Forums
The new forums at http://www.ericflint.net/forum are open and ready for business. Come join us. Or, you could always visit Eric’s forums at Baen’s Bar.
March 24, 2006
18 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Hi, Eric!
So, the important stuff: how’s the writing going. You finish _1824: The Arkansas War? You and the Committee for Public Safety workikng on _COS2 and _1635: The Baltic War_ yet?
By the way, just finished rereading _Boundary_, and loved it the second time as much as the first.
Stephen
Comment by Stephen M. St. Onge — April 9, 2006 @ 10:48 pm
Oh, by the way, the link for Convergence on the travel page is wrong, it goes to Marcon. Link should be http://www.convergence-con.org/.
S.
Comment by Stephen M. St. Onge — April 9, 2006 @ 10:51 pm
Dear Mr Flint,
i am very dissappointed in the scraps you’ve been publishing in regards
to your 1632 series. I was fully enthralled by your first two pieces of
the main storyline. Now your work has degenerated into disconjointed rubbish
with your stamp of approval collaborated by lesser author’s. You seem to have
forgotten about your fans and are more worried about putting out as much product
as possible regardless of quality, and res assured some of the quality has been
very poor indeed. hope to see something worth reading soon.
Yours Truly
Disgruntled Fan
Comment by George — June 8, 2006 @ 11:36 am
I concur completely with disgruntled fan. It’s all been downhill since 1633. Ram rebellion was just awful and Galileo affair was only slightly less so.
I’m hoping Dave Weber can revive this series.
Comment by Anthony — June 17, 2006 @ 1:17 am
I don’t normally respond to criticisms of my books, for the good and simple reason that I think people have a right to their own opinions, and I certainly have no “right” to insist that they should like what I decide to do. However, in this case, since both of the last two posters have made general pronouncements about the series that I believe are wildly off the mark, I decided I’d take the time to address those general issues. And I will so do in considerable detail.
Of course, I’m sorry the last two people who posted here are disgruntled with the series. But one of the first thing I learned as a writer is that any book is going to displease somebody. That’s true even with a series like the Belisarius series, where each book is very much like the others, in terms of everything except the specific plot of the novel. It will be even more true of series which, by their nature, are highly variegated in the sense that different books in the series will often have a very different style and flavor to them. I have two series of that latter nature, the 1632 series and the Joe’s World series.
So, how is a writer supposed to react to criticisms like these? Well, since my critics didn’t hesitate to be blunt, I won’t either. The first and simplest thing you do is look at the sales figures, to see if the opinions of these two people seem to reflect a widespread opinion.
Yeah, yeah, that’s “crude.” Very true — but so are _all_ opinions, when you get right down to it. “Crude,” in the sense that however subtle and sophisticated the reasoning behind the opinion may be, it’s still only the opinion of one person — and, at last count, there were over six billion opinions out there. At least five million of whom are regular readers of F&SF.
So, here are the figures:
1634: THE GALILEO AFFAIR outsold 1633, and 1634: THE RAM REBELLION may very well do the same.
Of course, the reasons for this can vary. It could be simply that the higher sales of GALILEO were what you might call an “inertia effect.” That is, a lot of readers who were pleased by 1633 went out and bought the next novel that came out (GALILEO), and between them and spreading word of mouth GALILEO wound up selling better. But it’s all really an illusion, because disappointed fans will now be leaving the series in droves, and the next books will see their sales plummeting.
Well, that’s certainly a possible explanation. But the problem is that it immediately runs into a couple of uncomfortable facts which point the other way.
Fact 1: Not only did GALILEO outsell 1633 in terms of raw numbers sold (20,600 copies vs. 17,600) but it had a considerably better sell-through: 75% for GALILEO, versus 62% for 1633.
I’m using hardcover figures instead of paperback for the same reason publishers nowadays are mostly concerned with hardcover figures: Over the past ten years, the paperback market has been in what amounts to free fall, with lower and lower sales every year. (The reasons are complex, and mostly involve a profound transformation in the US book distribution industry, which in term stems from and is connected to the ever-growing oligopolization of most retail industries.)
