Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

As far as HH novels go it is really hit or miss. Some are page turners and others are just very painful to read.

Horus Rising, False Gods, Galaxy in Flames and Flight of the Eisenstein were good. Flight of the Eisenstein was acutally my favorite of the first four.

Fulgrim: Hated it.
Descent of Angels: It was 'ok'
Legion: Long read.
Battle of the Abyss: Hated it
Mechanicum: Started off nice and struggling to finish it.
Fallen Angels: It was 'ok'.
Thousand Sons: Pretty good actually
First Heretic: My favorite so far.
Prospero Burns: Loved it.

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

No opinion honestly offered is either manufactured or false. If the OP has found recent HH books to be less entertaining than the earlier ones, then he is perfectly entitled to say so and that viewpoint is completely valid. Just as you're entitled to disagree, what you're not allowed to do is dismiss it because you do.

As a valid analogy there is a clear loss of direction, pace and quality in the Wheel of Time series both genuine failings on RJ's part in his ability to carry such a large series and his genuine health problems. It was still good. But those criticisms are more than true.

That's not an analogy.

The HH series is different authors so claiming there has been a fall off in quality (or any suggestion that ADB is a bad author) makes me laugh as the quality is up and down, between individual authors in specific cases and in the variance between quality in different authors. The overall drop off in guidance is an editorial one who are guiding the ark and milking it, bad business and bad artistry in composing the story. But of course there are genuinely amazing things coming out (again, hate to be that fanboy but anything ADB produces) and Dan Abnett still occasionally pulls awesomeness out of his ass.

I've not noticed anyone suggesting ADB is a bad author. He's one of BL's best, but he's not likely to be winning the Booker prize in the next couple of years either.

The frustration is just bleeding through from either bias against the HH series that was present before reading a sentence (looking at you old timers) or the people running the show who look to try and drag this to 150 books +.

I'm still enjoying the HH books, and I've been kicking around since RT, so careful who you tar with that brush. But please, rather than attacking people for having opinions, why not provide us with some positive input on why you think the quality of the series has remained high? Or do you agree, and are therefore just here to moan at people?

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

No opinion honestly offered is either manufactured or false. If the OP has found recent HH books to be less entertaining than the earlier ones, then he is perfectly entitled to say so and that viewpoint is completely valid. Just as you're entitled to disagree, what you're not allowed to do is dismiss it because you do.

Yes I can. You are getting mixed up in objective assessment of writing and subjective taste. Both are equally valid. There is both good and bad writing throughout the series and the only part that makes any sense in terms of long going quality discussions is the writing. Measurably its up and down throughout.

Taste wise. Well hell everyone will say differently there. But I think again that will be coloured by the extreme length the business modellers are pushing for.

As a valid analogy there is a clear loss of direction, pace and quality in the Wheel of Time series both genuine failings on RJ's part in his ability to carry such a large series and his genuine health problems. It was still good. But those criticisms are more than true.

That's not an analogy.

Just because there are multiple authors isn't an excuse for thin plot, one-dimensional action-figure characters and dialogue stripped from B movies.

The benefit of having multiple writers is that you can cut or ignore the bad ones. Not give everybody equal time, especially if sub-par YA fiction is the highest they can achieve as a writer.

Plus, it is very possible for a handful of writers to all be getting worse simultaneously. If they're all being given progressively shorter deadlines, for example, or if they're starting to suffer from burnout, or are running out of things to write about, or are getting a slowly more overwhelmed editor. There are lots of ways that quality can be generally declining over a group of people over time.

I mean, it takes a lot of people to make a car, but we can still talk about the time recently where Mercedes had reliability problems, for example.

Well I don't think Dan Or Aaron are getting progressively worse, hell not particularly a GM fan but he is hit or miss throughout the series. I don't think the plot is thin (the overall 40k setting and HH is fine) and dialogue is fine with in certain novels.

I think you have poor choice in novels and what they are about due to the extending of it. I think you have spectacularly poor authors which is a criticism I'm more than happy to say the editorial team are crazy guilty of, but I can't say quality is getting worse because Betrayer was amazing, Kharn was crazy good and you know quite a few others we'd all probably love if not for it being contained in a series with the aforementioned flaws.

I'll really get behind the business model killing what was and could be a great series.

The other, main problem with the entire premise is that we know how this story ends. So far, they haven't really done a super-good job of making most of those involved particularly interesting. Of the major players in the Heresy, on both sides, just about all of them strike me as fairly stupid.

Psienesis wrote:The other, main problem with the entire premise is that we know how this story ends.

Well, that's not necessarily a bad thing. I mean, you're told on practically the first page of Dune that the duke is getting killed, so it's far from a surprise when it happens, but that doesn't make things worse. If anything, it make it better, as it's the proper use of suspense.

The only problem, of course, is when you get unfocused and disorganized on the way to the event you're building towards.

It is in BL's financial interest to drag things on as long as possible, because obviously if we get to the end of the Heresy, that is the end of the line for the Heresy setting, unless they want to then move into the next phase of the Scouring.

