Story,game and books.**(SPOILERS)**

[saltyB]

@figulus01


Well, we have to keep in mind that Geralt and all the others are basically searching for Ciri most of the time! So they often split up and stuff. And well Ciri is on the Run the whole time, so they all get into different little stories while they are still on their main path. Maybe that's why you have the feeling that there is not much progression!

I mean i kinda agree, that he maybe got lost in some moments. But he still followed a red line!


And like i said already...The Witcher is no fairy tail where everything works fine with happy endings, and reunions and so on...it is a dirty and dark world. Many characters die in the books, Ciri get's from one bad situation into another, and Geralt and Yen are also constantly under pressure and everything. So i can imagine that Sapkowski intentionally wrote his books like that!

I like Lord of the Rings very much, but in comparison to The Witcher, LotR was always too "happy" and "fairy tail" in my Opinion.

The Witcher is just a more "realistic" fantasy saga for me.

 

[figulus01]

The Witcher is just a more "realistic" fantasy saga for me.

A realistic fantasy? Not sure I like the sound of that!!

LotR was always too "happy" and "fairy tail" in my Opinion.

I used to think so too until my daughter was born and I found myself reinvesting in fairy tail..

Don't get me wrong I like Sapo but wouldn't have read/heard of the books if not for the games and can't help wondering what heights those characters may have attained in the hands of a master storyteller.

Cheers,

Figulus.

 

[Trireme]

Where, precisely?

Took me a while to find it- in Tower of the Swallow, when Geralt is interviewed by the governor of Riedbrune.
‘I will not ask who you are, where you come from, or where and why you are travelling. I will not ask why you speak Nilfgaardian with a barely perceptible accent or why dogs and horses sometimes shy away from you. I will let the troubadour Dandelion keep his tube filled with records. And I will not inform the Imperial Intelligence Service about you until Nightingale is dead or sits in jail with me. Perhaps even later, what's the rush? I'll give you time. And an opportunity.’

 

[Sephira]

Took me a while to find it- in Tower of the Swallow, when Geralt is interviewed by the governor of Riedbrune.
‘I will not ask who you are, where you come from, or where and why you are travelling. I will not ask why you speak Nilfgaardian with a barely perceptible accent or why dogs and horses sometimes shy away from you. I will let the troubadour Dandelion keep his tube filled with records. And I will not inform the Imperial Intelligence Service about you until Nightingale is dead or sits in jail with me. Perhaps even later, what's the rush? I'll give you time. And an opportunity.’

You took that snippet from the fan translation? Or it's another one? Because in the italian translation I read it's "I will not ask why one of you speak with a barely perceptible nilfgaardian accent"

---------- Updated at 10:14 PM ----------

Don't get me wrong I like Sapo but wouldn't have read/heard of the books if not for the games and can't help wondering what heights those characters may have attained in the hands of a master storyteller.

Nonetheless I have always the thought that he was not that "popular" apart from East and a bit of Central/South Europe because it's a fantasy polish author, and the english translation was also so troubled that fans translated on their own.

 

[Trireme]

You took that snippet from the fan translation? Or it's another one? Because in the italian translation I read it's "I will not ask why one of you speak with a barely perceptible nilfgaardian accent"

Interesting! Yes, I was using the English fan translation, so maybe that is causing some problems.

 

[figulus01]

Nonetheless I have always the thought that he was not that "popular" apart from East and a bit of Central/South Europe because it's a fantasy polish author, and the english translation was also so troubled that fans translated on their own.

Aye, translation may be relevant.Still, I look forward to younger more energetic writers taking up the Witcher torch..as must surely happen for the next game.

 

[saltyB]

A realistic fantasy? Not sure I like the sound of that!!

it sounds weird, but i think that you can portray the Witcher very well to our real life, if you understand what i mean.

The Witcher is a very Adult/Mature kind of story, it picks up a lot of topics that are also present in our modern life like! Also the characters change a lot throughout the books, as you can also change your Character or behavior in real life in!

It also criticizes and portrays the effects of War and Politics!

Also like i often said, "Black" and "White" doesn't exist in the Witcher world...you always have to look behind things, you always have to question things.

I mean in LotR, Sauron is the pure Evil, he has no real explanation why he is Evil, he is just Evil.


