Beyond Jack Vance discussion

Anyone know of anyone who an author who writes in a similar vein to Jack Vance? The closest I have found is Paula Volsky - she is technically extremely good but her stories lack closure (her heroes and villains generally reach rapprochement, which really defeats the whole point of villains).

Her "The Traditions of Karzh" in the Vance tribute collection Songs of the Dying Earth is (in my opinion) the closest to Vance's voice.

Gene Wolfe - Torturer series
M.A. Foster - Waves (and Ler series to a lesser degree)
Silverberg - Majipoor series
M. John Harrison - Vircronium series
Tannith Lee - some of her novels, often early ones

There are quite a few contempary authors who have been heavily influenced by Jack Vance as well, like:

Tim Stretton:
- The Zael Inheritance - inspired by the Demon Princes
- The Annals of Mondia (DragonChaser, The Dog of the North and The Last Free City) - inspired by Lyonesse

Everett Coles:
- Faces of Immortality and To Rule the Universe - inspired by the Demon Princes

Adele Abbot:
- Of Machines and Magics - inspired by the Dying Earth

Matthew Hughes is very Vancian. Here's his website: http://www.matthewhughes.org/the-arch...

There is no author like Vance if there was he wouldnt be so unique. Tanith Lee,Matthew Hughes might have similar settings for Dying Earth like stories like Gene Wolfe does.

But that isnt Vance, Vance writing is about the prose style, the wit, the wierd imagination. Its like saying any generic play writer today is as important as Shakepeare or Euripides just because they write in the same genre.....

Dan Simmons credited Vance in one of his book (Endymion I think) and that's even what made me start reading Vance! Both are very different but similar in a way: travels and awe. Maybe you'll like him ?

"The Pulsifer Saga: Deluxe 3rd Illustrated Edition" by William Michael Mott is a deliberate omage to Vance. So is "Jack of Shadows" by Roger Zelazny. A true Vance fan should not fail to read some of what JV himself did when young..especially "The Tree of Life" by C. L. Moore.

I agree with Gan -- if you want to read something similar to Vance, it's usually better to read authors that have inspired him than vice versa: Lord Dunsany, Jeffery Farnol, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Clark Ashton Smith, C.L. Moore, and especially, P.G. Wodehouse.

Also, many people claim that James Branch Cabell is very Vancean, though I haven't read him yet so I can't confirm.

Bokeshi wrote: "I agree with Gan -- if you want to read something similar to Vance, it's usually better to read authors that have inspired him than vice versa: Lord Dunsany, Jeffery Farnol, Edgar Rice Burroughs, C..."

I agree also. I see a lot of Vance in both Jeffery Farnol and Clark Ashton Smith, and they have a sort of density to them that many of the writers who are inspired by Vance lack, they seem thinner, lighter somehow. I have not yet read anything by Wodehouse. Perhaps you could recommend one, if I'm looking for Vance-similarities. I've been thinking of staring with Code of the Woosters.

Michael Shea, Nifft The Lean: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...

Jaro wrote: I have not yet read anything by Wodehouse. Perhaps you could recommend one, if I'm looking for Vance-similarities. I've been thinking of staring with Code of the Woosters.

Well, the short answer is: read any Wodehouse you can find (especially stuff written between 1920-1940), and guaranteed you'll be amused and entertained. PGW is a master of light farce, and his playful dance with the English language is a joy to behold. His three best books (by a general consensus) are Leave it to Psmith, The Code of the Woosters, and Uncle Fred in the Springtime, so you can't go wrong with any of those.

The long answer is... a little bit more complicated. The Code of the Woosters is definitely top-notch Wodehouse, but it's also seventh book in the Jeeves-Wooster series; and even though it can be read without reading all the previous books, I think your enjoyment might be diminished if you know nothing about the characters, their relationships, and previous interactions. So I'd recommend that you read at least one of the short story collections before, e.g., The Inimitable Jeeves, where all the major characters are introduced. Consider that an aperitif, after which you'll be ready for the main course. You wouldn't want to start your meal with the dessert first, right?

