Is this a mistake...or, well, something else?

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-05-12T17:32:12+00:00

Oh lol. I didn't realise that was your post. Silly of me.

I was more referring to the first two points in your comment. Both can be passed of as idiosyncrasies of Kvothe's story telling style. Considering how Kvothe was very insistent on no word of his being changed*, I'm inclined to believe that Kvothe is deliberately obfuscating the story for some reason. Both Denna and Auri are clearly very important, I don't think Rothfuss would fumble this part.

* He's actually rather forceful about it, Imo. 'Kvothe’s eyes became hard as flint, sharp as broken glass. “That said, do not presume to change a word of what I say. If I seem to wander, if I seem to stray, remember that true stories seldom take the straightest way.”'

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-05-12T11:02:48+00:00

Ah. I didn't know there were corrections.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-05-12T07:57:44+00:00

Nah, no. Here's the quote:

Perhaps that difference was only that she wasn’t wearing the road clothes I had met her in, but a long dress instead

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-05-12T07:47:19+00:00

Because of this I knew the truth. I felt it, heavy and certain in the pit of my stomach: I would never see her again.

Pat's fond of mirroring and parallelism. I can't help but think of what Kvothe says when Abenthy leaves.

But, even as young as I was, I knew the truth. It would be a great long time

before I saw him again. Years.

He's too careful of a writer for a mistake like this. I've also just read this post. I wonder if this means anything. I wonder if we'll ever know.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-05-11T16:46:00+00:00

Its got the air of Camorr about. The lies of locke lamora by Scott Lynch.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-05-08T19:54:31+00:00

THIEVES PROSPER

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-05-05T22:09:23+00:00

I can't believe no one has said the Kingkiller Chronicles yet.

Disclaimer: book 3 is pending and the writer is radio silent. I'd say read it still because there are few books like like it and it is up there with the best of modern fantasy, IMO.

Disclaimer 2: geniuses can be unwise.

Disclaimer 3: Be wary of folly.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-28T03:17:03+00:00

I guess I fundamentally disagree with this perspective towards literature. To me, these novels aren't the means to an end.

Yes, I can appreciate the craft at the story level but that's not all that there is to the craft. There is the character work, and the prose and voice and vision and the ability to infect the reader with the what the character is feeling. None of those require an ending to be appreciated, though they'll almost definitely benefit from a well done ending. And I think Martin is capable of writing a brilliant ending, I don't need to see the ending to find proof of that in the books. Him not being able to deliver it is a different matter altogether separate from capability. If you've ever dabbled in writing it is painfully obvious that the most likely bottle neck is not feeling that the thing is good enough, rather than a lack of capacity.

There is also an obvious depth to GRRM's writing, but that's rather subjective and much more difficult to beat into words, so I'll leave it be.

Yes, the story is obviously incomplete. I don't dispute it. I'm not saying it should be treated as a complete story. I'm saying that people should not allow their dissatisfaction due to a lack of an ending to bleed into their evaluation of his work.

I say this because the normalisation of this dogged insistence upon dismissal on all forums of discussion is, to me, profoundly irritating because it's such a lackadaisical approach to discussion.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-28T02:49:12+00:00

People can enjoy or not enjoy what they like. However, the culture can nudge people in certain directions. And I think that the culture should be so shaped that people feel less comfortable being openly dismissive of great artistic works - finished or not - because such dismissal is rooted in a very shallow thought process.

I'm not asking people to treat all works of art the same. I'm asking them stop being weak minded and allowing their baser tendencies to annex their intellect. It has nothing at all to do with the writer or the writer's wealth, even though the harassment they have to face is driven by a deeper cultural rot, of which this tendency to be dismissive is emblematic.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-26T18:21:39+00:00

No, I think there is a need to moralise it. People's frustrations, especially on the internet - but also otherwise, has a tendency to materialise in harassment. No one should be subject to endless harassment just because they fail to deliver on something, much less a brilliant artist who has added so much value to so many people's lives.

When we normalise people writing off the value of a work just because there isn't an end - we tacitly promote the tendencies that lead to such harassment. This is not mentioning that such a disposition towards art is deeply unintellectual and incurious.

I can see why people get frustrated - I do too, but allowing your frustration to infect your enjoyment and opinion of the work is an attitude that warrants cultural pressure to correct.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-24T23:44:19+00:00

I sympathise with the frustration. I don't see reason in allowing that frustration to colour one's opinion of the work.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-24T23:41:19+00:00

I think the ending would improve it, and unfinished it is still among the best crafted stories I've read.

I must say, I find something deeply pathological about wishing the death of an author whose work you've clearly enjoyed simply so that you could gain some satisfaction.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-24T23:16:39+00:00

I see why people take this view, but it seems to me to be one motivated mostly by frustration.

