The following review appeared in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons:
This book has the potential to turn the world of evidence-based medicine upside down. It boldly asserts that with regard to everything having to do with evidence, we’re doing it all wrong: probability, statistics, causality, modeling, deciding, communicating—everything. The flavor is probably best conveyed by the title of one of my favorite sections: “Die, p-Value, Die, Die, Die.”
Nobody ever remembers the definition of a p-value, William Briggs points out. “Everybody translates it to the probability, or its complement, of the hypothesis at hand.” He shows that the arguments commonly used to justify p-values are fallacies. It is far past time for the “ineradicable Cult of Point-Oh-Five” to go, he states. He does not see confidence intervals as the alternative, noting that “nobody ever gets these curious creations correct.”
Briggs is neither a frequentist nor a Bayesian. Rather, he recommends a third way of modeling: using the model to predict something. “The true and only test of model goodness is how well that model predicts data, never before seen or used in any way. That means traditional tricks like cross validation, boot strapping, hind- or back-casting and the like all ‘cheat’ and re-use what is already known as if it were unknown; they repackage the old as new.”
Some of the book’s key insights are: Probability is always conditional. Chance never causes anything. Randomness is not a thing. Random, to us and to science, means unknown cause.
One fallacy that Briggs chooses for special mention, because it is so common and so harmful, is the epidemiologist fallacy. He prefers his neologism to the more well-known “ecological fallacy” because without this fallacy, “most epidemiologists, especially those employed by the government, would be out of a job.” It is also richer than the ecological fallacy because it occurs whenever an epidemiologist says “X causes Y” but never measures X. Causality is inferred from “wee p-values.” One especially egregious example is the assertion that small particulates in the air (PM 2.5s) cause excess mortality.
Quantifying the unquantifiable, which is the basis of so much sociological research, creates a “devastation to sound argument…[that] cannot be quantified.”
I could not agree more. As I have repeatedly observed, the only theories that are worthwhile are those that serve as the basis for successful predictive models. Or, as the ancients put it, let reason be silent when experience gainsays its conclusions. All the backtesting and p-values and statistical games are irrelevant if the predictive models fail.
Just a little clearing the plate as we gear up for some new releases, beginning with the much-anticipated Appendix N: A Literary History of Dungeons & Dragons from Jeffro Johnson. The three Eternal Warriors novels are now available again on Amazon. If you are a New Release subscriber, be sure to check your email. These were my first solo novels, and it tends to show, particularly in the first book. They don’t need to be read in order.
Mariel thought she was the guardian angel of an ordinary child — until the night an army of fallen angels takes an unholy interest in her charge. Overcome by an angel prince of awesome power, Mariel can only watch as a terrible evil descends upon the home of the boy she is guarding, then vanishes with him. 307 pages. $4.99. Available on Kindle Unlimited.
On a fallen planet, evil may be defeated, but it is never vanquished. When the evil archangel Kaym seeks vengeance, he does not aim at those who belong to his divine Enemy, but at the vulnerable souls around them. Two troubled boys are easy prey for Kaym, and as the high school prom approaches, they are willing to serve as his chosen instruments of death. 337 pages. $4.99.
There is war among the Fallen. As the dread daughter of Moloch cuts a broad swath through the demon princes of Europe, the long-conquered Faery kingdom of Albion threatens to rise against its dark master. Treachery and intrigue are the order of the day as evil battles evil, and jackals lurk amidst the shadows to devour the defeated. 346 pages. $4.99.
As others have noted, the dialogue is the worst part of the book. Considering that this was Mr. Beale’s first novel, we immediately discover that he is not a most naturally gifted writer. While it always feels evident that he has made great efforts to craft the dialogue carefully, there are moments where it titters on being banal and cringe-worthy.
The story was alright, but the Christian message was not subtle, and ended up being a complete turnoff. American Protestant Evangelical Christians of a certain variety will enjoy this, though. I didn’t, and can’t recommend it at all.
