Epic success

The early reviews are in, and I’m pleased to see that the general verdict is that A SEA OF SKULLS is an improvement on A THRONE OF BONES. Success, for a writer of epic fantasy, is when one aims at George RR Martin, only to discover that with Book Two, reviewers are beginning to compare the work to that of Tolkien rather than Martin.

Even better than the first. The perspectives were well written and differed entirely on the concepts of civilization and what it means for each to make war. Whether it is from an orc captain or an elven wing of flying calvary, a stranded Legion, a feudal kingdom of knights and let us not forget the Vikings. All unique with a current of practical realism in how strategy and tactics play out in total war including the inner turmoil of personal ideology of each main character. What is the right choice? What pieces make up the foundation of how to even begin to inform one of which choice is wisdom and which folly.

Epic on the level of Tolkien, but written in a totally different way, for a different generation of audience. Tolkien addressed good and evil of his generations struggle, while Day is focused on the heart of his own generation. Good and evil are timeless, but the battlefield shifts with the times and Day nails it.

When I began writing Arts of Dark and Light, I believed that I could do better than Martin did in A Dance With Dragons, which I found extremely disappointing given the earlier books in the series. I was naively optimistic that the decline in quality I perceived in the fifth book of ASOIAF was more the result of a foolish decision on Martin’s part to fill in the blanks rather than skipping ahead to when the dragons were grown, as I understand was his original plan.

After all, even though A Storm of Swords was not quite as good as its two predecessors, the introduction of the Ironborn and their religion was a spectacular scene, and it was entirely possible that its deficiencies were more related to middle-book syndrome than any incapacity or lack of imagination on Martin’s part. And the problem with A Feast for Crows was obviously mere fat fantasy bloat, a problem easily resolved by stripping things down. But A Dance With Dragons was simply bad, with false characterizations and even the dread river journey; the surefire sign of an author who lacks for better ideas. Even given the signs that the decline was structural in nature, it never once occurred to me that I could write anything equal to the rest of the series.

However, as I struggled with the challenges of deciding how to proceed with all the various options presented by the perspective characters, and prospective new perspective characters in the second book, I began to realize how thoroughly Martin had ruined A Song of Ice and Fire when he expanded it from the original concept of a trilogy. What I realized was that as the story expanded, and as the characters separated, even more discipline and focus was required, not less. In other words, fewer perspective characters, but deeper engagement with their personal story, and therefore letting significant elements of the larger story go without more than tangential attention or description.

This is why it has taken me so much longer to write the second book. It was less about simply cranking out the story, and more about making good decisions about what not to write and what avenues to leave unexplored. Even a well-written and interesting scene is a problem if it requires going down a path that will ultimately prove an unnecessary distraction.

Martin’s error, as I see it, is that he tried to describe too much of the larger story while failing to understand which of his characters are necessary to the larger story. His books increasingly read as if Tolkien had decided to devote as much of The Return of the King to Elrond in Rivendell, and to introducing the travails of a new female character from Bree, as he does to Aragorn and Frodo. Martin’s error is compounded by his apparent compulsion to keep trying to shock the reader; the impact of the Red Wedding was considerably less than that of Ned’s execution despite the greater quantity of blood shed, because the sophisticated reader can’t help but see it coming. Moreover, Martin increasingly relies upon cheating the reader, engaging in increasingly transparent sleight-of-hand, and sabotaging his characters in order to try to achieve the effect he is foolishly seeking.

The idea that the Young Wolf, who has proven to be a brilliant strategist and tactician, is going to throw everything away for love in the middle of a war to avenge his father is so profoundly stupid, and so false to his character as established, that it actually made me angry at the time. And all so that Martin could have an excuse to “shock” the reader. That was the moment that I realized Martin was not necessarily the first-rate writer one might have believed on the basis of the first book, although I wrongly assumed at the time that it was a singular mistake.

