Is it just me or is it Stackpole?

[abou]

I recently managed to get my hands on a copy of Grave Covenant, which is great because I've been meaning to read all of the Twilight of the Clans series.  However, I'm only three chapters in and I'm already starting to get annoyed.  I can't tell if it's Stackpole's writing in general or just his characterizations of the major players we see.

Specifically, I'm bothered by what I see in the third chapter where Victor, Hohiro, Kai, Morgan, Jerry Cranston, and Theodore are having their conversation.  It's not that there are people from different realms getting along -- if anything, that should be expected and it makes sense considering where the universe is at the time.  It's not the characters themselves -- I like them all (at least when they're written by other writers).  I'm not sure what it is, but it just doesn't sit right with me.

I think it comes down to Victor's training in what I think is Iaido or maybe it is Stackpole's channelling of the late 90s/early 00s zeitgeist where everyone was fascinated in everything Japanese and all internal monolog had to be melodramatic.  This idea that Hanse Davion has this sort of ridiculous perception gap of his understanding of the Draconis Combine; that Hohiro teaches Victor how to use a Katana, but Victor teaches Hohiro boxing -- all of this represents Stackpole's inability to really deal with nuance.  Everything has to be in absolutes.

This isn't just a dig at the Combine.  You can just take a look at any other of Stackpole's books and the roles flip.  I only mention those examples because I came across them in the past 30 minutes.  I'm seriously supposed to believe that Victor hadn't been at least taught some form of fencing?  Not even just sabre?  But he has boxing?  Again: absolutes of elegance vs. (at least perceived) brutishness.

So why is this in the Inner Sphere board?  Well, I suppose it could have gone into the General board, but it's Stackpole's approach to Inner Sphere characters that I think turns people off to certain factions or turns them on to others.  This goes all the way back to the Warrior Trilogy and continues up to the last book he's written.  Many of these characters that were movers and shakers were fleshed out under his watch.

Stackpole's books do have a history of selling well.  Maybe he just writes for his audience or maybe that's simply his style and it works for the audience.  But I can't really be the only one who notices this, can I?

[Underscore]

Nope, I can't stand his writing either. It might sound odd, but I rarely feel like he likes what's he's writing. It feels more like he's someone who's been paid to do a job, and he's just not going to commit to much to it. I haven't looked at his political stuff, but I do kinda of wonder if it's same. That said there are worse BT authors.

[Caesar Steiner for Archon]

It's not just you. Stackpole does an awful job of conveying any kind of subtlety or nuance in anything he's ever done. It's just with Star Wars we didn't notice.

[Lost_Heretic]

It's not just you. Stackpole does an awful job of conveying any kind of subtlety or nuance in anything he's ever done. It's just with Star Wars we didn't notice.

Wow, no nuance about that sweeping statement.

Honestly, there aren't too many subtle themes anywhere in Battletech. Just last night I was reading Broken Blade by Steven Mohan and the short story just hits you over the head with the "moral" at the end. No show, just tell.

If you want some sort of complex fiction, go read Dune or something by Asimov.




Tangent:

Actually, now that I think about it, Stackpole writes rather plot driven novels. I know it's a tough distinction, but it seems like his characters are usually "riding the wave" in a way. Examples are Will in The Dragon Crown saga and Phelan in The Blood of Kerensky trilogy. I tend to like watching the story unfold, but perhaps you guys are the types that prefer strong character interaction?

[Caesar Steiner for Archon]

Fiction doesn't need to be laden with complex themes to be believable. Just look at how his characters talk. It's not a conversation, they just give speeches. People don't talk like that. You can't just have your characters come out and say how they feel. That makes me angry!

[17thRecon]

Tangent:

Actually, now that I think about it, Stackpole writes rather plot driven novels. I know it's a tough distinction, but it seems like his characters are usually "riding the wave" in a way. Examples are Will in The Dragon Crown saga and Phelan in The Blood of Kerensky trilogy. I tend to like watching the story unfold, but perhaps you guys are the types that prefer strong character interaction?

Pretty good description of it.  Taking out personal feelings (I read one of his letters where he talks about fans who dislike the direction of the battletech books and how "even if you could do it better, you really couldn't because all of your ideas are based off of my ideas"....coming from someone who writes for multiple lines that were created by other people, just seemed kinda cocky and hypocritical, end gripe.) I always thought his "storys" were decent, but not a single character he wrote ever became a favorite of mine.  They all seemed very basic "here is the confident/ brash leader", "here is the sinister scheemer guy", etc.

[roosterboy]

"even if you could do it better, you really couldn't because all of your ideas are based off of my ideas"

That's not even remotely what he said.

[17thRecon]

That's not even remotely what he said.