The book has a couple of strengths that make it unique in Christian fiction. First, the author is honest about the power of evil. He does not whitewash, downplay or ignore the temptations of evil and it’s potentially consuming power. Beale represents evil as the willful choice and temptation that it is, and in doing so incorporates it’s tragic consequences effectively into the story, without diminishing the power of God’s grace and redemption.
Not only an amazing sequel to the first story, but dives right into the logical consequences in ‘real life’ of the universe the author described in the opening book. This second book, I must say, was even more enjoyable and immediately identifiable than the first. I literally could not put the book down once I got into the story line a few dozen pages into the book.
I have been most impressed by Mr. Beale as an author. His development from his first novel to his second is phenomenal. What strikes me most is his dead-on ability to catch the dialogue and culture of his characters. There are few writers who come close to his ability at this. More than that, he is writing not only page-turning stuff, but page-turning stuff with a brain.
This book was better than the first, without a single doubt. It brought the spiritual war to Earth, where it indeed is being fought daily.
This is the third, and in my opinion, the best, story of the War in Heaven trilogy, though this book departs considerably from the other two. While the first two are very noticeably ‘young adult’ in their writing style, this one approaches a regular novel, albeit it is rather unusual in terms of its content. All are written in the vein of C. S. Lewis’s Space Trilogy and Milton’s Paradise Lost, taking the perspective of a ‘fallen world’ very literally.
This, the third book in the Eternal Warriors Series, shows a significant jump both in Mr. Beale’s story-writing abilities and the complexity of the Eternal Warriors setting. One experiences the world of this third book as significantly more expansive, alive, and realistic than the world in the first book. Likewise, the internal worlds of these characters also loom larger.
Excellent finale to this excellent trilogy. I felt a little sad when I finished as I wished the characters were around for a fourth book. I especially enjoyed the spiritual dimension – both the good and evil. Fast paced and fun read. The monsters were enticingly freakish.
At Castalia House, we are intent on building gradually, on the strong foundations of well-loved series of novels rather than chasing one-off hits. Amazon has listed Arts of Dark and Light as a series now, and the reviews for the latest installment continue to be gratifyingly positive.
Vox Day has a gift. He is exceptionally skilled at crafting viewpoints that are reasonable, relatable, emotionally compelling, and completely opposed to each other. This serves him well in the genre of epic fantasy, as it enables him to ensure the reader is fully invested in all the many pieces that make up the puzzle of a great fantasy epic.
Not only do his characters feel realized, his plot is suitably grand. From labyrinthine schemes, to an army that has yet to show its true terror, and a pervading presence of evil that threatens all of Selenoth, our heroes have quite the obstacles to overcome. With these first two books we’ve been shown small pieces of the disaster that is to befall Selenoth, and I for one, cannot wait for the next installment.
Head and shoulders above its predecessor, which is no mean feat! It manages to have multiple characters with completely different viewpoints without a) becoming a confusing mess or b) being disappointing when subbing in an uninteresting character for an interesting one, since all the characters were genuinely interesting. All were fully fleshed out and heroic in their own way. Amazing world-building also really made the story come alive, everything had a real sense of place. A fantastic read, and I can’t wait for the next book in the series!
One of my favorite, all-too-brief parts of Lord of the Rings was the brief view of things we get from an orcish perspective when Sam is temporarily bearing the ring on Frodo’s behalf; not with guilty pleasure because the orcs were bad, but because it gave us a glimpse of the world of Middle Earth and War of the Ring from such a different point of view. A Sea of Skulls, the second installment in the Arts of Dark and Lighttrilogy pentalogy set in the world of Selenoth–a fantasy realm where elves and dwarves, orcs and goblins, have been partially displaced by a Catholicized Roman Empire exerting powerful influence through the iron discipline of its legions–gives us that and much more.
If you’ve ever wondered what it would be like for Roman infantry, with their centurions and balllistae, to stand their ground against goblin hordes, war pigs, and orcish shamans (or have now begun to wonder), the world of Selenoth is for you, and the Arts of Dark and Lighttrilogy pentalogy tells a complex and engaging story of war and intrigue set in that world as the various races of Selenoth are manipulated and set against each other by powerful actors in the shadows….
