(no subject)
Apr. 17th, 2008 11:01 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Last week, the weather here was cold, windy and glum. Then, all of a sudden, Friday came - and we were suddenly in perfect late spring, with ridiculous amounts of sunshine and every open space sprouting its usual crop of sunbathers clutching premed textbooks. As for me - the next on my to-read-not-for-school list, already checked out of the library, is Mary Doria Russel's The Sparrow, which I have heard many good things about. However, I have also heard that it is full of angst. I don't mean to say that this is a point against the book, because it isn't . . . but I walked outside on Friday, and could not help feeling that it would be a waste of the most beautiful day of the year so far to sit outside in the sun and stock up on angst. So, The Sparrow has been postponed, and instead I went to the library resolved to check out the most cheerful thing I could find, which happened to be an all-in-one volume of Patricia C. Wrede's Enchanted Forest Chronicles.
For those who have not read them, the Enchanted Forest books are prominent members of that subgenre of fantasy whose main goal is to poke gentle fun at all the other, rather ridiculous fantasy and fairy-tale tropes. Diana Wynne Jones' Ingary and Derkholm books also fall into this category, as does Shrek, and many more things I am not thinking of right now (does the subgenre have a name, by the way? If not, it should.) The main recurring characters include a runaway princess, a dragon, a no-nonsense witch, a king, and a research magician, who are mostly distinguished by the fact that they value good sense over the conventions usually associated with their roles. (Except for the research magician, who is not so much defined by his sense but has other qualities.) Most of the books involve some kind of dastardly wizard plot, but in fact the plot is really more of an excuse for the characters to bump into a number of other silly characters and situations and use their good sense to fix various dilemmas. As you might guess, they are no end of fun, and were among my favorite books growing up.
Now, for those of you who have read them - which I have a feeling is at least a semi-significant chunk of my flist - I am curious. I have a vague memory of talking to a few people recently who were disappointed with the last book or two of the series (Rym, was this at the conference?) Me, I am actually rather fond of the last book - it's completely deux ex machina-y, but hey, so are all the rest, and polite little Daystar has won a place in my heart. So, to satisfy my curiosity: a poll!
[Poll #1172737]
Please feel free to elaborate in comments, too! :D
For those who have not read them, the Enchanted Forest books are prominent members of that subgenre of fantasy whose main goal is to poke gentle fun at all the other, rather ridiculous fantasy and fairy-tale tropes. Diana Wynne Jones' Ingary and Derkholm books also fall into this category, as does Shrek, and many more things I am not thinking of right now (does the subgenre have a name, by the way? If not, it should.) The main recurring characters include a runaway princess, a dragon, a no-nonsense witch, a king, and a research magician, who are mostly distinguished by the fact that they value good sense over the conventions usually associated with their roles. (Except for the research magician, who is not so much defined by his sense but has other qualities.) Most of the books involve some kind of dastardly wizard plot, but in fact the plot is really more of an excuse for the characters to bump into a number of other silly characters and situations and use their good sense to fix various dilemmas. As you might guess, they are no end of fun, and were among my favorite books growing up.
Now, for those of you who have read them - which I have a feeling is at least a semi-significant chunk of my flist - I am curious. I have a vague memory of talking to a few people recently who were disappointed with the last book or two of the series (Rym, was this at the conference?) Me, I am actually rather fond of the last book - it's completely deux ex machina-y, but hey, so are all the rest, and polite little Daystar has won a place in my heart. So, to satisfy my curiosity: a poll!
[Poll #1172737]
Please feel free to elaborate in comments, too! :D
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 07:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 07:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 07:23 pm (UTC)I always classed the Chronicles as "girls' adventure fiction," putting in a subgenre with Tamora Pierce and Gail Carson Levine, but that's more focusing on the feminist aspect... I don't know what you call ridiculousified fairy tale fantasy in general... a friend of mine used to use the phrase "fractured fairy tales", but that might have just been her.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 09:37 pm (UTC)The first book is definitely in that 'girl's adventure fiction' - I think the fractured fairy tale aspect is probably stronger in the second and third than in the first, which is more focused on Cimorene's unconventional princesstasticness. (And I read Searching for Dragons first, because I didn't know any better, so that one tends to stick out in my head most, too.)
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 07:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 09:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 10:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 01:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 08:35 pm (UTC)I miss playing Cimorene a lot. I wish I had more time to get back into RP so I could pretend to be a princess on a more regular basis. Also, because playing Cimorene with baby Daystar (who, in my head, has been born) would be maybe the best thing *ever*
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 09:40 pm (UTC)I miss your Cimorene tooooo. She was ridiculously fabulous. And mom Cimorene is so badass!