In The Witcher, you have for example Avallach, well he prisons Ciri and forces her to have a Child with Auberon. Sure Avallach is a ass, but he has at least a motivation for it, because he knows that the child of Ciri will stop the white frost, and he wants the elder blood back to the Elves! What kinda makes sense since Lara Dorren pretty much thought:" Nah, fuck it...let's have a Child with a Human" >.>

I can understand that the Elves were pretty much pissed!
(But i still hate Elves....)





For me personally, the Books of Sapkowski are very complex and interesting! You have to understand, to analyze the characters, the world...just everything.



And again i love LotR and i appreciate Tolkiens work. ( I mean every fantasy lover should...because...he basically developed the foundation of fantasy literature)

what heights those characters may have attained in the hands of a master storyteller.

Well, in my Opinion...Sapkowski did a great Job with the Characters. Every character has a very interesting personality and behavior! And every character is also very individual.

 

[toudis815]

I look forward to younger more energetic writers taking up the Witcher torch

And are you looking forward to younger more energetic writers to take up LOTR torch? Or maybe somone younger will take Ursula LeGuinn works?

in the hands of a master storyteller.

While I'm seeing some troubles in Lady of the lake etc...What the hell it means to be a master storyteller? Who's the master storyteller? Tolkien? Master storyteller wouldn't write sth as boring as Hobbit (I know I'm gonna get troubles by it, but srsly I forced myself to finish this one, thank god next ones were much better).

 

[saltyB]

And are you looking forward to younger more energetic writers to take up LOTR torch? Or maybe somone younger will take Ursula LeGuinn works?



While I'm seeing some troubles in Lady of the lake etc...What the hell it means to be a master storyteller? Who's the master storyteller? Tolkien? Master storyteller wouldn't write sth as boring as Hobbit (I know I'm gonna get troubles by it, but srsly I forced myself to finish this one, thank god next ones were much better).

The Hobbit wasn't that boring but....i know what you mean! ^^

 

[figulus01]

I mean in LotR, Sauron is the pure Evil, he has no real explanation why he is Evil, he is just Evil.

Untrue..Even Sauron wasn't evil at the beginning..one must go back before Celembribor.

it sounds weird, but i think that you can portray the Witcher very well to our real life

Sure,but why would I want to? I'm very happy with my real life,I like fiction to be..well..fiction.

Again enjoyed books but see for instance Tolkien as 'Rolls Royce' and Sapkowski as Fiat Polski..

Sapkowski did a great Job with the Characters

Here we agree,Sap's greatest assets are his characters for me...although i pity some of the female ones and wonder wether he's got a rape fetish??

 

[saltyB]

Untrue..Even Sauron wasn't evil at the beginning..one must go back before Celembribor.

But he had no real reasons to be evil anyway!

Sure,but why would I want to? I'm very happy with my real life,I like fiction to be..well..fiction.

I don't mean that you can portray it to your real life! haha

But in general i mean.

Again enjoyed books but see for instance Tolkien as 'Rolls Royce' and Sapkowski as Fiat Polski..

Don't agree with that!

 

[figulus01]

And are you looking forward to younger more energetic writers to take up LOTR torch? Or maybe somone younger will take Ursula LeGuinn works?

Indeed not,as far as Tolkien's books are concerned i'm happy in their resolution.

While I'm seeing some troubles in Lady of the lake etc...What the hell it means to be a master storyteller? Who's the master storyteller? Tolkien? Master storyteller wouldn't write sth as boring as Hobbit (I know I'm gonna get troubles by it, but srsly I forced myself to finish this one, thank god next ones were much better).

Tolkien : 'Ferrari.'
Sapkowski : 'Fiat Polski.'


---------- Updated at 09:29 PM ----------

Don't agree with that!

Of course you don't..or can't..or shan't..damn it!!

 

[toudis815]

Indeed not,as far as Tolkien's books are concerned i'm happy in their resolution.

ahh OK, if you are happy with resolution, then it's not needed indeed.

Sapkowski : 'Fiat Polski.'

Nope. Sapkowski: Polish Hussarya GT

 

[figulus01]

ahh OK, if you are happy with resolution, then it's not needed indeed.



Nope. Sapkowski: Polish Hussarya GT

Nice! And nice try toudis.