This is grown-up fantasy which makes for a decent study of human (or orcish, for that matter) nature, not to mention Roman military chain of command, and entertains questions like how the seemingly inevitable decline of an advanced but decadent elven civilization could possibly be reversed, and how dwarves unexpectedly stuck in their own tunnels might feel about it. The violence depicted is quite explicit, both in the grim reality of war and especially in the opening scene of a brutal orc raid on a human village, but not exulted in, and one manages to understand the comradery-in-arms of warriors on every side of the struggle, human or otherwise.
But speaking of trilogies that are not trilogies, let’s not forget the first quarter of John C. Wright’s excellent Moth & Cobweb series. The final book of The Green Knight’s Squire have also been getting excellent reviews.
If you like the old tales of elves, heroes, Arthurian legends, men and monsters and great deeds, then you will enjoy this modern retelling. Highly enjoyable and recommended.
Swan Knight’s Sword is a fitting end to the story of Gilberec Moth, an idealistic teenager out of place in the human world who gradually becomes a brave, worthy, Christian knight….The same elements present in the earlier works are apparent here. Swashbuckling adventure featuring lavish description of mystical beings and surroundings as well as full-blooded, desperate combat. A strong sense of Christian morality. Many newly revealed secrets of both Gil’s past and the elf world.
As with the second book, there are a myriad of references, both Christian and pagan, expertly blended together. I was particularly amused by the one to a character of Edgar Rice Burroughs, an author all modern adventure writers owe a debt of gratitude to. Or the use of Roland’s horn.
However, this installment also introduces several new wrinkles. There is a more varied, consistent use of humor. Much of it comes from Ruff, Gil’s trusty dog whose barks he can understand. In fact, all the interaction with Gil talking to animals is funny. John C Wright evidently discovered the same comedic truth that Ricky Gervais has; personifying animals is always funny. There is also verbal humor and some absurdist situations.
Swan Knight’s Sword features an especially strong conclusion, being the culmination of Gil’s transformation from a strange boy into a righteous, mighty man. While it satisfyingly ends this tale of Gilberec Moth, it promises more adventure for both him and the world at large.
Swan Knight’s Sword is the best in this trilogy. A beautiful paean of adventure, courage, honor, loyalty and love. This book reminds me of the stuff I read in my youth, before the fantasy genre was a cesspool of pornography and meaningless nihilistic violence. I laughed, I cried, I wished I had a sword. But of course one does not simply walk into MordorMart and buy a sword, one must be bequeathed a sword by a father, or win one in a heroic quest. And sometimes one must hunt down and confront the magically invulnerable sasquatch that stole your father’s sword. This is one of those times…
As I mentioned in a previous post, reading Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History and the Last Man helped me articulate the difference between the smart and the brilliant, or to use the terms that are less easily confused, the VHIQ and the UHIQ.
The Fukuyama text is in blockquotes, my observations are bullet-pointed.
From By Way of an Introduction:
The distant origins of the present volume lie in an article entitled “The End of History?” which I wrote for the journal The National Interest in the summer of 1989. In it, I argued that a remarkable consensus concerning the legitimacy of liberal democracy as a system of government had emerged throughout the world over the past few years, as it conquered rival ideologies like hereditary monarchy, fascism, and most recently communism. More than that, however, I argued that liberal democracy may constitute the “end point of mankind’s ideological evolution” and the “final form of human government,” and as such constituted the “end of history.” That is, while earlier forms of government were characterized by grave defects and irrationalities that led to their eventual collapse, liberal democracy was arguably free from such fundamental internal contradictions. This was not to say that today’s stable democracies, like the United States, France, or Switzerland, were not without injustice or serious social problems. But these problems were ones of incomplete implementation of the twin principles of liberty and equality on which modern democracy is founded, rather than of flaws in the principles themselves. While some present-day countries might fail to achieve stable liberal democracy, and others might lapse back into other, more primitive forms of rule like theocracy or military dictatorship, the ideal of liberal democracy could not be improved on.