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 09:52 pm (UTC)The real question is, have you read The Frying Pan of Doom?
no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 01:15 am (UTC)I have, but it was so long ago that I don't actually remember it, except for the title and that it was appropriately awesome.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 11:19 pm (UTC)...I want to re-read those books now. *glares at you* And I love Dark Lord of Derkholm, too--I went spectacularly crazy over it in the fifth grade, to the point where I told my teacher I wanted to be a geneticist when I grew up so I could make unicorns and griffins. The sequel's got a bit of let's-pair-everyone-off-yay, but it's still quite good, of course. D'you know if she wrote any after that? I can't recall. I do remember 'The Frying Pan of Doom', though, which was also awesome.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 01:18 am (UTC)I love Dark Lord of Derkholm SO MUCH, too. Uh, but I may be a little bit Diana Wynne Jones-obsessive in general. >.> I don't think DWJ's written any more Derkholm books that I know of - but of course as soon as I say that she'll announce she'll come up with another one, like she just did for the Ingary books, so who knows! (And that is so the best reason to want to be a geneticist.)
no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 02:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 04:19 am (UTC)It's Diane Duane who I think you're thinking of as internet-savvy, though - she's got an LJ and everything (and, terrifyingly, left a comment on a post that one of my friends made about her books.)
no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 04:58 am (UTC)It's a bit freaky to think that authors and so on might be actually listening--heaven knows I'd be like a deer in headlights if I knew certain TV writers were reading my journal--but from what I hear, Diane Duane is very cool about it all. If I were a published writer, actually, I think I'd follow her example--it's more of a direct connection to your readers, after all, and it can't hurt to be able to actually talk to them once in a while.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 05:09 am (UTC)Also the plot kind of made no sense. But anyways!
Yeah, I actually had that experience a few days ago - I posted a few reviews of Jo Walton's books, and then realized afterwards that she not only looks at everyone who reviews her books on LJ, but links to all the reviews from her own LJ. So I went 'aaah! Aaaaah!' for a bit, but it is definitely a good reminder that Authors Are Real People Too!
no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 12:33 am (UTC)I love those books, if for nothing else than for the melting wizards, who make me LOL every time.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 01:21 am (UTC)Telemain totally rules, and I always wanted more (and more Telemain/Morwen) in the books than we actually got. He's so awesomely dorky, except when he is BADASS.
no subject
Date: 2016-11-18 03:23 am (UTC)I have a vague memory of talking to a few people recently who were disappointed with the last book or two of the series
I couldn't be disappointed with the last book in the series because I read it first—Talking to Dragons was first published in 1985 as part of the MagicQuest series that also gave me Patricia McKillip's The Throme of the Erril of Sherill (1984), Jane Yolen's The Magic Three of Solatia (1974), Diana Wynne Jones' Power of Three (1977), and Elizabeth Marie Pope's The Perilous Gard (1974) and The Sherwood Ring (1958). When Dealing with Dragons came out in 1990, I think it must have been one of my first experiences of a prequel. I agree that I am not crazy about Calling on Dragons (1993) because it's mostly filling in time between Searching for Dragons (1991) and the finale, and as a result is the only one of the books that really feels like it's being written to an itinerary rather than sprawling weirdly off in its own directions, but I don't hate it. I have good memories of reading it while camping in Nova Scotia with the rest of my sixth grade class.
Honestly, I think all of the canonical romantic pairings in the series work as far as I am concerned—a rarity, or I was young enough to accept them without scrutiny—but Morwen/Telemain, always. I didn't learn Latin because of Dealing with Dragons, but it definitely got me into cherries jubilee.
no subject
Date: 2016-11-19 04:34 pm (UTC)I think I read Searching for Dragons first and then I don't remember the order of all the rest, but I do remember exactly where the books could be found in Ludington Library near Bryn Mawr.
Morwen/Telemain will always remain a delight and a joy.
no subject
Date: 2016-11-19 06:54 pm (UTC)RULE 34 WHERE ARE YOU.
I think I read Searching for Dragons first and then I don't remember the order of all the rest, but I do remember exactly where the books could be found in Ludington Library near Bryn Mawr.
I remember reading Searching for Dragons in my elementary school library right after it came out. That's another location of my childhood that's been reduced to a memory palace—I know where they kept everything I cared about, but the school moved at least a decade ago. I have no idea what their new library looks like and probably never will.
Morwen/Telemain will always remain a delight and a joy.
+1.