 

[zappy3]

Untrue..Even Sauron wasn't evil at the beginning..one must go back before Celembribor.



Sure,but why would I want to? I'm very happy with my real life,I like fiction to be..well..fiction.

Again enjoyed books but see for instance Tolkien as 'Rolls Royce' and Sapkowski as Fiat Polski..



Here we agree,Sap's greatest assets are his characters for me...although i pity some of the female ones and wonder wether he's got a rape fetish??

WOW!
Well, you use Tolkien a lot as an example, could you give us another fantasy author you like, just out of curiosity?

Regarding what you say, Sapkowski is among the best fantasy authors I have ever read (along with Tolkien by the way), and I guess I understand what you mean, because Sapkowski is very different from Tolkien, it's the opposite actually, regarding the story AND regarding the writing style. But different doesn't mean less interesting.

Tolkien focuses on the universe (while also writing very interesting characters, and you were right regarding for example Sauron, more complex characters than you would think), Sapkowski focuses on the characters, the individuals and their personal stories (while also creating a very interesting universe, using LOTS of mythology and old legends, I mean if you dig deeper into his world you simply cannot say it is not well written).
Tolkien gives you that wonderful world which allow you to really escape reality for a little while and to lose yourself completely in wonders and magic. Sapkowski is more about giving you a realistic world (and then again very well written, I mean the politics and trading stuff in there are just GREAT) and then telling you that the real magic comes from the little things you find in real life, love, family etc...
Tolkien likes to be epic when he writes, long description of wonderful areas, huge battles, poetry on every page, sentences so well written that you will stop and be like : wow that was nice. Sapkowski is much more intimate in his style, writing only what needs to be written, writing not a word that doesn't need to be there, not telling you everything, playing with your imagination and the way you can picture things in your own mind.
They are the two opposite sides of fantasy literature. And I get that you would like one and not like the other, that makes sense. But they BOTH are brilliant writers and they BOTH wrote sagas which go well beyond what most people would expect from fantasy books.

 

[saltyB]

WOW!
Well, you use Tolkien a lot as an example, could you give us another fantasy author you like, just out of curiosity?

Regarding what you say, Sapkowski is among the best fantasy authors I have ever read (along with Tolkien by the way), and I guess I understand what you mean, because Sapkowski is very different from Tolkien, it's the opposite actually, regarding the story AND regarding the writing style. But different doesn't mean less interesting.

Tolkien focuses on the universe (while also writing very interesting characters, and you were right regarding for example Sauron, more complex characters than you would think), Sapkowski focuses on the characters, the individuals and their personal stories (while also creating a very interesting universe, using LOTS of mythology and old legends, I mean if you dig deeper into his world you simply cannot say it is not well written).
Tolkien gives you that wonderful world which allow you to really escape reality for a little while and to lose yourself completely in wonders and magic. Sapkowski is more about giving you a realistic world (and then again very well written, I mean the politics and trading stuff in there are just GREAT) and then telling you that the real magic comes from the little things you find in real life, love, family etc...
Tolkien likes to be epic when he writes, long description of wonderful areas, huge battles, poetry on every page, sentences so well written that you will stop and be like : wow that was nice. Sapkowski is much more intimate in his style, writing only what needs to be written, writing not a word that doesn't need to be there, not telling you everything, playing with your imagination and the way you can picture things in your own mind.
They are the two opposite sides of fantasy literature. And I get that you would like one and not like the other, that makes sense. But they BOTH are brilliant writers and they BOTH wrote sagas which go well beyond what most people would expect from fantasy books.

We share the same thoughts!

 

[figulus01]

My,what a well thought out and written response.Thank-you.

In truth i'm not really much of a fantasy enthusiast and usually stick to classical historical/historical fiction. I read Tolkien at boarding school some 35 yrs ago and several times since,it still amazes me the depth of the world he created from the languages he invented,to the corners of the worlds he created.
I suspect much may be lost in translation(with Sap) because I found myself asking questions of him under my breath all the time,like he would start a scene with a very (often far too quick) quick description of the scene and I would be asking him..."what colour is this or that or what does it smell like...he really uses so little colour in his descriptions and while I know the whole 'film-noir' dark and dreary thing has been hip over the years it just becomes dank and grey to me.As to realism,well what it's role is in fantasy is subjective I suppose.