Remarkable consensuses are reliably incorrect.
Liberal democracy absolutely does not constitute the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution or the final form of human government.
It would not be unreasonable to use “the end of history” to describe a genuine such end point and final form, given the Hegelian-Marxian context. Fukuyama is clearly using History in the progressive intellectual sense, not the prosaic sense. It’s actually a rather clever title in that regard.
It’s also a ludicrous and anti-historical idea, albeit one certain to prove seductive to men of influence for precisely the same reason that Keynesian economics and Ricardian trade theory have.
After dealing with the midwit critics who have had trouble dealing with the idea of a History that is not wholly synonymous with history, he plants his flag; an act I suspect he has come to regret.
The present book is not a restatement of my original article, nor is it an effort to continue the discussion with that article’s many critics and commentators. Least of all is it an account of the end of the Cold War, or any other pressing topic in contemporary politics. While this book is informed by recent world events, its subject returns to a very old question: Whether, at the end of the twentieth century, it makes sense for us once again to speak of a coherent and directional History of mankind that will eventually lead the greater part of humanity to liberal democracy? The answer I arrive at is yes, for two separate reasons. One has to do with economics, and the other has to do with what is termed the “struggle for recognition.”
Fukuyama clearly declares that he believes in a specific, directional Marxian-style History which will eventually come to a predictable end.
Given the context of the article, Fukuyama is definitely declaring that liberal democracy constitutes the “end point of mankind’s ideological evolution” and the “final form of human government”.
He’s wrong. I don’t know his economic reasoning or his “struggle for recognition” yet, but I know that he is wrong and I know that I will be able to prove it. I can even disprove the first prt to my own satisfaction: given that he is not an economist, his economic argument must be entirely based on 1990s economic orthodoxy, which is already in tatters and was insufficient to support the philosophical case in the first place.
And here is where the tendency towards binary, or at least limited, thinking on the part of the VHIQ betrays itself.
In the course of the original debate over the National Interest article, many people assumed that the possibility of the end of history revolved around the question of whether there were viable alternatives to liberal democracy visible in the world today. There was a great deal of controversy over such questions as whether communism was truly dead, whether religion or ultranationalism might make a comeback, and the like. But the deeper and more profound question concerns the goodness of liberal democracy itself, and not only whether it will succeed against its present-day rivals. Assuming that liberal democracy is, for the moment, safe from external enemies, could we assume that successful democratic societies could remain that way indefnitely? Or is liberal democracy prey to serious internal contradictions, contradictions so serious that they will eventually undermine it as a political system? There is no doubt that contemporary democracies face any number of serious problems, from drugs, homelessness, and crime to environmental damage and the frivolity of consumerism. But these problems are not obviously insoluble on the basis of liberal principles, nor so serious that they would necessarily lead to the collapse of society as a whole, as communism collapsed in the 1980s.
A prediction about the future obviously revolves around both currently viable alternatives as well as potentially viable alternatives that are not visible today.
The deeper and more profound question does not concern the goodness of liberal democracy, but rather the existence of self-destructive internal contradictions in liberal democracy. Systems fail due to their internal contradictions; communism failed because the impossibility of socialist calculation slowed economic growth vis-a-vis capitalism. SJWism always fails due to the impossibility of social justice convergence preventing the converged organization from performing its original function. Liberal democracy – or as it is more properly termed – limited democracy – fails for much the same reason that communism does; it creates perverse incentive systems.
No, we cannot assume that successful democratic societies could remain that way indefnitely.
Yes, liberal democracy is not only prey, it is prone to internal contradictions so serious that they will eventually undermine it as a political system. Forget eternity, this is already visible everywhere from California to Switzerland.
Yes, these problems these problems are obviously insoluble on the basis of liberal principles. Not only that, but they are so serious that they will necessarily either lead to the collapse of liberal democracy or the collapse of society as a whole.
