|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:29 pm
Laurell is so much better than Anne.
I love how the Anita Blake books have humor,
which Anne's books kind of...well, lack.
Plus you can relate better to LKH's books.
And as my friend's dad says,
"The Anita Blake books have detail and stuff,
but Anne Rice's books...well, she kind of goes
into the history of every rock that anyone has
ever stepped on."
xD
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:52 pm
Valas Hume Anne Rice is the Queen of Boring Authors stare
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 1:18 am
Laurell K. Hamilton is practical. She describes what's necessary and fills up the empty space with dialogue and action, and it's low-brow without being insulting. The fresh style that we feed upon because we're a fast-thinking generation.
Anne Rice drives me absolutely insane. I don't mind that she draws her descriptions out, because she definitely has a lot of skill. However, she has little going on during those descriptions. No suspense, just depth into things that are as necessary as an extra hole in the head. She can spend a chapter worth describing a room, and while I find that admirable on one side, it's a bloody pain on the other. Dialogue makes a book more real, and shoves the reader into the world. Upon reading Anne Rice, it's impossible to stay grounded in her world, because you're taking an hour to simply notice hair blowing in the wind. I apologize to her fans, but her writing is deeply flawed when it comes to those with a short attention span, or a taste for action, or at least with the expectation of plot movement - in the same book. Sure, the plot shifts, but you have to read six books to notice. Ontop of all that, I can agree with Social Suicide, there. There's some high-brow humour, but that's only when her dry characters feel a little playful, or decide to mock, not really used effectively to manipulate the reader's emotions.
Don't get me wrong. Old styles and old English have a powerful effect on me, but I can't give Rice more kudos than actually using that form. She has skill, but no real tact. Her predominant technique doesn't go far beyond demonstrating that she knows how to use adjectives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:26 am
I have started feeling the same way about LKH's sex scenes! I mean when it takes 50 pages just to go from first touch to final orgasm, it gets a bit tiresome. I love LKH, but I am desperate for the fast paced, page turning mysteries and danger that happened in GP-OB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:56 pm
Narniakat I have started feeling the same way about LKH's sex scenes! I mean when it takes 50 pages just to go from first touch to final orgasm, it gets a bit tiresome. I love LKH, but I am desperate for the fast paced, page turning mysteries and danger that happened in GP-OB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:45 am
Actually, I'm more of an Anne Rice fan, before her husband died. I love the detail she puts into her work. Her novels have more elegance to them, which makes the wording beautiful.
Laurell's writing is brash and unrefined, which is nice sometimes, but I crave the elegance. This is probably why you'll most likely find me reading more Jane Austen or the Bronte sister's novels, rather than modern authors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:00 pm
Yeah, there's definitely a craving for elegance, in a high-brow mannerism that keeps the reader in a world far too intricate for the LKH style. However, in my opinion, I find that the said elegance can be abused, and rather harshly. I enjoy description - I fancy myself capable of the same technique - but to an extent.
And I can agree with Narniakat - the sex scenes occasionally take more description than one of Rice's hair-blowing chapters, but I think it's mainly tasteful. It's a special twist that we find ourselves so attached to certain characters that allows us to enjoy scenes when it includes those characters..
I'd like to venture out to say that I have a feeling that Hamilton is trying to find that equilibrium that exists between the two obvious time frames: before and after the ardeur. I think she's trying to find that yummy balance of action, danger and suspense with some tasteful sex and emotional issues. Her novels are split from suspense to romance, and those are different genres for a reason. It's harder to reach that shade of grey between without stepping towards one or the other, and I'd be willing to bet that she's working at it. I highly doubt she decided after OB that she wanted to have her plot go from interesting and gripping to pointless sex. We'll see what she has in store for us. The peek of her talent has yet to come~ ^_^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:09 pm
I, in my 20yrs, have never been able to read Anne Rice... but i picked up Guilty Pleasures and couldnt put the series down...i beat someone up bc they had the book i wanted...and wasnt going fast enough... i'd never do that for Anne Rice... Valas Hume I'm curious about what you all think. Do you LOVE LKH but despise Anne Rice or are you impartial question exclaim
Personally, I'm not a fan of Anne Rice's writing style, its too drawn out for me. She takes too long to describe something that needs 2-3 words or maybe a full sentence. If I look past her drawn out style, her World is too boring for me. I just don't feel the depth that Laurell K. Hamilton has.