However this dragging on leads to an increasing sense of boredom as there is little suspense when we know certain characters will survive (or will die but at a later date) and also it starts to conflict with the original conception of Horus launching a sudden rebellion with a decapitation strike aimed at Terra before the rest of the Imperium could recover and mass its still larger forces against Horus. Now with the novels and the Forge World books we see Horus do apparent illogical and stupid things of splitting his forces all over the place, grabbing all sorts of secondary objectives here and there, with ostensible rationale of seizing economic and production facilities to feed his forces as if for a longer conflict. However it is also shown that many of these conquests are superficial and there is still significant ongoing insurgency activity or Imperial counterattacks retaking territory. While this might feed into the whole apocalyptic theme of everything going up in flames, it also makes Horus look foolish for wasting valuable strength for conquests that melt away as soon as his forces move on.

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

As a valid analogy there is a clear loss of direction, pace and quality in the Wheel of Time series both genuine failings on RJ's part in his ability to carry such a large series and his genuine health problems. It was still good. But those criticisms are more than true.

The HH series is different authors so claiming there has been a fall off in quality (or any suggestion that ADB is a bad author) makes me laugh as the quality is up and down, between individual authors in specific cases and in the variance between quality in different authors. The overall drop off in guidance is an editorial one who are guiding the ark and milking it, bad business and bad artistry in composing the story. But of course there are genuinely amazing things coming out (again, hate to be that fanboy but anything ADB produces) and Dan Abnett still occasionally pulls awesomeness out of his ass.

The frustration is just bleeding through from either bias against the HH series that was present before reading a sentence (looking at you old timers) or the people running the show who look to try and drag this to 150 books +.

I don't think anyone is looking for a linear progression, but it would be nice if the quality was consistent and the action was directly proportional to the advancement of events.

As it stands, the series spends a lot of time focused on specific battles that don't seem to be very important to the actual events of the Heresy, and there are all the McGuffins starting to appear that detract from the grimdark the series is supposed to portray.

I mean, look at Vengeful Spirit. Why is this book out there? The major events are that a lot of Black Legion marines get killed, and Horus goes on some vision quest that doesn't happen in-universe. We learn the Emperor made some deal with the dark powers, but there are thousands of ways to reveal that without necessarily needing another book.

Now look at the series.

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Home/our-ranges-horus-heresy.html

This started out as a series of paperbacks describing the conditions that lead to this huge uprising. Now there are all these audiodramas, special editions, reprints, novellas, etc that depict very specific people doing some nutty things with no significance beyond simple character development.

What ever happened to just telling a story and doing it well? This is off course.

I stopped reading them quite a while back. I got through the first few. The first 5 were pretty alright, Descent of Angels was only really a "40k" book for the last quarter of the book (the rest could have been generic "any-land" high Fantasy stuff), Legion was....a thing, and Battle for the Abyss was just boring, I didn't make it through. I read Mechanicum, but honestly it was unremarkable enough that I don't remember anything about it. I read Prospero Burns and A Thousand Sons, but aside from really poisoning any remaining respect for and interest I made have had in the Space Wolves, they didn't do much for me.

I stopped after that.

Honestly, the HH books have really killed what was interesting about the history of the event. There was a mystique about the Horus Heresy before these books, it was a foggy recollection of Myth regarding the most legendary of beings and powers beyond comprehension, the true details of which remained only as fragments within the twisted minds of the warped Traitor Legionnaires.

The books have basically destroyed that, and reduced most of it to human ego's, daddy issues, and simple politics with a thick coating of bolter porn. The highly variable quality of the writing has obviously been an issue, and it has absolutely not helped that there's been what, a dozen authors for the series?

FW's Horus Heresy series is a bit better, and feels like an entirely different universe, and as a result is more tolerable, though still suffers from many of the same issues.

That said, I'm of the opinion that most current 40k fluff and stuff coming out of Black Library isn't particularly great at all, my favorite 40k books, the ones I will actually go back and re-read, are mostly all older books.

The Inquisition Trilogy (based on late RT-era/early 2nd edition fluff, probably the best 40k books out there), Storm of Iron. some of the older Ciaphas Cain books, Dead Men Walking (the only "newer" book, 4 years old now), and the first few Gaunts Ghosts books (some derpier parts notwithstanding).

Odd how Fulgrim seems to be largely slated as one of the weaker books in the series. I thought it was one of the better books - although I do have a vested interest in the EC legion.

To the earlier post, I agree that Betrayer was a very good read. That book gave me some hope the series would pick up, then the travesty that was Angel Exterminatus dropped. I like all things EC but that book left a sour taste.

All these books people are saying they hated I actually really enjoyed haha. Legion, Prospero Burns, Angel Exterminatus, Vengeful Spirit... I really liked them.

I also think, if you liked all the mystery surrounding the Heresy, you maybe shouldn't have read the 'Horus Heresy' books. I like that they're explaining the events.