This is true across the board, with _all_ books. So comparing paperback sales of a book that came out in 2002 with one that came out in 2005 simply doesn’t tell you much. It’s true that 1633 will outsell GALILEO in paperback — 51,800 copies versus a projected 35,000 for GALILEO. (I say “projected” because the first hard royalty figures won’t be available until the end of this year, since the paperback of GALILEO came out so recently, in October, 2005.) But that decline is no greater — in fact, it’s less — than the average decline in paperback sales of all books over that same three year period.
And, furthermore, the sell-through for GALILEO in paperback is projected to be, again, considerably better than 1633 — 82% versus 68%. Pretty much the same spread, 13 to 14 percent, that we see with the hardcover editions.
And… that’s one hell of a difference. The average sell-through for F&SF titles is probably around 50%, and may even be lower. So the 62% sell-through that 1633 got was quite good, certainly better than average — but the 75% sell-through that GALILEO got was phenomenal. _Very_ few hardcovers get sell-through figures better than 70%.
For those of you who aren’t familiar with the term “sell-through,” it’s a simple but critical term in publishing. Unlike most industries, where wholesalers and retailers buy the products they want to sell from the manufacturers — and thus _they_ absorb any losses, if a product doesn’t sell as well as expected — publishing works almost entirely on a consignment basis. If a book doesn’t sell, the bookstores or distributors simply return it to the publisher, and the publisher absorbs the loss.
“Sell-through,” therefore, simply refers to the percentage of books that were actually _sold_, out of the total number shipped. It’s a critical feature of publishing, because good sales by themselves can still be disastrous for a publisher if the sell-through is bad. A few years ago, we had a dramatic and flamboyant demonstration of this truth, when the publisher who put out the novelization of the first of the recent STAR WARS trilogy went bankrupt. The problem wasn’t sales, which were terrific — about three million copies sold in hardcover. The problem was that they shipped _thirteen_ million, and wound up with a disastrous 23% sell-through. Ten million copies were returned, each and every one of which represented a loss for the publisher.
To get back to the subject at hand, sell-through is also very important in terms of analyzing sales, because it tells you something different than simple net sales figures. What sales tell you is how big the existing market is for that particular book. If you’re wondering, by the way, hardcover sales of 20,000 copies are excellent — and, in fact, GALILEO made it onto the NYT extended bestseller list for two weeks in a row. (It was #29 the first week, and #27 the second week, out of a total of 35 fiction titles listed.)
But what sell-through indicates is something else. For lack of a better term, it gives you a rough indicator of the level of customer satisfaction within that size market (whatever it is). That’s because the only reliable factor that accounts for a book getting a significantly better sell-through than the average is good word-of-mouth being passed from one customer to another. There is simply no other way to explain it.
You can’t explain it as the result of a really aggressive promotional campaign, by the way — which GALILEO didn’t get, anyway. There is no question that a major and aggressive promotional push by a publisher will increase sales. Absolutely. BUT — you can’t do that sort of major promo push in the first place unless you’re willing to print and ship a lot of copies. You _can’t_, folks. 98% of the promotion _any_ book gets, unless it gets on something like the Oprah Winfrey show, is simply being very visibly displayed at bookstores — and bookstores can’t do that unless they have a lot of copies to display in the first place.
Obviously, therefore, that can’t improve sell-through. The STAR WARS book I referred to above got a massive promotional campaign — most of which consisted of flooding the market with 13,000,000 copies of the book. All that did was make the eventual sell-through collapse a complete financial disaster. (That’s why most books don’t get much in the way of promotion. It’s simply too risky for a publisher, even if they can afford it. That’s because there’s no magic wand when it comes to promoting a book. Whatever else you do, you _have_ to print and ship a lot of copies. So it’s a very risky gamble.)
All right, that’s Fact One. GALILEO outsold 1633 and had a much better sell-through. That does not jibe with the notion of my two critics that the series suffered a drastic deterioration after 1633. Of course, for _them_ it did — and they are certainly entitled to their opinion. But that’s all it is — _their_ opinion. Fact One would seem to indicate that their opinion does not actually reflect much, in terms of the general opinion of people who are interested in the series.
