Trigger Warning: Short Fictions and Disturbances Trigger Warning discussion

Another cash-grab by Neil Gaiman?!?

Comments Showing 1-13 of 13 (13 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Kevinreadstoomuch Do you mind expanding a bit on what you mean? I'm not sure what you're getting at with only "one new story" unless you mean that you pick up collections which feature a short story by him and therefor to you personally only one story is "new." To someone like me, each of these stories will be brand new to me, so I have no idea what you're talking about? What 12 books that only have one new story each are you referring to?
Either way, I'm excited about this book . . . long live the short story!

message 2: by Courtney (last edited Nov 18, 2014 03:19PM) (new) - added it

Courtney If you wait, he often puts his short stories on his blog, or they can be found online. Additionally, I believe that Fragile Things is a collection of only his short stories. I'm sure that there will be other collections of only his work. I think that your bellyaching is your own problem, and undermines the claim of a 'loyal fanbase'.

message 3: by Kevinreadstoomuch (last edited Nov 19, 2014 03:51PM) (new)

Kevinreadstoomuch Couldn't disagree with you more, and you also provided no proof at all that your claims about him releasing "12 new books ever 3 or 4 years with one new story" has any truth whatsoever. And almost any popular author will go through multiple printing of their books and will have a few different covers over time. I have no idea what you're whining about. I just don't get your point at all?

Kevinreadstoomuch James wrote: "Thanks, Kevin. Appreciate your opinion. Keep spending :)"

I have never ever bought a Gaiman book where there was only one new story and a bunch of recycled ones, and I highly doubt they exist at all. Unless you seek out every time he writes a short story and buy that format, whether it be an anthology or magazine, then each of these stories will be brand new. Same with King or any short story writer. And you still haven't backed up your accusations.
Your welcome, James

Scott Looks like the original poster deleted, but I do not think a collection of stories printed in various other sources is a "cash grab." It certainly isn't new, unusual, or unique to Gaiman, and I appreciate having all this material easily accessible in one place.

I do think some of it was on the weaker side and could have done without the poetry at all, but it doesn't seem like that was what the original poster was on about.

Tina I guess I missed the drama of the OP

I liked Trigger Warnings. But I'm a starry-eyed fangirl when it comes to Gaiman, so, ya know....I like quite a bit of what he does.

message 7: by David (last edited Nov 24, 2015 10:39PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

David Hmmm, wish I could've seen what the OP actually wrote. Seems like it was a bunch of unfounded hate surrounding a seed of truth.

I'll pitch in and say, although Gaiman is my favorite author, I have issues with this book. Big ones. Yes, his previous two collections had reprinted material, but much less than appears here, and it was more obscure stuff. It was stuff from print magazines or newspapers or incredibly obscure, out of print anthologies. There are two stories here that were already in anthologies as recently as two to five years ago. One of them definitely qualifies as lesser known (Rags & Bones), but one was edited by Gaiman himself (meaning his name is on the cover) and it contained some humongous, genre-crossing names like Jodi Picoult, Chuck Palahniuk, etc. If you're a fan of his and a reader in general, the likelihood that you've at least heard of that collection is quite high. It's not something you have to go rooting around for. Those two stories also have standalone illustrated editions that were released before this, (Truth in a Cave, Sleeper and Spindle). The redundancy is just too much for me to forgive. It's hard not to feel ripped off when two anthology stories turn into expensive illustrated short stories and then are used as filler here as well. They also chose to reprint that weird BlackBerry-sponsored twitter experiment of his (A Calendar of Tales) that's quite bad and didn't really deserve reprinting. And even if you did want to read it, it's online for free, so what's the point?

I'm sure it's not Gaiman's fault. The man has enough money and integrity that I doubt he'd do anything just for the money. But it's his work, and he's biased. I'm sure he believes in all of this stuff to some degree, but somebody needed to tell him that there just wasn't enough quality new and reprint-worthy material to justify another collection just yet.

