely no self-awareness at all, so I highly doubt we’re going to get a twist like this.

          Reply
      2. Emily

        That, and also the mantears moment when Krin/Ellie get kidnapped and raped. “I hate men!” “NOT ALL MEN ARE LIKE THAT.” (Also the part in which he condemns the bandit women for going along with it as a survival tactic as somehow worse than the men, who are described as animals lacking self-control.) This from a self-avowed feminist.

        But hey, I can still hope, right?

        Reply
      3. Emily

        “Call it prostitute if you will, doesn’t make it any different. Using different terms is not “respect”, it is stupidity born out of the perception that women who use their bodies are dirty, therefore the term given to such women is used as an insult by raging bigots. By refusing to treat these words with normalization, we are letting such biggots win.

        I will not do that. A black person is BLACK, a gay is GAY and a whore is a whore.”

        Um, excuse me? I’ve been called a number of slurs in my life, and I can tell you right now that it’s not okay, or acceptable, nor is it calling me “what I am” (I think one of the better things that have been hurled at me was an “imperialist dog” from a Korean nationalist–which, okay, I’m quite aware of the terrible shit Japan inflicted on the other East Asian countries, pre- and during, and to some extent post-WW2, so I found it somewhat better than being called “a Jap btich”). I’m sure from his point of view, he was “calling me what I am.”

        More importantly, however, even if you’re just “calling people what they are”–there’s a reason you called blacks “blacks” (which happens to be, AFAIK, the preferred term for many blacks in the USA), and not a certain 6-letter slur. It’s because that slur carries a history of institutionalized bigotry, racism, othering, etc. Likewise, the word “whore” is a slur that carries a history of institutionalized bigotry and sexism. Many sex workers suffer from the social stigma of being called whores; what’s more, there’s also a prevalent idea that whores don’t deserve protection from the government. And that’s not even getting into how quite a few people believe that it’s not rape if a “whore” was involved (whether that’s used as a slur for women in general, or sex workers).

        But at the end of the day, the most important point is that if a group is marginalized, you really don’t get to decide what label they’re called. That’s for them to choose. 🙂 All we can do to support them is to accept their decision.

        Reply
      4. Signatus

        Well, my apologize there if it was deemed as offensive. Never my intention. As a woman, I’m part of the collective more heavily submited to discrimination, and it is not unsual to hear phrases like; “woman you had to be” or “that’s because you’re a woman”. I believe that if we allow terms like “woman” to offend us, we are loosing against the extremists, instead of holding up our pride and saying “yes, I am a woman, and I’m proud to be one”.

        I’m sorry you thought by saying “acting like a whore” I was being offensive in any way. I simply meant to the activity itself. A person who sells his or her body (as in sexual favors) is a prostitute, and thus acting like one was not meant in any different way than saying”hes acting like a taxi driver” to someone who drives people in exchange for money but doesn’t own a taxi license. Sure, taxi drivers are not submitted to discrimination, but my intent was never negative.

        And I think I’ll leave the debate here. Thank you, I learned a lot from your points of views.

        Reply
      5. Signatus

        Of course I did, Emily. It was very enlightening! 🙂

        It is always fantastic to have such educated debates, because they are thought inducing and make me think I might have been wrong.

        Only thing I feel sorry about (and that is entirely my fault) is that my opinions might have made you think I’m something Im not. Like I said, I am sincerely sorry I sounded offensive (it was deffinitely not a very delicate thing to say), but it was never further from my intention.

        Reply
    2. Signatus

      I frankly don’t find Denna has any redeemeable qualities. The fact that she’s a whore doesn’t bother me one bit, it’s a honorable proffession like any other. It’s everything else about her. She’s an inssufferable Mary Sue. She’s so beautiful, has such a great voice, is so intelligent (that she actually eats drugs thinking its CANDY!), and has some tragic backstory. If she was called Raven Blackstar, I’d burn the book!

      I actually mind Kvothe less than Denna. That’s actually the character that pulled me completely off the book.

      Kvothe is a ridiculous self insert mantasy. Denna is everything that’s wrong with certain male authors.
      What’s even more ridiculous is how she acts like a whore, and runs away before sex, ending up like someone who actually uses men for her own beneffit. We are never treated to these men’s point of view, so what’s to tell us they are not actually in love with her? And she’s using them for monetary gain, caring very little about their feelings.

      The fact that there is no sex in her relations (because she actually says she leaves when they, logically, try to advance the relation) is Rothfuss saying that sex makes women used, dirty, so he can’t have the male’s love interest being dirty. While Kvothe does have all the sex he wants and that’s treated as a sign of prowess. It’s sexism all over again.

      Can’t we have a whore who actually likes her job? They do exists, and they are perfectly fine women.

      Reply
      1. ronanwills Post author

        “What’s even more ridiculous is how she acts like a whore, and runs away before sex, ending up like someone who actually uses men for her own beneffit. We are never treated to these men’s point of view, so what’s to tell us they are not actually in love with her? And she’s using them for monetary gain, caring very little about their feelings.”

        That’s true, but (in a rare case where I actually agree with the books) I don’t really see anything wrong in her essentially scamming these men out of their money. In Kvothe’s society the deck is stacked ridiculously against women- at least when Rothfuss remembers it is- so she’s just playing an unjust system the only way she can to get by without resorting to out and out prostitution, which she obviously doesn’t want to do.

        “She’s an inssufferable Mary Sue. She’s so beautiful, has such a great voice, is so intelligent (that she actually eats drugs thinking its CANDY!)”

        But see, I attribute all of this to Kvothe and not Denna. Like I said in my Let’s Read, it’s like Kvothe emits some kind of field that turns Denna into a simpering child, because she can’t be allowed to upstage Our Hero.