Jaq Draco lives wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

No opinion honestly offered is either manufactured or false. If the OP has found recent HH books to be less entertaining than the earlier ones, then he is perfectly entitled to say so and that viewpoint is completely valid. Just as you're entitled to disagree, what you're not allowed to do is dismiss it because you do.

Yes I can. You are getting mixed up in objective assessment of writing and subjective taste. Both are equally valid. There is both good and bad writing throughout the series and the only part that makes any sense in terms of long going quality discussions is the writing. Measurably its up and down throughout.

Taste wise. Well hell everyone will say differently there. But I think again that will be coloured by the extreme length the business modellers are pushing for.

I'll be honest, I stopped taking you seriously at this point, and the conversation is going nowhere. That you're suggesting that it is possible to objectively assess a creative work demonstrates you've got, at best, a tenuous grasp of the argument.

Unless by objectively measuring the quality of the books you mean things like spelling errors, grammatical mistakes, incorrect punctuation etc? Because then we're on completely different subjects.

 ChazSexington wrote:
HH and wh40k books are all pulp, and thus of fairly low quality. Of course, there are exciting moments, but what makes them generally quite bad is the style of prose. I understand descriptions are important, but as a speed reader I have never read books with quite this verbose.

What they should've done is put them ALL into short stories. They are generally far more interesting, because they don't have the luxury of 3 paragraph descriptions of Sanguinius' passed out body. IMHO, the only really good story is the Serpent Beneath; it has good plot, short and sweet, and not overly verbose. The plot isn't drawn out over hundreds of pages of adjectives.

The books became rather expensive.
Newer books are 128 pages and cost 15 to 20 €.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I stopped reading them quite a while back. I got through the first few. The first 5 were pretty alright, Descent of Angels was only really a "40k" book for the last quarter of the book (the rest could have been generic "any-land" high Fantasy stuff), Legion was....a thing, and Battle for the Abyss was just boring, I didn't make it through. I read Mechanicum, but honestly it was unremarkable enough that I don't remember anything about it. I read Prospero Burns and A Thousand Sons, but aside from really poisoning any remaining respect for and interest I made have had in the Space Wolves, they didn't do much for me.

I stopped after that.

Honestly, the HH books have really killed what was interesting about the history of the event. There was a mystique about the Horus Heresy before these books, it was a foggy recollection of Myth regarding the most legendary of beings and powers beyond comprehension, the true details of which remained only as fragments within the twisted minds of the warped Traitor Legionnaires.

The books have basically destroyed that, and reduced most of it to human ego's, daddy issues, and simple politics with a thick coating of bolter porn. The highly variable quality of the writing has obviously been an issue, and it has absolutely not helped that there's been what, a dozen authors for the series?

FW's Horus Heresy series is a bit better, and feels like an entirely different universe, and as a result is more tolerable, though still suffers from many of the same issues.

That said, I'm of the opinion that most current 40k fluff and stuff coming out of Black Library isn't particularly great at all, my favorite 40k books, the ones I will actually go back and re-read, are mostly all older books.

The Inquisition Trilogy (based on late RT-era/early 2nd edition fluff, probably the best 40k books out there), Storm of Iron. some of the older Ciaphas Cain books, Dead Men Walking (the only "newer" book, 4 years old now), and the first few Gaunts Ghosts books (some derpier parts notwithstanding).

This.

All of it. The HH books have pulled too much of the curtain back IMO.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

No opinion honestly offered is either manufactured or false. If the OP has found recent HH books to be less entertaining than the earlier ones, then he is perfectly entitled to say so and that viewpoint is completely valid. Just as you're entitled to disagree, what you're not allowed to do is dismiss it because you do.

Yes I can. You are getting mixed up in objective assessment of writing and subjective taste. Both are equally valid. There is both good and bad writing throughout the series and the only part that makes any sense in terms of long going quality discussions is the writing. Measurably its up and down throughout.

Taste wise. Well hell everyone will say differently there. But I think again that will be coloured by the extreme length the business modellers are pushing for.

I'll be honest, I stopped taking you seriously at this point, and the conversation is going nowhere. That you're suggesting that it is possible to objectively assess a creative work demonstrates you've got, at best, a tenuous grasp of the argument.

Unless by objectively measuring the quality of the books you mean things like spelling errors, grammatical mistakes, incorrect punctuation etc? Because then we're on completely different subjects.

So by your mindset no book reviews or writing skill exists, the ability to craft and pace a narrative or develop characters. An entire industry is defunct! Yes I am not taking you remotely seriously at this point either. Hooray!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

As a valid analogy there is a clear loss of direction, pace and quality in the Wheel of Time series both genuine failings on RJ's part in his ability to carry such a large series and his genuine health problems. It was still good. But those criticisms are more than true.

The HH series is different authors so claiming there has been a fall off in quality (or any suggestion that ADB is a bad author) makes me laugh as the quality is up and down, between individual authors in specific cases and in the variance between quality in different authors. The overall drop off in guidance is an editorial one who are guiding the ark and milking it, bad business and bad artistry in composing the story. But of course there are genuinely amazing things coming out (again, hate to be that fanboy but anything ADB produces) and Dan Abnett still occasionally pulls awesomeness out of his ass.