I won’t give away any details, nor will I claim to be a better or more accomplished writer than Martin across the board, but I will note that in ATOB, I was capable of pulling off something that Martin proved unable to do without cheating, despite multiple attempts on his part to do so. What is intriguing about the recent reviews of A SEA OF SKULLS is that, unlike when I started writing Arts of Light and Dark, I now believe that the end result of what will be a five-book series has the potential to be considered by impartial readers of the future to be a better epic fantasy in the end than A Song of Ice and Fire.

I’m not saying that it will be, only that I now think it may be possible. There is still a long and arduous road ahead. It is possible that my writing has peaked, it is possible that Martin will somehow manage to pull a rabbit out of a hat and reverse his apparent decline. Only time will tell. But what I can say is that it is no longer my object to write an epic that will be seen as being worthy of comparison to Martin’s, but rather, one to which his series compares unfavorably. That may sound arrogant or it may sound insane. Nevertheless, that is my objective.

The good news, for those who are just reading the first book now, is that the second one is now available. And, of course, for those who have read both, there is Summa Elvetica and the collection of short stories set in Selenoth, which will be available in hardcover and paperback editions next month.

A fabulous read, very entertaining. I was very sad to reach the end. Dammit, I want to know what happens next! The sequel cannot come quickly enough. Mr Day is a great new voice in fantasy. The story moves at a brisk pace, and is just a whole lot of fun. The world of Selenoth is imaginatively realised, and both more logical and intriguing than Westeros from Game of thrones. I was particularly impressed by the scenes featuring the Legions, which featured some incredible battles. Very well realised. Highly recommended for anybody who likes fantasy. Great characters. Shocking twists. And a story that continues to suprise right up to the end. Try it, and see for yourself just how quickly you go through its hundreds of pages.


The bright side of narcissism

Anonymous Conservative reviews The Nine Laws by Ivan Throne:

I recently finished The Nine Laws by Ivan Throne of DarkTriadMan.com, the new Castalia House release. The book is basically like A Book of Five Rings, or perhaps more so, the Art of War, a little more organized and spread broadly to cover the way of approaching life in its entirety. It is also infused with Ninjutsu lessons in mindset, philosophy, and strategy which the author has acquired in his study of that art. That is all overlaid on an analysis of the Dark Triad Traits, and the specific advantages which aspects of those traits can contribute to success in endeavors, if used properly. In short, I think it is among the best mindset/strategy books out there, and I expect that there will be a lot of copies of Art of War and Five Rings throughout the world finding a bold new title sharing their space on the bookshelves of the world….

To be clear, the book is not advocating for the dark triads traits broadly. As an example, it encourages the aspects of narcissism which lead to success – the belief in self, the grand visions it produces, the fearlessly plunging into endeavors as if failure is impossible. Those are all traits of the narcissist which explain why you see so many narcissists attain high positions in life. They expect success, and plunge into ridiculous endeavors as if it is to be expected.

But not all narcissists succeed, and those who fail due to their malady fail badly. He examines why this is, and concludes correctly, in my opinion, that the reason is delusion. Narcissists, just as their malady drives them forward relentlessly, and fearlessly, also suffer from a detachment from reality which leads them to misjudge their abilities and expect success to just happen. He encourages you to develop the former traits of plunging forward fearlessly into grand visions, while maintaining a grasp of reality and an ability to see where failure may arise so you may enjoy the benefits of the narcissist’s grandiose vision, without the detriments of being unable to effectively plot courses.

Similarly, sociopaths enjoy freedom from the moral rules which constrain others. But their ignorance of them is reflex, and uncontrolled. That leads them to stumble as often as they ascend. He encourages a recognition of the fact that there are no rules, but tempers it with a recognition that ignorance of the rules may have consequences, and thus you must always be on the lookout for them.

Because the book is so deep, I cannot say how it will change your life. I’d need to post that review in a few years. But I can say there is a ton of wisdom in the book, and it is solid.

This is an important review, because AC is the foremost observer of narcissism, sociopathy, and deranged minds in general on the Internet. The Nine Laws has been a surprisingly good seller for Castalia, and should easily break the 10,000-lifetime sales mark that serves as the unofficial “successful book” line in the mainstream publishing world now that the average U.S. nonfiction book is now selling less than 250 copies per year.

