I like "traditional" angels.

[Colleen]

If you tend to prefer angel fiction about "traditional" angels (I.e., have wings, are from heaven - may be fallen, may be not fallen, help people or struggle for their redemption) leave your thoughts here.

[Danielle The Book Huntress]

I like the traditional angels best. Angels remind me of God, and I like the angel stories to stay close to this frame of reference. I am open to reading a different spin on things, but I always find that the traditional angels resonate with me more.

[Colleen]

I agree Danielle. I typically like the traditional types of angels as well.

[[deleted user]]

I like traditional angels also and this book The Fallen is upsetting as the the angel who is supposed to be the right hand of God is a sadistic monster. His name should be Satan not Verchiel.

The Fallen Omnibus, Vol 1

[Colleen]

Alice wrote: "I like traditional angels also and this book The Fallen is upsetting as the the angel who is supposed to be the right hand of God is a sadistic monster. His name should be Satan not Verchiel.

Verchiel, does go through a change of heart later in the series, if that helps.

[[deleted user]]

I don't want to read anymore about Verchiel or his torture of the poor little autistic child. I am on page 415 and I was just telling my husband I really have doubts about finishing this. I thought it started out great with much promise but its falling apart and turning into a horror show. Aaron is such a wonderful angel too but this series not for me. I much preferred Fallen and may read the second one of that.

[Danielle The Book Huntress]

Yeah, I wouldn't like that idea. I think Angels can go and come as they need to. I do believe fallen angels are barred from Heaven.

[[deleted user]]

I too prefer more traditional forms of representations, not just of angels but for all divine or supernatural beings. I don't think too many modern writers can improve on the ancients who sincerely believed in such beings and, if the old texts and scriptures can be believed, had face to face encounters with them. Most modern day perceptions are rather vapid with very few exceptions.

[Colleen]

Craig wrote: "I too prefer more traditional forms of representations, not just of angels but for all divine or supernatural beings. I don't think too many modern writers can improve on the ancients who sincerely..."

I comperely agree craig!

[[deleted user]]

Colleen wrote: "Craig wrote: "I too prefer more traditional forms of representations, not just of angels but for all divine or supernatural beings. I don't think too many modern writers can improve on the ancients..."

In my opinion one of the exceptions for modern writers was Gene Wolfe's represtentation of the arc-angel Michael in The Knight. Wolfe is a converted Catholic and his faith does make its presence known in his books. His representation of Michael is very (and for Wolfe, typically) poignant. The arc-angel Wolfe produces is very much along the lines of the ancients; powerful, overwhelming, mysterious, a respesentation or personification of the Infinite and the Divine.

[Colleen]

L.S. wrote: "Colleen, did you like, "The Knight"?"

L.S. I never read the knight, did you?

[Chrysoula]

I think I generally prefer traditional angels, but it takes a unique perspective to make me appreciate pure helper angels with nothing complicated going on. I still have strong memories of the angel in "Unworthy of the Angel", a short story by Stephen Donaldson contained in Daughter of Regals and Other Tales. I don't remember the plot at all, but the sense of that angel has stuck with me for decades.

[[deleted user]]

What was it exactly, or even generally, Chrysoula, that you liked about Donaldson's depiction of an angel? I read his Thomas Covenant series (the first three) and generally liked his writing. It was strong and inventive, although his character became something of a burden.

[[deleted user]]

Hello L.S. I liked The Knight very much. I had left the fantasy genre behind 20 years ago, almost half my life, because of the paucity of good writers in that field, but Gene Wolfe's Wizard Knight duology brought me back to it. I think more than any other writer I've encountered, his depictions between humans and divine/supernatural beings are the best.

However, many people aren't fond of him. He has his own way of writing that often includes a non-linear narrative in which he often and intentionally leaves out pieces of information and frequently doesn't fill in the gaps, leaving the reader to speculate. Not everyone enjoys such a method, but in my opinion, he's one of the best writers out there alive today in any genre.

[Chrysoula]

Craig wrote: "What was it exactly, or even generally, Chrysoula, that you liked about Donaldson's depiction of an angel? I read his Thomas Covenant series (the first three) and generally liked his writing. It wa..."

I liked that the angel had no persistent memory, and (I believe) no idea what his task was. He just stepped from mission to mission and he knew his purpose and identity but nothing else. And I remember a tone of grim passion and wonder. Greyness and light. As I said, I don't really remember the plot or how it resolved at all

[[deleted user]]

Chrysoula wrote: "Craig wrote: "What was it exactly, or even generally, Chrysoula, that you liked about Donaldson's depiction of an angel? I read his Thomas Covenant series (the first three) and generally liked his ..."

He sounds like Guy Pierce in Memento.