The frustration is just bleeding through from either bias against the HH series that was present before reading a sentence (looking at you old timers) or the people running the show who look to try and drag this to 150 books +.

I don't think anyone is looking for a linear progression, but it would be nice if the quality was consistent and the action was directly proportional to the advancement of events.

As it stands, the series spends a lot of time focused on specific battles that don't seem to be very important to the actual events of the Heresy, and there are all the McGuffins starting to appear that detract from the grimdark the series is supposed to portray.

I mean, look at Vengeful Spirit. Why is this book out there? The major events are that a lot of Black Legion marines get killed, and Horus goes on some vision quest that doesn't happen in-universe. We learn the Emperor made some deal with the dark powers, but there are thousands of ways to reveal that without necessarily needing another book.

Now look at the series.

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Home/our-ranges-horus-heresy.html

This started out as a series of paperbacks describing the conditions that lead to this huge uprising. Now there are all these audiodramas, special editions, reprints, novellas, etc that depict very specific people doing some nutty things with no significance beyond simple character development.

What ever happened to just telling a story and doing it well? This is off course.

There is nothing wrong in what you've said here. I fundamentally agree.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

As a valid analogy there is a clear loss of direction, pace and quality in the Wheel of Time series both genuine failings on RJ's part in his ability to carry such a large series and his genuine health problems. It was still good. But those criticisms are more than true.

The HH series is different authors so claiming there has been a fall off in quality (or any suggestion that ADB is a bad author) makes me laugh as the quality is up and down, between individual authors in specific cases and in the variance between quality in different authors. The overall drop off in guidance is an editorial one who are guiding the ark and milking it, bad business and bad artistry in composing the story. But of course there are genuinely amazing things coming out (again, hate to be that fanboy but anything ADB produces) and Dan Abnett still occasionally pulls awesomeness out of his ass.

The frustration is just bleeding through from either bias against the HH series that was present before reading a sentence (looking at you old timers) or the people running the show who look to try and drag this to 150 books +.

I don't think anyone is looking for a linear progression, but it would be nice if the quality was consistent and the action was directly proportional to the advancement of events.

As it stands, the series spends a lot of time focused on specific battles that don't seem to be very important to the actual events of the Heresy, and there are all the McGuffins starting to appear that detract from the grimdark the series is supposed to portray.

I mean, look at Vengeful Spirit. Why is this book out there? The major events are that a lot of Black Legion marines get killed, and Horus goes on some vision quest that doesn't happen in-universe. We learn the Emperor made some deal with the dark powers, but there are thousands of ways to reveal that without necessarily needing another book.

Now look at the series.

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Home/our-ranges-horus-heresy.html

This started out as a series of paperbacks describing the conditions that lead to this huge uprising. Now there are all these audiodramas, special editions, reprints, novellas, etc that depict very specific people doing some nutty things with no significance beyond simple character development.

What ever happened to just telling a story and doing it well? This is off course.

vengeful spirit actually was one of the more relevent books of late. Molech is specificly mentioned in various stuff it's a battle we KNOW happens and is noted as being a "important world en route to terra" this book just gave Horus a reason to stop

ADB's stuff is surprisingly good and often leaves me wondering why he works at BL of all places.

First Heretic was a real book and transcended most (Cough cyrene end cough) pulp qualities.

Betrayer should have been unreadable but ended up being my favorite BL book.

Except for some of the parts with Argel Tal. His cringe factor got so high at times I assume he was using tumblr in between his "tactical brooding sessions."

Jaq Draco lives wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

No opinion honestly offered is either manufactured or false. If the OP has found recent HH books to be less entertaining than the earlier ones, then he is perfectly entitled to say so and that viewpoint is completely valid. Just as you're entitled to disagree, what you're not allowed to do is dismiss it because you do.

Yes I can. You are getting mixed up in objective assessment of writing and subjective taste. Both are equally valid. There is both good and bad writing throughout the series and the only part that makes any sense in terms of long going quality discussions is the writing. Measurably its up and down throughout.

Taste wise. Well hell everyone will say differently there. But I think again that will be coloured by the extreme length the business modellers are pushing for.

I'll be honest, I stopped taking you seriously at this point, and the conversation is going nowhere. That you're suggesting that it is possible to objectively assess a creative work demonstrates you've got, at best, a tenuous grasp of the argument.

Unless by objectively measuring the quality of the books you mean things like spelling errors, grammatical mistakes, incorrect punctuation etc? Because then we're on completely different subjects.

So by your mindset no book reviews or writing skill exists, the ability to craft and pace a narrative or develop characters. An entire industry is defunct! Yes I am not taking you remotely seriously at this point either. Hooray!

Honestly, how do people (and you're not the first, but maybe one of the most spectacular) struggle with this concept?

Take the most popular, widely regarded work in any medium, whether that be cinema, literature, sculpture, whatever, and there will still be a spectrum of reactions, the reason that work will be considered exceptional will be because it is well regarded by the majority.

