Eric’s review of The Wise Man's Fear (The Kingkiller Chronicle, #2) > Likes and Comments
2146 likes · Like
One- I agree I really don't like Denna, but that does not mean some other person might find Denna enchanting. I don't have to fall in love with the love interest for me to enjoy the book.
Two- Almost every literary giant ignored the "rules" of writing", in fact I have found those who are so hell bent on following the rules just don't have a talent of their own.
Three- Kinda hard to ignore not only the sales of this book: But how high its rated so evidently Patrick is doing somthing right.
I agree with your thoughts on Denna, mostly. But i just think you are missing something from the book. Your review in my opinion is somewhat accurate, pointing out parts of the book that are not as well done as i would like. But still, there is more to it.
One, yes this book could have been more eventful. Not just eventful, because it was, but more leading to the plot. That being said, there are hundreds if not more hints toward the plot and references to things you most likely have forgotten from the first book purely because you didnt understand some things yet. I had to re-read both books before really putting things together.
Second, This book did advance in the plot. In the first book, Kote speaks of the things hes done in his life. In WMF he spends the night with Felurian and leaves with both his sanity and his life. It doesnt sound like much but this is where he truly sees Felurian and it sheds light on him about women, then he also gets his famed shaed and speaks to the Cthaeh. He learns how to fight with his fists and a sword rather than only the mind. He advances in his waking of the sleeping mind and discovers it is becoming easier to call the wind when he needs it. I believe these are all subtle advancements in the plot. This was just another learning stage. These together bring him to be the famous Kvothe the Bloodless and i believe we will see his true power in the next book.
Third, I just believe it is ignorant to say this book is pointless. I respect your opinion, but you have not read the third book yet. Nobody has, therefore you cannot say this book had no meaning and you can pick up off from the third book without reading the second. How would he somehow become a skilled fighter in hand to hand combat or with a sword none the less? Where did his "magic" cloak come from? How does he know the Fae exist and know that Denna is being beaten by her patron. There is a lot to learn from the second book and even if you did not like it, it definitely advances the plot. Not as much as you or i would like, but i think Patrick is saving it. There's a lot of un answered questions but the answers are hidden through the book.
AND Kvothe learns more about the Amyr and the Chandrian. Not much, but he realizes things more. He even goes up against Cinder at the bandit camp before realizing it. He learns from Felurian how much more there is to the Amyr than he thought and how they stretch back to a time where history is barely accounted for. He even learns the name of all the Chandrian. I think in the third book, when his skill of naming grows, he will use this to his advantage.
You know, I was having a bad day today. Then I read your description of Denna as a character, and laughed so hard that I literally spat and choked on the water I was drinking. Thank you ;D
i love this book- and i also agree wholeheartedly with your criticism of it. i'm reading this trilogy as a bildungsroman adventure, so i enjoy seeing kvothe go on his tangents. that's the reason i love this book rather than hate it. the treatment of women is getting quite annoying but it's easy to be desensitized to it as it's omnipresent in literature.
I hate Denna. why cant they just screw (literally)and get it over with? The avg amount of sex in the 2 books isnt that staggering, considering "making out" starts when Kvothe the Chaste meets Felurain (halfway through book2)and afterwards bones every girl with his bonafide newfound powers..overall it's a good book and the mystery around the Amyr, Chandrians, the box which Melua has,etc is interesting..heres hoping that it doesnt turn out to be the last episode of Lost.
I also hate Denna but I don't think she ruined the book enough to give it a 1 star rating...
Lol funny thing is... though this review shows just how horrible the book is i now want to read it just to see for myself...*funny how life is*
I didn't hate this book but I was very disappointed with it compared to the name of the wind. There was next to no real story climax or enough satisfying revelations about interesting things hinted at from the first book to satisfy me. And it ends so suddenly on such a mundane note.
I dont like Denna and think Kvothe is an ass for obsessing over her. Would he be the first or the last person to obsess over the wrong one only to finally discover the right one was there all along?
This review is exactly how I felt about this book. Bravo Eric - you read my mind! I really enjoyed Name of the Wind, but Wise Man's Fear was SO BORING. Do we really need (what seems like) 10,000 pages about his first time getting laid? And Denna... ugh. Just kill her. Please. It would have been nice to have at least one question answered (wasn't he supposed to tell them how he got kicked out of the University?), but you are correct in your apt review - Wise Man's Fear was just a longer, extremely BORING re-vamp of Name of the Wind. If there is a 3rd book in the series I won't be reading it. I simply don't care anymore. Besides, even with a third book I doubt that any questions would be answered or progress in the story would move forward. We would probably just hear about Kovthe and Denna's never-going-to-happen love for each other, and if it does, it should be a one night stand just to get rid of the sexual tension. Wait... no. Because if that happens then we'll probably get 20,000 pages of her getting laid and the reasons why she will leave him because men are bad and only to be used for their money and position so she doesn't have to live on the street. Boo...frickin'....hoo. Ech... Denna isn't worth spending a lifetime with. In fact, as a woman, Denna in general offends me. I just want to punch her in the throat... over and over and over and over again. If I wanted to be bored to death, instead of reading anymore Kingkiller "stories" I would have a conversation with my husband's ex-wife. Don't spend your money on Wise Man's Fear - you can nap for free.
Couldn't agree more with this review ... although, bizarrely, I gave the book more stars because, for all its faults, I think he writes in a beguilingly good way and I did enjoy it (even though, by p.450, I was wondering if it would ever end ...)
By an reasonable criteria a 1 star book should be something barely readable, and its clear that is not the case. There are plenty of books that are not to every taste, but giving them a review lower than they deserve is unfair and a poor service to your fellow readers many of whom clearly love this book - myself included. You only make yourself look foolish with that rating, which clearly is not backed up by your own comments. If a book is not for you that does not mean it is a one star book.
To be fair, the star-ratings are based on what *you*, the reader, felt about the book: "It was OK", "Loved it", or whatever. That means that the rating one gives a book can only be subjective. So, whether or not one feels that the book doesn't deserve a 1-star rating, that is the reviewer's prerogative, just as it's another reader's prerogative to disagree.
Damn you really hate Denna. It seems people are really polarized over her character
To start off I want to say That I enjoyed your review of this book. I liked that you have strong opinions about it, and more importantly that you have solid reasons for those opinions supported by facts. Something most of the hateful comments on this site seem to lack. Plus you're really funny. I have to say though after reading your entire review, yes I read the entire thing, even though it was really long, has some really funny parts to it, went on quite a few tangents, and totally could have gotten the same point across if you had cut it down to a third as long (wait does that sound familiar? Did I just compare you to the author you were reviewing?)I have to say your review of the book doesn't seem to warrant a one stare review. You continually mention the redeeming qualities of the book while bashing it. If I hadn't seen your stars rating before reading the review, I would have thought you gave it three stars, maybe two, but one seems to suggest unreadable, and you continually give reasons why it is readable, just not five star readable.
Anyway I give your review 4 stars (same as I give the book), Its funny, but overly long, it goes on tangents, but they're pretty entertaining, and your rather repetitive, but you get the point across.
Cheers
Tim wrote: "By an reasonable criteria a 1 star book should be something barely readable, and its clear that is not the case. There are plenty of books that are not to every taste, but giving them a review lowe..."
Incorrect, hover over the star system and you will see that 1 star = Dislike, 2 star = meh, 3 star = like, 4 star = really liked, 5 star = amazing. He disliked the book, 1 star. Simple.
Griffinstein wrote: "Incorrect, hover over the star system and you will see that 1 star = Dislike, 2 star = meh, 3 star = like, 4 star = really liked, 5 star = amazing. He disliked the book, 1 star. Simple."
