Can someone pretty please with a cherry on top explain why the hell people like these books?
Even real writers talk about them like they're hot shit. I do not understand. Is this a giant meme or something? I had to immediately stop reading when the Mary Sue protagonist with flaws like "some teachers hate him because he's SO good at stuff!" and "oh he's brash which can get him into trouble sometimes that little rascal!", with color-changing eyes and bright red hair, who is not only the greatest, but the youngest to ever be so great- and he can learn anything almost immediately and he's the best musician ever and he's so good looking and bangs basically every single girl worth banging in the story (but apparently this is okay because he spats with one girl in particular, which instantly makes up for all the mary sue-ness?)-
When this fucker straight up white knights a girl and instantly has the perfect comeback to embarrass and anger the bully and win the girl over, I had to stop reading. It was like Good Will Hunting, as written by a thirteen year old girl.
I gave up on the book when Denna was losing at cards.
I thought
>huh, this is refreshing
>normally she's an unbearably clever Mary Sue
>it's nice to see she's not perfect at everythi...
Oh wait, it was all a clever ruse. She was just lulling everyone into a false sense of security. Denna wins!
Fuck it.
You have to talk about them while knowing what they are.
If we're talking fantasy stories for young ones, it's an alright book. If we're comparing it to literary fiction of high caliber, it's absolute garbage.
It's like reviewing OG Maco's 'U Guessed It' and saying it's shit because it's nowhere near the quality of Bach.
If you like this shit as a teenager or a kid, it's okay; but if you are an adult who would be able to comprehend something beyond a children's book and still read this type of literature on regular basis, you're wasting your time and potential, and that's bad.
>>8219577
It's a Bard, a performer, telling his life's story. Very definition of an unreliable narrator. That's why he's so perfect.
Having said that, I still hate the story as well. Denna and Kvothe are fucking insufferable. I like the prose though, the guy can write.
>>8219577
The beginning and the end is enjoyable.
Now the Harry Potter middle.is terrible, I'll with you on that. Just finished reading because I never drop my readings.
>>8219584
pretty much this. The unreliable narration is the most attractive part of the book. It's okay for genre-shit, can't compare to actual literature.
What real writers think this is good? You mean other mediocre fantasy writers?
It's a western light novel basically.
I'm sorry that you can't relate to prodigious characters.
>>8220747
There is a way to write superhuman character.
This is not it.
>>8219577
to everyone saying "hes a an unreliable narrator" I call bullshit
In most stories with an UN there is an air of uneasiness or hidden motives behind the character's actions and motives. from what the samples I've read, his story is presented as is without a fucking hair of self awareness. Done right, you will notice that the narrator might be lying, hiding, or aggrandizing, but in here it feels really cheap and like a self insert. Almost like Joss Whedon was drunk and high and decided to write a Quippen Roman about his younger days.
>>8219577
>Can someone pretty please with a cherry on top explain why the hell people like these books?
Teenage boy power fantasies.
>>8221006
Yeah. Read Miss Wade's chapter in Little Dorrit for a good example of that.
>>8221006
>Almost like Joss Whedon was drunk and high and decided to write a Quippen Roman about his younger days.
Oh god I cannot unsee it.
At least Whedon self inserts with female characters to be more subtle.
>heh
>this will seem so witty
I can't believe all the people I have seen say that his prose is good. The guy doesn't go ten pages in the second book without saying things like 'impossibly', or, if you haven't done this, sorry i can't explain it, or, 'i wish i could say i did X, but that would not be the truth'. He recycles the same descriptions to a tedious degree, and uses all the cliches a dozen times over. Not to mention his cherrypicking of problems of the English language. Other cultures he describes with no detail or imagination, they merely rely on the reader's understanding, and the reader is responsible for filling in holes.
The second book is largely unenjoyable. It's fun while he's at Uni and across the river, but, everything else is facile or ill-conceived. Come to think of it, his time at the university could be criticized for the same thing, but, at least I found that entertaining.
>>8221043
Consider the audience. It's literally directed at adolescents.
I'm 30 now and I read mythology, philosophy, psychology, etc now but when I was a teen I was just dumb for lack of a better word.