There is no way of objectively measuring this!

Some things just have broad appeal, what qualities those things have that results in the broad appeal is not quantifiable. One could perhaps make some links between subject matter or techniques and popularity, but even then, a work that features those things has no guarantee of being popular.

Sure, a well paced narrative and well developed characters are a good thing, but these aren't objective measurements, they are terminology that allows one to express what one finds appealing about a book, film or whatever.

Regardless, what you may find a well-paced narrative others may find skates over certain aspects they felt could have been explored further, what I find a well developed character may well ignore a certain aspect that another person would have liked to seen emphasised more.

Far from me suggesting that book reviews, or any other form of critique, shouldn't exist, it is actually your idea that does this - if it were possible to objectively assess a creative work for it's creative merit then we wouldn't need critics, as we'd simply be able to download an app that would have every single thing anyone ever created on it rated because it would all be treated the same. What I'm saying is because anything creative must, by definition, provoke an entirely subjective reaction, critics perform a useful function by articulating these often widely varying reactions, and can offer an alternate view to our own, or useful guidance should one find a critic who shares a similar viewpoint in the medium in question to our own.

So, go ahead, kindly outline how you'd go about objectively assessing the creative work of any BL book, and I'll happily tear your reasoning to pieces, because what you're stating is impossible.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
What books would you recommend for someone who just wants to read the progression of the main HH storyline and avoid all legion specific or short-story-compilation novels that break off at tangents?

Haha. That's remarkably east.

First Herestic -> Horus Rising -> False Gods -> Galaxy in Flames -> (maybe Fulgrim) -> A Thousand Sons -> Know No Fear, and you're caught up and can wait for the Battle of Terra book whenever it comes out.

I'd toss vengeful spirit onto that list, I think it's reasonably important eneugh to be included.

That's pretty low man, trying to trick people into reading Vengeful Spirit. That's like telling them to read Battle for the Abyss.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
As if there was a linear progression of quality! These criticisms are so manufactured and false.

No opinion honestly offered is either manufactured or false. If the OP has found recent HH books to be less entertaining than the earlier ones, then he is perfectly entitled to say so and that viewpoint is completely valid. Just as you're entitled to disagree, what you're not allowed to do is dismiss it because you do.

Yes I can. You are getting mixed up in objective assessment of writing and subjective taste. Both are equally valid. There is both good and bad writing throughout the series and the only part that makes any sense in terms of long going quality discussions is the writing. Measurably its up and down throughout.

Taste wise. Well hell everyone will say differently there. But I think again that will be coloured by the extreme length the business modellers are pushing for.

I'll be honest, I stopped taking you seriously at this point, and the conversation is going nowhere. That you're suggesting that it is possible to objectively assess a creative work demonstrates you've got, at best, a tenuous grasp of the argument.

Unless by objectively measuring the quality of the books you mean things like spelling errors, grammatical mistakes, incorrect punctuation etc? Because then we're on completely different subjects.

So by your mindset no book reviews or writing skill exists, the ability to craft and pace a narrative or develop characters. An entire industry is defunct! Yes I am not taking you remotely seriously at this point either. Hooray!

Honestly, how do people (and you're not the first, but maybe one of the most spectacular) struggle with this concept?

Take the most popular, widely regarded work in any medium, whether that be cinema, literature, sculpture, whatever, and there will still be a spectrum of reactions, the reason that work will be considered exceptional will be because it is well regarded by the majority.

There is no way of objectively measuring this!

Some things just have broad appeal, what qualities those things have that results in the broad appeal is not quantifiable. One could perhaps make some links between subject matter or techniques and popularity, but even then, a work that features those things has no guarantee of being popular.

Sure, a well paced narrative and well developed characters are a good thing, but these aren't objective measurements, they are terminology that allows one to express what one finds appealing about a book, film or whatever.

Regardless, what you may find a well-paced narrative others may find skates over certain aspects they felt could have been explored further, what I find a well developed character may well ignore a certain aspect that another person would have liked to seen emphasised more.

Far from me suggesting that book reviews, or any other form of critique, shouldn't exist, it is actually your idea that does this - if it were possible to objectively assess a creative work for it's creative merit then we wouldn't need critics, as we'd simply be able to download an app that would have every single thing anyone ever created on it rated because it would all be treated the same. What I'm saying is because anything creative must, by definition, provoke an entirely subjective reaction, critics perform a useful function by articulating these often widely varying reactions, and can offer an alternate view to our own, or useful guidance should one find a critic who shares a similar viewpoint in the medium in question to our own.

So, go ahead, kindly outline how you'd go about objectively assessing the creative work of any BL book, and I'll happily tear your reasoning to pieces, because what you're stating is impossible.

Yeah your reading comprehension is obviously suffering as I clearly mentioned the fact that there is both subjective and objective assessments of writing earlier on. I don't know what else to say to someone who can't read my posts, and again got nothing to say to someone who thinks skillful writing doesn't exist. Certainly no one who has ever taken a detailed interest in writing and the various skillset that goes into it, those that people review, on a peer reviewed objective basis as well as offering their general opinions about how the piece effected their tastes and subjective basis for offering opinions and evaluations.

