I love Morgan's work, and the violence has never bothered me. I am much more bothered by sugar-coated violence (usually in movies) where it seems to be so accepted and glorified. Morgan's work always seems to show complex characters struggling with layers of issues and problems surrounding the violence and I find it honest and thought-provoking. And frankly, I read books ultimately to find these thought provoking jems... and I watch TV when I just want the sugar coating.

I hugely appreciated when he joined our group to discuss Thirteen--he's clearly thought a lot about these issues, and is well versed in so much of the politics & issues he is working with in his books. He's clear and articulate, and seems to enjoy a good (respectful) debate. I have a lot of respect for him.

And Jane, I agree with you... I want him cloned too! Market Forces was my least favorite, but I understand it was originally written as a screenplay, which is how it felt reading it.

I remember the discussion on the yahoo group. At that point I had read Altered Carbon (library copy) but not the sequels. I had attempted to read Market Forces the only one of his novels I have tossed. I mentioned the discussion to my husband who had also read Altered Carbon and the sequels and he went out and bought Black Man. As soon as he had read it I picked it up, read it and went out and bought Altered Carbon and its two sequels one after another. Just waiting for the details to fade enough (usually a year to 18months) When I am sure I will pick them up again.
My only problem is that when I read The Steel Remains I had a dilemma what did I want Mr Morgan to write next sci fi or fantasy....could he me cloned so he could write both at the same time.

Interesting. Thanks for turning me on to a new author.

I'm glad you dug that up. I think I made the comment that he was responding to. I have to say that his answer totally changed the way I looked at his book and made me go on to read a second. I will definitely be reading more of his work because of what he wrote. If you like Morgan's approach to violence, check out J.D. Rhoades. He was one of my GoodReads friends through the SciFi/Fantasy group for ages before I read one of his books. Although he writes crime thrillers, I couldn't help but compare his approach to violence to Morgan's.

I just dug into the archives of our old Yahoo group to retrieve this message from Richard K. Morgan, who joined our group for the discussion of Thirteen. It really resonated with me and made me respect him even more as a writer. Come to think of it, I actually only started reading his books after that discussion - and I'm glad I did. I'm going to quote his message here in its entirety.

Richard K. Morgan, on April 13, 2008, in Beyond Reality:

"Ah, yes - the violence.

Most of my writing is born out of a terrible rage at human stupidity. I see vast potential everywhere, and everywhere I see it being pissed away. My central characters tend to be retributive, Fury-like figures who show up to smash, murder and destroy everything I hate about the established order. Viscerally, this is very satisfying, but - and it's a huge but - it doesn't come without cost. Violence is not a Good Thing. Usually, in fact, it's the last refuge of desperate fools, the proof that those committing it have already fucked up somehow at some prior point. What I try to do in my books is balance those two things - the sick visceral thrill with the honest cost. The best way I know to do that is to go in close.

In many ways, this is the exact opposite of most popular entertainment. Endless action movies and novels like to do what I call "violence-lite" - for those consumers who like the thrill but don't want to have to face the cost. So the hero deals out bullets and crisp punches, the bad guys go down with a minimum of noise and blood, and we fade out to a happy ending complete with picket fence and family dog.

Violence is not like this. Violence is horrible, whoever's doing it. Violence marks, usually for life. Violence is burning oil in your cupped hands - it's not safe, it's not fun, and I have no intention of pretending it is in my fiction. If, in one of my books, you see the "hero" kill the "villain" with his bare hands, my hope is that the scene will sicken you. You would be sickened if you had to kill someone with your bare hands, wouldn't you? Want to be that guy, that hero? No, you really don't - though you (and I) will still take the shaky, unclean ride with him for the thrill it gives, and then, at the end, we'll thankfully climb down and go home, (I hope) a little soiled and a little more thoughtful.

I don't want to rant on about this, because in the end everyone has to find their own level of entertainment, and I'm all about that being an individual choice. But I will say that I
think popular culture too often tips towards the "cost-free" end of this spectrum. If the message we send in our movie houses and the pages of our novels and comic books is that violence is okay when the good guys do it, and only bad when the bad guys are at it, if we pretend there is no (or hey, not much) blood or pain involved in the process, and that anyway suffering is important only when the good guys suffer (and "we" are always the good guys) - well, then we'll continue to mishandle conflict at both a social and a geopolitical level. We'll continue to treat crime as a "war" between good people and bad people, rather than a complex social and biochemical problem, and abroad we'll continue to commit war crimes ourselves. We'll continue to drop bombs without bothering to imagine what actually happens at the impact end of that falling steel; and we'll continue to increase rather than decrease the amount of hatred and bloodshed in the world."

(For members of the old Yahoo group, the message can also be found here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Beyond_Rea... There are a bunch of other very insightful messages by him around that one too.)

Deedee made a comment on the thread on nominations that I wanted to respond to but the thread was closed so I started this one

Deedee said
On STEEL REAMAINS: "His portrayals of sex and violence are not for the squeamish reader, and his language is down-to-earth, but for those who prefer to have the sugar coating removed , THE STEEL REMAINS is a fantastic example of the modern fantasy genre." I agree with this review of Morgan's works in general. And .... as a "squemish reader" I prefer the "sugar coating". George R. R. Martin has shown in his Fire and Ice series that a story can be adult without obsessively wallowing in the details of violence. I read ALTERED CARBON a few years ago. I couldn't get past the gruesomeness in ALTERED CARBON to enjoy the story, so Richard Morgan is on my do-not-read list ..... at least, until I read a review that states that Morgan is trying something "new and different" by backing away from the violence that has overwhelmed his stories in the past.

I agree that Morgan's books are more violent than Martin. But I find Morgan's books easier to read. I read the first three in Martin's series a few years back and gave up because I found them so depressing. Though in Martin's books the violence isn't described in the level of detail that you find in Morgan's novels. But for me it didn't lessen the impact. I found Martin's novels had a darker world view, I can't remember how many central characters he had killed off when I stopped reading. I just didn't want to pick up the next novel in the series. I prefer my books to have a glimmer of hope in them.
Morgan's novels do have more graphic descriptions of violence in them but I found them to have more hope in them. Though technology changed the world that the characters of Alerted Carbon find themselves in, in many ways people haven't changed they still hate and love. And it is the capcity of his central character to love and fight for truth.

Jane