Brian's other works


Moderators: Omphalos, Freakzilla, ᴶᵛᵀᴬ

Slugger
Posts: 158
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 20:13

Brian's other works

Post by Slugger »

Has anyone ever read any of Brian's other works, the one's he's published by himself or the final one with Frank? How do they compare to his collaborations with TheHack? Better/worse? Childish writing style?
User avatar
Nekhrun
Icelandic Wiener
Posts: 3298
Joined: 10 Feb 2008 16:27

Re: Brian's other works

Post by Nekhrun »

I mentioned yesterday that I tried to read Race for God. I actually tried to read it three times before I tossed it. It was just so damn boring I couldn't take it. Everything was just so obvious and child-like. I don't know about any of his other work though. Byron wets his panties over Sudanna, Sudanna but that's got to be just as shitty.
"If he was here to discuss Dune, he sure as hell picked a dumb way to do it." -Omphalos :character-cookiemonster:

Happy Memorial Day everyone! -James C. Harwood

"Three of my videos have over 100 views."
"Over 500 views for my 'Open Question' video." -Nebiros
User avatar
TheDukester
Posts: 3808
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 13:44
Location: Operation Enduring Bacon

Re: Brian's other works

Post by TheDukester »

Brian Herbert is proof of two things:

1. Writing talent is not necessarily a genetic trait;

2. Anyone can be published if they have the correct name.
"Anything I write will be remembered and listed in bibliographies on Dune for several hundred years ..." — some delusional halfwit troll.
User avatar
SandChigger
KJASF Ground Zero
Posts: 14492
Joined: 08 Feb 2008 22:29
Location: A continuing state of irritation
Contact:

Re: Brian's other works

Post by SandChigger »

I've read Sidney's Comet and skimmed parts of his first Timeweb.

The writing of the first (Comet) seemed really much better than the McDune shit and the Timeweb thing, but the exaggerated silliness passing for "humor" and "irony" soon became really tiring and it was a chore to finish.

The first Timeweb book (it's another trilogy) is just awful. So much so that I can't even begin to imagine actually reading it from cover to cover. But Mr Teg borrowed my copy and actually did so. Ask him for the nasty details. ;)

BoBo should probably go back to selling insurance.

If he hasn't made enough from raping his dad's legacy yet to retire on. :evil:
"Let the dead give water to the dead. As for me, it's NO MORE FUCKING TEARS!"
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Brian's other works

Post by Freakzilla »

SandChigger wrote:If he hasn't made enough from raping his dad's legacy yet to retire on. :evil:
Official OH holiday #2, unless KJA retires first, but I'm affraid he'll go kicking and screaming.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Brian's other works

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

I read the one he wrote with FH when I was a kid, I don't remember it being either good or bad, I had no taste then, I only wanted to be entertained.
Image
User avatar
TheDukester
Posts: 3808
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 13:44
Location: Operation Enduring Bacon

Re: Brian's other works

Post by TheDukester »

What's funny is that you described the average preek. :lol:
"Anything I write will be remembered and listed in bibliographies on Dune for several hundred years ..." — some delusional halfwit troll.
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Brian's other works

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

Which is fine. I mean that - we all spend a lot of time insulting and harrassing people who don't take writing seriously as a fine art, and as such are ok with enjoying the new Dune. I hate what KJABH did to one of the finest peices of lit ever written, but I have no issue with people who read it just for entertainment.

I would bet that every person in this forum has one art form or another that they do not enjoy as fine art, only as low art or pop art or entertainment. In the music thread I hear people talking about all kinds of bands that are just barely (if at all) art to me, because the majority of people just look at music as entertainment. Most people who look at visual art only want to be entertained, either by pleasing colours or imagery, or by the sheer technical skill of the artist (I'm often guilty of this myself, visual art is not my thing).

Sorry for the out of nowhere rant, but I think we get a little high and mighty sometimes because we see people taking lightly something that we take seriously - but we all probably go do the same thing with what someone else takes seriously.