Agreed. Absolutely.
Your review made me laugh so hard, my belly hurt. Thank you for the warning, I knew I did a right thing to get this book out of my "to-read" list ;P
Tim wrote: "By an reasonable criteria a 1 star book should be something barely readable, and its clear that is not the case. There are plenty of books that are not to every taste, but giving them a review lowe..."
I don't grade on a liked it/hated it scale. I actually have five things that I grade a book on when I review it. Each one is worth a star. This is what they are, and a little explanation on each as to why I graded the book as I did.
Writing. The book is well written, so it earns a star on that.
Characters. I actively dislike the majority of the characters in this book. Kvothe reminds me of Adrick from Dr. Who, which is not a good place to go if you want me to enjoy your character. he has his moments where he can say or do things that are really entertaining, but on the whole, I really just don't like him as a character. Denna... I raged for half the review about Denna, so I'll spare you. No one else in this book seems like a real person to me. They don't act and react to things as real people do. Especially the women. It seems like every female character in this book exists for one purpose and one purpose only, because Kvothe needs or wants something from them that he can't get from a man, whether it be sex, comfort, or someone to confound him so that the story has some sort of conflict in it. There is not a single female character in this book that gets treated like anything more than a plot device or stage prop rather than with due respect as a human being by the author, which I found to be very aggravating and somewhat offensive. I don't think Kvothe meets a single woman in the whole of the book that he doesn't sexually objectify in one way or another at least once. I'm sorry, but women are people, not plot devices. People keep trying to justify it by telling me that this is a story being told by a teenaged boy, but no, it isn't. Kvothe is fictional. He does not exist. And even if he did, the one telling the story is the adult version. He STILL thinks of women this way after he has grown up. he never says anything like "that's what I thought of women then, but I've since seen the folly of my ways." He points out nothing wrong with young Kvothe's thoughts or behavior, and frequently finds ways to justify them, which means he still thinks that way, even in the present day. But that's beside the point. These are the words of the author, not of the character, because the character does not exist. The author wrote them. These ideas had to come from somewhere in the author's mind. All the side characters do and say the things on the author's script, not because it is what they, as people, would do, but because the story requires it of them. No additional stars earned.
Character development. Kvothe does not learn or grow as a person during the course of this book, as evidenced by his writing of the letter to Ambrose at the end. He is in the exact same place doing the exact same things as he was at the beginning, having learned nothing and not having come through his trials and tribulations a better man. No additional stars earned.
Story. There isn't much here that can really be called a story. The actual content of the book does not justify even half the length. It is a seemingly random series of events that really have nothing to do with each other and no over-arching theme tying them together into a cohesive narrative. I found it incredibly boring. I was looking for the next installment of an epic fantasy series, not a few episodes of the Kvothe sitcom, or a skit show like Saturday Night Live, or Monty Python, where nothing that happens in one episode impacts any of the others in the slightest. It was like every time the scene changed, the author stepped in with a fake British accent, trying to sound like John Cleese, and said "and now for something completely different." Additionally, the overall story of the series did not progress at all during this book. None of the questions and mysteries introduced in the first book were answered, built upon, or even addressed in this book. There is no clear sense of something having been accomplished or moved forward. The book is just wallowing in impotence and not advancing either the plot or the characters to any stage beyond where they were left at the ending of the first book. No additional stars earned.
Climax. This book does not have a climax in any way shape or form. A story without a climax is like sex without an orgasm, dissatisfying, disappointing, and a lot of work for no payoff in the end, leaving you feeling in need of a shower so you can cry your self-loathing away in private. People keep using the "it's not the destination, but the journey" argument with me on this one, but you know what? No. Just no. The journey is important, and without it, the destination is meaningless. HOWEVER, when there is no destination, the journey is equally as meaningless. You need one to give the other meaning. When one of them fails to deliver, or is completely missing entirely, it cheapens both of them. No additional stars earned.
I gave this book one star because of the five things that I grade books on, it only did one of them right in my opinion. I find these "criteria" to be very "reasonable", don't you? These are the things that make a book entertaining. Without them, what's the point? Why does the book even exist? Rothfuss is so wrapped up in being new, and different, that he completely ignored the fact that he is still supposed to be telling a story, and so he didn't tell a story. He rambled on about nothing for 1000 pages and called it a story. And then he put it forward as having a deeper meaning when there actually is none, which is rather insulting, and the very definition of pretentious. Should I not take these things into account when rating a book? Should I give a book five stars simply because it was written well, when every other aspect of the story and characters was a complete mess in my opinion? The book is well written... but it's not THAT well written. The fact that Patrick Rothfuss took four years to polish up the prose doesn't change the fact that the book has, literally, nothing else going for it, and literally, no reason whatsoever to exist. I try to be fair and objective, but I just couldn't give a book I enjoyed so little, and that had so little to offer me any more than the one star it earned in my eyes. It completely failed in four of the five areas in which I grade, and so, for me, it completely fails as entertainment, which is its primary purpose for existing. However, it is all a matter of opinion. That's why it says "opinionated" in the title. I'm judging the book against my likes and dislikes, not against anything else. If you want completely objective, I'm afraid you've come to the wrong place. Even if I did rate books on a liked it/hated it scale, this book would still have gotten one star. I hated it that much. I hated it so much, in fact, that I never want to read another Rothfuss book so long as I live. It was so incredibly awful and painful to slog my way through that it has forever colored my opinion of Rothfuss as a writer to the point where I doubt I will ever pick up another book with his name on it for the rest of my life. I have never had the displeasure of reading a book so vacuous, vapid, pretentious, and up its own ass as The Wise Man's Fear.
In short, in my opinion this book is an epic failure to tell a story even on the most basic levels. It is an epic failure as a second volume of a series as it completely ignores any questions and such brought up by the first book rather than building upon them or answering them. It is an epic failure as a character study as the character does not learn, grow, or develop in any way throughout the story, and ends the book off exactly where he was at the end of the previous book in location, disposition, and development as a human being. Why do I hate this book? THAT'S WHY. Because it is a pointless piece of trash that does nothing but waste your time. It is nothing but fluff without a single thing of meaning or substance to offer. Do I really have to give any more justification than the review I already wrote, pointing out all of the most egregious things I found wrong with it, which, by the way, took up the entire character allotment provided by Goodreads? Was that, somehow, not enough to get the point across? Do you really need to hear MORE from me on the subject before you will believe me when I say that this is one of the worst, most insultingly pointless, pretentious, vapid, vacuous excuses for a book that I have ever had the displeasure of reading? You can't just take my word for it that I hated it with a fiery, burning passion? The only things it has going for it is that it is well written, and it does have some entertaining humor. These things, however, cannot carry the entire book for me. It needs something more. Some sort of purpose and direction, a goal to be achieved, or really ANYTHING more than the absolutely NOTHING that it offers. This is not a novel, it is an author stroking his own ego and wasting my time. I would rather read a terribly written book that is highly entertaining, than a well written book that isn't entertaining in the least. To be a good fictional writer one must be able to write well, AND tell a good story, and Rothfuss did not tell a good story. He didn't tell a story at all. This book is like cake. It looks amazing, and tastes great, but has zero actual nutritional value in it. You get that nice sugar rush... and then you crash, and then comes the feelings of regret and self-loathing as you wonder how much weight you just gained by eating it. Except then you have the author selling it as a weight loss remedy and telling you, very loudly, publicly, and at every opportunity that something must be wrong with you if you're gaining weight by eating it, because he's a stuck up asshole and can't admit that maybe his cake really didn't have much nutritional value to it, and continues to insist that the problem must be with you instead of his cake.