It may sound counterproductive to look to deranged minds for success strategies, but the fact of the matter is that those strategies are so effective that they allow even the delusional and the brain-damaged to succeed despite themselves. Therefore, it makes sense that a healthy mind utilizing the positive aspects of those strategies while rejecting the negative ones should be able to generate even more success for itself.


The Awful Mask of the Alt-Right

A moderate reviews SJWAL:

In the most interesting section of the book, he moves from describing the tactics of the fight to advocating a strategy for winning the war. Personally, this is where things get most uncomfortable. While I can easily imagine myself falling foul of my companies HR department, or being hounded for being discovered holding an incorrect opinion – I have several – I struggle to imagine myself trying to get someone else fired in case they try to do the same to me. In fact, there is a section in the book devoted to the importance of keeping people like me on the margins.

Moderates… generally mean well, but they have a tendency to believe that goodwill, hand-holding, and being open minded will inspire even the most lunatic, hate-filled SJW to see sweet reason.

The thrust of the book is that the unvarnished truth is not worth speaking, because in the battle of ideas it will inevitably be defeated by persuasive lies. The only option for people who love the truth is to adopt a new way of speaking – a rhetoric – which crushes the lies that claim to be social justice, and at least allows a path for people to reach the truth, if they care to.

The rhetoric Vox Day advocates is cruel. It laughs at the mentally fragile, hurts by striking at weaknesses that opponents can’t do anything about, and offers little hope to those who want to live today in peace. Perhaps it is necessary for ensuring stability tomorrow. Reading the book is certainly necessary for anyone who wants to understand how our culture has changed.

What I find informative about this review is the resigned tone. I don’t think that would have been the case even one year ago. Moderates are finally capitulating, as they are beginning to understand that their paradigms are false, their enemies are relentless, and their jobs, their lifestyles, their families, and even their nations are endangered. They’re not ready to join the Alt-Right yet, but their eyes are now open, and it is only a matter of time before they realize that there are absolutely no other options available to them.

I received an email from someone with a similar perspective yesterday, who objected to the way I characterized (((Ben Shapiro)))’s statement about who he wants to have sex with his wife and what color the other gentleman should ideally be. I simply asked him to characterize (((Shapiro)))’s comments to which I was responding:

First he mischaracterizes the definition of cuck by going the sexual fetish route. He then used ineffective rhetoric in the quoted portion by saying if someone in the alt-right was actually cuckolded they wouldn’t care so long as the guy cuckolding them was white.

I understand meet rhetoric with rhetoric. What I don’t understand in this case is what truth the rhetoric was pointing towards.

What I fail to understand about “every tactic used against us is justified…” are the moral implications as I despise double standards in general. Your WWI mustard gas analogy makes sense but I still wrestle with the concept morally.

Actually, (((Ben))) lied, which was why his rhetoric was ineffective. What is the truth my rhetoric was pointed towards? The truth that (((Ben Shapiro))) is a shameless liar. (((Shapiro))) lied about  the nature of racism, he lied about American history, he lied about the Constitution, he lied about the Declaration of Independence, he lied about Western civilization, he lied about what “cuckold” means, and he lied about the Alt-Right. And he did it all in a single interview. He very nearly managed to tell all those lies in a single paragraph!

You simply cannot trust that filthy little (((creature))) about anything at all. There is absolutely no truth in him. None whatsoever. That alone should suffice to indicate the intrinsically false nature of “America’s founding Judeo-Christian values” he has proclaimed.

I understand there are those who struggle with the morality of tactical equivalence, but it doesn’t bother me in the slightest. We are called to forgive and be merciful, which means that surrender is not inevitable and victory must be a possibility. And, I can’t help but notice that few of those moderates who profess moral struggles with rhetoric tend to restrain their own whenever they shoot at extremists on their own side.

If you want to better understand the difference between dialectic and rhetoric, and how to make effective use of them, you can either read Aristotle’s Rhetoric or my SJWs Always Lie. SJWAL is easier and has better examples. And it’s even got cartoons!