Sapkowski is much more intimate in his style, writing only what needs to be written, writing not a word that doesn't need to be there, not telling you everything, playing with your imagination and the way you can picture things in your own mind.

Now this bit I can understand(to a point) when Geralt's in the scene as he's a man of few words but all to often I found myself saying,"Come on Sap show me something! You're just coasting." It's also dangerous to be too brief as you run the risk of being missunderstood.

As i've said,I love his characters I just don't think he does them justice in a number of ways but as you've described,that may be just his style.

Cheers,
Figulus.

 

[zappy3]

My,what a well thought out and written response.Thank-you.

In truth i'm not really much of a fantasy enthusiast and usually stick to classical historical/historical fiction. I read Tolkien at boarding school some 35 yrs ago and several times since,it still amazes me the depth of the world he created from the languages he invented,to the corners of the worlds he created.
I suspect much may be lost in translation(with Sap) because I found myself asking questions of him under my breath all the time,like he would start a scene with a very (often far too quick) quick description of the scene and I would be asking him..."what colour is this or that or what does it smell like...he really uses so little colour in his descriptions and while I know the whole 'film-noir' dark and dreary thing has been hip over the years it just becomes dank and grey to me.As to realism,well what it's role is in fantasy is subjective I suppose.



Now this bit I can understand(to a point) when Geralt's in the scene as he's a man of few words but all to often I found myself saying,"Come on Sap show me something! You're just coasting." It's also dangerous to be too brief as you run the risk of being missunderstood.

As i've said,I love his characters I just don't think he does them justice in a number of ways but as you've described,that may be just his style.

Cheers,
Figulus.

Yes, Tolkien is amazing, no doubt about that, and what I love while reading Tolkien is indeed exactly that, the depth and complexity of that universe he created. LoTR is the very first fantasy book I read (not counting Harry Potter), it's the one that got me into fantasy in the first place, I remember losing myself completely in his work. And yes when you read Tolkien, he just describes everything so well that you can actually SEE it in front of your eyes, and hear the music, and feel that wonderful sense of beautiful melancholy that inhabits everything he writes.

Sapkowski is indeed very different, he doesn't rely on description much, actually as he says it himself he only writes what is needed for the plot and it gives a very different feeling. And yes I guess not everyone can like his work because it requires the reader to read between the lines, to let go completely and just, I don't know, feel the book. But the way he writes is very precise. EVERY single word in his work has meaning, and when I read some scenes well it just hit me right where it should, gives me pure emotion. But yes you are right relying completely on the reader to get there and understand the world and characters the way Sapkowski does, well it can lead to misunderstanding sometimes and I read comments about the books sometimes.... Yes some readers will never understand them, that is a fact. But still it is brilliant.

And well, I often use that as an example but maybe you've heard of Glen Cook? Another very famous fantasy author, great writing too, and there too, very specific writing style. And well I don't like it, at all. But still he is a great writer, it's just not the thing I like to read Yes fantasy literature is often seen has "lesser literature", yet it is not, it's very complex, with lots of great authors for everyone to enjoy.

 

[toudis815]

And well, I often use that as an example but maybe you've heard of Glen Cook? Another very famous fantasy author, great writing too, and there too, very specific writing style. And well I don't like it, at all. But still he is a great writer, it's just not the thing I like to read

Black company is brilliant, dark, funny, and so original. I get that memorials narration in specific, but it spares readers unnecessary descriptions

Yes fantasy literature is often seen has "lesser literature", yet it is not, it's very complex, with lots of great authors for everyone to enjoy.

I think that, this is a result of many idiots re-writing again and again: young peasant appers to be chosen one, who will save the world killing orges, trolls, and becoming a king. But fortunately there are few masters who take this genre and make it more meaningful

 

[figulus01]

I think that, this is a result of many idiots re-writing again and again

..Or not writing it particularly well in the first place.

---------- Updated at 07:48 PM ----------

But fortunately there are few masters who take this genre and make it more meaningful

..Uhm..well.. one actually.

..And a veritable host of wannabes.

---------- Updated at 07:54 PM ----------

you've heard of Glen Cook?

No, but thanks for the heads up!