Crane’s review of Empire of Silence (The Sun Eater, #1) > Likes and Comments
492 likes · Like
OMG, I didn't realise how much of a rip off that book was. I immediately spotted the Dune similarities, but as I never finished the Name of the Wind, I couldn't really tell. It's weird. I mean what's the point of doing that??
Spot on, this book reads like Dune fan fiction. Struggling with it.
Don't forget the large debt it owes to Dune, as well.
As I said:
"The entire book is a transparent mash-up of The Name of the Wind, Dune, and Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan Saga"
And I pointed out the obvious presence of mentats and the Orange Catholic Church. The energy shields too, come to think of it.
I couldn't do the paragraph-by-paragraph comparison for Dune though, because I've only read it once and don't remember it as well as the other books.
well duh, that explains the erie feeling i had through out the book :D
Damn, eye opening. I thought it sounded a little generic but probably fun from the description.
Everyone's been calling it King Killer in space, but this goes well beyond being a homage to that other series.
Every author does this. No surprises here. Look closely at every book you've read. It's just more noticeable with this book because you've read the books that he has taken ideas from. All stories are a re-telling. Even the master, Shakespeare, stole most of his greatest ideas. Think of all the ideas and similarities The Name of The Wind has with certain other works (if you don't know read more).
Tomaz wrote: "Every author does this. No surprises here. Look closely at every book you've read. It's just more noticeable with this book because you've read the books that he has taken ideas from. All stories a..."
That might be true but u can do it way more subtle than that.
Tomaz wrote: "Every author does this. No surprises here. Look closely at every book you've read. It's just more noticeable with this book because you've read the books that he has taken ideas from.
Sure, and sure, Rothfuss' work is also super derivative, like a whole lot of modern fantasy, which is a pretty incestuous genre. But I bet you can't point me to a section where he (or Bujold, or Herbert for that matter) straight-up paraphrases another author's prose like Ruocchio does.
Maybe he'll take a big step forward in his next novel. I can't help think of how badly Sword of Shannara ripped off LotR and then how Brooks found his own voice in Elfstones and Wishsong. Not that Brooks ever really became a master, but I do like the early-ish Shannara novels.
Look at the bright side, when Rothfuss dies, somebody can finish Kingkiller trilogy...
Right on the dot. I’m rereading this one whilst in the middle of my first read of the Dune series and it has definitely been eye opening. I initially liked it because of its Kingkiller-ness but I have come to realize it’s the Eragon of the sci-fi genre with Ruocchio stealing left and right.
Just book 1, you'd have to forgive it by the end of book 2 and say FI to all of it in book 3. I can't believe so many people fell into these comparisons. Even harder to believe people still write reviews for the first book of a series.
"Even harder to believe people still write reviews for the first book of a series. "
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Like these two reviews you wrote, you mean?
Even harder to believe people can be such arrant hypocrites. :-)
Right, exactly the same, as long as we don't count how many reviews I didn't write because something begs a re-read or it's too far from feeling complete.
All Systems Red review came after reading Artificial Condition and then I pre-ordered the Rogue Protocol, despite the price (for a total of $33 by the third book). Still true, as The Murderbot Diaries #1, 2, 3 and 4 should have been one book, barely scratching 600 pages. And I didn't judge it's quality in what I wrote (because I like it), but the outrageous price.
Don't care enough about the Ninth House to even explain why I've rated it like this.
Thanks for this review. I just read the first hundred pages or so and had an overwhelming feeling that it was ripping off better novels.
Let's face it, lots of fantasy is derivative of other fantasy, so I'm not sure why that warrants a one star review.
You wasted to wayyyy too much time coming to incorrect conclusions.
I’m at 50% of this book and I’m absolutely enjoying it! It’s a slow build up and it very much feels like a first in the series. I gotta say that although some of the writing style MAY BE similar to the two books you’ve mentioned, it absolutely stands upon its own! Its not Dune. It’s not Name of the Wind. It’s a great and interesting story. It is its own story, with its own unique characters, and experiences. The prose is absolutely beautiful. Yes many books have been inspirational to many writers over the years, but that’s only natural and welcome. Why wouldn’t we want to read more books like Dune? We freakin love Dune!
