[daveT]

I am done with the first two chapters, and I am stopping there. Sci Fi is not my first choice in reading, but I always attempt to give a book an honest chance.

Ironic that I demanded a written form, since I would have probably enjoyed it more if I was listening to it. There is a difference between spoken word and written word, and few writers can be good at both.

Despite owning an appreciation for Tad Williams, I believe in brevity. This book is over-explained, there is nothing left to my imagination. The constant referencing to the modern geography pulls me out of the world he is trying to create. I believe in getting to the point; I loathe cliff-hangers and extensive description. I feel like I could write in one concise page what the author wrote in 9.

I know that fur sizzles when it burns, or maybe I don't: maybe I want it to go up in a puff of smoke with a loud "poof!" The relationship between author and reader is that the author is a guide. He will show you the city, it is up to you to find what you like. The author has to trust the reader's imagination to stay with him.

The book would be better if there was a discovery of a problem, rather than explaining the problem out-right. I am not saying that this IS the problem, but as a reader, I am thinking that this is the problem in the future. With the over description, I feel like I am not going to find any further surprises in the book, and the last thing I want to do is wallow through a second over-description.

It is clear that this author is very intelligent. He is writing in the wrong medium, and he is not trained. Joining a writing class would help him -- he does have a "voice" that should be heard if it is focused in the right direction.