I read it long ago, and paraphrased it (horribly, obviously,  ;D), but after reading it, that was the feeling and tone I remembered getting out of it.    At the same time I was reading that, I was giving one of his original fantasy novels a try and ended up putting it down about halfway finished because it was horrible.  Those two things combined had left a bad taste from Stackpole in my mouth.  That said, I never disliked any of the BT novels he wrote and I'm not trying to bash Stackpole (in hindsight, probably should have just left that bit out of the initial post, to prevent that, so sorry).

[ATN082268]

That's not even remotely what he said.

  Here it is:

<<Don’t write me telling me your ideas of how the universe could be done better. First off, if you approach things logically and build on what’s been laid out in the novels, your ideas for what should happen in the future are likely my ideas, since I’m the one who has been layering in the foreshadowing and hints upon which you’ll build your future. Second, I do this for a living. If everyone could do what I do, I’d be selling bacon-cheeseburger heart attacks at some fast food joint. It’s not that your ideas won’t be good, its that they won’t be good enough to make the universe sing and scream. Third, and very important, you don’t know enough of the other things going on to be able to provide suggestions that will work to shape the universe into what we need it to be. Lastly, you’re not paying me, so I can’t listen to your input anyway.>>

[Guardsman]

I’ve usually enjoyed Michael A. Stackpole’s work. It’s been a while since I read any of his novels, but I enjoyed the Warrior Trilogy, Blood of Kerensky, Bred for War, Dark Age, etc.

[Neufeld]

It seems to me that Stackpole writes better and more interesting "Bad guys" than "Good guys". His "good guys" tends to me Mary Sueish.

[mechgregor]

  Here it is:

<<Don’t write me telling me your ideas of how the universe could be done better. First off, if you approach things logically and build on what’s been laid out in the novels, your ideas for what should happen in the future are likely my ideas, since I’m the one who has been layering in the foreshadowing and hints upon which you’ll build your future. Second, I do this for a living. If everyone could do what I do, I’d be selling bacon-cheeseburger heart attacks at some fast food joint. It’s not that your ideas won’t be good, its that they won’t be good enough to make the universe sing and scream. Third, and very important, you don’t know enough of the other things going on to be able to provide suggestions that will work to shape the universe into what we need it to be. Lastly, you’re not paying me, so I can’t listen to your input anyway.>>

Now I remember why I dislike this guy

[JPArbiter]

Now I remember why I dislike this guy

because he says he has worked hard at his craft for decades, puts tons of thought into his work, and tries to keep plot threads well thought out?  or was it that last line of "because you are not paying me I can not use your ideas."  That is just a hard legal fact any first year BAR student can tell you.

Mr. Stackpoles statment, though a little curt, is pretty much the same as Herbs many "Hello, for various reasons I can not take your suggestions into account. Thank you"

[ATN082268]

because he says he has worked hard at his craft for decades, puts tons of thought into his work, and tries to keep plot threads well thought out?  or was it that last line of "because you are not paying me I can not use your ideas."  That is just a hard legal fact any first year BAR student can tell you.

Mr. Stackpoles statment, though a little curt, is pretty much the same as Herbs many "Hello, for various reasons I can not take your suggestions into account. Thank you"

<<Snip from Mr. Stackpole's statement>>

<<First off, if you approach things logically and build on what’s been laid out in the novels, your ideas for what should happen in the future are likely my ideas, since I’m the one who has been layering in the foreshadowing and hints upon which you’ll build your future.>>

  When he comes to the conclusion that your ideas can't possibly be good enough to use and if they were, they were his ideas already, that comes off as pretty arrogant. Despite beliefs to the contrary, no one has the cornered the market on good ideas in the Battletech universe :)

-Andrew

[mechgregor]

"It's not that your ideas won't be good, it's that they won't be good enough to make the universe sing and scream"...

I've read his Battletech novels, he's not making the universe sing or scream either, so for him to take the time to actually put this nonsense out there is ridiculous. He's the last person who should be crowing about his chops as a writer.

Just an opinion mind you, if you like the man's work then more power to you. I'm more discerning when it comes to what I enjoy and out of all the authors who have written in the setting, Stackpole is strictly middle tier.

[Minerva]

Stackpole writing technique is essentially based on following ideas:

First, he has rule that each character uses roughly 30000 words per novel. Thus he at first assigns a set number of main characters based on total words available. Let's assume 100000 words and thus see three characters and call them A, B and C.

Second, he invents some kind of major conflict in end and what character A/B/C will do during it. The next part of his technique is deciding what kind of characterization A, B and C need to be. Stackpole starts from assumption that all characters are essentially finished and they do not really need to grow anything more (i.e. their personalities do not change during the novel). This line of thinking has profound effect on actual writing and plot development.

Third, Stackpole divides his book to three parts on 25/50/25 for introduction, development and conclusion. This is fairly regular method of writing.