These comparisons are downright shocking when put side by side :O
These comparisons are... not good. And they don't illustrate what you seem to think they do. The only valid comparison between this book and kingkiller is in how it is framed.
TwoTonYoda wrote: "You wasted to wayyyy too much time coming to incorrect conclusions."
You get one comment, buddy. You don't need to come back to fellate this book every time someone else posts on this review.
This form of pedantry serves only to demonstrate an ignorance towards the history and traditions of storytelling. You are pointing out that a number of machines have nuts and bolts, or pulleys and pistons, and declaring that the latter to be designed and assembled is therefore merely a crude imitation without merit; all the while failing to comprehend it as a collection of mechanisms, of functions and processes, made meaningful in concert and in the manner of its interaction with the world.
Shall you next compose a treatise to proclaim Shakespeare a worthless hack for his reappropriation? For the irony alone, I hope you do.
Awful take, Marc. It’s not pedantry to point out a terrible attempt at plagiarising others works. That’s not storytelling. It’s just a child not able to come up with their own ideas. Everyone understands that writers or artists utilise other ideas to create new ones. You’re not special in pointing that out, even if you want to express it like a neck beard. There was zero imagination Ruocchio’s attempt at that. It was blatant and boring.
I am fully aware of the grand literary tradition of drawing on the work of others.
Most authors, however, do not lift passages nearly verbatim from other writers to the extent that Ruocchio does here.
Nikolai wrote: "Just book 1, you'd have to forgive it by the end of book 2 and say FI to all of it in book 3. I can't believe so many people fell into these comparisons. Even harder to believe people still write r..."
you might be the winner of the dumbest argument competition. What kind of flawed logic is that? I read a book that I don't like, but can't say and have to wait a year to read 2nd installment which I most likely will not write, cause you don't write reviews on first installment. Oh yeah, and this would totally help new authors, write a great book, but have no reviews at all cause it's only book 1. Just wow
While I don't disagree entirely that Ruocchio was probably influenced by the novels you mention, I feel like you really stretched on some of the comparisons. As if this book and Bujold's are the only ones that ever used the name of a group of people as an epithet.... And your birth scene comparison - these two paragraphs are nothing alike.
While I wholeheartedly agree on most of your comparisons, the birthing scenes are literally completely different. I feel like your point would be stronger without it
Dejvo wrote: "you might be the winner of the dumbest argument competition. What kind of flawed logic is that? I read a book that I don't like, but can't say and have to wait a year to read 2nd installment which I most likely will not write, cause you don't write reviews on first installment. Oh yeah, and this would totally help new authors, write a great book, but have no reviews at all cause it's only book 1. Just wow"
Ofc, feel free to ignore the rest of the series because someone used his favorites and probably even thought its a cool Easter Egg thing to do, until someone caught him and decided it's too much. Well, while it is not (cool) for someone else, I could ignore or relate to it.
By the time I left my comment here, book 3 was out, and needless to say, Roucchio develops a language and style of his own, especially with 4 and now the 5th book, and there are more. By the time you wrote your review, we had all 5 books in the series, and your rating is low because it has not delivered all that he promised in that first book. Well, the main thing the Halfmortal said he did back there in the beginning is still not delivered by the fifth book too, so I guess you were right.
Check out this guy who thinks he’s uncovered something! With the first book in the series he decided to make references and hommages to his favorite sci-fi writers. And so what? All original works are derivative anyway.
Dune. That is what I got from the very first chapter and through the whole book. But nowhere near as good as Dune was.
I have to say I made an account mostly just to comment on this review. Because in reading it I was convinced to give this series a try. You managed to describe something glorious to me and the series is really delivering on it! And the prose, while nowhere near Patrick’s level, is surprisingly good too. So thanks for the review. It’s the best series I’ve read in years.
It's amazing that so many comments can handwave line by line plagiarism--and paraphrase IS plagiarism-- like it's no big deal. The reviewer is not claiming that x book has similar themes, "oh Shakespeare stole everything too" puh-leaze. The reviewer did a textual analysis comparison and y'all are still falling all over each to defend it.