J wrote: "To start off I want to say That I enjoyed your review of this book. I liked that you have strong opinions about it, and more importantly that you have solid reasons for those opinions supported by..."
I was actually subtly (or not so subtly) mocking the author by making the review overly long, and running off on tangents. Because the book, I felt, was overly long and full of pointless tangents. I was trying my hand at satirical humor without bothering to let anyone know what I was doing, so I was the only one in on the joke, and that made it even more funny to me. I have a weird sense of humor like that.
Tim wrote: "By an reasonable criteria a 1 star book should be something barely readable, and its clear that is not the case. There are plenty of books that are not to every taste, but giving them a review lowe..."
Wrong on all counts. Eric explained why he disliked the book quite well. He has the right to give it one star without someone telling him he is wrong. If you don't like cherry pie and I do, I'm not going to say you have no right to dislike cherry pie. Geesh.
Whoa you must have really been pissed off to write such a long review? What were you trying, to beat TWMF in word count?
No, actually, I'm paid by the word. The more I write, the more I get paid for it. And yes, I was pissed off, quite a bit. I've never seen an author take something so great and pile so much pointless, needless shit atop it, while also forgetting to bother continuing the story, or the development of the characters, in any meaningful way.
I didn't get the appeal of the first book and am glad I read this review (even if it was way over the top) because I heard it was a retread and one long build-up. How is he going to squeeze the payoff into one book? And I was also really annoyed at how every female character was one-dimensional and in love/lust with Kvothe. His incredible stupidiy was another grating element. Rothfuss justfies this by saying, "He's 16!" Well, I remember being 16 and can't comprehend how I could have been so astonishingly dumb with money, getting and losing it with abandon, while simultaneously being absolutely amazing at everything else.
Wow, the butthurt fanboys.
I liked Wise Man's Fear despite its flaws, but I cannot but laugh at people who descend on negative reviews to cry and whine. Jeez, a significant number of my Goodreads friends love books I hated and hate books I loved. Why should that make anyone upset?
Kvothe is the man. I love Gary Stu characters.
I mostly enjoyed this book but completely agree with your thoughts on the stupid tangents, the section of How Kvothe Discovered the Kama Sutra (and Made a Cloak), and mysterious freaking Denna. Rothfuss hasn't given me anything to understand why Kvothe is so drawn to her, except that she's pretty and knows the words to that one song back when he got his talent pipes. Ditch the girl and 300 pages of "Wise Man's Fear" and I feel like it's a much more interesting story. Oh - and Kvothe's Special Unicorn Power can be toned down a bit: he's like Bruce Wayne, Gandalf, and Iron Man all rolled into one.
I'm gonna pull out the mega-geek card and reference oldschool Doctor Who. There was a companion to the Doctor who was named Adrick, who was like Westly Crusher from Star Trek TNG only more annoying, more arrogant, and more insufferable in every way imaginable. Whenever I read about Kvothe, I only see Adrick, and it really kind of annoys me. I know it's probably kind of stupid to dislike one character because I dislike another similar character, but eh, it is what it is. Kvothe can say or do things that are pretty entertaining at times, but overall his entire character just rubs me the wrong way, and I get flashbacks of Adrick from my childhood watching Doctor Who on VHS with my dad. And when your reaction to just about everything a character says or does is eye-rolling disgust, well, it's kind of hard to enjoy any story revolving around him.
Oh lord, thank you for the Wesley Crusher comparison! Iron Man didn't feel right but I couldn't come up with anything better; I had completely forgotten about the Star Trek Boy Wonder and how much I hated him - probably because Wil Wheaton is pretty amusing when he's playing Wil Wheaton. I have to admit that my relationship with Doctor Who started with Eccleston so I can't relate to your Adrick pain. I'm curious now, though - I'll have to see if I can find some episodes on a day when I'm in the mood for annoying tv.
Wesley Crusher! Yes!
"So, after all is said and done, is The Wise Man’s Fear really as bad as I make it out to be? YES!!! IT IS!!! But at the same time, no. It really isn’t that horrible." This is your quote. Got it- I like your reveiw... but why don't you make your star rating a little more realistic. What is a horrible book to you? negative 2 stars? That isn't an option. A horrible book should be a 1, a book that is ok but not horrible 2 or 3...? right? Your review is obviously helpful and I agree with so much of it, just confused by that rating. FYI- The whole first half of this book was brutal. I kept checking the pages and asking myself, when is he leaving the University!! Finally he leaves and I was wondering how much can Pat actually fit into a half of the book. Not much is the answer.
That's actually a joke. I'm poking fun at the way Rothfuss will say one thing, and then immediately invalidate it by saying something contrary to it, and then pretend that there wasn't a contradiction at all. If you keep reading past the part that you quoted there's a few more lines that give my real opinion on the book, after saying it's not all that bad. It was kind of my way of saying that Rothfuss needs a better editor without actually saying that he needs a better editor. It's just something that I do, using something that the author does that annoys me in the review like it's an actual part of the review to illustrate something that really annoys me without really telling anyone about it unless they ask. It makes me laugh, and that's really the only reason I do it. Another thing from this review that's a joke along the same lines is how it rambles around incoherently and takes off on a lot of tangents, because that's basically what Rothfuss did for 1000 pages, he rambled around and explored every single tangent to little point or purpose except to make the book longer. Like I said, it's basically only a joke for my own enjoyment, but every now and then someone will ask about it and I'll explain it to them.
Make no mistake, I hated this book with a fiery burning passion, and it has forever colored my opinion against Rothfuss as a writer and storyteller. I've read few books that were more of a pretentious waste of my life than this one. I was just poking fun at the author's lack of any sense of continuity.
And
I hate
Denna- she shows up just when the plot has no where else to go! Hahaha
I just finished Name of the Wind and was wondering whether the next one would be as tedious...
Thanks for saving me the trouble!
haha this is a funny, funny review. Nice.
Not every novel has to have a concrete plot. Take "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn". What's it about? Practically nothing. There is no real climax, not clear sequence of events, no plot. The author spends a few pages describing the purchase of a pickle.
Rothfuss, as you so eloquently described, does the same, except he blends fantasy with that "bildungsroman" type story. Not everyone likes it, you clearly don't, but there's really no need to hate the book for its lack of plot progression. You don't NEED plot progression for a book to be good if your story-telling makes it interesting enough. Think about all the things Rothfuss weaves into the story. The worldbuilding, the foreshadowing. I don't find a need to focus on plot so much - to me, enjoying the book for what it is is enough.
I will admit - the lack of character development is very worrying. And Rothfuss's treatment of women is pretty bad, and Denna's character is pretty annoying as well. Not every novel is perfect, and I hope he improves on those aspects of it in his future books. Rothfuss is very inexperienced. This is his first set of novels. You can criticize him for not getting everything right (or not even remotely close to right), but you should be somewhat understanding as well.
I have to disagree re the plot progression point. It's fair to say that sometimes the point of the story is just the telling, like "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich," which was beautiful and engrossing and utterly static because of its setting, but I have to measure epic fantasy by a different scale.
I'm conditioned to read epic fantasy as a clear journey with a goal. Find the jewel, save the prince, restore the rightful ruler to the throne, become the most powerful magician ever known to the kingdom. For me to enjoy this kind of story, it has to follow some of those rules even while finding ways to make them fresh. With 1800+ pages of story (and counting), and relatively little happening in the second book, I don't feel that Rothfuss is holding up his end of the bargain very well. The inn scenes in the present clearly hint that something is supposed to be happening, and the flashback parts lead us to that, but after all this world-building I'd like to see Rothfuss do something with that world other than insist that Denna is the most fascinating creature in the world and remind us how much Kvothe loves cloaks with pockets.