I DO take issue with preeks when they try to argue that KJABH is good art though - that's a different issue altogether than just enjoying their works.
Image
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Brian's other works

Post by Freakzilla »

I may not know art, but I know what I like!
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
Apjak
Posts: 519
Joined: 30 Jun 2008 12:06
Location: Kansas City

Re: Brian's other works

Post by Apjak »

Freakzilla wrote:I may not know art, but I know what I like!
Are they too Jewish then? I tried to make Judas the most Jewish.
I don't think the author should make the reader do that much work - Kevin J. Anderson
We think we've updated 'Dune' for a modern readership without dumbing it down.- Brian Herbert
There’s an unwritten compact between you and the reader. If someone enters a bookstore and sets down hard earned money(energy) for your book, you owe that person some entertainment and as much more as you can give. - Frank Herbert
User avatar
Hunchback Jack
Posts: 1983
Joined: 30 May 2008 15:02
Location: California, USA

Re: Brian's other works

Post by Hunchback Jack »

Frankly, there are books I read now just to be entertained. I enjoy challenging, complex, rich books, but sometimes I need a break and want a laugh or a cheap thrill.

Having said that, though, I don't think "light and entertaining" is the same as "badly written". I loathe the KJA/BH monstrosities not just because they're Dune-lite, but because they're simply appalling novels.

HBJ
"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
- Carl Sagan

I'm still very proud of The Quarry but … let's face it; in the end the real best way to sign off would have been with a great big rollicking Culture novel.
- Iain Banks
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Brian's other works

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

Hunchback Jack wrote:Frankly, there are books I read now just to be entertained. I enjoy challenging, complex, rich books, but sometimes I need a break and want a laugh or a cheap thrill.

Having said that, though, I don't think "light and entertaining" is the same as "badly written". I loathe the KJA/BH monstrosities not just because they're Dune-lite, but because they're simply appalling novels.

HBJ
That's about how I am too.
Image
User avatar
SadisticCynic
Posts: 2053
Joined: 07 Apr 2009 09:28
Location: In Time or in Space?

Re: Brian's other works

Post by SadisticCynic »

A Thing of Eternity wrote:Which is fine. I mean that - we all spend a lot of time insulting and harrassing people who don't take writing seriously as a fine art, and as such are ok with enjoying the new Dune. I hate what KJABH did to one of the finest peices of lit ever written, but I have no issue with people who read it just for entertainment.

I would bet that every person in this forum has one art form or another that they do not enjoy as fine art, only as low art or pop art or entertainment. In the music thread I hear people talking about all kinds of bands that are just barely (if at all) art to me, because the majority of people just look at music as entertainment. Most people who look at visual art only want to be entertained, either by pleasing colours or imagery, or by the sheer technical skill of the artist (I'm often guilty of this myself, visual art is not my thing).

Sorry for the out of nowhere rant, but I think we get a little high and mighty sometimes because we see people taking lightly something that we take seriously - but we all probably go do the same thing with what someone else takes seriously.

I DO take issue with preeks when they try to argue that KJABH is good art though - that's a different issue altogether than just enjoying their works.

Out of curiosity, what is it you look for in music that makes it 'art'? To me, there are two main aspects of music (to one who is not a music theorist that is) and they are 1, the sound; that is, the music is pleasing to the ear and 2, technical skill; that is, the music is 'complex'. The combination of the two is an 'art' i.e. musicality. When reading comments on some of the music I listen to, I find people often fall into one of the two camps. For example, alot of people who like metal seem to be quite proud of technical prowess. Especially death metal, to the point where there is a subgenre 'technical death metal'. This often leads to the music sounding mathematical and flat. On the other hand much pop music is simple in structure and almost cringeworthy in it's catchiness.
Ah English, the language where pretty much any word can have any meaning! - A Thing of Eternity
User avatar
chanilover
Posts: 1644
Joined: 18 Feb 2008 08:29

Re: Brian's other works

Post by chanilover »

Slugger wrote:Has anyone ever read any of Brian's other works, the one's he's published by himself or the final one with Frank?
HELL NO!
"You and your buddies and that b*tch Mandy are nothing but a gang of lying, socially maladjusted losers." - St Hypatia of Arrakeen.
Image
Image
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Brian's other works