Especially when we combine it with Fact 2, which is the following:
Both of the critics point to the disjointed nature of the post-1633 stories — using terms like “scraps” and “rubbish” — as the major source of their dissatisfaction. I’m willing to bet — yes, I’ve heard these criticisms before, and you can find them also in the Amazon reader reviews — that if they amplified their remarks they’d say things along the lines of:
– The level of action declined drastically;
– Way too much time is spent with people jabbering about boring stuff like religious disputes;
– The “important” character like Mike Stearns and Rebecca Abrabanel take a back seat or disappear almost completely, with minor and none-too-interesting characters like Frank Stone and Sharon Nichols coming to the fore.
Fine. But now (roll of drums) enter Fact 2 — which is actually a constellation of facts:
The 1632 series, since 1633, has now produced no fewer than FOUR volumes of “scraps” and “rubbish.” These are:
RING OF FIRE, the anthology which came out in January of 2004, half of whose stories are written by completely new authors. (”Fanfic,” basically, to use the common term.)
GRANTVILLE GAZETTE 1, which came out in paperback in November of 2004 and consists (except for one very short story by me) _entirely_ of “fanfic.”
GRANTVILLE GAZETTE 2, which came out in hardcover in March of 2006 and, again, consists entirely of fanfic except for one short story by me.
1634: THE RAM REBELLION, which came out in hardcover in May of this year.
Furthermore, in addition to these paper editions, the Gazettes in electronic format have now come out in eight volumes. (The 8th just came out.)
Okay, folks, I am now going to start getting really blunt. Jim Baen died just a few days ago, and you can find obituaries of the man and his life all over the internet. I’ll be writing what amounts to one myself, for my editor’s preface to the second issue of Jim Baen’s UNIVERSE, which will be coming out in a month. In addition to the more-or-less formal obituaries, you can also find a ton of comments made informally on any one of many venues and forums and newsgroups.
Not all of those comments will be laudatory, mind you. Jim was a somewhat controversial figure as a publisher and editor, and not by any means a man who was universally liked and admired, either because of his personality or his publishing policies. That said, there is ONE statement I can pretty much guarantee you will not find anywhere, said by anybody, outside of a lunatic asylum:
“Jim Baen was a dimwit who didn’t understand the publishing industry.”
Nope. _That_ statement you will not find, anywhere, except…
Implicitly (although I’m sure they don’t realize it) by my two critics above. Because they apparently think that Jim Baen was such an incompetent nincompoop that he kept publishing volumes of “rubbish” and “scraps” that the audience was choking on and revolting against.
Uh, well, no. The reason Jim very cheerfully kept producing those volumes — the very last book I sold to him, in fact, was GRANTVILLE GAZETTE 4 — was because they sold like hotcakes. Here are the figures:
RING OF FIRE sold 13,800 copies in hardcover with a 73.5% sell-through. The total sales are lower than 1633, to be sure, but that was a given. Anthologies _always_ sell less well than novels. The only thing that was striking about RoF was how _well_ it sold. Jim was, I assure you, absolutely tickled pink. This anthology outsold — by a big margin — most novels he’d ever published.
And, please note, again, the extraordinary sell-through: 73.5%, almost as good as GALILEO’s 75%, and far better than that of most anthologies of any kind. (Or novels, for that matter – including 1633.)
GAZETTE 1 only came out in paperback. It was an experiment, and Jim (wisely, and I agreed with his decision) decided to forego a hardcover edition. The volume came out in November 2004, by which point in time the plunge the paperback sales was well-established. Yet, despite bucking that incredibly bad tide, the book sold extremely well for a paperback in that period. I seem to have misplaced my latest royalty statement on it, alas, so I can’t give you hard figures. But net sales were close to 30,000 – which is _very_ good for any paperback, even a novel, that came out at that time – and enjoyed the same superb sell-through range.