When it comes to being understanding, I tend to reserve my patience for the first novel in a series: we're meeting characters for the first time, learning the rules of the magic, etc. - and many of those novels run about 350 - 400 pages. Rothfuss had twice that in the first novel and almost three times again in the second, with a couple of years to think about where he wanted to go. I think he's plenty experienced enough and it would be nice to reward his readers with a little bit of evolution rather than getting bogged down in setting things up and rehashing the same details over and over again.
lol I thought I was the only one who noticed how the plot of the king killer chronicles seemed to stop 1/3 of the way through book 1
I agree with most of your review, and although I think I "got more plot out of it" than you, its entirely subjective to the reader. I respect and agree with your opinion, but I still love the book. Thats what love is about in the end, isnt it? Just like Rothfuss said, "To love something despite." All those details you pointed out in your review, they didn't make me love the book any less.
The misogyny is just too evident. This book is as unreadable as The Name of The Wind was un-put-downable. Not interested in future books. I like strong female characters. If i wanted a conservative's idea of a "strong" woman, barefoot and in the kitchen, then this is the book I'd read.
Thank you for your review, it is exactly how I feel about this book.
I get it. You love Rothfuss. I love Name of the Wind, too. And I have the Slow Regard of Silent Things on my shelf at home. (Christmas gift. Can't wait.)But Wise Man's Fear was a miss, and besmirching reviewers who don't agree with your opinion is unfair.
Nah, I agreed with both the commentor and the reviewer. I think eric (the reviewer) made some good points, but did come off as somewhat arrogant. I really don't think the book deserved a 1 star rating (especially when eric gave a book from the dresden files a 5... the dresden files are incredibly sexist, and eric bashed the wise man's fear for being sexist).
I still enjoyed wise man's fear despite its flaws.
Agreed with the review. I loved 'Name of the Wind', it felt like a more mature and heavy/dark version of Harry Potter with a very well built magic system. But 'Wise mans fear' pretty much just had Kvothe turn from mr.Caring-Chaste-Witty-Clever, to mr.douchebaggery-harem-pimp-retarded in a few moments. The only part(s) I really liked in the whole book was his relationship building with Tempi, the few parts with Elodin, the bandit battle(the buildup was a bit annoying, and afterwards kinda meh, but the action part was pretty fantastical). Besides that... Somebody please edit Denna out of the 3rd book, NOONE WILL NOTICE(or care).
Allen wrote: "especially when eric gave a book from the dresden files a 5... the dresden files are incredibly sexist, and eric bashed the wise man's fear for being sexist"
There is a difference between the old-fashioned chivalry of Harry Dresden, and the objectification, sexual or otherwise, of every single female character in an entire book by it's author as Rothfuss did in this one. In The Wise Man's Fear, women are not people. They are objects that exist for one purpose and one purpose alone, to fulfill Kvothe's needs in one way or another. Harry Dresden treats women as an old-fashioned gentleman would, and yes, his actions might be considered sexist by some. However, the female characters in Butcher's books have personalities, likes, dislikes, and goals all of their own that do not revolve around Harry Dresden. Dresden may be old-fashioned, but the author is not, and you can see it in the way he writes his female characters. Dresden is often attracted to women, but attraction is a fact of life. There's a difference between attraction with the occasional bout of lust (which is usually played off as Dresden being a douche), and objectification with constant lust, leading into such behavior as extreme, and rather creepy, stalking (which is played off as completely normal and accepted by society). Do you see the difference? Especially in how Dresden is visibly shown to exercise quite a bit of restraint in his dealings with women, whereas Kvothe does not even realize a need for it. Kvothe is an utter sociopath. And the way he writes, Rothfuss appears to be one as well. Kvothe is the only person that exists in his world. All other people don't count as people, but the women get it doubly bad because the author doesn't treat them like people either. Both old and young Kvothe seem to see all women as objects, have no respect for them at all, and the way Rothfuss writes his female characters, they exist in no other capacity outside of Kvothe's needs or desires. They don't have personalities of their own, or wants, desires, goals, etc except to be there to be objectified by, used by, or to somehow confound Kvothe. There is no sense that these characters exist outside of Kvothe's sight, whereas Butcher's female characters frequently do their own thing when Dresden isn't watching, whether he wants them to or not. They always act in character, doing the things that they, as people, would do. The female characters in Rothfuss' book don't have characters to act within, because they're treated like part of the scenery by the author and the character alike. This is how I can give 5 stars to a Dresden Files book and 1 star to this trash, whilst calling down Rothfuss for severe and disconcerting sexism, but not Jim Butcher. On top of the fact that Skin Game was extraordinarily entertaining and less than half the length of Wise Man's Fear, whereas Wise Man's Fear was boring, pointless, infuriating, not entertaining in the least and was about 800 pages longer than the actual material in the book required. In the end, on the sexism issue, it comes down to how the two authors portray their female characters. One of them writes people to interact with his viewpoint character, the other writes stage props to be used by his viewpoint character. And that makes ALL the difference in my opinion.
Name one female character in The Wise Man's Fear that is either not objectified in some way, or is actually seen to have a life outside of Kvothe's interactions with her. I can name you several just off the top of my head from Brucher's work. Molly, The Summer and Winter mothers, The Archive, Bianca, Georgia, Charity, Martha Liberty, Titania, Lily, and the list gets much bigger if you add in the characters Dresden finds himself attracted to in one way or another throughout the series, but still are visibly seen to have a life of their own outside of their interactions with him, like Karen, Susan, Mab, Maeve, Aurora, I forget the name of his childhood girlfriend, and so on, and so on, and such. The only one I can think of in The Wise Man's Fear that even comes close is Devi, but again, there's really no sense that she exists as a person outside of Kvothe's interactions with her. She is there to provide money, conflict, and nothing more. And Jim Butcher is the sexist one here? Um, no. Not even close. He hasn't got a shade on Patrick Rothfuss for sexism.
Agreed. I don't find the Dresden Files to be sexist at all, actually. I think JB goes out of his way to make Dresden look like a douche when he acts like that. Also, can we all agree that of the blockbuster fantasy writers, Sanderson has the best female characters. He's one writer who didn't get the memo that you need to create stereotypes to empower twelve-year-old nerds who can't get the good looking girl in Grade Seven to look at them.
back to top
One- I agree I really don't like Denna, but that does not mean some other person might find Denna enchanting. I don't have to fall in love with the love interest for me to enjoy the book.Two- Almost every literary giant ignored the "rules" of writing", in fact I have found those who are so hell bent on following the rules just don't have a talent of their own.
Three- Kinda hard to ignore not only the sales of this book: But how high its rated so evidently Patrick is doing somthing right.
I agree with your thoughts on Denna, mostly. But i just think you are missing something from the book. Your review in my opinion is somewhat accurate, pointing out parts of the book that are not as well done as i would like. But still, there is more to it.One, yes this book could have been more eventful. Not just eventful, because it was, but more leading to the plot. That being said, there are hundreds if not more hints toward the plot and references to things you most likely have forgotten from the first book purely because you didnt understand some things yet. I had to re-read both books before really putting things together.