Then again, if you're just looking for "Vanceness", four Psmith books are a good place to go--Leave it to Psmith being the best of them. Rupert Psmith (the P is silent, "as in pshrimp") is quite Vancean, with his flamboyant speeches, ironic wit, and nonchalant attitude. So is the mischievous Uncle Fred--and if you read Uncle Fred in the Springtime, you'll discover the origin of Vance's erb. ;)

However, you should know that the similarities between PGW and JV lie in the style rather than in the content; it's clear that PGW was a huge influence on Vance, but the resemblances are rarely too overt, and are most apparent in the witty persifilage, the amusing names, and the lapidary prose.

Hope this wasn't too confusing. I tend to get a bit nerdy when I'm talking about my favorite authors.

My books are often called Vancean -- Booklist has called me "Jack Vance's heir apparent" -- and I am definitely influenced by his work. But I've also read (and loved) a lot of Wodehouse and I see strains of Plum in my stuff. In fact, for my contribution to the Martin/Dozois retro-antho, Old Venus, I tried my hand at an actual Jeeves and Wooster pastiche, with the names changed so as not to invite the litigious wrath of the Wodehouse estate.

I have only once set out to write a deliberately Vancean novel, a Gaean Reach style space opera called Template. Those interested can read the opening chapter here: http://www.matthewhughes.org/excerpt-...

I'm happy to discuss any of these matters at any time, but my attitude is this: I'm not trying to copy Vance, and I believe there are substantive differences between our works. But I am definitely teetering on his literary shoulders.

There are no writers like Jack Vance. Jack Vance did not become the Jack Vance you know until early failures, his myriad life experiences, his particular upbringing and education, and his likes/dislikes molded him into the artist of style, imagination, and linguistics that we have all come to enjoy and admire. Having collected all of Vance's science fiction and fantasy, including the rare collectibles, and the better bibliographies and analyses, I feel that the best you can do re: Vance is to read all of his works (I have no experience with his mystery novels) and then read them again. That's the thing about Vance. You can reread his books and short stories and still savor them. He is the most neglected and underrated American author in the 20th and 21st centuries.

The Kai Lung books by Ernest Bramah have some of Vance's style and sensibility to them.

In terms of weirdness and creativity, Perdido Street Station comes to mind.

And I second all the mentions of Wodehouse. For my money, either the Jeeves short stories or the Blandings Castle novels would be a great start.

Lucas wrote: " (I have no experience with his mystery novels) "

I reviewed the two Joe Bain novels and The Dark Ocean for the SF Site a few years back.

https://www.sfsite.com/12b/dd382.htm

James Branch Cabell has been referenced. I will second him, and add a specific recommendation to read him. Definitely strong Vance similarities (in fact, it seems certain that Vance must have read him).

"Jurgen" is a great place to start. Wonderful book, and because Cabell is largely forgotten, you can get very nice editions of it for startlingly cheap.

Ivan wrote: "James Branch Cabell has been referenced. I will second him, and add a specific recommendation to read him."

And I will third that. It would have been hard for Vance not to be influenced by Cabell because Cabell was a huge figure in the literary landscape Jack was entering as a young man.

BTW, I didn't know until recent years that his name was pronounced to rhyme with "rabble."

I've created a Patreon account so that people who like my work and want me to keep on producing can support the effort with a dollar or a few each month.

In return for which they will not only get my sincere gratitude, but all kinds of rewards.

If you're interested, here's where to go: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4687520

I'm going to go out on a bit of a limb here and suggest Henry Adams (grandson on President John Quincy Adams and great-grandson of Pres. John Adams).

Specifically his memoir/autobiography "The Education of Henry Adams."

It's a phenomenally brilliant work in its own right. Adams was born in 1838 and watched the US rise from a sleepy agricultural confederation to a technologically advanced world power. It's by far the best account I've read of this progression. Adams is thoughtful and a superb writer. Sometimes profound.

It's also written in a sardonic, witty, style. More than a few Vance echoes. Adams identifies strongly with his eighteenth century roots rather than his 20th century future. The ongoing theme is his effort to become "educated" about the society in which he finds himself. The US was changing at breakneck speed. Adams was incredibly smart and from one of the nation's leading families, but was not really successful. (Well he *was* successful. He was a Harvard professor and wrote the first modern history of the US -- but he wasn't world-beatingly successful as he might have been had he been born in *seventeen* thirty-eight).