We don’t have any sales and sell-through figures for GAZETTE 2 and RAM REBELLION, because they haven’t been out long enough. But the shipping orders were extremely good: 14,700 copies for GAZETTE 2 in hardcover, and 26,700 for RAM REBELLION. Until we know the sell-through, of course, we can only guess at the final sales figures. But, for whatever it’s worth, despite its nature as an anthology as much as a linear story, the shipping figures for RAM REBELLION are almost as good as GALILEO (which shipped 28,000 copies in hardcover) and 1633 (which shipped 28,400). And the shipping figures for GAZETTE 2 are somewhat astonishing, for a hardcover that consists entirely of so-called “fanfic.” That’s TWO OR THREE TIMES as many copies as the average novel ships in hardcover.
Finally – call this Fact 3, if you want – there has been no decline in sales of the electronic edition of the Gazette. In fact, sales look like they’ve been picking up over the past few months.
All right. Add all these facts together and what you get is a very different picture of the series as a whole than the one put forth by the two critics above. What you seem to be seeing is a series that is deepening its audience, not losing – albeit some individuals are certainly falling aside, as they always do with long series.
My critics’ problem – again, being blunt – is that they can’t seem to distinguish between their own personal tastes as readers and objective reality, as measured by the opinions of the reading audience for the series taken as a whole. Their views are a form of solipsism, ultimately. In essence: “_I_ don’t like the way the series is developing, therefore it must be no good.”
Well, “no good” for them, certainly. They have every right to their opinion, and certainly every right to spend their money on something more to their liking. But their opinion does not determine the world’s – nor, more to the point, is it anything that will influence me in my own decisions as to how I want to shape the series.
Furthermore, this is a very common pattern, and by no means one restricted to the 1632 series. To use two better known examples, as they get longer and more complex, disgruntled readers of Robert Jordan’s “Wheel of Time” series and David Weber’s “Honor Harrington” series have been predicting for years that the series are about to see a collapse in their sales, because they’ve gotten so lousy. Yet… the reality is that the latest volumes in both of those series have outsold any of the others.
There is a reason for this. Not every reader finds the world being depicted in a long series so interesting that they have much tolerance for complexity and a slower pace of story-telling. There’s no fault involved in that, of course. Why should they? As it happens, I myself am one of the “disgruntled readers” of Jordan’s series. I enjoyed the first books, but stopped following the series somewhere around the fifth or sixth book, simply because I didn’t enjoy it enough to want to put the effort into keeping track of all the complexities that had emerged.
Fine. But what I did _not_ so was assume that, simply because I didn’t have enough interest in the story, that my opinion would be shared by everyone. That’s why, unlike my two critics, I refrained from pronouncements on Jordan’s series. I just lost interest personally and left – but I wasn’t at all surprised to see that the series continued to become more popular.
Why? Because people who _do_ find a series really engrossing generally LIKE the complexities. This is exactly the “secret” of maintaining a large audience that the lowly and much-derided soap operas have known for decades.
And that, to conclude this very long response, is the reason I can only shrug my shoulders at the reaction of my two critics. Of course, no writer likes to lose any readers. But experienced writers know that you _will_, no matter what. And what I also know – or believe firmly, at any rate – is that the surest way to kill a long and popular series is to make it too simplistic, too homogenous, too much the same old, same old.
This is particularly true with the type of series that the 1632 series represents, which is what you can think of as “open-ended.” What I mean by that is that there is no set and definite end point toward which the whole series is being shaped. That’s a very different kind of series than a “series” which is really just one great big huge novel that simply needs to be divided into separate volumes because the story is just plain too long to contain within one volume. A well-known example of such a series is Tolkien’s LORD OF THE RINGS. From my own writings, the Belisarius series is another example. That story had a definite beginning, a definite end, and a set story-arch that connected the two.
A series of that nature can – indeed, generally should – maintain a certain homogeneity throughout the story, because the reader is following a single story arch. But trying to do what with an open-ended series is far, far more likely to produce the sort of series that starts off well and then just gets stale, because the same thing just gets rehashed over and over again.
By the way, if anyone’s wondering, to this day the standing “champ” of the series in terms of sell-through is 1632 itself. The paperback has now been out for over five years, keeps selling steadily year after year – and has maintained throughout a sell-through that bare fluctuates at all, between 87 and 89 percent. That’s right at the very edge of what’s even possible in terms of sell-through, for a commercial title.