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

SadisticCynic wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:Which is fine. I mean that - we all spend a lot of time insulting and harrassing people who don't take writing seriously as a fine art, and as such are ok with enjoying the new Dune. I hate what KJABH did to one of the finest peices of lit ever written, but I have no issue with people who read it just for entertainment.
I would bet that every person in this forum has one art form or another that they do not enjoy as fine art, only as low art or pop art or entertainment. In the music thread I hear people talking about all kinds of bands that are just barely (if at all) art to me, because the majority of people just look at music as entertainment. Most people who look at visual art only want to be entertained, either by pleasing colours or imagery, or by the sheer technical skill of the artist (I'm often guilty of this myself, visual art is not my thing).
Sorry for the out of nowhere rant, but I think we get a little high and mighty sometimes because we see people taking lightly something that we take seriously - but we all probably go do the same thing with what someone else takes seriously.
I DO take issue with preeks when they try to argue that KJABH is good art though - that's a different issue altogether than just enjoying their works.
Out of curiosity, what is it you look for in music that makes it 'art'? To me, there are two main aspects of music (to one who is not a music theorist that is) and they are 1, the sound; that is, the music is pleasing to the ear and 2, technical skill; that is, the music is 'complex'. The combination of the two is an 'art' i.e. musicality. When reading comments on some of the music I listen to, I find people often fall into one of the two camps. For example, alot of people who like metal seem to be quite proud of technical prowess. Especially death metal, to the point where there is a subgenre 'technical death metal'. This often leads to the music sounding mathematical and flat. On the other hand much pop music is simple in structure and almost cringeworthy in it's catchiness.
Oh gods, very tough question. No one other than the artist ever knows how much art truly went into a work, and I would never say that something is completely devoid of art. Art isn't a black and white thing, there are shades. You are totally correct that too much technicality can leave something flat and lifeless - the most complex and difficult music on earth might be very low art (and I'm a total tech-prog-metalhead so I don't say that lightly), technical skill in NO way contributes to whether something is artistic, and NEITHER does whether or not it sounds good. "An art" is very different from "art" - and nailing down a definition for art is impossible (not "close" to impossible, it is impossible).

How much the listener enjoys the music has nothing to do with its artistic merits, that falls under entertainment (which is not an insult, all art contains some amount of entertainment - the two are inseperable but different sides of the same coin). Also, how impressed the listener is with the skill of the musicians has nothing to do with how artistic something is. A truly deeply artistic song might require very little technicality, but be terrible to listen to, or it might be highly complex and great to listen to.

A simple song can be extremely artistic, or not. Same goes for complex music. And at the end of the day, no one but the artist knows how much "art" (loosely defined here as "expression" or "deep meaning/intent") went into something.

However, the observer can make a good guess. For example, KJA's work is very low art. Very low - if you press someone to explain exactly why his work is technically poor we can come up with lots, but when it comes to explaining exactly how we know that it is poor art, well - that's more of a total sense that we get from reading his work, a sense that he simply had "nothing to say", and put little or no heart and soul into the work.

That's a simplistic explanation, we could talk our whole lives about this and barely scratch the surface though.
Image
User avatar
SadisticCynic
Posts: 2053
Joined: 07 Apr 2009 09:28
Location: In Time or in Space?

Re: Brian's other works

Post by SadisticCynic »

That's a simplistic explanation, we could talk our whole lives about this and barely scratch the surface though.
Still a good answer though. For me, the distinction between something being art and entertainment is that art manages to evoke a feeling of beauty, it stimulates the aesthetic sense. It's difficult to describe but its definitely there.

But then, of course, we get to 'What is beauty?', which, probably, is essentially the same question as before... :think:

:oops:

Oh, and by the way, on the thread topic, I haven't read any other books by Brian... and probably never will at this point.
Last edited by SadisticCynic on 27 Aug 2009 19:44, edited 1 time in total.
Ah English, the language where pretty much any word can have any meaning! - A Thing of Eternity
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Brian's other works

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

SadisticCynic wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:That's a simplistic explanation, we could talk our whole lives about this and barely scratch the surface though.
Still a good answer though. For me, the distinction between something being art and entertainment is that art manages to evoke a feeling of beauty, it stimulates the aesthetic sense. It's difficult to describe but its definitely there.

But then, of course, we get to 'What is beauty?', which, probably, is essentially the same question as before... :think:
Would you agree that art can be ugly though? Not just ugly to you type thing, but ugly period?
Image
User avatar
SadisticCynic
Posts: 2053
Joined: 07 Apr 2009 09:28
Location: In Time or in Space?