Since Stackpole's characters are already ready, he employs method of revealing more and more of characters. His chief writing idea is that readers are so impressed on characters when they are first shown that we want to learn more of them. Subsequent chapters are used to reveal more of things of characters and their established skills, persona and resources. Characters A, B and C often have gophers (which he ties to make likeable to reader by making them "everymen" ) who ask stupid questions and/or comment on actions A, B and C do to explain them and make A, B and C more likeable to readers.

This writing style relies heavily on:
1) readers liking mystical/cool newly introduced characters.
2) readers accepting role of a gopher and liking her to follow A, B or C.
3) new revelations of characters A, B or C being actually cool/mysterious.

In my mind Stackpole's writing technique's primary problem is that he has discarded the concept of character growth as a persona which is generally accepted method in real world novel writing. He is also very bad in writing dialog (which comes across as speeches), he uses extensively internal monologues (that both sides occasionally seem to instinctively understand) and his descriptions of women in general and romantic involvement in particular is downright awful.

Stackpole's prose is usually described as "pedestrian". I do believe this description is fairly accurate as he uses technique of one main sentence followed by further elaboration. This is common writing method but there is plenty of word bloat in descriptions -many of which could have been eliminated to make book read faster.

[17thRecon]

  Here it is:

<<Don’t write me telling me your ideas of how the universe could be done better. First off, if you approach things logically and build on what’s been laid out in the novels, your ideas for what should happen in the future are likely my ideas, since I’m the one who has been layering in the foreshadowing and hints upon which you’ll build your future. Second, I do this for a living. If everyone could do what I do, I’d be selling bacon-cheeseburger heart attacks at some fast food joint. It’s not that your ideas won’t be good, its that they won’t be good enough to make the universe sing and scream. Third, and very important, you don’t know enough of the other things going on to be able to provide suggestions that will work to shape the universe into what we need it to be. Lastly, you’re not paying me, so I can’t listen to your input anyway.>>

Yep. That's the one (and it looks like my paraphrasing wasn't as horrible as was thought  ???).  I thought this sounded pretty arrogant and condescending (see specifically the "...your ideas for what should happen in the future are likely my ideas..." part) coming from an authors who's greatest claim to fame is writing in other people's settings.  Then add in the fact that I pick up one of his  original novels and couldn't finish it because it was boring and could not hold my interest and you can see where my opinion of the guy went way down.  The last statement about "not paying me" didn't bother me at all, it is the rest of the little "better than you" rant that I took umbrage with.

[Peacemaker]

  Here it is:

<<Don’t write me telling me your ideas of how the universe could be done better. First off, if you approach things logically and build on what’s been laid out in the novels, your ideas for what should happen in the future are likely my ideas, since I’m the one who has been layering in the foreshadowing and hints upon which you’ll build your future. Second, I do this for a living. If everyone could do what I do, I’d be selling bacon-cheeseburger heart attacks at some fast food joint. It’s not that your ideas won’t be good, its that they won’t be good enough to make the universe sing and scream. Third, and very important, you don’t know enough of the other things going on to be able to provide suggestions that will work to shape the universe into what we need it to be. Lastly, you’re not paying me, so I can’t listen to your input anyway.>>

This is statement is so arrogant and stupid for so many reasons, it boggles the mind. I have some free time, so let me break it down for everyone.

Don’t write me telling me your ideas of how the universe could be done better ... Third, and very important, you don’t know enough of the other things going on to be able to provide suggestions that will work to shape the universe into what we need it to be. Lastly, you’re not paying me, so I can’t listen to your input anyway.

These are about the only parts of his rant that I can sympathize with. Constant hounding by fanboys is probably pretty irritating.

First off, if you approach things logically and build on what’s been laid out in the novels, your ideas for what should happen in the future are likely my ideas, since I’m the one who has been layering in the foreshadowing and hints upon which you’ll build your future.

BattleTech is a massive universe that could go go in numerous directions regardless of anyone's "foreshadowing". I'm sure the universe probably could have spun off into dozens of equally logical directions at any point in time.

And I can assure you that I for one wouldn't have make Focht a dribbling idiot who thought the Clans were aliens and Terra was insignificant. I wouldn't have made the Refusal War such a convoluted mess. I wouldn't have made Phelan Kell such a genius that he was able to rise from Spheroid bondsman to saKhan over the course of three years. And I certainly wouldn't have given Yorinaga and Morgan superpowers, even if Stackpole foreshadowed it.

Second, I do this for a living. If everyone could do what I do, I’d be selling bacon-cheeseburger heart attacks at some fast food joint. It’s not that your ideas won’t be good, its that they won’t be good enough to make the universe sing and scream.

Uwe Boll directs movies for a living. Tila Tequila sings and acts for a living. Just because you something professionally doesn't mean that you're good at it. Not everyone could write a BattleTech novel, but a lot of people could, and many of them would do a pretty good job of it. At the very least, unlike Stackpole, they probably wouldn't make the universe scream for mercy.