        Reply
      2. Signatus

        Make her phisically normal and not specially talented, and I’ll agree with everything you said. It is true the character could be more interesting without the male hero’s influence, and it is an interesting trait to use men in her favor (although I despise these sort of women, and I’ve known a few). It might make for a good story, a character that’s not inherently good, a gray area personality.

        But, no, the character, as it is portrayed, is evidently Kvothe’s trophy, same as Kahlan, and since that was the idea behind the creation of the character, I can’t see her in any other form. It shows way too much.

        Reply
      3. Emily

        “What’s even more ridiculous is how she acts like a whore, and runs away before sex, ending up like someone who actually uses men for her own beneffit.”

        Really? I find it pretty telling that you’re describing her as a whore, even if you claim that there’s nothing wrong with being a sex worker 😉 You’re also using a stock, trite phrase meant to denigrate the sex industry: “she acts like a whore.”

        Besides, I’m not entirely sure what makes her a sex worker, exactly–she’s not promising them sex for money. I’ve actually always found her relationship with her boyfriends, for lack of a better word, to be both entertaining and actually fairly reflective of the American perception of relationships (not sure about countries, and not going to speak for them), in that sex in relationships has taken on a rather commercial quality. As a friend put it (pretty heteronormative metaphor, but it’s apt): “A girl puts in sex tokens in a guy, and nice tokens come out. A guy puts nice tokens in a girl, and sex comes out.” Denna’s boyfriends seem to think that if they buy her things, they’re entitled to have sex with her. Nope, don’t think it works that way.

        “We are never treated to these men’s point of view, so what’s to tell us they are not actually in love with her? And she’s using them for monetary gain, caring very little about their feelings.”

        I find it refreshing, actually. SFF (and fuck, the real world) is filled with narratives written by the dominant voice (white, Western, hetcis male) in which we positively have thousands of men crying about how this girl TOTALLY led them on and never had sex with them. It’s fantastic that we’re not seeing a necessarily negative portrayal of this (though it certainly isn’t perfect), particularly since–if we’re buying the in-story explanation–Denna’s options are pretty limited (I think the Let’s Read mentioned that the reasons given for this are pretty sketchy, and I agree, but that’s another argument). And that’s not even mentioning that the most common form of this trope is actually a man using a woman for sex, and not even something as interesting as their livelihood. To bring up an example that’s a pretty personal sore point with me–the universally acclaimed opera, Madame Butterfly, is the fucking archetype of this shit (man uses woman, woman gets pregnant, finds out that man is a dick) with a healthy dose of both Western imperialism and orientalism. This exists -everywhere- in literature, particularly in SFF (I’m sure we could pull out like 10 examples alone from Martin’s series alone). I’m all for seeing the tables turned.

        Which isn’t to say that there certainly aren’t problematic elements of her character–but I’m not really sure I can buy your criticisms here.

        Reply
      4. Signatus

        Call it prostitute if you will, doesn’t make it any different. Using different terms is not “respect”, it is stupidity born out of the perception that women who use their bodies are dirty, therefore the term given to such women is used as an insult by raging bigots. By refusing to treat these words with normalization, we are letting such biggots win.

        I will not do that. A black person is BLACK, a gay is GAY and a whore is a whore.

        Reply
        1. ronanwills Post author

          “therefore the term given to such women is used as an insult by raging bigots”

          It is, though. I’m not aware of any usage of the word “whore” that isn’t considered pejorative.

          I think people should be addressed by whatever words they choose, and as far as I can tell most sex workers don’t choose to call themselves that, nor would they appreciate others labeling them as such.

          Reply
      5. Signatus

        On the rest, you do have a point there, Emily.

        Still doesn’t change my perception that the character was not intended as such and thus perpetuates many of the issues this mantasy industry has, but you have a point.

        Reply
      6. Alice

        “I will not do that. A black person is BLACK, a gay is GAY and a whore is a whore.”

        That’s a gay PERSON. I’d appreciate it if you didn’t refer people like me as “a gay”. I’m not a thing. And yeah, whore is almost universally used as an insult, and almost always by misogynists, so how about not.

        Reply
      7. Signatus

        Forgive me, Alice. Never meant to reffer to anyone as a thing. 😦
        In my language, we don’t add “person” after a person’s quality, such as “a heterosexual”, a nerd, a child. English is not my native language, so I made a terrible mistake by simultaneously translating from my language’s norms to english.

        Please, forgive me.

        Reply
      8. Alice

        Sorry, I’m just super cynical these days. Years of dealing with homophobic people online has kinda burned me out and left me always expecting the worst.

        Reply
      9. Signatus

        I can see why you might have taken it the wrong way.

        What you said about homosexuals in the other post was dead on. I, myself, have written many homosexual characters in my books, being their sexual preferences simply a part of who they are, with no relevant significance to the plot. I am currently planning a transexual character for a book I’ve got in project (once I finish the one I’m working on), a man in a woman’s body. That’s something I have never done before and I thought it would bring a nice dimension to explore.

        I also believe there shouldn’t be any reason to write such characters other than human nature is not one dimensioned, and having all this dimensions represented brings up life to a world. That’s reason enough.

        Reply
      10. noam

        A good rule of thumb is, if it isn’t your slur, it isn’t yours to reclaim. So even if sex workers refer to themselves as whores, you aren’t allowed to refer to them that way. Black and gay were never slurs, they weren’t derogatory terms inflicted on people by outsiders from dominant groups; they were chosen, therefore they can be used freely.

        Reply
  3. Signatus

    Seems like there wasn’t a less interesting character to write a book about. Reminds me of Meyer’s spinoff about a vampire who had like a single scene in one of her books (to get brutally executed by the Vulturi).

    This promises to be interesting.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s