Say, does anyone remember....
emcmullin at kl.com
Tue Dec 21 10:16:31 EST 1999
> >Elise wrote:
> >> I was thinking how I loved a part in it [The Darkangel] when the
> heroine, taken to
> >>drudge in the dark angel's castle, has to spin invisible thread from a
> >>spindle to make garments for the dark angel's wives, who are wraiths.
> >>to think of it, I'd really like to read those again.
> On Mon, 20 Dec 1999 18:10:22 +0100, Bodil Gram wrote
> >The first two books I found deeply fascinating, full of dream-like and
> >vivid images, but to me, at least, the third book was a bit of a
> >disappointment because the author "explains" much of the very exotic and
> >innovative magic as some kind of extremely advanced science fiction.
"Darn straight. Talk about letting down your readership, too. Here
> all set to accept a fantasy world and she had to turn it into something
> entirely. It was also unnecessary explanation--probably a lot of readers
> had already figured out that there was science behind the creation of the
> world, and it's obviously our own moon that they live on.... She gave
> plenty of hints throughout the first two books. I don't even own the
> book, it was such a disappointment. But I really liked the first two, and
> loved the world she came up with."
Yeah, I agree completely with you both. If there was going to be
sci-fi, then I felt like there ought to have been a lot more of it - like, a
whole new detailed adventure we hear all about - not just an explanation as
a dead end, once she goes into that city (been a long time, a bit vague now,
but I do remember the event sequence - because I was so surprised and
dismayed). Who knows, maybe the author even wishes she could go back and
tinker with that third book. Did the author present us with an answer we
didn't care about in place of answering the questions we did care about?
(Until this list I would've used the singular because I only knew one other
girl who read this book and we've lost touch years ago).
But there was so much that was so powerfully realized and memorable
- see, my memory for names, titles, authors and quotes is totally
underdeveloped - instead I tend to remember the How of things, sort of like,
dynamic structures or something.
And if it was really evocative for me, it's as if I remember the
book as if I was standing there and saw it. I was just thinking about this
the last night. When I call to mind anything from Charmed Life, I feel as
if I am standing a few paces away from the action. I can describe every
detail of the scene down to how the sun makes Cat's hair shine or that Julia
has a day dress with pointelle trim. Anyway, even after forgetting the
author and the series titles for the darkangel books, I could remember the
heroine climbing up the hill with her friend/mistress in the thin, thin air
- and what they looked like, and the expressions on their faces. It's like
remembering a really powerful dream.
Really, it's Nat's comments on Dean's literary-minded characters
that got me wondering about that. I've known folks who can quote so many
things, so easily - it always amazes me. I know that my mind treats and
idea as a raw material for processing - not respecting source or exactitude.
Anyway, just rambling along and wondering how other people's
memories work. Better stop now!
To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at suberic.net with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at http://suberic.net/dwj/list/
More information about the Dwj