Video review of SJWAL


“It’s the first time in my life I’ve ever read an entire book from cover to cover in one sitting…. it was that fantastic!”


In addition to the book, you may want to contemplate triggering an SJW with the SJWAL shirts. We’ve got a black one now, for the subtle “wait, what’s up with that” triggering, and the purple one for the direct splodey-head, how-dare-you effect.

Avert your eyes

This isn’t a book review, it’s a literary rape scene. Robert Stacy McCain reviews Jessica Valenti’s SEX OBJECT:

New
York City is a terrible place to raise children. This is one obvious
lesson the discerning reader might glean from Sex Object, although it’s
not the lesson Valenti intends to teach, nor is it a lesson she has
learned, given that she and her husband, Andrew Golis, are now raising
their daughter in Brooklyn. The belief that New York is the only place
in America worth living has become an idée fixe among young writers,
even as the Internet has made it possible for anyone to be a writer
anywhere. No doubt the neighborhood in Brooklyn where Valenti and Golis
live is crowded with would-be writers in their 20s, English majors fresh
out of college, crowded into tiny apartments, working day jobs to pay
the rent in hope that their spare-time hobby — poetry, fiction,
political commentary, whatever — will someday make them famous. The
success of 1990s TV shows like Seinfeld, Friends, and Sex and the City
served as an advertisement for the idea that all the cool kids live in
New York, having zany adventures with their colorful cast of attractive
friends. The urban hipster lifestyle — tribes of carefree single buddies
hanging out together in their cool apartments — is now as blatantly
promoted by TV as was the suburban idyll of Ozzie and Harriet and Leave
It to Beaver in the 1950s. For all the media criticism that has emerged
from the latest feminist resurgence, no one seems to notice this
particular elephant in the room, i.e., the way TV sitcoms sell a
particular way of life. Because this urban hipster lifestyle is in fact
pursued by feminists themselves — all those ambitious 20-something girls
in Brooklyn — they don’t notice it for the same reason fish don’t
notice water.

“Stay away from New York” is not a lesson
Jessica Valenti intends to teach in Sex Object, nor does she bother to
warn middle-class girls against the error of thinking that an elite
private university is the ticket to happiness.

Read the whole thing. It’s funnier than all the collected performances of Amy Schumer combined.


A tale of three reviews

Bestselling SF author Christopher Nuttall reviews MAGA MINDSET: Making YOU and America Great Again:

MAGA Mindset is not specifically about Trump, although – as you might have guessed – it discusses Trump and his appeal in some detail. Instead, it is a background study of the present-day cultural conflict – I would really call it a civil war – within America and, in at least some aspects, the rest of the West. Such an assessment is long overdue, yet often lacking. Politics, as always, cast a long shadow over any such assessment….

One can only be defeated if one accepts defeat. Trump’s success comes from two factors – the willingness to dream big and the willingness to keep going, even after setbacks. He is correct in many ways – but Big Government works hard to make it difficult. Fighting them can be immensely demoralising. But we have to carry on regardless.

This is a historic election. And this book goes quite some way towards explaining why.

Even if you don’t like Trump, even if you recoil in horror at the thought of President Trump taking office next year, you need to read this book.

Speaking of politics, It’s always cute when fake reviewers try to guess what the book is about, and guess wrong:

Used to be a long time reader of Mike and his blog; this book lacked any real evidence as to why Trump and his policies are and actually will be effective if he were to win the 2016. This book completely ignores the discussion of policy and instead focuses on “mindset” techniques that have been rehashed from Gorilla Mindset and his previous blog postings. If Donald Trump loses, this entire book and Mike will lose credibility, proving that Mike has become nothing more than a sheep for the alt-right movement / manosphere.

Notice a theme with these one-star “reviewers”?

I’m a long time reader of Cernovich’s excellent blog, and I’ve purchased and enjoyed his previous books. It saddens me the way the entire “manosphere” has latched onto the odious Donald Trump, swallowing his garbage hook line and sinker. Cernovich claims to be “journalist” now, but in reality he is nothing but a Trump cheerleader, repeating the usual Trump conspiracy theories (Clinton has Parkinsons, election is rigged, etc). If you like Trump, you will probably like this book. Honestly, even if I did like Trump this would be a pretty pathetic effort.