Marvelous, indeed – but I can guarantee you that if I just kept writing 1632 clones, you’d see that sell-through (and the sales, eventually) gliding down toward oblivion.
I will add one final note. There is one aspect of my critics’ views that I think has some substance. It is indeed the case that the 1632 series has become too unbalanced in terms of the mix of novels and anthologies, as well as – though to a lesser extent – unbalanced in terms of the amount of time spent on what you might call “the big picture.” I.e., the major political and military developments in the story.
But that’s simply a random fluctuation, so to speak, created by the long delay in producing 1634: THE BALTIC WAR – which, in turn, was caused by nothing more “profound” than simply the difficulty Dave Weber and I have had getting our writing schedules to mesh. But we’re finally at the stage when we can do so, and in fact I’ve already started writing THE BALTIC WAR.
Give it two years, and – being blunt one more time – almost nobody is going to remember any of this, with any clarity. By then, not only will 1634: THE BALTIC WAR be out, but so will 1635: THE CANNON LAW – the sequel to GALILEO which has far more in the way of major political and (especially) military action than GALILEO itself. And the sequel to BALTIC WAR will also be out, 1635: THE BAVARIAN CRISIS. Some more anthologies will have come out also, of course, but I don’t foresee any repetition of the same long “drought” between major novels in the series.
One of the many things I learned from Jim Baen was that a writer and a publisher have to take a long view of things. I can well remember when I expressed to Jim my worries about producing three more anthologies and the sequel to GALILEO before I’d have THE BALTIC WAR ready. Jim just laughed. More or less in these words, he told me: “Eric, I’ve been doing this for decades. Give it a year or two, and nobody remembers which book came out in which order in a long series. Not even the existing audience – and the new readers that a successful series keeps picking up could care less. You think the 1632 series has gotten a little scrambled lately? Big deal. Take a look sometime at the order in which C.S. Forester’s Hornblower series came out – and every book in that series has stayed in print continuously since the first one came out back in the 30s.”
(If you’re wondering, he wrote the middle books first, then started the first books, then jumped ahead to write the last book, before returning in the 1960s to write an “early period” novel and a collection of short stories.)
Eric
Comment by Eric — July 1, 2006 @ 5:47 am
Eric,
Thank you for taking the time for explaining the way things are from your point of view, the author. Everyone I have introduced to the 1632 universe has enjoyed it, even my father-in-law who doesn’t typically devote a lot of time to reeading books, much less a series, read it avidly and quickly. We are all eagerly awaiting The Baltic War and have read the novels. I typically skip anthologies as I find them too short and disjointed to really enjoy. It did take me a while longer than usual to finish The Galileo Affair, but I am glad I did as the political repercutions it represents could go far and wide.
Again I just wanted to take the time to thank you for your unique view point and sharing it with all of us. It is sad to read about Jim Baen passing away as through his publishing house I have found many great sf books to read and enjoy. I am glad to know his close friends will continue his tradition of publishing good stories.
As for Robert Jordan and the Wheel of Time, the lastest book has finally got the series headed in a more quick paced and focused direction again. It is unfortunate that he is sick and I hope he finds the recovery he is looking for.
Thanks,
Dan Kulinski
Comment by Dan Kulinski — July 1, 2006 @ 9:04 pm
With the death of mister Baen are you still going to be using his company to put out the future books in the 16** series. and are there any more plans to print in a hard cover addition of the grantville gazette
Comment by lonewolf — July 9, 2006 @ 9:54 am
Gazette 3 and 4 are scheduled for hardcover release. The contract for 4 was the last Eric got from Jim before he died. Since then, Toni has contacted Eric and contracted for several MORE 1632 solo novels… the details of which will be posted on the forthcoming page “Soon.”
– Loyal Minions.
Comment by webmaster — July 9, 2006 @ 7:00 pm
Remembering the plot isn’t very difficult for me. What separates my enjoyment of long series from series that don’t get old for me, Honor Harrington, is the introduction of new characters and the essence of the moral philosophy used in those novels.
Jordan, for example, was someone I could no longer tolerate simply because I did not like his characters, I did not like or approve of their actions, and I certainly did not like the fact that plot lines never get wrapped up.