Second, This book did advance in the plot. In the first book, Kote speaks of the things hes done in his life. In WMF he spends the night with Felurian and leaves with both his sanity and his life. It doesnt sound like much but this is where he truly sees Felurian and it sheds light on him about women, then he also gets his famed shaed and speaks to the Cthaeh. He learns how to fight with his fists and a sword rather than only the mind. He advances in his waking of the sleeping mind and discovers it is becoming easier to call the wind when he needs it. I believe these are all subtle advancements in the plot. This was just another learning stage. These together bring him to be the famous Kvothe the Bloodless and i believe we will see his true power in the next book.
Third, I just believe it is ignorant to say this book is pointless. I respect your opinion, but you have not read the third book yet. Nobody has, therefore you cannot say this book had no meaning and you can pick up off from the third book without reading the second. How would he somehow become a skilled fighter in hand to hand combat or with a sword none the less? Where did his "magic" cloak come from? How does he know the Fae exist and know that Denna is being beaten by her patron. There is a lot to learn from the second book and even if you did not like it, it definitely advances the plot. Not as much as you or i would like, but i think Patrick is saving it. There's a lot of un answered questions but the answers are hidden through the book.
AND Kvothe learns more about the Amyr and the Chandrian. Not much, but he realizes things more. He even goes up against Cinder at the bandit camp before realizing it. He learns from Felurian how much more there is to the Amyr than he thought and how they stretch back to a time where history is barely accounted for. He even learns the name of all the Chandrian. I think in the third book, when his skill of naming grows, he will use this to his advantage.
You know, I was having a bad day today. Then I read your description of Denna as a character, and laughed so hard that I literally spat and choked on the water I was drinking. Thank you ;D
i love this book- and i also agree wholeheartedly with your criticism of it. i'm reading this trilogy as a bildungsroman adventure, so i enjoy seeing kvothe go on his tangents. that's the reason i love this book rather than hate it. the treatment of women is getting quite annoying but it's easy to be desensitized to it as it's omnipresent in literature.
I hate Denna. why cant they just screw (literally)and get it over with? The avg amount of sex in the 2 books isnt that staggering, considering "making out" starts when Kvothe the Chaste meets Felurain (halfway through book2)and afterwards bones every girl with his bonafide newfound powers..overall it's a good book and the mystery around the Amyr, Chandrians, the box which Melua has,etc is interesting..heres hoping that it doesnt turn out to be the last episode of Lost.
I also hate Denna but I don't think she ruined the book enough to give it a 1 star rating...
Lol funny thing is... though this review shows just how horrible the book is i now want to read it just to see for myself...*funny how life is*
I didn't hate this book but I was very disappointed with it compared to the name of the wind. There was next to no real story climax or enough satisfying revelations about interesting things hinted at from the first book to satisfy me. And it ends so suddenly on such a mundane note.
I dont like Denna and think Kvothe is an ass for obsessing over her. Would he be the first or the last person to obsess over the wrong one only to finally discover the right one was there all along?
This review is exactly how I felt about this book. Bravo Eric - you read my mind! I really enjoyed Name of the Wind, but Wise Man's Fear was SO BORING. Do we really need (what seems like) 10,000 pages about his first time getting laid? And Denna... ugh. Just kill her. Please. It would have been nice to have at least one question answered (wasn't he supposed to tell them how he got kicked out of the University?), but you are correct in your apt review - Wise Man's Fear was just a longer, extremely BORING re-vamp of Name of the Wind. If there is a 3rd book in the series I won't be reading it. I simply don't care anymore. Besides, even with a third book I doubt that any questions would be answered or progress in the story would move forward. We would probably just hear about Kovthe and Denna's never-going-to-happen love for each other, and if it does, it should be a one night stand just to get rid of the sexual tension. Wait... no. Because if that happens then we'll probably get 20,000 pages of her getting laid and the reasons why she will leave him because men are bad and only to be used for their money and position so she doesn't have to live on the street. Boo...frickin'....hoo. Ech... Denna isn't worth spending a lifetime with. In fact, as a woman, Denna in general offends me. I just want to punch her in the throat... over and over and over and over again. If I wanted to be bored to death, instead of reading anymore Kingkiller "stories" I would have a conversation with my husband's ex-wife. Don't spend your money on Wise Man's Fear - you can nap for free.
Couldn't agree more with this review ... although, bizarrely, I gave the book more stars because, for all its faults, I think he writes in a beguilingly good way and I did enjoy it (even though, by p.450, I was wondering if it would ever end ...)
By an reasonable criteria a 1 star book should be something barely readable, and its clear that is not the case. There are plenty of books that are not to every taste, but giving them a review lower than they deserve is unfair and a poor service to your fellow readers many of whom clearly love this book - myself included. You only make yourself look foolish with that rating, which clearly is not backed up by your own comments. If a book is not for you that does not mean it is a one star book.
To be fair, the star-ratings are based on what *you*, the reader, felt about the book: "It was OK", "Loved it", or whatever. That means that the rating one gives a book can only be subjective. So, whether or not one feels that the book doesn't deserve a 1-star rating, that is the reviewer's prerogative, just as it's another reader's prerogative to disagree.
Damn you really hate Denna. It seems people are really polarized over her character
To start off I want to say That I enjoyed your review of this book. I liked that you have strong opinions about it, and more importantly that you have solid reasons for those opinions supported by facts. Something most of the hateful comments on this site seem to lack. Plus you're really funny. I have to say though after reading your entire review, yes I read the entire thing, even though it was really long, has some really funny parts to it, went on quite a few tangents, and totally could have gotten the same point across if you had cut it down to a third as long (wait does that sound familiar? Did I just compare you to the author you were reviewing?)I have to say your review of the book doesn't seem to warrant a one stare review. You continually mention the redeeming qualities of the book while bashing it. If I hadn't seen your stars rating before reading the review, I would have thought you gave it three stars, maybe two, but one seems to suggest unreadable, and you continually give reasons why it is readable, just not five star readable. Anyway I give your review 4 stars (same as I give the book), Its funny, but overly long, it goes on tangents, but they're pretty entertaining, and your rather repetitive, but you get the point across.
Cheers
Tim wrote: "By an reasonable criteria a 1 star book should be something barely readable, and its clear that is not the case. There are plenty of books that are not to every taste, but giving them a review lowe..."Incorrect, hover over the star system and you will see that 1 star = Dislike, 2 star = meh, 3 star = like, 4 star = really liked, 5 star = amazing. He disliked the book, 1 star. Simple.
Griffinstein wrote: "Incorrect, hover over the star system and you will see that 1 star = Dislike, 2 star = meh, 3 star = like, 4 star = really liked, 5 star = amazing. He disliked the book, 1 star. Simple."Agreed. Absolutely.
Your review made me laugh so hard, my belly hurt. Thank you for the warning, I knew I did a right thing to get this book out of my "to-read" list ;P
Tim wrote: "By an reasonable criteria a 1 star book should be something barely readable, and its clear that is not the case. There are plenty of books that are not to every taste, but giving them a review lowe..."I don't grade on a liked it/hated it scale. I actually have five things that I grade a book on when I review it. Each one is worth a star. This is what they are, and a little explanation on each as to why I graded the book as I did.
Writing. The book is well written, so it earns a star on that.