I mean anyone vaguely interested in literature would get this, so just stop talking to me.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Honestly, how do people (and you're not the first, but maybe one of the most spectacular) struggle with this concept?

Take the most popular, widely regarded work in any medium, whether that be cinema, literature, sculpture, whatever, and there will still be a spectrum of reactions, the reason that work will be considered exceptional will be because it is well regarded by the majority.

There is no way of objectively measuring this!

Some things just have broad appeal, what qualities those things have that results in the broad appeal is not quantifiable. One could perhaps make some links between subject matter or techniques and popularity, but even then, a work that features those things has no guarantee of being popular.

Sure, a well paced narrative and well developed characters are a good thing, but these aren't objective measurements, they are terminology that allows one to express what one finds appealing about a book, film or whatever.

Regardless, what you may find a well-paced narrative others may find skates over certain aspects they felt could have been explored further, what I find a well developed character may well ignore a certain aspect that another person would have liked to seen emphasised more.

Far from me suggesting that book reviews, or any other form of critique, shouldn't exist, it is actually your idea that does this - if it were possible to objectively assess a creative work for it's creative merit then we wouldn't need critics, as we'd simply be able to download an app that would have every single thing anyone ever created on it rated because it would all be treated the same. What I'm saying is because anything creative must, by definition, provoke an entirely subjective reaction, critics perform a useful function by articulating these often widely varying reactions, and can offer an alternate view to our own, or useful guidance should one find a critic who shares a similar viewpoint in the medium in question to our own.

So, go ahead, kindly outline how you'd go about objectively assessing the creative work of any BL book, and I'll happily tear your reasoning to pieces, because what you're stating is impossible.

I get your point about the objective quality of great literature, but this is a commercial product with a defined purpose (to make money and leverage mass market appeal in a profitable way). On these grounds alone, there are some objective assessments that can be made relative to the quality of any book in the Black Library series.

Quality, as a word, really refers to many things, and I get in trouble on this board for using it too loosely. In the case of the Black Library novels, we are getting a dramatic retelling of events from 10,000 years ago through an in-universe perspective. We already know the major outcomes, so Quality can be considered a matter of how well the books fulfill the expectations of readers.

If we put aside the relative strengths of individual authors and their storytelling techniques, I think it's possible to get to a reasonable set of characteristics that define whether or not any particular book in the series contributes to fulfilling people's expectations. These can be expressed as questions, and objective assessments can be gained by the answers people give.

I think the following lead to an objective assessment of any book in the Horus Heresy series:

1) Does the book fulfill the basic expectations of the reader? Was it worth your time to go through the pages?

2) Does the book advance the narrative towards the outcomes we know are going to happen? Has the in-universe timeline advanced since you started reading the book?

3) Does the book stay focused on the central narrative and contribute to it in a significant way? Significant means the story was enough to warrant a book on the subject.

4) Does the book provide you with insights about in-universe events that are new or otherwise revealing? Did you learn anything you did not know before?

5) Does the story being told require you to suspend disbelief at a level you are satisfied with? Was it way out of bounds or wacky?

This is just a suggested criteria and I don't mean to tell people how to evaluate a novel, but think about the last book you read based on these questions. Quality probably means you answered yes to 4 out of 5 questions (at the amount GW charges, it should mean 5 out of 5).

If we wanted to get to a true objective truth on the matter, we simply tally up people's votes and present them as evidence in support of a specific decision.

Or -- did you mean all objective truth must be observable and a priori? Anything involving judgement must be quantifiable based on some universal scale that allows comparisons of radically different things? If so, that's a pretty steep demand there Mr. Kant.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
What books would you recommend for someone who just wants to read the progression of the main HH storyline and avoid all legion specific or short-story-compilation novels that break off at tangents?

Haha. That's remarkably east.

First Herestic -> Horus Rising -> False Gods -> Galaxy in Flames -> (maybe Fulgrim) -> A Thousand Sons -> Know No Fear, and you're caught up and can wait for the Battle of Terra book whenever it comes out.

I'd toss vengeful spirit onto that list, I think it's reasonably important eneugh to be included.

That's pretty low man, trying to trick people into reading Vengeful Spirit. That's like telling them to read Battle for the Abyss.

Vengeful Spirit is NOT Battle for the Abysmal! Ironically, I think the most important story-advancing part of VS is what wasn't detailed in the book (ie Horus' 'journey').

I'd say you need to add Mechanicum to the list too, as it brings you up to speed on events on Mars.

 techsoldaten wrote:


I think the following lead to an objective assessment of any book in the Horus Heresy series:

1) Does the book fulfill the basic expectations of the reader? Was it worth your time to go through the pages?

Every reader's expectations will be different, subtly or remarkably. Therefore this is subjective. If a majority of readers agreed, then you would have good evidence it was a popular book, not that it was an objectively good one.

2) Does the book advance the narrative towards the outcomes we know are going to happen? Has the in-universe timeline advanced since you started reading the book?