I kept thinking that he is a lot like one of those Vancian heroes who finds himself in a completely new planet and new society where all his moral intuitions are useless and the denizens act in strange ways that make sense to them, but none to him. Adams seems to approach the issue just like Jubal Droad or someone. He wants to make something of himself, but these arcane and seemingly arbitrary power structures keep getting in the way.

Anyway. Great book. Recommend it to all. I suspect at least some Vance fans might like it a lot.

Here's a passage about the Chicago World's Fair that I thought was interesting (Adams writes about himself in the third person, FYI):

By the time he got back to Washington on September 19, the storm having partly blown over, life had taken on a new face, and one so interesting that he set off to Chicago to study the Exposition again, and stayed there a fortnight absorbed in it. He found matter of study to fill a hundred years, and his education spread over chaos. Indeed, it seemed to him as though, this year, education went mad. . . . [W]hen one sought rest at Chicago, educational game started like rabbits from every building, and ran out of sight among thousands of its kind before one could mark its burrow. The Exposition itself defied philosophy. One might find fault till the last gate closed, one could still explain nothing that needed explanation. As a scenic display, Paris had never approached it, but the inconceivable scenic display consisted in its being there at all--more surprising, as it was, than anything else on the continent, Niagara Falls, the Yellowstone Geysers, and the whole railway system thrown in, since these were all natural products in their place; while, since Noah's Ark, no such Babel of loose and ill joined, such vague and ill-defined and unrelated thoughts and half-thoughts and experimental outcries as the Exposition, had ever ruffled the surface of the Lakes.

The first astonishment became greater every day. That the Exposition should be a natural growth and product of the Northwest offered a step in evolution to startle Darwin; but that it should be anything else seemed an idea more startling still; and even granting it were not--admitting it to be a sort of industrial, speculative growth and product of the Beaux Arts artistically induced to pass the summer on the shore of Lake Michigan--could it be made to seem at home there? Was the American made to seem at home in it? Honestly, he had the air of enjoying it as though it were all his own; he felt it was good; he was proud of it; for the most part, he acted as though he had passed his life in landscape gardening and architectural decoration. If he had not done it himself, he had known how to get it done to suit him, as he knew how to get his wives and daughters dressed at Worth's or Paquin's. Perhaps he could not do it again; the next time he would want to do it himself and would show his own faults; but for the moment he seemed to have leaped directly from Corinth and Syracuse and Venice, over the heads of London and New York, to impose classical standards on plastic Chicago. Critics had no trouble in criticising the classicism, but all trading cities had always shown traders' taste, and, to the stern purist of religious faith, no art was thinner than Venetian Gothic. All trader's taste smelt of bric-à-brac; Chicago tried at least to give her taste a look of unity.

One sat down to ponder on the steps beneath Richard Hunt's dome almost as deeply as on the steps of Ara Cœli, and much to the same purpose. Here was a breach of continuity--a rupture in historical sequence! Was it real, or only apparent? One's personal universe hung on the answer, for, if the rupture was real and the new American world could take this sharp and conscious twist towards ideals, one's personal friends would come in, at last, as winners in the great American chariot-race for fame. If the people of the Northwest actually knew what was good when they saw it, they would some day talk about Hunt and Richardson, La Farge and St. Gaudens, Burnham and McKim, and Stanford White when their politicians and millionaires were otherwise forgotten. The artists and architects who had done the work offered little encouragement to hope it; they talked freely enough, but not in terms that one cared to quote; and to them the Northwest refused to look artistic. They talked as though they worked only for themselves; as though art, to the Western people, was a stage decoration; a diamond shirt-stud; a paper collar; but possibly the architects of Pæstum and Girgenti had talked in the same way, and the Greek had said the same thing of Semitic Carthage two thousand years ago.