Characters. I actively dislike the majority of the characters in this book. Kvothe reminds me of Adrick from Dr. Who, which is not a good place to go if you want me to enjoy your character. he has his moments where he can say or do things that are really entertaining, but on the whole, I really just don't like him as a character. Denna... I raged for half the review about Denna, so I'll spare you. No one else in this book seems like a real person to me. They don't act and react to things as real people do. Especially the women. It seems like every female character in this book exists for one purpose and one purpose only, because Kvothe needs or wants something from them that he can't get from a man, whether it be sex, comfort, or someone to confound him so that the story has some sort of conflict in it. There is not a single female character in this book that gets treated like anything more than a plot device or stage prop rather than with due respect as a human being by the author, which I found to be very aggravating and somewhat offensive. I don't think Kvothe meets a single woman in the whole of the book that he doesn't sexually objectify in one way or another at least once. I'm sorry, but women are people, not plot devices. People keep trying to justify it by telling me that this is a story being told by a teenaged boy, but no, it isn't. Kvothe is fictional. He does not exist. And even if he did, the one telling the story is the adult version. He STILL thinks of women this way after he has grown up. he never says anything like "that's what I thought of women then, but I've since seen the folly of my ways." He points out nothing wrong with young Kvothe's thoughts or behavior, and frequently finds ways to justify them, which means he still thinks that way, even in the present day. But that's beside the point. These are the words of the author, not of the character, because the character does not exist. The author wrote them. These ideas had to come from somewhere in the author's mind. All the side characters do and say the things on the author's script, not because it is what they, as people, would do, but because the story requires it of them. No additional stars earned.
Character development. Kvothe does not learn or grow as a person during the course of this book, as evidenced by his writing of the letter to Ambrose at the end. He is in the exact same place doing the exact same things as he was at the beginning, having learned nothing and not having come through his trials and tribulations a better man. No additional stars earned.
Story. There isn't much here that can really be called a story. The actual content of the book does not justify even half the length. It is a seemingly random series of events that really have nothing to do with each other and no over-arching theme tying them together into a cohesive narrative. I found it incredibly boring. I was looking for the next installment of an epic fantasy series, not a few episodes of the Kvothe sitcom, or a skit show like Saturday Night Live, or Monty Python, where nothing that happens in one episode impacts any of the others in the slightest. It was like every time the scene changed, the author stepped in with a fake British accent, trying to sound like John Cleese, and said "and now for something completely different." Additionally, the overall story of the series did not progress at all during this book. None of the questions and mysteries introduced in the first book were answered, built upon, or even addressed in this book. There is no clear sense of something having been accomplished or moved forward. The book is just wallowing in impotence and not advancing either the plot or the characters to any stage beyond where they were left at the ending of the first book. No additional stars earned.
Climax. This book does not have a climax in any way shape or form. A story without a climax is like sex without an orgasm, dissatisfying, disappointing, and a lot of work for no payoff in the end, leaving you feeling in need of a shower so you can cry your self-loathing away in private. People keep using the "it's not the destination, but the journey" argument with me on this one, but you know what? No. Just no. The journey is important, and without it, the destination is meaningless. HOWEVER, when there is no destination, the journey is equally as meaningless. You need one to give the other meaning. When one of them fails to deliver, or is completely missing entirely, it cheapens both of them. No additional stars earned.
I gave this book one star because of the five things that I grade books on, it only did one of them right in my opinion. I find these "criteria" to be very "reasonable", don't you? These are the things that make a book entertaining. Without them, what's the point? Why does the book even exist? Rothfuss is so wrapped up in being new, and different, that he completely ignored the fact that he is still supposed to be telling a story, and so he didn't tell a story. He rambled on about nothing for 1000 pages and called it a story. And then he put it forward as having a deeper meaning when there actually is none, which is rather insulting, and the very definition of pretentious. Should I not take these things into account when rating a book? Should I give a book five stars simply because it was written well, when every other aspect of the story and characters was a complete mess in my opinion? The book is well written... but it's not THAT well written. The fact that Patrick Rothfuss took four years to polish up the prose doesn't change the fact that the book has, literally, nothing else going for it, and literally, no reason whatsoever to exist. I try to be fair and objective, but I just couldn't give a book I enjoyed so little, and that had so little to offer me any more than the one star it earned in my eyes. It completely failed in four of the five areas in which I grade, and so, for me, it completely fails as entertainment, which is its primary purpose for existing. However, it is all a matter of opinion. That's why it says "opinionated" in the title. I'm judging the book against my likes and dislikes, not against anything else. If you want completely objective, I'm afraid you've come to the wrong place. Even if I did rate books on a liked it/hated it scale, this book would still have gotten one star. I hated it that much. I hated it so much, in fact, that I never want to read another Rothfuss book so long as I live. It was so incredibly awful and painful to slog my way through that it has forever colored my opinion of Rothfuss as a writer to the point where I doubt I will ever pick up another book with his name on it for the rest of my life. I have never had the displeasure of reading a book so vacuous, vapid, pretentious, and up its own ass as The Wise Man's Fear.
In short, in my opinion this book is an epic failure to tell a story even on the most basic levels. It is an epic failure as a second volume of a series as it completely ignores any questions and such brought up by the first book rather than building upon them or answering them. It is an epic failure as a character study as the character does not learn, grow, or develop in any way throughout the story, and ends the book off exactly where he was at the end of the previous book in location, disposition, and development as a human being. Why do I hate this book? THAT'S WHY. Because it is a pointless piece of trash that does nothing but waste your time. It is nothing but fluff without a single thing of meaning or substance to offer. Do I really have to give any more justification than the review I already wrote, pointing out all of the most egregious things I found wrong with it, which, by the way, took up the entire character allotment provided by Goodreads? Was that, somehow, not enough to get the point across? Do you really need to hear MORE from me on the subject before you will believe me when I say that this is one of the worst, most insultingly pointless, pretentious, vapid, vacuous excuses for a book that I have ever had the displeasure of reading? You can't just take my word for it that I hated it with a fiery, burning passion? The only things it has going for it is that it is well written, and it does have some entertaining humor. These things, however, cannot carry the entire book for me. It needs something more. Some sort of purpose and direction, a goal to be achieved, or really ANYTHING more than the absolutely NOTHING that it offers. This is not a novel, it is an author stroking his own ego and wasting my time. I would rather read a terribly written book that is highly entertaining, than a well written book that isn't entertaining in the least. To be a good fictional writer one must be able to write well, AND tell a good story, and Rothfuss did not tell a good story. He didn't tell a story at all. This book is like cake. It looks amazing, and tastes great, but has zero actual nutritional value in it. You get that nice sugar rush... and then you crash, and then comes the feelings of regret and self-loathing as you wonder how much weight you just gained by eating it. Except then you have the author selling it as a weight loss remedy and telling you, very loudly, publicly, and at every opportunity that something must be wrong with you if you're gaining weight by eating it, because he's a stuck up asshole and can't admit that maybe his cake really didn't have much nutritional value to it, and continues to insist that the problem must be with you instead of his cake.
J wrote: "To start off I want to say That I enjoyed your review of this book. I liked that you have strong opinions about it, and more importantly that you have solid reasons for those opinions supported by..."I was actually subtly (or not so subtly) mocking the author by making the review overly long, and running off on tangents. Because the book, I felt, was overly long and full of pointless tangents. I was trying my hand at satirical humor without bothering to let anyone know what I was doing, so I was the only one in on the joke, and that made it even more funny to me. I have a weird sense of humor like that.
Tim wrote: "By an reasonable criteria a 1 star book should be something barely readable, and its clear that is not the case. There are plenty of books that are not to every taste, but giving them a review lowe..."Wrong on all counts. Eric explained why he disliked the book quite well. He has the right to give it one star without someone telling him he is wrong. If you don't like cherry pie and I do, I'm not going to say you have no right to dislike cherry pie. Geesh.
Whoa you must have really been pissed off to write such a long review? What were you trying, to beat TWMF in word count?
No, actually, I'm paid by the word. The more I write, the more I get paid for it. And yes, I was pissed off, quite a bit. I've never seen an author take something so great and pile so much pointless, needless shit atop it, while also forgetting to bother continuing the story, or the development of the characters, in any meaningful way.
