Fantasy Book Club Series discussion

Initiate's Trial (Wars of Light and Shadow, #9)
This topic is about Initiate's Trial
55 views
Wars of Light and Shadow > Initiate’s Trial: Janny's posted her AUTHORIZED book blurb on her website

Comments Showing 1-22 of 22 (22 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Sandra  (sleo) | 1059 comments If you want to read it it's here.

I am now awaiting the book with my breath held!


message 2: by Kerry (new)

Kerry (rocalisa) | 50 comments I'm still not going to take the risk and read it, but thanks so much for letting us know.


Sandra  (sleo) | 1059 comments You will probably want to get farther in the series before looking, as there may be one or two slight spoilers.


message 4: by Janny (new)

Janny (jannywurts) | 414 comments Official publication date is announced for the hardbound release of Initiate's Trial in the UK and US and likely Canada: OCTOBER27, 2011.

The manuscript is complete, turned in, and in production by HarperCollins UK.


message 5: by Jon (new) - added it

Jon (jonmoss) | 706 comments Huzzah!


Sandra  (sleo) | 1059 comments HOORAH RAH RAH!!! I can't wait!!!


Bill (kernos) | 59 comments Will the UK and US versions be different at all (beyond spellings)? Which will be the official 1st edition?

I pre-ordered at amazon.co.uk and am wondering if I should change it to amazon.com.


message 8: by Janny (new)

Janny (jannywurts) | 414 comments Kernos wrote: "Will the UK and US versions be different at all (beyond spellings)? Which will be the official 1st edition?

I pre-ordered at amazon.co.uk and am wondering if I should change it to amazon.com."


The editions will be exactly the same, likely with British spellings since HarperCollins UK is the publisher/distributed in the US by Trafalgar, and in Canada by HarperCollins. The nice thing: the British side uses FSC (Forest Stewardship Council - sustainable) paper content in their books, and has for some time now.


Sandra  (sleo) | 1059 comments I checked both Amazon and B&N yesterday and it's not available for preorder here in the US yet, but as soon as it is I plan to order it!


message 10: by Bill (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bill (kernos) | 59 comments I didn't know about the paper, Janny. I think I will keep with the UK order and put my money where my mouth is. Global warming, you know.


message 11: by Janny (new)

Janny (jannywurts) | 414 comments Kernos wrote: "I didn't know about the paper, Janny. I think I will keep with the UK order and put my money where my mouth is. Global warming, you know."

It's the same edition. One of the reasons was pleased to arrange for HarperCollins UK to distribute to the US and Canada.

The fact you care about the paper is appreciated very much.


message 12: by Bill (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bill (kernos) | 59 comments One of my avocations, Janny, is convincing people that global warming is not a matter of belief, but of science.


message 13: by Janny (new)

Janny (jannywurts) | 414 comments Kernos wrote: "One of my avocations, Janny, is convincing people that global warming is not a matter of belief, but of science."

One doesn't need to be a scientist to look out the window and realize: every species of tree frog and lizard that lived here when we moved to Florida has shifted to another, hotter climate variety that was not native here, but farther south. A lot farther south. The shifts in nesting and migration patterns. The last two winters we had five freezes into the 20s - yes, they happen, but rarely and never five times a winter. The drier summers, and the shift in storm patterns.

It would appear that mankind fishes the seas deeper, and mines anything it can reach, subject to market pressures. What is held sacred anymore?

Do we hold any concept of a 'sacrosanct free wilds' and if our planet needs this for its long term stability, what will instill that respect?

People argue all the time that they have no power to change the big picture. I have long held that little choices matter.

The paper in a book is one such little choice. When I signed this contract, the only part of the book that was not FSC paper was the cover stock - that part was not possible to do (yet).


Sandra  (sleo) | 1059 comments People used to believe the world was flat, as well.


message 15: by Jim (new)

Jim (jimmaclachlan) Kernos wrote: "One of my avocations, Janny, is convincing people that global warming is not a matter of belief, but of science."

It might help if the science wasn't so tainted by politics & poor science.


message 16: by Jeff (new)

Jeff Watson | 46 comments And one should listen to the right scientists, when everyone is yelling that the sky is falling one shouldn't be listening to the chicken little scientists but finding out what the 'sky' scientists are saying.


message 17: by Jim (new)

Jim (jimmaclachlan) Jeff wrote: "And one should listen to the right scientists, when everyone is yelling that the sky is falling one shouldn't be listening to the chicken little scientists but finding out what the 'sky' scientists..."

But who are they? Hasnain admitted he fudged facts about the Himalayan glacier melt due to political pressure when his data was finally peer reviewed & found to be completely wrong. In fact, the glaciers were growing, not shrinking, as shown by several other studies. Unfortunately, his study was used to bolster the 'evidence' for global warming that won Gore his prize & made all the headlines. How much of the other data is similarly tainted either through sheer fabrication or by being ignored?