Jostled by these hopes and doubts, one turned to the exhibits for help, and found it. The industrial schools tried to teach so much and so quickly that the instruction ran to waste. Some millions of other people felt the same helplessness, but few of them were seeking education, and to them helplessness seemed natural and normal, for they had grown up in the habit of thinking a steam-engine or a dynamo as natural as the sun, and expected to understand one as little as the other. For the historian alone the Exposition made a serious effort. Historical exhibits were common, but they never went far enough; none were thoroughly worked out. One of the best was that of the Cunard steamers, but still a student hungry for results found himself obliged to waste a pencil and several sheets of paper trying to calculate exactly when, according to the given increase of power, tonnage, and speed, the growth of the ocean steamer would reach its limits. His figures brought him, he thought, to the year 1927; another generation to spare before force, space, and time should meet. The ocean steamer ran the surest line of triangulation into the future, because it was the nearest of man's products to a unity; railroads taught less because they seemed already finished except for mere increase in number; explosives taught most, but needed a tribe of chemists, physicists, and mathematicians to explain; the dynamo taught least because it had barely reached infancy, and, if its progress was to be constant at the rate of the last ten years, it would result in infinite costless energy within a generation. One lingered long among the dynamos, for they were new, and they gave to history a new phase. Men of science could never understand the ignorance and naïveté of the historian, who, when he came suddenly on a new power, asked naturally what it was; did it pull or did it push? Was it a screw or thrust? Did it flow or vibrate? Was it a wire or a mathematical line? And a score of such questions to which he expected answers and was astonished to get none.

Education ran riot at Chicago, at least for retarded minds which had never faced in concrete form so many matters of which they were ignorant. Men who knew nothing whatever--who had never run a steam-engine, the simplest of forces--who had never put their hands on a lever--had never touched an electric battery--never talked through a telephone, and had not the shadow of a notion what amount of force was meant by a watt or an ampère or an erg, or any other term of measurement introduced within a hundred years--had no choice but to sit down on the steps and brood as they had never brooded on the benches of Harvard College, either as student or professor, aghast at what they had said and done in all these years, and still more ashamed of the childlike ignorance and babbling futility of the society that let them say and do it. The historical mind can think only in historical processes, and probably this was the first time since historians existed, that any of them had sat down helpless before a mechanical sequence. Before a metaphysical or a theological or a political sequence, most historians had felt helpless, but the single clue to which they had hitherto trusted was the unity of natural force.

Did he himself quite know what he meant? Certainly not! If he had known enough to state his problem, his education would have been complete at once. Chicago asked in 1893 for the first time the question whether the American people knew where they were driving. Adams answered, for one, that he did not know, but would try to find out. On reflecting sufficiently deeply, under the shadow of Richard Hunt's architecture, he decided that the American people probably knew no more than he did; but that they might still be driving or drifting unconsciously to some point in thought, as their solar system was said to be drifting towards some point in space; and that, possibly, if relations enough could be observed, this point might be fixed. Chicago was the first expression of American thought as a unity; one must start there.

that is definitely from left field! but also very interesting. thanks for posting it.

I've sometimes wondered if Jack Vance was influenced by Horatio Alger's theme of the poor orphan who, by pluck and hard work, rises from poverty to respectability, often with the assistance of a powerful patron impressed by the boy's qualities. I hear echoes of the Connatic's interventions in the Alastor novels.

-- Phaedra: Alastor 824 by Tais Teng

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...

--

Well that's very interesting! I had not seen it. It looks like a series too -- "Paladins of Vance". Any more info on that?

Ivan wrote: "Well that's very interesting! I had not seen it. It looks like a series too -- "Paladins of Vance". Any more info on that?"

-- Not positive, however Matthew Hughes may be doing a book for them for this imprint, perhaps he will comment on this conversation. --

I think its worth throwing Roger Zelazny's 'Jack of Shadows' in here for something that hits the mark very close to home.

Christopher wrote: "I think its worth throwing Roger Zelazny's 'Jack of Shadows' in here for something that hits the mark very close to home."

Who influenced whom, I wonder? But it is an interesting note. Zelazny’s Jack has an awful lot of Cugel in him.

He's actually named for Vance isn't he? I'm sure I read that somewhere.

-- from Wikipedia --> "Jack of Shadows

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Genre Science fantasy
Publisher Walker and Company
Publication date 1971
Media type Print (Hardcover & Paperback)
Pages 207
ISBN 0-8027-5535-6

Jack of Shadows is a science fantasy novel by American author Roger Zelazny. According to him, the name of the book (but not the titular character) was an homage to Jack Vance. In his introduction to the novel he mentioned that he tried to capture some of the exotic landscapes that are frequent in Vance's work. Zelazny wrote it in first draft, with no rewrites.[1] The novel was serialized in the Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction in 1971 and published in book form that same year. It was nominated for a 1972 Hugo Award[2] and finished #4 in the 1972 Locus Poll for Best Novel.[3] --

Christopher wrote: "I think its worth throwing Roger Zelazny's 'Jack of Shadows' in here for something that hits the mark very close to home."