I didn't get the appeal of the first book and am glad I read this review (even if it was way over the top) because I heard it was a retread and one long build-up. How is he going to squeeze the payoff into one book? And I was also really annoyed at how every female character was one-dimensional and in love/lust with Kvothe. His incredible stupidiy was another grating element. Rothfuss justfies this by saying, "He's 16!" Well, I remember being 16 and can't comprehend how I could have been so astonishingly dumb with money, getting and losing it with abandon, while simultaneously being absolutely amazing at everything else.
Wow, the butthurt fanboys.I liked Wise Man's Fear despite its flaws, but I cannot but laugh at people who descend on negative reviews to cry and whine. Jeez, a significant number of my Goodreads friends love books I hated and hate books I loved. Why should that make anyone upset?
Kvothe is the man. I love Gary Stu characters.
I mostly enjoyed this book but completely agree with your thoughts on the stupid tangents, the section of How Kvothe Discovered the Kama Sutra (and Made a Cloak), and mysterious freaking Denna. Rothfuss hasn't given me anything to understand why Kvothe is so drawn to her, except that she's pretty and knows the words to that one song back when he got his talent pipes. Ditch the girl and 300 pages of "Wise Man's Fear" and I feel like it's a much more interesting story. Oh - and Kvothe's Special Unicorn Power can be toned down a bit: he's like Bruce Wayne, Gandalf, and Iron Man all rolled into one.
I'm gonna pull out the mega-geek card and reference oldschool Doctor Who. There was a companion to the Doctor who was named Adrick, who was like Westly Crusher from Star Trek TNG only more annoying, more arrogant, and more insufferable in every way imaginable. Whenever I read about Kvothe, I only see Adrick, and it really kind of annoys me. I know it's probably kind of stupid to dislike one character because I dislike another similar character, but eh, it is what it is. Kvothe can say or do things that are pretty entertaining at times, but overall his entire character just rubs me the wrong way, and I get flashbacks of Adrick from my childhood watching Doctor Who on VHS with my dad. And when your reaction to just about everything a character says or does is eye-rolling disgust, well, it's kind of hard to enjoy any story revolving around him.
Oh lord, thank you for the Wesley Crusher comparison! Iron Man didn't feel right but I couldn't come up with anything better; I had completely forgotten about the Star Trek Boy Wonder and how much I hated him - probably because Wil Wheaton is pretty amusing when he's playing Wil Wheaton. I have to admit that my relationship with Doctor Who started with Eccleston so I can't relate to your Adrick pain. I'm curious now, though - I'll have to see if I can find some episodes on a day when I'm in the mood for annoying tv. Wesley Crusher! Yes!
"So, after all is said and done, is The Wise Man’s Fear really as bad as I make it out to be? YES!!! IT IS!!! But at the same time, no. It really isn’t that horrible." This is your quote. Got it- I like your reveiw... but why don't you make your star rating a little more realistic. What is a horrible book to you? negative 2 stars? That isn't an option. A horrible book should be a 1, a book that is ok but not horrible 2 or 3...? right? Your review is obviously helpful and I agree with so much of it, just confused by that rating. FYI- The whole first half of this book was brutal. I kept checking the pages and asking myself, when is he leaving the University!! Finally he leaves and I was wondering how much can Pat actually fit into a half of the book. Not much is the answer.
That's actually a joke. I'm poking fun at the way Rothfuss will say one thing, and then immediately invalidate it by saying something contrary to it, and then pretend that there wasn't a contradiction at all. If you keep reading past the part that you quoted there's a few more lines that give my real opinion on the book, after saying it's not all that bad. It was kind of my way of saying that Rothfuss needs a better editor without actually saying that he needs a better editor. It's just something that I do, using something that the author does that annoys me in the review like it's an actual part of the review to illustrate something that really annoys me without really telling anyone about it unless they ask. It makes me laugh, and that's really the only reason I do it. Another thing from this review that's a joke along the same lines is how it rambles around incoherently and takes off on a lot of tangents, because that's basically what Rothfuss did for 1000 pages, he rambled around and explored every single tangent to little point or purpose except to make the book longer. Like I said, it's basically only a joke for my own enjoyment, but every now and then someone will ask about it and I'll explain it to them. Make no mistake, I hated this book with a fiery burning passion, and it has forever colored my opinion against Rothfuss as a writer and storyteller. I've read few books that were more of a pretentious waste of my life than this one. I was just poking fun at the author's lack of any sense of continuity.
And I hate
Denna- she shows up just when the plot has no where else to go! Hahaha
I just finished Name of the Wind and was wondering whether the next one would be as tedious...Thanks for saving me the trouble!
haha this is a funny, funny review. Nice.
Not every novel has to have a concrete plot. Take "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn". What's it about? Practically nothing. There is no real climax, not clear sequence of events, no plot. The author spends a few pages describing the purchase of a pickle.Rothfuss, as you so eloquently described, does the same, except he blends fantasy with that "bildungsroman" type story. Not everyone likes it, you clearly don't, but there's really no need to hate the book for its lack of plot progression. You don't NEED plot progression for a book to be good if your story-telling makes it interesting enough. Think about all the things Rothfuss weaves into the story. The worldbuilding, the foreshadowing. I don't find a need to focus on plot so much - to me, enjoying the book for what it is is enough.
I will admit - the lack of character development is very worrying. And Rothfuss's treatment of women is pretty bad, and Denna's character is pretty annoying as well. Not every novel is perfect, and I hope he improves on those aspects of it in his future books. Rothfuss is very inexperienced. This is his first set of novels. You can criticize him for not getting everything right (or not even remotely close to right), but you should be somewhat understanding as well.
I have to disagree re the plot progression point. It's fair to say that sometimes the point of the story is just the telling, like "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich," which was beautiful and engrossing and utterly static because of its setting, but I have to measure epic fantasy by a different scale. I'm conditioned to read epic fantasy as a clear journey with a goal. Find the jewel, save the prince, restore the rightful ruler to the throne, become the most powerful magician ever known to the kingdom. For me to enjoy this kind of story, it has to follow some of those rules even while finding ways to make them fresh. With 1800+ pages of story (and counting), and relatively little happening in the second book, I don't feel that Rothfuss is holding up his end of the bargain very well. The inn scenes in the present clearly hint that something is supposed to be happening, and the flashback parts lead us to that, but after all this world-building I'd like to see Rothfuss do something with that world other than insist that Denna is the most fascinating creature in the world and remind us how much Kvothe loves cloaks with pockets.
When it comes to being understanding, I tend to reserve my patience for the first novel in a series: we're meeting characters for the first time, learning the rules of the magic, etc. - and many of those novels run about 350 - 400 pages. Rothfuss had twice that in the first novel and almost three times again in the second, with a couple of years to think about where he wanted to go. I think he's plenty experienced enough and it would be nice to reward his readers with a little bit of evolution rather than getting bogged down in setting things up and rehashing the same details over and over again.
lol I thought I was the only one who noticed how the plot of the king killer chronicles seemed to stop 1/3 of the way through book 1
I agree with most of your review, and although I think I "got more plot out of it" than you, its entirely subjective to the reader. I respect and agree with your opinion, but I still love the book. Thats what love is about in the end, isnt it? Just like Rothfuss said, "To love something despite." All those details you pointed out in your review, they didn't make me love the book any less.
The misogyny is just too evident. This book is as unreadable as The Name of The Wind was un-put-downable. Not interested in future books. I like strong female characters. If i wanted a conservative's idea of a "strong" woman, barefoot and in the kitchen, then this is the book I'd read.