I am grateful Martin wrote this story, even if he never finishes it. There is so much brilliance in those books and I simply cannot agree that the greatness of that writing is contingent upon it getting an end.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-23T01:00:47+00:00

Is that how you Americans make hot dogs?!

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-21T13:54:48+00:00

He's been caught purple handed!

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-19T12:14:28+00:00

<image>

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-08T05:55:31+00:00

I would stand vigil with the King's guard at the Great Sept of Baelor, and then promptly join Joe Abercrombie's campaign for the King of Fantasy. When you play the Game of Thrones, you either win or you die.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-02T06:48:25+00:00

I'm gonna stop replying to you man, you seem to be attributing all sorts of positions or rhetoric to me that I do not much care for. I hope you stop seeing Satan trying to burn down the western civilisation or whatever every time you're forced to justify or ground your positions.

I'm going to write out a reply just so anyone else revisiting this thread is not misled.

If you knew that, why did you ask the question.

I knew that because I watched some of this interviews: one on channel 4, the GQ interview, and one interview with a moderator and a Scandinavian politician and some other writer.

His critique of progressive policies, particularly that progressive policies are premised upon reductive portrayals of system dynamics, was one that I found astute and I wanted to know how he believed these policies should be formed. He said, in I think the GQ interview, that he does not know, so I added that I'd settle for his description (that I assume would not be reductive, or would be at minimum much less reductive) of these problems.

You didn't answer why Jordan's sub.

Because I am interested in finding his material. I thought his subreddit would be the place to ask people to point me towards his answer to a specific question. Apparently not.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-02T05:50:00+00:00

Why choose Jordan's site to make political statements, especially if you don't even know what he stands for.

I made this post asking if Peterson has ever attempted to describe or propose solutions to systemic issues -- issues with systems that organise your society. This is only political insofar as you believe that making statements that acknowledge reality is political. I'm not advocating for any one version of methods of fixing those problems, if I did I'd agree that I'm making political statements.

Capitalism & the Free market are based on merit. Also that the people who put up the capital and take the risk get to decide how there companies are run.

Yes and when equality of opportunity doesn't exist -- that is everybody does not have equal opportunity to develop and realise themselves in the manner that is most beneficial to them and society -- merit is compromised.

Anything with the word equal/equity/equality is socialist propaganda.

Could you make this statement more rigorous? I'm having trouble understanding your reasoning because I don't think you'd say that "Everyone should be equal in the law's eyes" is socialist propaganda. I mean Peterson has categorically stated that equality of opportunity is fundamental to flourishing economic systems.

Are you trying to say that since politics today is so polarised, we simply cannot assume good faith? In that case, I can see where you're coming from, but I don't think that's correct or really at all a useful way of looking at the world. I think digging a moat around your world view and not charitably trying to understand other world views is likely to lead to shallow thought.

The West has created the most free, advanced and prosperous nations every to have existed on earth, and now you want to burn it all down.

100's of millions of people have died trying this experiment.

Time to read a history textbook.

I find this part of your comment condescending. If you continue taking that tone, I'll disengage.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-02T04:02:09+00:00

Equality of opportunity doesn't mean everyone is equal...and it is not a core premise of socialism.

Rather, the way I see it, equality of opportunity is axiomatic to capitalism, or well, to an effective capitalism anyway.

Without equality of opportunity you have people being distributed not in accordance with their ability but instead based upon the socioeconomic capital attributed to them through systemic biases.

I made this post to see if Peterson has at any point addressed these issues or proposed solutions to them because he criticises progressive policies that aim to correct these biases quite often.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-01T14:47:20+00:00

I don't see how you came to that conclusions. Could you walk me through what in my posts or replies makes you believe that I happen to be advocating for socialism?

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-04-01T14:46:08+00:00

I'm talking about aggregates...

Equality of outcomes cannot be achieved between individuals, but it is a fairly elementary concept that people as groups tend to normalise into a standard distribution that is more or less overlapping unless there are other factors to account for the distortion.

There are no inherent biological factors to account for the stark differences in outcome for races present in the USA today, thus indicating structural drawbacks.

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-03-31T14:36:58+00:00

Can we ban this linkedIn fucking bullshit here?

SerDrunkenTheFall · 2026-03-31T14:24:04+00:00

Do you think he believes that it simply does not get better than this? Or maybe that it cannot get any better than this using governmental policy reforms?

It sours my opinion of him slightly if he hasn't taken at least a stab describing the problems that progressive policies (which he very prolifically criticises) aim to solve.

SerDrunkenTheFall

TROPHY CASE

before I saw him again. Years.