This review stopped me from reading the book for a while. I read Empire of Silence recently, and forgot about the it.
And I must say It is deceiving.
The book like many is inspired by its predecessors but has its own plot, and characterization. It is clearly inspired by the modern classics but is quite distinctive.
And considering the size of the book (it is quite long), the selected similarities don't convince me. They are short, and quite common tropes in the genre. many other books would have the same close formulations.
You could not be more wrong about a series ever. This comparison and calling this series “derivative” is like calling the first book of wheel of time “derivative” of Lord of the rings. SURE they have familiarity and inspiration but to say it’s completely derivative is just ignorant
Isaiah wrote: "You could not be more wrong about a series ever. This comparison and calling this series “derivative” is like calling the first book of wheel of time “derivative” of Lord of the rings. SURE they ha..."
Buddy, Wheel of Time did not literally lift several quotes wholesale from Lord of the Rings! If it was a mere thematic similarity, that would be one thing; I've read many books which iterate on existing themes or stories; hell I just finished a reread of What Moves the Dead, which is fundamentally a rehash of The Fall of the House of Usher, but it didn't just lift the best bits of prose from that book and call it a day!
The funny thing about this is that people keep saying that as the series develop it becomes less derivative. Well, to me it really doesn't. I bought book 3 because I was told that it's better, but I'm getting major Dune vibes, Ender Game a little too and in the way, the authors tries to write, I'm getting a little Red Rising. I'm more of fantasy than sci-fi gal but I have a feeling that if I were more into sci-fi, I would find even more similarities with other work.
Agree with your review. I did not even find the prose any at all as good as many people describe it. On the contrary
Wouldn't derivative mean it's based on another prior work? When you need to reference a dozen other stories it's no longer a derivation, it's a synthesis. The ability to synthesize is the basis of all creative works.
this is almost cassandra clare levels of "taking inspiration from previous works".
Well while this is not as great a work as dune, I have read that entire series top to bottom (including his son's work) several times.
I must admit that I immediately got Dune vibes from this series... but unfortunately the best epic space operas often reuse some of these concepts. If you want sword play and men doing work in the future sci-fi, you need personal shields, and some restriction on technology. It's even a logical leap to assume (given the danger of the paperclip problem) that humanity will at some point pass too much power to AI, and end up over-correcting to the abolition of "thinking machines"; assume sever hundred or thousand years of advancement without higher computing and you inevitably end up with Mentats (or similar).
Your entire first paragraph, designed to highlight the stolen aspects of the plot, is roughly the plot of 20% of all science fiction.
As frequently lamented, "these is nothing new under the sun"... however, the plot of this story is sufficiently unique that I would argue "Inspired by" is more accurate than "derivative".
Now, I love how much time you spent pulling together passages to compare... because none of those are even remotely close enough to call derivation. The closest you have is the line about her favorite swear "imperials"... but what a common trope! people have done this since the beginning of time, if not modern language. examples used everyday around the world: "Arg, Lawyers!", "Ugh, Politicians", "Oof, [insert race, religion, gender...]". It's an unbelievably common sentiment, common to all humanity - Us vs. Them.
Seriously, calling "1984" derivative of "Brave New World" would be more accurate.
If you want to see the most derivative work ever, look no further than "A New Eden" (the Betaverse series) ruthlessly ripping off the Bobiverse series. Even the bloody name!
Anyway, sorry for a bit of a rant here. I'm not super attached to the series, I just disagree with you and would suggest inspired or influenced be more appropriate terms.
Cheers,
C.
Holy hell these are some serious acts of paraphrasing/plagiarism. I can’t believe it’s this blatant and no one at the publisher said anything?
Wow. I knew this thing sucked while reading the first chapter, but god dam
How to grasp at straws, and end up drowning, well done crane, absolutely nothing to see here, yawn.
That's copyrighted material you are displaying
Wow! Now I want to read it even more... hahahaha!
Have you thought about being a literature DJ?