I'm a bit of a tree hugger, so I'd like to reasonably err on the side of saving the environment & we've been bad. We aren't getting any better, either. We - US citizens - are just pushing a lot of it off shore - out of sight & mind. (Where do all those ingredients for batteries come from?)

I also realize that any change in our habits has to be a rational, steady one. Look at the hardships that jumping gas prices cause. If we try to change too much, too quickly, it will cause more hardship than people want to bear & they won't work for the change but against it. Take a look at recycling at the residential level.


message 18: by Bill (last edited Mar 03, 2011 07:12AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Bill (kernos) | 59 comments Scientists being human are just as prone to human foibles are are any other group of people. It is easy to cherry-pick to find someone supporting your own hopes and desires. And what one scientist does badly has no effect on science— it is the nature of science to be self-correcting. But what one scientist does can greatly effect often-wrong public opinion.

There is no question that the preponderance of evidence supports anthropogenic global warming and other environmental changes. And the US has been and continues to be the main culprit with China catching up.

Personally I do not think our political systems are capable of dealing with global problems. And, it is probably too late to stop the occurring environmental changes due to our behavior. The earth has survived a number of extinction level events in the past and will again. Our civilization probably will not. I do fear for our kids and grandkids.

Read the post-apocalyptic fiction for clues on personal survival.


message 19: by Jim (new)

Jim (jimmaclachlan) Global warming seems distant compared to some of the other things we're running short of - chocolate & tequila among them. (The horror!) Here's a quick, fun article about 6 of them.

http://www.cracked.com/article_19048_...

Sure, it's written as a joke, but it has a serious side that makes Kernos' point about our current political & economic systems handling global issues. It's also scary when you think about just how complicated & intertwined our systems are, especially when you consider how heavily they're driven by economic factors. Money trumps all, usually.

I read an article a year ago in the John Deere magazine about how the government's interest in corn & alternative fuels was dangerous the wheat industry. Apparently only genetic engineering has allowed the wheat to stay ahead of diseases & continue to have the higher yields that are needed. Wheat or its gluten seems to be in most food now, so it's easy to see where any shortage would impact us all quickly.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the global warming theory. I remember back in the late 60's when they figured humans were going to cause a premature ice age. Besides, the weather men can't figure out what the weather will be like tomorrow with any accuracy. Still, the possible threat of global warming does bring environmental issues into the public eye & that's not a bad thing. Too many people think our civilization is too well established to fail. Hah! We're living on a knife's edge.


message 20: by Jeff (new)

Jeff Watson | 46 comments Kernos wrote: "There is no question..."

::giggles maniacally::

No question, not even one? :)

How about what impact the 'little ice age' brings into the mix? And yes I know that other 'chicken little' scientists have disproved that it even happened. (Did you know that prior to this event (1300's to mid 1800's) that England produced enough wine of a high enough quality that it exported that wine to Europe?)

What about 'global dimming'? Some studies indicate that we've put enough particulate matter into the atmosphere that water vapor formed around it is having a reflective effect resulting in less sunlight reaching the ground. This has resulted in a slower temperature recovery from the little ice age mentioned above.

Just two things that make me go "hmmmmmm" when I hear the words, 'global warming'.

Jim:

Which scientists? Well let's start with climatologists, one of which stated about ten years ago that 150 years of recorded temperatures is insufficient information on which to base a projection of climactic shift. This makes sense to mathematician in me.

Let's also remember that in the early 1970's the 'chicken little' scientists were saying that we might have been heading into an ice age because the fjords of Greenland had not thawed for several years. I think this might be what you were referring to by "cause a premature ice age". There is also some evidence gleaned from Arctic ice core samples that indicate that an ice age can occur in as little as 100 years.

With all of that, I'm not ready to accept that humans are causing 'global warming'. However, I do believe that we are polluting our planet, both air, water and ground in ways that are destructive and we need to find ways to stop this. Could mankind be contributing to the recent measured rise in temperatures? Certainly. Is it solely responsible? Probably not.

Jim wrote: "Too many people think our civilization is too well established to fail. Hah! We're living on a knife's edge."

You are right and if this technological civilization falls it cannot rise again in the same way. All the easily acquired natural resources have been consumed. I think survival of the species can only be ensured by a diaspora into space.


Sandra  (sleo) | 1059 comments While this topic is a hot one and your posts are entertaining, it is a bit off topic. Perhaps you could move further posts to the 'Other Stuff' folder?


Sandra  (sleo) | 1059 comments I just preordered my copy from The Book Depository. It's giving a 10/27 delivery date, so I trust I'll get the UK edition. They've announced US release for 1/12 which really sucks!


back to top