Dilvish the Damned is Vancian also, IMO.

Basically, you guys have hit upon my two favorite Sci-Fi Fanstasy authors. They definitely have different styles and voices. I think Zelazny saw himself a little like a smoke-filled lounge room poet with a penchant for merging myth and religion. He had some at least passing knowledge of the Bible as well as comparative religious themes and melded them into his own mythology. Jack Vance was a linguist, a lover of words. Think about The Languages of Pao, for example.

Lucas wrote: "Basically, you guys have hit upon my two favorite Sci-Fi Fanstasy authors. They definitely have different styles and voices. I think Zelazny saw himself a little like a smoke-filled lounge room poe..."

-- I complement you on your good taste in reading Lucas. --

Karl wrote: "-- Not positive, however Matthew Hughes may be doing a book for them for this imprint, perhaps he will comment on this conversation. --"

I'm discussing the possibility with John Vance. I'm rereading the Demon Princes novels now, with a view to writing a sequel that would explore what befell Kirth Gersen once he had killed the five arch-criminals.

The book may or may not happen, since the idea behind Paladins is to authorize the use of "Vance space" for new stories, not the use of Vance characters. We'll see.

Interesting. I remember the general mood surrounding Kirth Gersen at the close of the series as being of listlessness and anticlimax, not triumph. Obviously, his life purpose was eliminated with the last of his mortal enemies. All that training and accumulated wealth, now idle. Hmm—seems like a man like Gersen could serve the Connatic (spelled correctly?) well and put his abilities to the test. I know! Everyone here should bombard you with ideas! Haha...just kidding.

I hate to say this... let Kirth have his retirement. It ended perfectly for me.

As I say, we'll see.

Karl wrote: "-- from Wikipedia --> "Jack of Shadows

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Genre Science fantasy
Publisher Walker and Company
Publication date 1971
Media type Print (Hardcover & Paperback)
Page..."

I have a lot of respect, admire the qualites of Zelazny SF, his Amber books. He has unique voice in his writing.

I didnt know at all about the homage to Vance in Jack of Shadows but i like him for his good taste even more now.

Lucas wrote: "Basically, you guys have hit upon my two favorite Sci-Fi Fanstasy authors. They definitely have different styles and voices. I think Zelazny saw himself a little like a smoke-filled lounge room poe..."

What do you think of his Amber books compared to his SF writing? I havent read too many of his SF novels,collections yet but the language, the prose, the things he did with the Amber books i have yet to see his SF reach those hights.

Its like Vance i prefer his SF novels,short stories but his prose, imagination is at its best in Lyonesse, DE/Cugel books.

I agree, except for praising Lyonesse.

I enjoyed the Amber novels and I believe they show Zelazny in his top form. As does “This Immortal.” Those are my favorites, though I have reread most of Zelazny’s works.

I am ambivalent about “Creatures of Light and Darkness.” The beginning is perfect, compelling, focused as it is on the man who “walks through his Thousandyear Eve in the House of the Dead...”
Talk about poetry in prose. But along the way, insisting on being cool in its exploring the various Demi gods’ machinations and personalities, the story loses focus and power.

Amber was always about one man. (Before the series was stretched beyond its natural climax.) “This Immortal” likewise. While “Creatures of Light and Darkness” focused on one main persona, it maintained a singular voice.

This is where Jack Vance’s Lyonesse novels weaken. Jack was more enjoyable and focused when the series or single novel adhered to a main and unique character like in Big Planet, The Demon Princes, and so on. This, of course, does not apply to his wonderful short stories.

Lucas wrote: "I agree, except for praising Lyonesse.

I enjoyed the Amber novels and I believe they show Zelazny in his top form. As does “This Immortal.” Those are my favorites, though I have reread most of Ze..."

Heh the two Zelazny books/series you mention one of the few ones i have read. I have read the first Amber, This Immortal, was so impressed by their qualities. Creatures of Light and Darkness i havent read yet.