This isn't necessarily a measure of quality for everyone, some people (like myself) are happy to meander about, reading stories of events that aren't necessarily central to the War On Terra narrative, others are frustrated by the lack of progress in this regard (if threads discussing it are to be believed.)

3) Does the book stay focused on the central narrative and contribute to it in a significant way? Significant means the story was enough to warrant a book on the subject.

Again, not a measure of quality, there are many character driven works (in a broader sense, not specifically HH or BL) where essentially nothing happens for the entire duration of the book, it doesn't stop these works being critically acclaimed or popular (I find a lot of Mike Leigh films to be like this, not to my taste, but definitely generally well regarded.)

4) Does the book provide you with insights about in-universe events that are new or otherwise revealing? Did you learn anything you did not know before?

This is certainly a criteria I would apply for an HH book, it could probably be used as a predictor of popularity, but I could list 20 bullet point facts about the existence and destruction of one of the lost legions - that would fulfil this requirement but it would make a lousy book.

5) Does the story being told require you to suspend disbelief at a level you are satisfied with? Was it way out of bounds or wacky?

Again, this is down to the individual, so while it may be able to produce a consensus opinion from the readership, it would in no way provide a definitive measure of quality, it would just demonstrate people's opinions.

This is just a suggested criteria and I don't mean to tell people how to evaluate a novel, but think about the last book you read based on these questions. Quality probably means you answered yes to 4 out of 5 questions (at the amount GW charges, it should mean 5 out of 5).

If we wanted to get to a true objective truth on the matter, we simply tally up people's votes and present them as evidence in support of a specific decision.

Or -- did you mean all objective truth must be observable and a priori? Anything involving judgement must be quantifiable based on some universal scale that allows comparisons of radically different things? If so, that's a pretty steep demand there Mr. Kant.

My assertion is simply this - the success of any creative work is predicated on getting a reaction from it's audience. A commercial creative work's primary objective is to entertain that audience. It is impossible to objectively assess what an individual will be entertained by, or to what degree, as everyone has different tastes. Therefore, while it may be possible to assess and predict what will be popular, it is impossible to objectively assess what any one given person will think of any one given work via a set of criteria. I enjoyed Deliverance Lost, for instance, while many share that opinion, it seems many more did not. It is impossible to draw up a set of criteria that would accurately account for both viewpoints, because it is a fundamentally subjective thing.

I guess I am the minority in saying I enjoyed all so far, on my 10th. Fulgrim was a bit dry, but after chapter 17 it gets kicked into high gear, for me anyway.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:


I think the following lead to an objective assessment of any book in the Horus Heresy series:

1) Does the book fulfill the basic expectations of the reader? Was it worth your time to go through the pages?

Every reader's expectations will be different, subtly or remarkably. Therefore this is subjective. If a majority of readers agreed, then you would have good evidence it was a popular book, not that it was an objectively good one.

You are just splitting hairs by creating a distinction between 'popular' and 'quality', and introducing the word 'good' to the debate. As long as your assertions dwell purely in the ambiguous lexicon of speculative truths, there's no way for you to prove your point - you're just choosing to have them mean whatever it is you want. This makes you an evil, double plus ungood man.

If quality is judged solely by the enjoyment of individual readers, I would argue the word has no meaning at all. Instead, it might be useful to take a definition that is actually in use. This is what the British Standards Association has to say about quality:
"Degree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfills requirements." The standard defines requirement as need or expectation, and would be completely appropriate to apply to books produced as part of a commercial series.

I guarantee you this is how the quality of series like Harry Potter, Hunger Games and the like are judged by their publishers. The opinions of individual readers are meaningless unless the series is able to enjoy commercial success.

 Azreal13 wrote:

2) Does the book advance the narrative towards the outcomes we know are going to happen? Has the in-universe timeline advanced since you started reading the book?

This isn't necessarily a measure of quality for everyone, some people (like myself) are happy to meander about, reading stories of events that aren't necessarily central to the War On Terra narrative, others are frustrated by the lack of progress in this regard (if threads discussing it are to be believed.)

Why do you think I care about your definition of quality so much? There are other definitions in common use that are much more meaningful and can lead to quantifiable measurements.

I am suggesting a framework for how to determine whether or not something is good and you are insisting your point of view is so much more important without suggesting an alternative. This is pure, self-centered snobbery.

 Azreal13 wrote:

3) Does the book stay focused on the central narrative and contribute to it in a significant way? Significant means the story was enough to warrant a book on the subject.

Again, not a measure of quality, there are many character driven works (in a broader sense, not specifically HH or BL) where essentially nothing happens for the entire duration of the book, it doesn't stop these works being critically acclaimed or popular (I find a lot of Mike Leigh films to be like this, not to my taste, but definitely generally well regarded.)

4) Does the book provide you with insights about in-universe events that are new or otherwise revealing? Did you learn anything you did not know before?

This is certainly a criteria I would apply for an HH book, it could probably be used as a predictor of popularity, but I could list 20 bullet point facts about the existence and destruction of one of the lost legions - that would fulfil this requirement but it would make a lousy book.