Scott I don't like reading stories online at all. I'm glad when they get collected in good ol' paper form. But I see your point about redundancy. Maybe if this had come out ten years from now it would have justified its existence more.

I think at least one other story was reaching a bit, the one he did for Amanda Palmer, which contrary to what he says does not really make sense without its accompanying photo (although at least he explains what the photo was.)

message 9: by David (last edited Nov 25, 2015 09:36AM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

David Scott wrote: "I don't like reading stories online at all. I'm glad when they get collected in good ol' paper form. But I see your point about redundancy. Maybe if this had come out ten years from now it would ha..."

At least two of the stories do have paper forms though. Even if you ONLY buy Gaiman's short fiction collections, never other people's anthologies where his stories appear, and even ignore the ones he's personally edited (although I don't know why you would if you're a fan), they have illustrated versions as well, which are expensive, and they came out before this. If you're a fan, it's likely you bought them. More likely, I'd wager, than it is that you bought the anthology Sleeper and Spindle was originally in. They are, after all, two new Gaiman books with his name on it and his marketing engine behind it. And if you did that, you probably wouldn't know they would be taking up a significant amount of space in his new collection, which you'd naturally be hoping was full of new goodies, because why would you expect them to be? You already bought those stories! They practically came out yesterday!

I was very close to buying the illustrated version of the sleeper and spindle a long while back, but ultimately didn't want to drop 13 bucks on a single short story that wasn't even written with a graphic novel format in mind. I knew full well the illustrations wouldn't be adding a damn thing. I just really wanted to read the story based on a summary I'd read. I'm so glad I didn't now.

I'm starting to get tired of illustrated versions of his stories which were never written with the intention of being illustrated. Gaiman may be a great comics writer, but that doesn't mean you can just shove his prose stories into that format. It doesn't work that way. Writing for comics bears more similarity to script writing for movies than writing prose. If you look at pictures of that illustrated edition of sleeper it really is nothing more than mediocre artwork sitting next to his words. No attempt to actually merge the two together like an actual graphic novel, because you can't. They may as well be on alternating pages, which makes the whole thing pointless, and yes, it does feel a tad like a cash grab. That's honestly more of a problem than this is. It just so happens that since the stories also appear here this book is compounding the problem of poor value and overuse of material.

message 10: by Jim (new) - rated it 2 stars

Jim i removed the OP because i don't enjoy answering nasty comments/commenters... yes, Gaiman can write fabulously. my point was/is/will be that collections of this sort (collecting things printed in other collections, sometimes more than once...) and making a 'new' collection come across as just another way to make more money by allowing the new collection to be marketed as 'new fiction', when in fact, the fictions are not new, just new to this book (form of being collected together). All this is my opinion. OPINION. not fact, just opinion. i won't debate Gaiman's literary skills, that is silly. but anyone who accepts anything done by a person, without critical thinking, is silly too. in my opinion :)

Scott There are all different levels of "fan." I like Gaiman a lot and have been reading him since Sandman first began. But I don't go out and buy everything that has his name on it and read it immediately, because I have limited space, funds and time. (Stories was on my to-read list, but I simply haven't gotten to it yet.) All of the pieces in this volume were new to me.

I don't agree that illustrated stories are the same as comics. The illustrations don't need to tell the story; they simply accompany the text, and a great many books--classics--have been published in both editions.

If you've read almost everything in this book, then you aren't forced to buy it. I imagine it would be easy to find in a library to catch up on the few you haven't read before.

Toolshed Well I may be off-point since I don't know what the OP referred to - only judging by the replies - but that's kinda why it's called a "collection", duh. It is, to my knowledge, a compilation of short works which the author published since the release of his last known collection which may contain some fresh new stories exclusive to that collection. And as plenty of others, I'm happy for this "cash-grab" since I don't have the time to follow all Gaiman's works by their respective individual releases and am glad to find them all in one place.

message 13: by [deleted user] (new)

That's exactly what I was thinking! :-)

back to top