When its about Vance, Lyonesse novels i cant really disagree or agree about them since i have only read Suldrun's Garden and was so impressed by the prose, the imigination,the mythical high fantasy world. I dont know yet if the other Lyonesse books are as great as the first one or if they do weaken in my eyes too. It and Durdane is the only JV series i havent read. When its about Vance series that focus on one main charcther, stand alone novels i couldnt agree more. I rate many of those novels very highly like Cugel books, The Demon Princes, Tschai books, Emphyro, Big Planet, Blue World etc

Yet i think his best form is the short story, one of the best ever in the field imho when it comes to writing short stories. His pure SF ones or those science fantasy ones like in Dying Earth, The Last Castle, Moon Moth, Dragon Masters etc

I think the Lyonesse trilogy is perfection. Lyonesse, Night Lamp, and Planet of Adventure are my favorites, all 5 star books to me at least.

His short stories amaze me as well and I'd be hard pressed to say which I prefer, his novels or his short stories. I think Moon Moth and the stories within Dying Earth are perfect.

I go back and forth whether I like Lyonesse as my favorite fantasy trilogy or Lord of the Rings. Lyonesse is that good to me.

mark wrote: "I think the Lyonesse trilogy is perfection. Lyonesse, Night Lamp, and Planet of Adventure are my favorites, all 5 star books to me at least.

His short stories amaze me as well and I'd be hard pres..."

I always recommend Dying Earth stories, the short stories,Cugel book and all to every friend,book friend who wants to try Vance. You sound very much like me in those short stories,books i see as perfection of his. Night Lamp i havent read yet, not when i had so many of his early, in his prime works to read yet.

First Lyonesee book was sheer poetry in high fantasy form, it was like if Lord Dunsany wrote a high fantasy novel of Tolkein kind. As someone who dont like high fantasy at all even if its the legendary Tolkein. As a fantasy fan im 60% Vance weird science fantasy stories, Lord Dunsany type fanstasy, 40% Howard,Leiber,Gemmell type S&S fan. So i really didnt expect to love the first Lyonesse novel. The beauty of it, the mythology, the language amazed me.

Kevin wrote: "I go back and forth whether I like Lyonesse as my favorite fantasy trilogy or Lord of the Rings. Lyonesse is that good to me."

Good to hear this, it would be such a disappointment after the brilliant Suldrun's Garden if the the rest of the trilogy never reached those heights again.

Mohammed Abdi Osman wrote: "Night Lamp i havent read yet, not when i had so many of his early, in his prime works to read yet...."

I think you should prioritize reading this one!

mark wrote: "Mohammed Abdi Osman wrote: "Night Lamp i havent read yet, not when i had so many of his early, in his prime works to read yet...."

I think you should prioritize reading this one!"

Yeah i prioritize any Vance work over any other authors works.

I have read close to 40 of his books by far the most i have read by any author in the last 10-12 years i have been an avid reader. I think i was more afraid of reading the great masters last books when i was a new fan. I'm reading his mystery right now being impressed by the Californian Joe Bain books.

Getting back to the topic, i wonder how much truth is to the remark of Lin Carter that the heavily influences of Cabell on early Vance led to Dying Earth stories.

"Fantasy historian Lin Carter notes several probable lasting influences of Cabell on Vance's work, and suggests that the early "pseudo-Cabell" experiments bore fruit in The Dying Earth"

People who have read Cabell? I have heard vague comparison to Cabell, read prolly in the old yuku Vance board.

No experience with Cabell, but the prior author who I really see as a strong influence on JV is Clark Ashton Smith.

Stephen wrote: "Michael Shea, Nifft The Lean: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1..."

I'm just about to start reading Shea's A Quest for Simbilis. At some point I'm also going to read Songs of the Dying Earth: Stories in Honour of Jack Vance and I'm interested to see if anyone can write in a Vancian style.

Not every author in Songs tried to emulate Jack Vance's style. In my own case, though I'm known to be strongly influenced by Vance, I chose to write a story in first person point-of-view, something JV almost never did.

L. Warren Douglas' Arbiter stories (https://www.goodreads.com/series/1525...) have a distinctly Vancean feel in some ways - more the concept than the prose, but very enjoyable.

I have to disagree with some of those above that the Lyonesse trilogy is Vance's best. I love Vance, but was underwhelmed by those books.