Cordelia Naismith is so above this heroine it’s no comparison! And the disgust with which that “Imperials!” is used cannot be compared to the almost loving and humouring “Barrayarans!” at all. Cordelia would never be that simplistically prejudiced ever. Its not a good comparison at all!
back to top
message 1:
by
Lennie
(new)
Aug 05, 2018 07:20AM
OMG, I didn't realise how much of a rip off that book was. I immediately spotted the Dune similarities, but as I never finished the Name of the Wind, I couldn't really tell. It's weird. I mean what's the point of doing that??
reply
|
flag
Spot on, this book reads like Dune fan fiction. Struggling with it.
Don't forget the large debt it owes to Dune, as well.
As I said:"The entire book is a transparent mash-up of The Name of the Wind, Dune, and Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan Saga"
And I pointed out the obvious presence of mentats and the Orange Catholic Church. The energy shields too, come to think of it.
I couldn't do the paragraph-by-paragraph comparison for Dune though, because I've only read it once and don't remember it as well as the other books.
well duh, that explains the erie feeling i had through out the book :D
Damn, eye opening. I thought it sounded a little generic but probably fun from the description. Everyone's been calling it King Killer in space, but this goes well beyond being a homage to that other series.
Every author does this. No surprises here. Look closely at every book you've read. It's just more noticeable with this book because you've read the books that he has taken ideas from. All stories are a re-telling. Even the master, Shakespeare, stole most of his greatest ideas. Think of all the ideas and similarities The Name of The Wind has with certain other works (if you don't know read more).
Tomaz wrote: "Every author does this. No surprises here. Look closely at every book you've read. It's just more noticeable with this book because you've read the books that he has taken ideas from. All stories a..."That might be true but u can do it way more subtle than that.
Tomaz wrote: "Every author does this. No surprises here. Look closely at every book you've read. It's just more noticeable with this book because you've read the books that he has taken ideas from. Sure, and sure, Rothfuss' work is also super derivative, like a whole lot of modern fantasy, which is a pretty incestuous genre. But I bet you can't point me to a section where he (or Bujold, or Herbert for that matter) straight-up paraphrases another author's prose like Ruocchio does.
Maybe he'll take a big step forward in his next novel. I can't help think of how badly Sword of Shannara ripped off LotR and then how Brooks found his own voice in Elfstones and Wishsong. Not that Brooks ever really became a master, but I do like the early-ish Shannara novels.
Look at the bright side, when Rothfuss dies, somebody can finish Kingkiller trilogy...
Right on the dot. I’m rereading this one whilst in the middle of my first read of the Dune series and it has definitely been eye opening. I initially liked it because of its Kingkiller-ness but I have come to realize it’s the Eragon of the sci-fi genre with Ruocchio stealing left and right.
Just book 1, you'd have to forgive it by the end of book 2 and say FI to all of it in book 3. I can't believe so many people fell into these comparisons. Even harder to believe people still write reviews for the first book of a series.
"Even harder to believe people still write reviews for the first book of a series. "https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Like these two reviews you wrote, you mean?
Even harder to believe people can be such arrant hypocrites. :-)
Right, exactly the same, as long as we don't count how many reviews I didn't write because something begs a re-read or it's too far from feeling complete.All Systems Red review came after reading Artificial Condition and then I pre-ordered the Rogue Protocol, despite the price (for a total of $33 by the third book). Still true, as The Murderbot Diaries #1, 2, 3 and 4 should have been one book, barely scratching 600 pages. And I didn't judge it's quality in what I wrote (because I like it), but the outrageous price.
Don't care enough about the Ninth House to even explain why I've rated it like this.
Thanks for this review. I just read the first hundred pages or so and had an overwhelming feeling that it was ripping off better novels.
Let's face it, lots of fantasy is derivative of other fantasy, so I'm not sure why that warrants a one star review.
You wasted to wayyyy too much time coming to incorrect conclusions.
I’m at 50% of this book and I’m absolutely enjoying it! It’s a slow build up and it very much feels like a first in the series. I gotta say that although some of the writing style MAY BE similar to the two books you’ve mentioned, it absolutely stands upon its own! Its not Dune. It’s not Name of the Wind. It’s a great and interesting story. It is its own story, with its own unique characters, and experiences. The prose is absolutely beautiful. Yes many books have been inspirational to many writers over the years, but that’s only natural and welcome. Why wouldn’t we want to read more books like Dune? We freakin love Dune!