Style wise, I feel Laurell K. Hamilton is a superior author because of the depth of EVERYTHING. From main characters to thee most minor, they all have a realism about them. As much as I dislike Gill the were-fox, I got a sense of how real his fear & terror were, in Narcissus in Chains. I almost felt bad for him, still wanted someone to shoot him though twisted As imaginative as her World is, I just can identify easier with her storytelling ability & writing prowess
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:10 am
I've always loved Anne Rice. It was her Vampie Chronicles that first got me into the world of vampires. But honestly, I would pick LKH over her any day. LKH I think is a better in depth writer, and her world and her characters just seem so much more real and toucable than Anne Rice's characters. Though Anne Rice is good in her own right; I just feel like I can connect w/her characters. LKH all the way for me!! Though in all honesty, she doesn't compare to Jaqueline Carey...but this isn't a guild about her... stressed sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 6:36 am
I think it's silly to even began trying to compare Anne to Laurell. Yes, they both write about vampires but their writing styles are totally different. Laurel is more modern and her approach to vampire culture and the world that surrounds them is entirely fictional (not to say Anne's isn't since of course vampire's don't exist). Anne's style is more classic and usually involves a history and romance that Laurell just can't create. Not to mention Laurell's purpose is to write about the life of a vampire executioner while Anne's is to write about the life of the actual vampire. They're pretty much opperating on two opposite ends of the spectrum.
Don't get me wrong. I like both authors and think they're both talented. I just don't think you can compare Laurell to Anne. Someone said Anne is like the mother and that would make Laurell one of the many children. Gifted child, but child none the less.
I hear lots of talk about Anne's work being drawn out and boring.. Has anyone read any book after NiC? Entire chapters dedicated to three minute sexual encounters are just boring. Her stories of late consist of so much tedious, pointless sex that there's no longer room for important things like solving memories. She's hardly writing about the executioner anymore. More like the den mother/house harlot. But I stray..
Laurel has two main series that are both practically clones of each other. She makes it work and I respect her for that but that doesn't show much for her creative ability. Her characters may have started as human and personable but they have flown beyond that into beings with superhuman/cartoony characteristics with no purpose in life but to serve as sex objects. If anyone has read not only the Chronicles but also the Mayfair trilogy should be able to see Anne's ability to create not only a glamorous vampire world but real human like characters with human flaws. To say her characters aren't human by just reading the Chronicles would be foolish.. Of course, silly! They aren't human like because they aren't human to begin with.
If forced to choose of course I'd choose Anne. Still though.. comparing the two would be like comparing chocolate to oranges. They're from two different worlds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 11:34 am
Laurell K. Hamilton's stories are exciting and keep her readers sitting, at the edge of their beds/ seats. On the other hand, Anne Rice will spend a remarkable amount of time describing a hill, and on that hill is a tree. In this tree is a nest that holds the eggs, of a small bird. But what's this..? One of the eggs has fallen to the ground.
My conclusion with a li'l l33t- speak, to add some flavor:
L.K.H. pwns all. <3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:50 pm
I second what Lolli Gag said. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 5:14 pm
I think each author has their own style of writing. Laurell's style in the Anitaverse is from the point of view the heroine and the world is comprised of more than just human's and vampires. Of course I've only read The Vampire Chronicles of Anne Rice's, so maybe there's more to her world than that. I like both authors but I definitely prefer Laurell. I used to be a fan of Anne's but then I picked up an Anita Blake book and that spoiled me for all other vampire books. Laurell just has a way of describing things and wording phrases that I prefer over almost anyone else's writing. It doesn't mean that I don't like other author's vampire stories, it just means that I tend to compare the books to Anita Blake books, and for me there's no contest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 6:19 pm
Anne Rice is a good Author, but her last 3 books have disapponed me, they usually intrest me with Lesats's wit and the other's common sense trying to do someting about Lestat. But now~~~ She's beging to bore me.
Hamilton has yet to dissapont though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
iStoleYurVamps
iStoleYurVamps
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:21 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