You are completely misstating the point. I suggested a framework where a book would need to possess 4 of 5 characteristics to be considered quality and all you can do is point out what you consider to be exceptions to one rule.

It's a scale, not a checklist.

 Azreal13 wrote:

5) Does the story being told require you to suspend disbelief at a level you are satisfied with? Was it way out of bounds or wacky?

Again, this is down to the individual, so while it may be able to produce a consensus opinion from the readership, it would in no way provide a definitive measure of quality, it would just demonstrate people's opinions.

Conduct a focus group of readers, ask the question, keep track of the answers and come up with a score. Quantitative. Used as part of quality improvement processes worldwide, including in creative professions such as writing books, making movies, drawing comic books, hardcore porn, etc.

 Azreal13 wrote:

This is just a suggested criteria and I don't mean to tell people how to evaluate a novel, but think about the last book you read based on these questions. Quality probably means you answered yes to 4 out of 5 questions (at the amount GW charges, it should mean 5 out of 5).

If we wanted to get to a true objective truth on the matter, we simply tally up people's votes and present them as evidence in support of a specific decision.

Or -- did you mean all objective truth must be observable and a priori? Anything involving judgement must be quantifiable based on some universal scale that allows comparisons of radically different things? If so, that's a pretty steep demand there Mr. Kant.

My assertion is simply this - the success of any creative work is predicated on getting a reaction from it's audience. A commercial creative work's primary objective is to entertain that audience. It is impossible to objectively assess what an individual will be entertained by, or to what degree, as everyone has different tastes. Therefore, while it may be possible to assess and predict what will be popular, it is impossible to objectively assess what any one given person will think of any one given work via a set of criteria. I enjoyed Deliverance Lost, for instance, while many share that opinion, it seems many more did not. It is impossible to draw up a set of criteria that would accurately account for both viewpoints, because it is a fundamentally subjective thing.

Your assertion is based on whatever you want the words to mean. Find a commonly held definition and explain your point in relation to it. Otherwise you are just making stuff up and not really asserting anything except how important you think you are.

As far as determining what any one person would think about a creative work, no one cares. Really, and this is objectively true. Production companies care about the opinions of broad audiences and invest a lot of resources in focus groups, critical reviews and public relations to influence them. They don't spend money sending people to your house to learn your opinion, it's meaningless and has nothing to do with any commonly accepted definition of the word 'quality.'

Don't let this hurt your feelings. The number of people who's individual opinions about commercial book series like this actually matter is very, very small. We are all in the same boat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 conker249 wrote:
I guess I am the minority in saying I enjoyed all so far, on my 10th. Fulgrim was a bit dry, but after chapter 17 it gets kicked into high gear, for me anyway.

The first 10 novels were not all that bad. I enjoyed Fulgrim as well, but thought the author was trying to be a little too much Oscar Wilde.

You honestly think drawing a line between what is good and what is popular is splitting hairs? Honestly? There's not one example in the whole of history where something wasn't the best example of whatever it was, was the most successful? The two do not necessarily correlate - especially so with creative works.

Tell you what, rather than continue with all this to and fro, just outline a set of criteria which will accurately predict which of the BL books, heck, just the HH stories, I will enjoy.

Do that, and you've torpedoed my whole argument.

If you read any of my earlier posts, you would know a) I don't think anyone would like any of them and b) I don't care what you enjoy. You give me enough data about yourself, I will find a nice market segment to fit you in and figure out what you will probably enjoy.

Although, based on this obsession with self gratification as a standard for quality, i'm betting you are a brony. Let me get you some books about rainbows and cotton candy.

Just like candyfloss, you eat too much and you begin to get sick and tired of it.

Before you know it, you're vomiting at the mere thought of another 40K romp through another war zone with the obligatory Space Marine / Human female will-they-won't-they but they won't plotline. Similar battle scenes and assaults, Space Marine questions his loyalty and honour. Space Marine broods over Chapters dark secret stash of their Primachs Pornography, Space Marine worries about the honour of their chapter and if they can live up to it yada yada yada yawn.

 techsoldaten wrote:
If you read any of my earlier posts, you would know a) I don't think anyone would like any of them and b) I don't care what you enjoy. You give me enough data about yourself, I will find a nice market segment to fit you in and figure out what you will probably enjoy.

Although, based on this obsession with self gratification as a standard for quality, i'm betting you are a brony. Let me get you some books about rainbows and cotton candy.

It is nothing to do with self-gratification, it is making what I felt was the fairly basic assumption that the primary purpose of any film, novel, album etc, any commercial creative work of that sort, is to entertain it's audience, therefore that would be the primary measure of quality for a book of the sort.

I don't have to offer you any data, as apparently you're arguing that it is possible to objectively assess the quality of a book or other creative work (because I'm arguing it's impossible and you're disagreeing, so that's what you're saying, right?) and the very essence of an objective assessment is to remove any personal preferences from the equation. Therefore what I like, and what you like, aren't relevant.