These comparisons are downright shocking when put side by side :O
These comparisons are... not good. And they don't illustrate what you seem to think they do. The only valid comparison between this book and kingkiller is in how it is framed.
TwoTonYoda wrote: "You wasted to wayyyy too much time coming to incorrect conclusions."You get one comment, buddy. You don't need to come back to fellate this book every time someone else posts on this review.
This form of pedantry serves only to demonstrate an ignorance towards the history and traditions of storytelling. You are pointing out that a number of machines have nuts and bolts, or pulleys and pistons, and declaring that the latter to be designed and assembled is therefore merely a crude imitation without merit; all the while failing to comprehend it as a collection of mechanisms, of functions and processes, made meaningful in concert and in the manner of its interaction with the world. Shall you next compose a treatise to proclaim Shakespeare a worthless hack for his reappropriation? For the irony alone, I hope you do.
Awful take, Marc. It’s not pedantry to point out a terrible attempt at plagiarising others works. That’s not storytelling. It’s just a child not able to come up with their own ideas. Everyone understands that writers or artists utilise other ideas to create new ones. You’re not special in pointing that out, even if you want to express it like a neck beard. There was zero imagination Ruocchio’s attempt at that. It was blatant and boring.
I am fully aware of the grand literary tradition of drawing on the work of others. Most authors, however, do not lift passages nearly verbatim from other writers to the extent that Ruocchio does here.
Nikolai wrote: "Just book 1, you'd have to forgive it by the end of book 2 and say FI to all of it in book 3. I can't believe so many people fell into these comparisons. Even harder to believe people still write r..."you might be the winner of the dumbest argument competition. What kind of flawed logic is that? I read a book that I don't like, but can't say and have to wait a year to read 2nd installment which I most likely will not write, cause you don't write reviews on first installment. Oh yeah, and this would totally help new authors, write a great book, but have no reviews at all cause it's only book 1. Just wow
While I don't disagree entirely that Ruocchio was probably influenced by the novels you mention, I feel like you really stretched on some of the comparisons. As if this book and Bujold's are the only ones that ever used the name of a group of people as an epithet.... And your birth scene comparison - these two paragraphs are nothing alike.
While I wholeheartedly agree on most of your comparisons, the birthing scenes are literally completely different. I feel like your point would be stronger without it
Dejvo wrote: "you might be the winner of the dumbest argument competition. What kind of flawed logic is that? I read a book that I don't like, but can't say and have to wait a year to read 2nd installment which I most likely will not write, cause you don't write reviews on first installment. Oh yeah, and this would totally help new authors, write a great book, but have no reviews at all cause it's only book 1. Just wow"Ofc, feel free to ignore the rest of the series because someone used his favorites and probably even thought its a cool Easter Egg thing to do, until someone caught him and decided it's too much. Well, while it is not (cool) for someone else, I could ignore or relate to it.
By the time I left my comment here, book 3 was out, and needless to say, Roucchio develops a language and style of his own, especially with 4 and now the 5th book, and there are more. By the time you wrote your review, we had all 5 books in the series, and your rating is low because it has not delivered all that he promised in that first book. Well, the main thing the Halfmortal said he did back there in the beginning is still not delivered by the fifth book too, so I guess you were right.
Check out this guy who thinks he’s uncovered something! With the first book in the series he decided to make references and hommages to his favorite sci-fi writers. And so what? All original works are derivative anyway.
Dune. That is what I got from the very first chapter and through the whole book. But nowhere near as good as Dune was.
I have to say I made an account mostly just to comment on this review. Because in reading it I was convinced to give this series a try. You managed to describe something glorious to me and the series is really delivering on it! And the prose, while nowhere near Patrick’s level, is surprisingly good too. So thanks for the review. It’s the best series I’ve read in years.
It's amazing that so many comments can handwave line by line plagiarism--and paraphrase IS plagiarism-- like it's no big deal. The reviewer is not claiming that x book has similar themes, "oh Shakespeare stole everything too" puh-leaze. The reviewer did a textual analysis comparison and y'all are still falling all over each to defend it.