Re: Brian's other works

Post by SadisticCynic »

Hmmm... I'm not quite sure what you mean, but perhaps some art is designed to shock, to knock people off-balance maybe by challenging a pre-conceived notion of what is attractive, desirable, even moral. Am I on the right wavelength?
Ah English, the language where pretty much any word can have any meaning! - A Thing of Eternity
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Brian's other works

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

SadisticCynic wrote:Hmmm... I'm not quite sure what you mean, but perhaps some art is designed to shock, to knock people off-balance maybe by challenging a pre-conceived notion of what is attractive, desirable, even moral. Am I on the right wavelength?
Yes and no, what you say here could certainly be included in what I'm talking about but doesn't encompass what I'm saying. A peice of art can be ugly, and have no intention of expanding someone's notion of beauty (or other concepts you listed), or to shock the veiwer. Art can convey meaning, and that meaning doesn't have to be in any way shape or form be positive (unless one considers any creation of art positive, in which case that might be the sole positive feature of a work). A work could simply educate, or deconstruct, or just plain bring something into the light.

I live with a visual artist who does very good art (though I'm not a visual art person other than tattoos, and those are usually lower art IMO, not to say that the medium can't have true art, but it is rare), and it is almost all ugly, if something happens to be beautiful it is just that, it "happens to be". And the purpose of much of it is not to make someone change their thinking persay, it is just an expression of a negative feeling (much of the work is about clinical depression and taking medication). Her paintings and multimedia peices are often very uncomfortable to look at (though I enjoy most of them more than most paintings I see, because I see art, not entertainment when I see her work), but I don't think the intent of the peices is necessarily to make the veiwer uncomfortable, or any reaction in particular. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure the veiwer is considered much at all in her work, most of it seems to be just for her.
Image
User avatar
SadisticCynic
Posts: 2053
Joined: 07 Apr 2009 09:28
Location: In Time or in Space?

Re: Brian's other works

Post by SadisticCynic »

Perhaps it can be ugly in that it creates something similar to cognitive dissonance which, apparently, is

the feeling of uncomfortable tension which comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in the mind at the same time.

And by that I mean you find yourself with the thought, this is repulsive, for whatever reason, yet on another level it is enjoyable or thought-provoking, or any number of other positive qualities (which may or may not actually feel positive).

I had a friend at school who would draw pictures that I suppose could be a little uncomfortable to look at, in that they expressed negative emotion (like you mention). He would obtain his inspiration from song lyrics. But at the same time they were definitely art.

Another example is the idea of the protagonist losing, which you mention elsewhere. In general the protagonist is the good guy and we expect that good will triumph over evil (that sounded so cliché) but when this doesn't happen we can still see it as art and it has meaning e.g. Dune Messiah.


If ugly art is art that portrays something negative, then I would say art definitely can be ugly. (And in fact I often enjoy it to be so).
Ah English, the language where pretty much any word can have any meaning! - A Thing of Eternity
Slugger
Posts: 158
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 20:13

Re: Brian's other works

Post by Slugger »

"Art" (generally) is any man-made creation that the artist presents (intends) as such.

A sunset isn't a piece of art, but a photograph or painting of the sunset is.
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Brian's other works

Post by Freakzilla »

Slugger wrote:"Art" (generally) is any man-made creation that the artist presents (intends) as such.

A sunset isn't a piece of art, but a photograph or painting of the sunset is.
Bah, good photography requires and artistic sense but is essentially the result of proper training on a piece of machinery.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
Slugger
Posts: 158
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 20:13

Re: Brian's other works

Post by Slugger »

Freakzilla wrote:
Slugger wrote:"Art" (generally) is any man-made creation that the artist presents (intends) as such.

A sunset isn't a piece of art, but a photograph or painting of the sunset is.
Bah, good photography requires and artistic sense but is essentially the result of proper training on a piece of machinery.
If it is intended as art. :wink:

But I don't think those millions of blurry, out-of-focused, revealing pictures that girls post on Facebook count.
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Brian's other works

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

Slugger wrote:"Art" (generally) is any man-made creation that the artist presents (intends) as such.
Yup, that's about it.
Image
User avatar
SadisticCynic
Posts: 2053
Joined: 07 Apr 2009 09:28
Location: In Time or in Space?

Re: Brian's other works

Post by SadisticCynic »

Just one more point before I become completely incoherent. There is a book called: The divine proportion: a study in mathematical beauty By H. E. Huntley. I didn't get to read all of it, but in the first chapter he essentially lays out what he considers beauty to be. The part I found interesting was that beauty is the appreciation of an act of creation.
Ah English, the language where pretty much any word can have any meaning! - A Thing of Eternity
Post Reply