I’m always sorry to see one of our writers disappoint a long time reader[sic] in this way.


Three book reviews

Not to excessively shill my own books here, but I’ve been meaning to post two of these rather substantial reviews for a few days, so when a third happened to appear, I thought I’d better just post them all at the same time. First, a review of Cuckservative, which is characterized as “something of a primer on the main positions of the Alt-Right”:

The Alt-Right is a recent  movement in western politics. The rise of the Social Justice Phenomenon and their takeover of the mainstream left, and the inability or refusal of the current political elite to address let alone being to deal with a febrile global situation has led to a resurgence of ideas that had for decades been lingering at the fringes.

Lingering not because they were defeated, empirically wrong or quite quite mad, but because they challenge a set of assumptions without which the current political consensus cannot operate.

The media’s monopoly on the dissemination of information and their complicity in maintaining a crumbling narrative has been smashed by the cunning and sophisticated use of the internet by alt-right writers. These writers are actually performing the function of the fourth estate and the present American election may be the first where a candidate’s campaign has been undermined by “citizen journalists”. It is a movement whose time has come, and which has the tools to change, possibly even save, a beleaguered Western culture.

This book was recommended to me by one of the authors after I asked for clarification of his position on Free Trade, and can be seen perhaps as something of a primer on the main positions of the Alt-Right.

The book is not a dense academic thesis and is aimed at the general reader, with a conversational tone throughout. Technical elements are clearly presented yet not simplified into error. The philosophical and historical underpinnings of some of the arguments are also clearly, compellingly and accurately presented.

An agnostic, Jose Camoes Silva’, has some thoughts concerning The Irrational Atheist, which are generally favorable, although I must correct him on one point. I do not believe, and have never argued, that “Goodness of religion ⇒ Existence of God [of that religion]”. I believe reading my book with Dominic Santarelli, On the Existence of Gods, would suffice to disabuse him of that notion. But that is a minor point, made only in the interest of clarification.

 Sam “reincarnation might be possible” Harris

I remember Sam Harris saying something along the lines of that quoted phrase at a conference. He really seems to believe a lot of mysticism and superstition. But his audiences forgive him those small trespasses, as long as he continues to attack the religious, under the guise of attacking religion.

I did read one of Harris’s books; it made me want to relapse into the Catholic faith of my upbringing. (I didn’t.) That’s how biased, poorly thought-out, poorly researched, supercilious, and absurd it was. I thought that was the worst possible case for atheism one could make.

Then I watched Harris in a conference and realized that a worse case was possible. If I had any doubts regarding my agnosticism, I would have become a young-Earth creationist speaking in tongues and handling snakes right then and there.

If anything, VD’s takedown of Harris is too kind.

Paraphrasing an earlier essayist, Harris’s books aren’t to be tossed aside lightly; they should be thrown with great force.

And finally, it was a distinct pleasure to learn that Robert Wenzel of the San Francisco Review of Books not only reviewed SJWs Always Lie, but thought rather highly of it.

The book is brilliant. Day understands the tactics used by SJWs and he understands the psyche of SJWs. What’s more, he has done heavy battle with SJWs in the science fiction arena and as an original player in #gamergate.

Day is an Alt Right leader and I don’t agree with all his views and I don’t agree with all the tactics he suggests in his book. I consider the battle against central planners, and other authoritarians, to ultimately be a long game, intellectual battle, where SJWs are mere grains of dirt in the eye.

My guess is that Day sees short-term skirmishes with SJWs as important in the long battle. I don’t. However, I do see Day’s tactics as extremely important survival techniques, so that SJW attacks don’t knock you of the box when developing your long game.

And, heaven help you, if you are in the corporate world minding your own business when SJWs launch and attack on you/

Thus, I consider this book  must reading for anyone in the corporate world so that corporate-types know in advance how to react and what to do if they are the target of an SJW attack.