This review stopped me from reading the book for a while. I read Empire of Silence recently, and forgot about the it.And I must say It is deceiving.
The book like many is inspired by its predecessors but has its own plot, and characterization. It is clearly inspired by the modern classics but is quite distinctive.
And considering the size of the book (it is quite long), the selected similarities don't convince me. They are short, and quite common tropes in the genre. many other books would have the same close formulations.
You could not be more wrong about a series ever. This comparison and calling this series “derivative” is like calling the first book of wheel of time “derivative” of Lord of the rings. SURE they have familiarity and inspiration but to say it’s completely derivative is just ignorant
Isaiah wrote: "You could not be more wrong about a series ever. This comparison and calling this series “derivative” is like calling the first book of wheel of time “derivative” of Lord of the rings. SURE they ha..."Buddy, Wheel of Time did not literally lift several quotes wholesale from Lord of the Rings! If it was a mere thematic similarity, that would be one thing; I've read many books which iterate on existing themes or stories; hell I just finished a reread of What Moves the Dead, which is fundamentally a rehash of The Fall of the House of Usher, but it didn't just lift the best bits of prose from that book and call it a day!
The funny thing about this is that people keep saying that as the series develop it becomes less derivative. Well, to me it really doesn't. I bought book 3 because I was told that it's better, but I'm getting major Dune vibes, Ender Game a little too and in the way, the authors tries to write, I'm getting a little Red Rising. I'm more of fantasy than sci-fi gal but I have a feeling that if I were more into sci-fi, I would find even more similarities with other work.
Agree with your review. I did not even find the prose any at all as good as many people describe it. On the contrary
Wouldn't derivative mean it's based on another prior work? When you need to reference a dozen other stories it's no longer a derivation, it's a synthesis. The ability to synthesize is the basis of all creative works.
this is almost cassandra clare levels of "taking inspiration from previous works".
Well while this is not as great a work as dune, I have read that entire series top to bottom (including his son's work) several times. I must admit that I immediately got Dune vibes from this series... but unfortunately the best epic space operas often reuse some of these concepts. If you want sword play and men doing work in the future sci-fi, you need personal shields, and some restriction on technology. It's even a logical leap to assume (given the danger of the paperclip problem) that humanity will at some point pass too much power to AI, and end up over-correcting to the abolition of "thinking machines"; assume sever hundred or thousand years of advancement without higher computing and you inevitably end up with Mentats (or similar).
Your entire first paragraph, designed to highlight the stolen aspects of the plot, is roughly the plot of 20% of all science fiction.
As frequently lamented, "these is nothing new under the sun"... however, the plot of this story is sufficiently unique that I would argue "Inspired by" is more accurate than "derivative".
Now, I love how much time you spent pulling together passages to compare... because none of those are even remotely close enough to call derivation. The closest you have is the line about her favorite swear "imperials"... but what a common trope! people have done this since the beginning of time, if not modern language. examples used everyday around the world: "Arg, Lawyers!", "Ugh, Politicians", "Oof, [insert race, religion, gender...]". It's an unbelievably common sentiment, common to all humanity - Us vs. Them.
Seriously, calling "1984" derivative of "Brave New World" would be more accurate.
If you want to see the most derivative work ever, look no further than "A New Eden" (the Betaverse series) ruthlessly ripping off the Bobiverse series. Even the bloody name!
Anyway, sorry for a bit of a rant here. I'm not super attached to the series, I just disagree with you and would suggest inspired or influenced be more appropriate terms.
Cheers,
C.
Holy hell these are some serious acts of paraphrasing/plagiarism. I can’t believe it’s this blatant and no one at the publisher said anything?
Wow. I knew this thing sucked while reading the first chapter, but god dam
How to grasp at straws, and end up drowning, well done crane, absolutely nothing to see here, yawn.
That's copyrighted material you are displaying
Wow! Now I want to read it even more... hahahaha!Have you thought about being a literature DJ?
Cordelia Naismith is so above this heroine it’s no comparison! And the disgust with which that “Imperials!” is used cannot be compared to the almost loving and humouring “Barrayarans!” at all. Cordelia would never be that simplistically prejudiced ever. Its not a good comparison at all!