[greywolf79]

What I took from the snippet was more a "I am paid to write these books, please stop trying to tell me how to. And though you may have an idea, if it is based on my work (which lets be honest, most will be) then I more than likely have thought about the idea and may even already be trying to implement it".

Granted, my version is much more diplomatic (?) in its statement, but that is how I viewed it... Not so much "my idea is better than yours, and even if yours was good it was my idea first"...

Just my 2 cents. And I do think he is an ok writer, but not a fantastic writer. I prefer many others over him, but to be honest I also like him over a great many I have read... So instead of bashing a guy who has helped this game so much, why not just post things in a more positive and constructive way. For example -

Instead of saying, he is arrogant and does not listen to people...

Try, I think he could do better if he maybe accepted input from other people to enhance his work...

This might not only net a better way getting ideas put into action but also much more likely to get to the person intended in a manner that does not put them on guard and thus allows for them to consider it as a way to improve themselves.

[FedSunsBorn]

I enjoy reading his books the first time around due to the new setting, new characters and new storyline but I usually cannot go back to them for a second try.

[Taurevanime]

I too enjoy his books. They might not be the best books, but they aren't the worst by far.
And the only book I could never finish was Highlander Gambit.

Also his characters do make developement, some just slower than others. I still enjoy the story of Kai overcoming his self doubt during the Blood of Kerensky trilogy.

[Charbok]

Reading what Mike Stackpole writes about being Mike Stackpole has always made the reading of things written by Mike Stackpole less enjoyable.  His screeds at the outset of the clickyverse helped me to walk away from BTech for ten years with no regrets.

Yet, I don't mind his books.  They're quick, pulpy reads that are fairly engaging.  His ego, though, terrifies me.

[ColBosch]

He comes across as far less arrogant than many fanfic writers, though.

[Snake Eyes]

I have one BT novel by Stackpole.....its Malicious Intent, i've only read it once, though it is an interesting book

[Frabby]

Stackpole may not be a nobel prize candidate with his writing. But honestly, folks: BattleTech and Star Wars are pulp fiction universes - it's hardly fair to accuse a successful pulp fiction writer of writing pulp fiction. A few books have tried to be literature, and the fans hate them for it (c.f. Far Country is a good book in its own right but violated the BattleTech aesthetics; Ideal War is a bit too realistic about war to be enjoyable).

Like any author, Stackpole has some areas where he's better and some where he's weaker.
His superhero characters fit the setting and comply with the rule of cool, even though I agree that he overdoes it. The Phantom 'Mech was a major slip on the BT aesthetics, and we're slowly purging it from the universe into the "in-universe myth" corner.

Stackpole's strength, imho, is that he can think up good stories and deliver memorable moments. The Warrior trilogy treated the 4th SW much much better than "Hulk Smash", and Hanse's wedding gift scene is epic. The Blood of Kerensky dramaturgy was good enough to keep me entertained throughout the books although I really seriously loathe the stillborn concepts of Clan "culture".

(To wit, my favourite piece of Stackpole writing is Bard's Tale III: Thief of Fate. Here he only had to provide overall storyline and setting, without characters, and my teenage self was well impressed with the story.)

[Lost_Heretic]

The Blood of Kerensky dramaturgy was good enough to keep me entertained throughout the books although I really seriously loathe the stillborn concepts of Clan "culture".

Yeah, but clan culture was really fleshed out in the Legend of the Jade Phoenix trilogy by Thurston. Those are also by far my favorite Battletech novels.

[skymarshall]

Just my 2 cents but I've never really minded Stackpole that much, he seems a bit formulaic, but then again we are enjoying 'guilty pleasure' literature.  My grandpa and step-grandpa couldn't get enough of Louis La'Moure (i probably misspelled that..sorry) for the same reason, even though its also very formulaic.  I personally prefer William H. Keith to Stackpole, but I'll still enjoy his novels nonetheless, even though I agree with the above gripes...

Do we really need our characters monologueing during converstaion? Do we really need three different versions of the Morgan/Yorinaga duel? I mean, I read the first version, did you think I forgot?

[Taharqa]

I pretty much blame Stackpole for everything. 25% of the time, its true. Good enough for me.

[A. Lurker]

Yeah, but clan culture was really fleshed out in the Legend of the Jade Phoenix trilogy by Thurston. Those are also by far my favorite Battletech novels.

Shows how much one's mileage can vary. I picked up the omnibus edition a while back and it just didn't do much for me. May have to do with Thurston ultimately never managing to convince me that Aidan's in-universe detractors, while harsh, were anything but right all along...

In contrast, while Stackpole's writing style definitely has its quirks, his books have managed to keep me entertained pretty reliably. And in BT fiction, that's really all I ask. :)

[Drufause]

I just want someone to write another book like 'surrender your dreams'