It is also necessary reading for anyone in the intellectual battle, academics, bloggers, etc. SJWs don’t play fair and they could do serious harm to your career if you respond incorrectly.

Finally. it is a valuable book for anyone who finds himself in debate with SJWs. Day brilliantly explains why logical debate doesn’t work with SJWs and he shows how to win in debate against them.

Anyhow, there is a little light reading available for those of you who are only familiar with my work here on the blog and are interested in diving a little deeper down the rabbit hole.


A Throne of Bones: a review

Katrina reviews ATOB on Amazon:

I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed this book. I picked it up because I’d seen the author’s critiques of the current state of SF/F and was curious to see if he could deliver an improvement on the mediocre works that just about define the genre today. I was also intrigued by the military emphasis- or more specifically the emphasis on an accurate portrayal of warfare. On both accounts, I came away impressed.

Yes, this is like A Game of Thrones. As I understand it, that’s intentional.It follows a similar format with each chapter named for the character whose perspective is shown, and the general idea is similar, with different warring kingdoms and factions and betrayals going on at the micro level and some vast cyclical magic operating at a macro level.

Where A Throne of Bones improves upon AGoT is mainly at that macro level. As much as it’s transparent in Martin’s books that he has no idea where the overall story is going, it’s quite clear that Day actually has a plan for Arts of Dark and Light. I get the feeling it’s a good plan, too, and, without giving too much away, I suspect it’s a little more Wheel of Time than Game of Thrones.

Day also roundly defeats Martin in the military arena. I wasn’t sure if this aspect of the book would interest me, since I’m more a fan of naval history, but I found AToB perfectly balanced realism and detail with excitement and pacing. I got the sense that Day could go on all, well, day, about tactics and logistics and this horse and that infantry, yet he didn’t, which gave the story a sense of depth without growing tedious. I don’t know whether we have the author or the editor to thank for that, but well done, Castalia House, either way.

(By the way, the human side of warfare is incredibly well illustrated, particularly in the chapter featuring “Eyepopper.” If I didn’t actually cry, it was only because I was too busy double-checking the by-line to make sure it didn’t say “Tolstoy.”)

I should also offer some praise to the characters whose perspectives we see in the book. Unlike in Martin’s books, there is no one I want to choke to death, no name that makes me dread the coming chapter (*cough* Sansa *cough*). Martin’s greatest strength is his ability to show both sides of every conflict in a sympathetic light. Day exhibits this ability as well, with legitimate heroes representing differing opinions on religion, morality, national identity, and so on. He writes persuasively and genuinely from all of these perspectives, which is enormously refreshing, especially as he avoids appearing to simply hate humanity in the process.

Which brings me to the worst thing about this book: the sequel isn’t out yet!

It’s in the works, although obviously slower than I’d like. It will be out this year, one way or another, but “this year” is looking more like “November” than “September” now. I’m beginning to understand why editors are so seldom very prolific writers, as once you spend a few hours editing someone else’s book, you’re seldom in much of a mood to work on your own.

Also, A Sea of Skulls is a more difficult book to write than A Throne of Bones was. Not for the same reasons that have plagued Mr. Martin, but because, as the reviewer noted, I try to write from the perspective of the different characters. It turns out that the level of difficulty rises considerably when one is writing not only from the various perspectives of human, elf, dwarf, and orc, but from those perspectives set within their native cultures. Alas for those who desired a greater sense of the numinous, it appears my vulgar lyrical gifts much better suit the latter two cultures than the elevated elven culture that Tolkien so memorably portrayed.

Anyhow, if you haven’t read A Throne of Bones yet, you should probably get started on it now if you’re going to get through it in time for the sequel, since it is an 850-page monster.

What’s interesting about this review is that it apparently isn’t by a longtime fan or someone familiar with my previous or current works, and yet they nevertheless reach the conclusion that at least the first volume compares favorably with the bestselling works by Mr. Martin. In contrast, those who spuriously claim that I cannot write invariably do so on the basis of not having done more than skimmed a short story or two, and moreover, are less than entirely credible on the basis of their pre-existing enmity for me.