If there’s too many new characters introduced, and none of those characters are developed or have had their individual destinies filled in part or whole, then that’s a proble for me. If however, there are too few characters, like with the Belisarius series, then that’s another dissatisfaction. The Dance of Time was refreshing because it told the story through the eyes of another. Even the most favorite of characters, gets old if the same old same old is seen through their eyes.
I’m a fan of underdog stories. 1632 obviously was a great story of the underdogs winning in the face of adversity. However, all underdogs eventually either die or they become the top dog. When they do become the top dog, the challenge is no longer there, and therefore the excitement wanes. I was reading Piers Anthony’s Bio of a Space Tyrant series, which was one of his more serious and comprehensive works. After the entire series was over, he then wrote a sort of Ender’s Shadow like sequel, with the story told from the perspective of another secondary. Even though I knew the exact plot, there were still lots of things I learned and a lot of fun to be had from reading that last book.
The reason why Honor Harrington never got old, was the simple fact that this whole theme of a war being fought by characters you could relate to and cheer on, from both sides, is a very potent mix and study in human nature. And the fact that you could never tell what major plot line would be present in a new novel, adds spice to expectation. The ability to change the main plot line, without actually changing how the series will progress, is a pretty neat trick.
I always liked anime series in which the hero would always get stronger, and face stronger opponents. It doesn’t get old, you always get something new to look foward to, and it’s fun to see people rise above their own limitations.
I’m a military science fiction reader. I don’t like RIngo’s fantasy works, and I don’t like novels without a strong military esprit de corps. But that’s no surprise. The story in 1633 of building a navy from scratch is another story of OTB solutions, and underdogs that will rise to the challenge. Just military stuff won’t be enough for me, I got to have new stuff, new people, and stunning plot lines. It helps when I don’t get my hopes up. Getting your hopes up is a good way to become demoralized.
I’m not disgruntled by the status of the 1632 novels simply because I don’t expect that the next novel will be so stunningly good that I just “must” have it. High expectations are hard to meet, so lower them. Ground the voltage.
Sometimes people become too emotionally involved with novels and characters. It’s not just seeing a media story about them on screen, reading actually involves hearing their thoughts and emotions which form a greater connection to the reader. But that has negative consequences as well as positive.
I’m interested in that novel where George Washington’s army goes back to the ROman Empire times.
Comment by Ymarsakar — July 20, 2006 @ 12:23 am
I’m a big scifi fan and I happen to really enjoy your 1632 story line both the main story novels and Ring of Fire. I have noticed people on these forums talking about in both positive and negative turns how you have allowed the story of Grantville to be fleshed out. Personally, I have been nothing but impressed with the novels I have read including the Anthologies (Ring of Fire still rates as the best of the anthologies released so far in my opinion). Your willingness to flesh out this universe from multiple perspectives actually has made me more interested in the story and am desperatly craving 1634: The Baltic War to the point where I am almost going crazy.
I am a huge science fiction fan because I like the way it stretches my imagination. I am also a big fan of David Weber’s Honor Harrington novels. A big thing I have noticed about the two of you as writers is your ability to incorporate humor that comes naturally from the characters into the stories. I think that more then the battle sequences is what really keeps people into a plot line because my least favorite Honor Harrington novel was Ashes of Victory which didn’t suffer from a lack of action.
I think what most people are noticing at least in the anthologies and in 1634 is less developed ability of some writers to create humor in a novel while maintaining or hightening the drama of a story. Still I just want to congradulate you on the hard work you have put into this novels.
Comment by Jim — September 6, 2006 @ 1:18 pm
Well, I’m not sure where I should say this, but I found here and decided it was as good a place as any. I just thought I would suggest a place that the Americans in England might find an ally.
You see, in the year 1632 Charles I granted the charter for the Proprietary Colony of Maryland to Cecil Calvert, the Second Lord Baltimore (the Baltimore in southern Ireland, not the one in Maryland). This was originally Cecil’s father’s idea. The idea was to establish a haven for (English) Catholics in the new world/make money, and originally they tried with a colony called Avalon in Newfoundland.
When Cecil got the charter, it took him two years to dispatch settlers aboard the Ark and the Dove to Maryland under his brother, Leonard Calvert, an expedition that left in 1634.