Thank you for your review, it is exactly how I feel about this book.
I get it. You love Rothfuss. I love Name of the Wind, too. And I have the Slow Regard of Silent Things on my shelf at home. (Christmas gift. Can't wait.)But Wise Man's Fear was a miss, and besmirching reviewers who don't agree with your opinion is unfair.
Nah, I agreed with both the commentor and the reviewer. I think eric (the reviewer) made some good points, but did come off as somewhat arrogant. I really don't think the book deserved a 1 star rating (especially when eric gave a book from the dresden files a 5... the dresden files are incredibly sexist, and eric bashed the wise man's fear for being sexist).I still enjoyed wise man's fear despite its flaws.
Agreed with the review. I loved 'Name of the Wind', it felt like a more mature and heavy/dark version of Harry Potter with a very well built magic system. But 'Wise mans fear' pretty much just had Kvothe turn from mr.Caring-Chaste-Witty-Clever, to mr.douchebaggery-harem-pimp-retarded in a few moments. The only part(s) I really liked in the whole book was his relationship building with Tempi, the few parts with Elodin, the bandit battle(the buildup was a bit annoying, and afterwards kinda meh, but the action part was pretty fantastical). Besides that... Somebody please edit Denna out of the 3rd book, NOONE WILL NOTICE(or care).
Allen wrote: "especially when eric gave a book from the dresden files a 5... the dresden files are incredibly sexist, and eric bashed the wise man's fear for being sexist"There is a difference between the old-fashioned chivalry of Harry Dresden, and the objectification, sexual or otherwise, of every single female character in an entire book by it's author as Rothfuss did in this one. In The Wise Man's Fear, women are not people. They are objects that exist for one purpose and one purpose alone, to fulfill Kvothe's needs in one way or another. Harry Dresden treats women as an old-fashioned gentleman would, and yes, his actions might be considered sexist by some. However, the female characters in Butcher's books have personalities, likes, dislikes, and goals all of their own that do not revolve around Harry Dresden. Dresden may be old-fashioned, but the author is not, and you can see it in the way he writes his female characters. Dresden is often attracted to women, but attraction is a fact of life. There's a difference between attraction with the occasional bout of lust (which is usually played off as Dresden being a douche), and objectification with constant lust, leading into such behavior as extreme, and rather creepy, stalking (which is played off as completely normal and accepted by society). Do you see the difference? Especially in how Dresden is visibly shown to exercise quite a bit of restraint in his dealings with women, whereas Kvothe does not even realize a need for it. Kvothe is an utter sociopath. And the way he writes, Rothfuss appears to be one as well. Kvothe is the only person that exists in his world. All other people don't count as people, but the women get it doubly bad because the author doesn't treat them like people either. Both old and young Kvothe seem to see all women as objects, have no respect for them at all, and the way Rothfuss writes his female characters, they exist in no other capacity outside of Kvothe's needs or desires. They don't have personalities of their own, or wants, desires, goals, etc except to be there to be objectified by, used by, or to somehow confound Kvothe. There is no sense that these characters exist outside of Kvothe's sight, whereas Butcher's female characters frequently do their own thing when Dresden isn't watching, whether he wants them to or not. They always act in character, doing the things that they, as people, would do. The female characters in Rothfuss' book don't have characters to act within, because they're treated like part of the scenery by the author and the character alike. This is how I can give 5 stars to a Dresden Files book and 1 star to this trash, whilst calling down Rothfuss for severe and disconcerting sexism, but not Jim Butcher. On top of the fact that Skin Game was extraordinarily entertaining and less than half the length of Wise Man's Fear, whereas Wise Man's Fear was boring, pointless, infuriating, not entertaining in the least and was about 800 pages longer than the actual material in the book required. In the end, on the sexism issue, it comes down to how the two authors portray their female characters. One of them writes people to interact with his viewpoint character, the other writes stage props to be used by his viewpoint character. And that makes ALL the difference in my opinion.
Name one female character in The Wise Man's Fear that is either not objectified in some way, or is actually seen to have a life outside of Kvothe's interactions with her. I can name you several just off the top of my head from Brucher's work. Molly, The Summer and Winter mothers, The Archive, Bianca, Georgia, Charity, Martha Liberty, Titania, Lily, and the list gets much bigger if you add in the characters Dresden finds himself attracted to in one way or another throughout the series, but still are visibly seen to have a life of their own outside of their interactions with him, like Karen, Susan, Mab, Maeve, Aurora, I forget the name of his childhood girlfriend, and so on, and so on, and such. The only one I can think of in The Wise Man's Fear that even comes close is Devi, but again, there's really no sense that she exists as a person outside of Kvothe's interactions with her. She is there to provide money, conflict, and nothing more. And Jim Butcher is the sexist one here? Um, no. Not even close. He hasn't got a shade on Patrick Rothfuss for sexism.
Agreed. I don't find the Dresden Files to be sexist at all, actually. I think JB goes out of his way to make Dresden look like a douche when he acts like that. Also, can we all agree that of the blockbuster fantasy writers, Sanderson has the best female characters. He's one writer who didn't get the memo that you need to create stereotypes to empower twelve-year-old nerds who can't get the good looking girl in Grade Seven to look at them.
Look, people, can't we all just act like adults here? Please? If you enjoyed the book, great, I'm happy that you found something that you enjoy. I really am. I'm not just saying that. But you have got to realize that just because you enjoyed something, it doesn't mean that everyone did. The minute you shift from saying "I liked this book a whole lot" to "If anyone out there does not agree with me that this book is great he must be a complete moron" you step over the line. Not everyone on earth is always going to enjoy the same things that you do. It doesn't mean that they're stupid. It doesn't mean that they don't understand, or missed the point. It simply means that they have different tastes. They're looking for something different in a story than what you are. The contrasting opinions and views of the world's many people are what make it such an interesting place to live. Life would be extremely boring if everyone enjoyed the exact same things for the exact same reasons. People are different. They enjoy different things. They dislike different things. Not everyone is going to agree with you 100% of the time. And learning to deal with that like an adult is part of what it means to be a member of the human race.
I understand that you may feel differently than I do. And that's a good thing. My opinion does not harm you in any way. It does not keep you from enjoying what you enjoy. I probably enjoy a whole lot of things that you do not, and it doesn't bother me a single bit that you don't, because I understand that people are different, and enjoy different things. All I ask is that if you disagree with me, please do so in a polite and civil manner. Keep the name calling to a minimum, and show a modicum of respect toward your fellow Goodreads commenters. There's really no call for the behavior I saw in those deleted comments. People were calling each other some of the worst things, and directing a whole lot of hatred toward me as well. And for what? Because we disagree about a book? Really? I've done a lot of stupid things in my life. I have never gotten shredded by random strangers for any of those things half as much as I did for disliking a popular book. If you think I'm wrong, or want to share with the world how much you liked this book, there's really nothing stopping you from writing a review of your own. Post me a link in the comments and I'll be more than happy to read it. If you make good points and write them out well, I'll probably even "like" it, even if I don't agree. I have nothing against you for liking this book. I thought it was terrible, but I'm willing to concede that I am in the minority on that. I know that my opinion is not the majority, and I know that a lot of people feel very strongly about the book and the author. It doesn't mean I'm stupid. It doesn't mean I don't understand what the author was trying to do with the book. It simply means that I'm looking for something else in a story than what you are. I'm still allowed to have my opinion, and to share it if I wish. And I do so wish.
We're all stuck on the same world with each other. Lets try to make it as painless as possible, shall we? There's no reason we can't disagree and still be civil and respectful towards one another.