I will never be a great novelist because I simply don’t have the gift. I know what a great writer is, and I simply cannot do what they do. But that doesn’t mean that I can’t write some of the best epic fantasy out there, because what is required for epic fantasy leans more towards stamina, clear thinking, and a coherent vision than pure literary talent. And that is one reason that I have chosen to focus on it, at least in terms of my fiction, rather than some of the other sub-genres in which I have dabbled.


Two weeks

Adam Piggott, Gentleman Adventurer, reviews Owen Stanley’s The Missionaries:

When I lived in Uganda there was an old joke that would routinely do the rounds:

“In Africa, what’s the difference between a tourist and a racist?”

Answer: “Two weeks.”

Occasionally I would recount this joke to a particularly inane group of Swedes who were about to depart for a gorilla trekking excursion into the remote Bwindi forest. They would get all self-righteous and mutter at my blatant prejudice and soon after they would depart. It was not uncommon to bump into them again after they had returned from their excursion.

“Ya, now your joke, we understands.”

Like all good jokes its premise is founded in truth and also of shared experience.

“The Missionaries,” by Owen Stanley, depicts a fictitious land known as Elephant Island, located somewhere in the confines of the Bismarck Sea, its people closely resembling the ways and mannerisms of Papua New Guinea. As colonialism no longer allows the natives to practice their favorite pastime of headhunting, the burden of keeping law and order falls to a small group of misfit expats, who despite their individual shortcomings, keenly understand the idiosyncrasies of the local population….

I have not enjoyed a novel as much as this in a very long time. In fact,
this novel could not have been published by the regular publishing
industry as it skewers the type of people who haunt that industry as
much as NGOs in misbegotten locales in the far corners of the globe. It
is a credit to Castalia House that the author has sought them out and I
sense that this will be a breakthrough work not just for Stanley but for
this small publishing house as well.

It appears his instincts are correct. Not only have we recently signed a number of new authors about whom we are extremely enthusiastic, but some of the existing authors have stepped up their game as well. Just as Mutiny in Space will not be our only SF juvenile and Brings the Lightning will not be our only Western, The Missionaries will not be our only literary satire.


Reviews of The Missionaries

Rawle Nynanzi reviews Owen Stanley’s satirical bestseller, The Missionaries:

When academic theories collide with practical reality, fun is had by all and sundry. The Missionaries is a hilarious book that will have you turning the page to see how badly a UN bureaucrat’s quest to modernize a distant tribe can go — and believe me, it goes really wrong. It shows the limits of the academic way of thinking while making you laugh all the way.

In the book, Dr. Prout is on a mission from the UN to develop the tribes of Elephant Island. As he does this, he finds himself going up against Roger Fletcher, a local administrator who prefers to let the tribes live as they always have, with him smoothing over any disputes. Despite Fletcher’s crude behavior and jokes about the natives’ culture, he clearly understands and respects them on a fundamental level. Dr. Prout, on the other hand, strides in like a know-it-all, spouting a mix of UN propaganda and left-wing orthodoxy while making no effort to understand the people in front of him. Most of the book’s humor comes from the collision of Fletcher’s practicality and Prout’s theoretical thinking…. I would proudly say that I loved the book. Highly recommended.

While you’re on Nyanzi’s site, I recommend having a look at his interesting take on proposition nations and the problem with them.

Some other comments about The Missionaries by reviewers.

  • A fun read that reminds me of Voltaire’s Candide.
  • This book is absolutely hilarious and a must buy. 6 stars out of 5.
  • I cannot praise the craftsmanship that went into the plot too highly; the entire novel is as tight-knit as a Chekov short story.
  • The way the bureaucrat reinterprets everything to fit his academic theories will leave you rolling on the floor.
  • HitchHikers Guide meets social justice warriors in a United Nations 3rd world development project.

I think it should now be clear that we have not exaggerated, in the least, how good this book is. If you haven’t picked up a copy yet, you really, truly, should. When readers are openly comparing it to Voltaire, Chekov, and Douglas Adams, you know it is a classic-in-the-making.