Now, I don’t remember when in the 1632-alternate the English sold the New World to the French, so I don’t know if that came before or after the settlers left, but I do know that either way Cecil might ally himself with anyone who could help his colony (as he did in reality, with an uneasy balance between Parliament and the king), either simply to make money or to protect his fellow English Catholics.
Even better, if you added a up-timer character who had recently moved to Grantville, WV from Maryland (I’d suggest them being from the Prince Georges County/DC area, Bawlmer (Baltimoreans have a really weird accent), the northwestern counties, or possibly the Annapolis area), and who was really state-patriotic, that’d be even better.
Oh, and a good incentive for the uptimers to help Calvert is the “Act Concerning Religion”, more commonly known as the “Act of Toleration”, he and his protestant governor, Stone, drafted. Though the Act was extremely intolerant (any non-Christians or those who denied the trinity could be executed)it was a hell of a lot better than a lot of other legislation at the time.
Just wanted to mention this, as inspired by the concurrent dates.
GO FREE STATE!
A Marylander
(Old Line State too, but that has nothing to do with anything.)
Comment by A Marylander — February 17, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
I finally bought “1634: Cannon Law”. I’ve like most of your books, and usually can get into them quickly, but this one is taking awhile.
Boundary: Read this a second time only last week, and loved it even more. Hope you are able to write a sequel.
Keep up the great work. I look forward too reading much more.
Respectfully,
Wilford Tibbetts
Comment by Wilford Tibbetts — February 23, 2007 @ 8:16 pm
Well. I must say that i have enjoyed most of your novels, and your one of the writers that i look forward to seeing when new material comes out. but i think you missed the point that your two disgruntled readers were trying to point out.
while i wont call the anthologies and short stories that are put out trash. i will say they are mildly entertaining, and something that i dont mind reading while im waiting on the rest of the series. I do believe that both individuals are more disgruntled by the fact that after reading 32 and 33 .. the reader is just kinda left up in the air as to what happens next. this for me personally has been less than pleasing. had thier not been so much distance between the last novels and the current.. then perhaps thier disatisfaction would not be so great. we have recieved a large amount of short stories or fanfiction, or side stories but very little on the main story for some time
As you said yourself, the drought should be less this time around. I eagerly await your next novel in the 16xx series.
.. on a lighter note.
I myself have also stopped reading the Robert Jordon series. if he actually finishes it or begins to wrap the series up i may pick it up again.. but for now.. going in circles with your readers.. isnt very fun.
last but not least.. have you read the Crosstime Engineer series by Leo Frankowski? if so what were your thoughts?
Comment by McTurbo — February 27, 2007 @ 9:25 am
Sir,
I would like to know if the book Desperate and Dispicable Dwarf (Joes World series) will be coming out in the near future, and does the new title you have created for the Joes World have a release date? Thank you.
Comment by Andrew Mackey — February 27, 2007 @ 9:38 pm
Hi, I greatly enjoy the 163x series (needs to be called something larger than “series” — I think it’s grown beyond a single dimension by now).
I’ve wondered whether Mike Stearns will receive blowback when he leaves the office of PM from some of his most faithful supporters — because when they took their oath to the USE, they thought they were taking it to Mike, the “Prince of Germany”. It might not have clicked with them that they were swearing fealty to an abstraction. And if it didn’t click, they might see his stepping down as a betrayal on his part. My understanding is that an oath of fealty is analogous to a marriage vow. If the office of “husband” were passed around at the whim of some wierd balloting ceremony, I could see how a wife could get a tad upset.
Comment by Jim Burns — March 5, 2007 @ 7:14 pm
1632 being discussed by tech geeks. Imagine that…
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/geekend/?p=458
Comment by Luis Cedeno — April 13, 2007 @ 7:45 am
i think that it would be really cool for you to start adding stuff about how china and ottoman empire start reacting to this.
Comment by Mouktar — July 8, 2007 @ 12:09 am
i was wondering what the exact chronological order of the 1632 series is because every book says something different, please let me know
Comment by donald — October 9, 2007 @ 5:12 pm