Keep in mind that these are my initial thoughts about the book by page xxi of the introduction. The clean room, as I have termed it, is already splattered with mud. Fukuyama is an erudite, thoughtful, intelligent and educated man. And yet, his enthusiasm for his potentially significant idea blinded him to its obvious flaws? This is the distinction between the VHIQ and the UHIQ. Compare this with SJWAL or Cuckservative, both of which are considerably more modest in scope.
How many potential errors can you find in either that even begin to compare with the obvious errors in this bestselling work of vast socio-political influence, which is so riddled with flaws that the author has, apparently, felt the need to blatantly lie about his original thesis?
Perhaps you will be after reading the reviews of the recently released A SEA OF SKULLS, Book Two in the Arts of Light and Dark epic fantasy series. If you haven’t started the series yet, you will probably want to start with Book One, A THRONE OF BONES, which is available in Kindle Unlimited.
Worthy successor series to LOTR “A Sea of Skulls” picks up and accelerates the pace from “A Throne of Bones”. We see some well-developed characters killed off, but encounter other interesting characters of multiple Selenoth races. Amorr and its former allies and provinces gird for war, while a Lost Legion allies with X to defend against a major orc invasion. The elves and dwarves gather their forces to defend against orcs, and also to keep a sharp eye on Man. At several places, you feel a cold chill as you realize one of the minor characters might well be one of the first race, hiding in shadows, biding its time and waiting to seize power for their own ends (enslaving or destroying the younger races). The action and lead characters are spread across the continent, where military action or political intrigue in one realm affects three or four others. The story line is woven more deftly than the first book, and increases the pull of action and intrigue.
Each race has its backstory and cultural values; gruesome as some may be, the cultures, assumptions, and lifestyles are internally consistent. Vox Day also describes each race’s military merit well, showing a consistent triad of strategy, tactics, and logistics that fits with the race’s culture. There are no all-powerful and ever-victorious species in Selenoth; the trick is in understanding your own strengths and then using you enemy’s weakness to best effect. Coalition forces work or don’t work, based on how well the commanders enhance strength and mitigate weaknesses. Political and social life are well written and reasonable for each race. Some of the best moments in the character views are watching how one observer looks in amazement or bemusement at how another race or culture lives – the fish out of water scenario. The set of viewpoint characters is finite and severely bounded, so it’s possible to keep several scattered event tracks in mind with minimal searching for a reminder.
There is a comparison to be made with A Song of Ice and Fire. By comparison, the Arts of Dark and Light is written much richer, more coherently, with a better span of scope, and with a definite conclusion in mind.
A Genre Revisited From the moment you pick up, and/or scroll through your epub device, you will not be able to put this book down until you have finished it…. If ASOS were an MMA fight, you will be punched in the face in the first thirty seconds, and continually pummeled until the end. There is no respite, no pauses in the action…you will experience Ali fighting Frazier from the moment you begin until the instant you reluctantly put the book down. Each POV character introduced is both interesting and endearing. The characters are so expertly written, that you find yourself wondering who you are rooting for. You will not need to continually consult the appendix to figure out who is speaking…the characters are immediately apparent and recognizable.
I slogged through Jordan’s Wheel of Time series years ago. I thoroughly enjoyed, and struggled through, Martin’s endless introduction of characters in his later books. Regarding both great authors, I must admit that there were times where I scrolled quickly through the flotsam to get to the action. ASOS requires no such recklessness. For those who disregard Vox Day as a Christian seeking to further his evangelistic agenda, have no fear. There is none of that. The prelude itself will avail you of any attempt to evangelize the Christian agenda…. Vox Day has successfully taken a genre and, as no author has done in the past decade, rewritten the rules for fantasy and violence.
Great novel: Better than the first As others have noted, this sequel is better than the original. The writing is better. The characters get better. The dialog gets better. Everything is better. And the first was great.
There is a love that Vox has for his characters. It shows in the richness of vision that describes them, and the way he holds them true to themselves and the culture that created them. It is easy to suspend disbelief in Selenoth and to get caught up in the narrative, carried along by the vivid “lifefullness” of his creations. Even the antagonists in the story, fighting for the “wrong” side, are delivered with an empathy to allow the reader to ride alongside them: Thinking what and how they think, feeling what and why they feel.
Wrap those characters around a exceptionally good story line and you come out with the absolute best novel of the year. I can’t recommend this book highly enough.
Fantastic Epic Fantasy I have hours poring through this monster…. and I can say it is superior in every way to its predecessor. Be forewarned… if you haven’t read A Throne of Bones recently it may be worth your while to refresh your memory a bit. This book doesn’t hold your hand. There is no backtracking to catch you up on important details you may not remember. And if you haven’t read A Throne of Bones then you absolutely cannot start with this one.
The writing is more taut. The different races… orcs… elves… dwarves… are treated much better than the standard fantasy offering and genuinely feel like distinct cultures. Some of the best chapters of the book are actually written from an orc invader’s perspective. The book is courageously written. It doesn’t play nice with your modern sensibilities… and it does not shrink from the brutal realities of invasion, warfare, and barbarism
I’ve been pointing out that fake reviews on Amazon are a potentially serious problems for years, but SJWs have repeatedly tried to claim that I am being a bully when I identify an individual has posted a fake review. I doubt they’re going to be able to get away with it much longer, though, as in addition to attacking the likes of Roosh, Cernovich, and me, they’re now attacking the President-Elect’s daughter:
Reviews of the Ivanka Trump Women’s Issa boots, which tout a list price of $180, included this: “These boots were perfect for wiping my feet on the Constitution and trampling the civil liberties and basic human rights of my fellow Americans,” wrote a user named Susan Harper. “The spike heel is ideal for grinding democracy into the ground, or simply kicking the downtrodden as you stride past.”
Amazon user AR called them “two extremely right boots” in her one star review and added that the “sizing and all other info is in Russian, but they are made in China.”
The stinging insults go on and on. Virtually every Ivanka Trump product on Amazon has at least one scathing review designed as a barb against the businesswoman, particularly as she relates to her father’s political agenda.
Rise of the ‘Activist Reviews’
This is hardly the first time products on Amazon (which did not return request for comment) have been assailed by trolls — just recently Megyn Kelly’s book “Settle For More” was targeted, and the site worked to scrub the hateful comments. These guerrilla attacks, if you will, have become more common in recent years.
“We’ve seen these ‘activist reviews’ for several years but they appear to be getting more common,” said Jason “RetailGeek” Goldberg, SVP commerce and content practice at Razorfish.
“In some ways, these smear campaign reviews are the natural extension of ‘funny fake reviews,’ which have been occurring for a number of years. Amazon even embraced these joke reviews by curating a list of their favorites. So now that the ‘funny’ reviews have taken a negative turn, retailers need to crack down on them in order to preserve the credibility and trust in the whole review system.”
Speaking of fake reviews on Amazon, here is the latest, left on SJWAL by one “Em”.
The book is comical in its lack of self awareness and hypocrisy. I agree that there are some strains of liberalism that are obnoxious and bad and anti-free speech and so on. But Milo is one of them! One of the many examples: He complains about liberals getting others fired for their beliefs and then is smugly self-congratulatory when it happens to liberals after Gamergate. His examples of “the left” behaving badly include individual nobodies tweeting him. The whole book struck me as petty and quite frankly kind of pathetic.
Amazon is taking fake reviews seriously, but they haven’t designed a proper system for detecting them yet. I expect they will in the next year or two. Once they start banning fake reviewers from being able to access their system at all, and paying a bounty to people who correctly identify them, they’ll be able to clean up their system in no time.
Gisela Hausmann, Amazon e-commerce expert and author of “Naked Truths About Getting Product Reviews on Amazon.com” noted: “Amazon’s algorithm notices disproportionate numbers of negative reviews [and] weeds out these reviews according to their criteria, as defined in their Community Guidelines.”
In time, these reviews will be plucked from the site, and aggressive trolls could face lawsuits for their words, even if they were simply horsing around. Retailers are taking an aggressive stand to crack down on fake reviewers; Amazon has sued more than 1000, for example,” said Goldberg.
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.
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.
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!
“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.
The following review appeared in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
:
