The Curse of Dan Abnett

[Walter Payton]

He is that, never said he wasn't. We need to try to get him commenting on Liber Comminiscor...

[Hergrmir]

I think the best of the best are the ones able to combine the two things sci-fi/fantasy (and to an extent historical) have to offer over contemporary fiction. On the one hand, lasers, ancient legendary weapons, robots, dragons, etc. Just some sheer cool badassery. On the other hand is the capacity for social commenary in the form of 'here's some traits that we as a people possess, let's look at how they stretch and twist in different situations.'

 

Given that, the vast majority of BL stuff just falls in the former. Which is fine, because that's what they're setting out to do and franchise fiction is hard to break out of the mold anyway.

 

That said, for my money Angels of Darkness is pretty much the only 40k novel I'd recommend to non-40k fans, and even then Hannah Arendt's theories on totalitarianism are a more detailed read. What I like about AoD is it's basically about two fascists discussing how best to pursue their ends. Great Crusade as a mindset not an event? I might recommend the Cain novels too, I really liked the first omnibus and am waiting for BL to get around to making a Second Omnibus.

 

Contra some of you, the ones that are most heavily bolter pr0n have no interest to me, but recently I realised I actually really LIKED the style of Herbert and Tolkien when I didn't have to read them for class. I'm also bad at following action scenes in comic books and can't write them well myself (unless it's sort of individuals rather than a warzone), so the more action-y it gets the less interested I get.

 

Character development is, by nature of having to spend a lot of time on world development, not going to be as pronounced in speculative fiction. Which is something I enjoy, because I generally dislike even the critically acclaimed contemporary fiction because they try to shove characterisation down my throat. I'd rather read what people do and draw my own interpretations about what they believe.

 

For that particularly, I really like William Gibson's writing style, where he gives you a framework for his characters to then fill in yourself. But for those of you who want to see where pulp can meet depth, check out Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash. It's VERY much a book for those of who are 16 inside and want to just see the world's two biggest BAMFs meet each in bladed combat, but behind it is some fairly interesting theorising about place, space and identity, as well as some whacko linguistic conspiracy theorising.

 

One thing I would like to remind people of is that a lot of the stuff we see as classics were also written with much more low-brow considerations in mind. The Illiad WAS basically attempting to bulk up a poet's word count by using stock phrases and too many adjectives. Dickens got paid by length. Plenty of Shakespeare's plays were to suck up to authority or pander to the lowest common denominator. A lot of writers and philosophers and historical figures are misrepresented in our minds as being all about serious business all the time. I sincerely doubt most humans beings sustain that level of seriousness constantly.

 

And since we're all listing off things we like and dislike:

I actually DISLIKE the Gaunt's Ghosts series for making the Imperium too familiar for my liking. But then I like NOT identifying with the humans in the Imperium, because for my money all we share is biology - they're NOT western liberal democrats or even, for that matter, stereotypically eastern despots. The Imperium is this totalising machine that reduces individuals to functionaries and refuels itself on an ideology of constant war. For that, AoD has my vote. That said, I REALLY loved Legion, and Horus Rising was very good too. Haven't read others.

 

James Swallow I've so far liked all of. I'm not sure why people have such a hard time thinking that a couple companies of Blood Angels would believe the Second Coming happened. There're a TON of cults/sects that do (or in the case of certain fringe Jewish sects), believed the First Coming happened. There're dudes preaching that they're reincarnated great figures all the time, and winning followers. When you realise that Space Marines are basically immature children in battlesuits who are taught NEVER to question, then it seems to follow really easily. And those who did question, like Koris, were considered merely curiosities to be tolerated for a while. Flight of the Eisenstein was a good read too, though both Rafen and Garro felt a bit too 'us' for my liking.

 

Bill King I actually think is plenty fun, but nothing more. Reading King is like me running old dungeons in WoW for easy mindless entertainment rather than doing anything with any challenge. Sandy Mitchell is also like this, but I find his style of humour to be very in line with my own so my entertainment level is much higher.

 

Nick Kyme's quite good, I really did like Salamander. Again, maybe a bit too 'us', but then I'm not really sure I've run across anyone who's done Space Marines well in my books aside from Gav Thorpe in AoD and Scanlon in DoA.

 

Re: Graham MacNeill, I don't get Storm of Iron and I don't get Honsou. Why is he so bitter as to constantly have it be noted in a legion noted for their bitterness? Are Space Marines REALLY such whiney children as to be working themselves into bitterer and bitterer states for millenia? Granted, I've only read Storm of Iron. I really did like Mechanicum though, and found I could picture almost all of it in my mind's eye as he described it while not getting too bored by over-description. Great book, IMHO.

 

Ben Counter is seriously hit or miss. Battle for the Abyss was AWFUL. The first Grey Knights book was great, and Soul Drinkers stuff can be good or bad.

 

I REALLY like Thorpe's stuff, if AoD and Raven's Flight are anything to go by. His idea of what the scale of 40k should be like fits with mine, and his notion of the mindset of the Space Marines fits with mine.

 

Heroes of the Space Marines and Tales of Heresy I actually enjoyed a lot of. I feel the short story format works particularly well for pulp, since the size of it means that you don't get clubbed over the head with repeated adjectives, stock phrases, drawn out action scenes, or needlessly dramatic EPIC TALKING. You get shown a slice of life in the setting, and that's cool.

[Lt. Smash]

Any other "important" people on the B and C I should no about?

[Dark Mechanicum]

Dan Abnett as the best author for BL? Hmmm, i'll say he is creative. On other authors in BL.

 

I like Mcneil due to the fact that he writes good chaos novels. Oh reason why Honsou is so bitter, he has geneseed from both ImpFist and Iron Warrior stock so no matter what, until all his rivals are pretty much gone he cant be recoginized for anything due to his mixed geneseed. Also Mechanicum due to the fact it gives the start of the Dark Mechanicum.

 

King for the Space Wolves was a great mindless travel through violence and howling puppies.

 

Counter in the Soul Drinkers made me want to punch babies except when fighting chaos. Haven't read the Grey Knights series yet and Battle for the Abyss made me cry for how the Word Bearers were shown to be.

 

Abnett: Brothers of the snake was long and blah, the Ghosts series is fun to read for guard, I liked Legion and the fact that not building the character too much on the AL was a good thing on what they do, As John Grammaticus was in the spotlight more than even the other humans I can understand his character being brought up more. Also, Dan Abnett has also written for Marvel, Doctor Who, Torchwood, and other Sci-fi venues.

[Gamb1t]

always makes me laugh when people hold up Gibson and an excellent author....ive tried and failed to read Neuromancer 4 times... i just cant take it seriously...it is so so so poorly written...its so clichéd it makes me cringe to read it.... Now this is not to say he doesn’t have some excellent ideas....but I think he suffers from the problems allot of scifi authors have which is they have some excellent ideas but arent very good writers.

 

Dan Abnett is an excellent author...and he draws his inspiration from 40K....which is great and he has added alot to it imo.... some of his characters will stay with me for the rest of my life.... having said that he has written the odd poor book...there is one of the guard books... his early ones...which was so bad i almost stopped reading it...but everyone has their bad days...on the whole i think his work stands head and shoulders above most of the BL writers.... which isnt that much of a surprise when you see depth of worth he has created over his life time.

[Simonius]

I tend to take BL fiction for what I think it is - pulp sci-fi.

 

Some is very poorly written and some is good - there are even one or two books that could compare with mainstream sci-fi (I'm not talking about any other tie-in type stuff like Star Wars, as this is all pulp too).

 

Abnett and some others do write well however, its just that there are rules to adhere to - length of book is generally limited which means stories and characters don't always develop, plots are generically shooty kill death in space and not moral tales of our times.

 

Its a bit like comparing great sci-fi of the past in EE "Doc" Smith's Lensmen series with Frank Herbert's Dune. One is (IMHO) an enjoyable adventure romp through galactic scale battles and stuff, which gives me a few hours escape (pulp) - the other is a deep piece of world building full of fundamental dialogues on the nature of humanity and existence (as well as being an enjoyable romp!) - I won't say which I think is which.

 

What I don't think is that, at present, that BL has any authors writing classic science fiction to compare with the best of the marketplace - there aren't any Peter F Hamilton's here.

 

However, the HH novels have some quality and don't seem to be as restricted in length which is allowing the story to be told, rather than just an adventure to happen. And generally I think that the quality of writing, plot, and character is rapidly improving at present across al the 40K novels.

[Gamb1t]

Simonius have you not read eisenhorn? Thats a fairly long series of books right there...and deals with alot more than shooty shooty. I can see what your saying about pulp sc-fi....and id agree...to a point...there are no ground breaking ideas being created here....and alot of the authors would deffinatly fall into the pulp catagory...Dan Abnett though...IMO is an excellent author and stands up to most mondern day sci-fi material without a doubt. Abnett uses 40k background...and as such is limited to this... so i dont think your ever going to get Herbert...or assimov.. or Dick... But to be fair...Herbert maybe being the exception....dick and co great ideas though they may have..their literary skills are lacking...which is more than made up for by the excellent ideas they have...

 

As far as i see it...Abnett created the world and the story acs for HH... and the other authors are dancing to his tune.... ^_^

^_^

[The Nephilim]

However, the HH novels have some quality and don't seem to be as restricted in length which is allowing the story to be told, rather than just an adventure to happen. And generally I think that the quality of writing, plot, and character is rapidly improving at present across al the 40K novels.

Titanticus was just over 600 pages in paperback. How's that a size constraint?

[Simonius]

OK - I was trying to brief, but most 40K novels until the last year had a page limit set on them - which then creates a word limit, so not everything the author wanted to explore could always be explored.

 

I'm not saying in any way that these are bad novels by the way - I wouldn't be spending my limited cash on them otherwise - and I have a fairly extensive collection of 40K, particulalrly any novels with marines in them - but these make up about 2% of my book collection. I do have Eisenhorn (and Ravenor) and have enjoyed them - but both of these are 3 books in one when it comes to length and contain their fair share of shooty kill death in space (which isn't a bad thing by the way).

 

I guess the best comparison I could give from my own reading experience is with my also extensive collection of Forgotten Realms novels. They're all enjoyable adventures but somehow seem to lack the highs (and lows) of the mainstream of sci-fi and fantasy. They don't "move" me as much - I rarely (not never) get the hairs on the back of my neck standing up in 40K. I don't get the tears welling up from some heroic or tragic event or character (I know I'm an old softie!) and rarely (not never) personalise deeply with the characters themselves

 

I'm not saying either that they are bad writers or badly written, Abnett is generally good, McNeill generally and ADB shows enormous promise (really enjoyed Cadian Blood). The HH series to date is some of the best output BL has produced and I'm thoroughly enjoying it and can't wait for each novel to come out - maybe thats the epic back story and mythos that goes with it. I even enjoyed that UM piece we can't name - my only issue with that was that it was a 40K novel not a 30K one.

 

Its just, I dunno, something is missing.

[Gamb1t]

Intellectual property? ...im guessing that’s the "something" missing bit...because...id imagine. GW don’t want BL driving their IP rights...and direction of 40k in general...and normal sci-fi writer has free reign...indeed this is the reason allot of writers go into the sci-fi genre... still most of the ground work is done for u I suppose...all you need to do is come up with the plot.

 

:P

 

I love Dan abnett...reading his books is like slipping in2 a really comfy safe pair of shoes...i know im going to get a good story well written with afew twists and turns in the plot..... this is more than can be said for alot of the BL authors.... still its all good :)

[Senseilord Ashahara]

Sandy Mitchell owns.

Really.

If you can write a eulogy to baked beans in a 40K book, and get away with it, and make it funny, then you are a man, my son, and all the world shall be yours.

 

Abnett is Abnett. He doesn't need any more.

 

I agree with the statement about Counter making you want to punch babies.

For me it's because he has wonderful ideas and great moments but then every now and then he goes abit mental and ruins it. And he pathologically can't write an ending.

It always feels like he's done the last chapter on the bus on the way to the publisher's office.

[Verythrax Draconis]

Sandy Mitchell owns.

Really.

If you can write a eulogy to baked beans in a 40K book, and get away with it, and make it funny, then you are a man, my son, and all the world shall be yours.

 

Abnett is Abnett. He doesn't need any more.

 

I agree with the statement about Counter making you want to punch babies.

For me it's because he has wonderful ideas and great moments but then every now and then he goes abit mental and ruins it. And he pathologically can't write an ending.

It always feels like he's done the last chapter on the bus on the way to the publisher's office.

 

Yes, you resumed Counter pretty well. He have awesome story and scene ideas, but he lacks the capacity to write them in a compelling way. I felt that way during all Grey Knights book. It's like watching a movie that have a killer plot, but the actors and direction sucks.

 

Mitchell proved that he can do anything. I'm dying to see him in a HH book, even if it's a comedy book (I think the HH series can survive to a single comedy piece). or at least a short story in a compilation, serious or not.

[Kodanshi]

Abnett: Brothers of the snake was long and blah

 

I liked it, and I’ll tell you why. I encountered 40K properly very recently, end of last year in fact. My sisters got me a £40 book voucher for Waterstone’s for my bday anniversary, and one of the books I bought (based mainly on the cover, something I don’t normally do!) consisted of the Ravenor omnibus. And I liked it. A lot. So when I visited my local library later I picked up the first Abnett book I could see: Brothers of the Snake.

 

Now, this book represented my first real introduction to Space Marines, and since the first story features an ordinary human woman encountering a Space Marine for the first time, I felt all the awe that SHE felt when reading about Priad. The descriptions of his armour, his giant size, the fact that Dark Eldar (called ‘primuls’ on that world) who wiped out entire armies warranted sending only a single Space Marine to tackle them, etc. really really excited me.

 

So, yes, Dan Abnett has a special place in my heart. Reading his Horus Rising only convinced me further that he represents one of the best authors in the Black Library.

 

As for length, I know what people mean. MOST of the paperbacks tend to weigh in at around 415 pages, sometimes a bit more, sometimes a little less.

[Dark Mechanicum]

@Kodanshi: Nothing against Brothers of the Snake, I own it and do re-read it randomly and it does have those great reactions. Just didn't sit too well with me.

 

@Simonius: Your library is sounding like my library. I will admit I dont get too attached to many characters in BL books or FR books, But there are some that just stand up to characters from other Major books and can hold out. My example is (prepare for deathstrikes) Paul Atredies and Horus from the first three HH books. In Paul we see the child becoming a man who then becomes well God, lots of emotional character to him and the writing is fantastic (Its Frank Herbet oh yea). Horus the Lupercal, a God like being who has to connect to being a human and those emotions and the strongest one is that of abandonment of a father. Its a character written by three different authors who brought tears to my eyes when he was wishing that his father would be there to help him be Warmaster and teach him.

 

Some BL books even though they are pulp can bring that emotional depth we see in other books.

[Kodanshi]

I actually agree with you on those characters you mention. I love the Dune novels (though not so impressed with the extensions to the Dune series his son has done), and I would call Paul Atreides one of my favourite characters in them along with Duncan Idaho. I too liked Horus, but mostly as portrayed in Horus Rising. The subsequent two books made him a bit ‘lesser’ for me.

 

Other books in which I liked characters emotionally include Salamander by Nick Kyme (Tsu’gan interested me a whole lot, he grew more complex as the book went on).

[Dark Mechanicum]

I shall need to read that one. Now I remember why I tried to not talk books on forums with fellow gamers.....I start buying ALOT of books.

 

On Dune, a couple of books his son did are good, the last two which were supposed to be the finishers was Frank Herbets notes with his sons embellishments.

[Kodanshi]

I bought, for very cheap, one of them and read it all — but it really did nothing for me. I can’t even recall its title now.

 

I’ve gone through a heavy book–buying phase at the moment, mainly because my library stocks very little 40K material — well, not enough for my liking, haha!

[A D-B]

Interesting thread, and a good read. I have my own theories on BL (and general sci-fi) quality. Essentially, I think a lot of writers these days don't read very much - or don't read outside their genre/license - and I reckon it shows in how they write. They're drawing from a limited pool of resources, and not getting any better as they go.

 

But when someone says there are no Hamiltons (or whoever) in BL's ranks, that's because there are hardly any of them anywhere. I mean, I like maybe 5% of Black Library books I read, and I love Warhammer 40,000. I also class myself as a Fantasy and Sci-Fi fan, but I like maybe 5% of Fantasy and Sci-Fi genre books I read, too. I don't necessarily think BL writers are any worse, but more people get hold of those books, and thus they get commented on more. Added to that, there's the stigma attached to tie-in fiction. That's gradually disappearing in the industry, but clings hard to some readers.

 

I'm not coming out in huge defence of BL's back catalogue, but there are issues at play here on the individual level. I think a lot of BL writers do suck, yeah. But I think that about all of the genre - in fact, about all writers in any genre. A lot of people aren't to my tastes, or I think they write poorly/averagely, and fail to hold my interest.

 

And as an interesting note, I can pretty much guarantee you that Dan Abnett has surely been hunted by other publishers over the years, desperate for him to do work for them.

 

...and ADB shows enormous promise (really enjoyed Cadian Blood).

 

Ta, dude.

[A D-B]

By the way. Look out for username A D-B on this forum. It's him.

 

I've already talked to him in the chaos forums. He's a nice guy.

 

Take that back.

[Kodanshi]

Funnily enough I just bough your Soul Hunter book today while at GW in Manchester. Hope I enjoy it!

 

As for people talking about the crap quality of some of BL… I love this section in McNeill’s False Gods, spoken by Erebus:

It is the work of outrageous taletellers and incorrigible demagogues to make their farragoes as exciting as possible… Many such books were written before the Unification and each writer filled page after page with the most outrageous, blood–soaked terrors in order to outdo his contemporaries, resulting in some works of... dubious value.

 

I remember laughing out loud when I read that.

[The Nephilim]

Interesting thread, and a good read. I have my own theories on BL (and general sci-fi) quality. Essentially, I think a lot of writers these days don't read very much - or don't read outside their genre/license - and I reckon it shows in how they write. They're drawing from a limited pool of resources, and not getting any better as they go.

 

But when someone says there are no Hamiltons (or whoever) in BL's ranks, that's because there are hardly any of them anywhere. I mean, I like maybe 5% of Black Library books I read, and I love Warhammer 40,000. I also class myself as a Fantasy and Sci-Fi fan, but I like maybe 5% of Fantasy and Sci-Fi genre books I read, too. I don't necessarily think BL writers are any worse, but more people get hold of those books, and thus they get commented on more. Added to that, there's the stigma attached to tie-in fiction. That's gradually disappearing in the industry, but clings hard to some readers.

 

I'm not coming out in huge defence of BL's back catalogue, but there are issues at play here on the individual level. I think a lot of BL writers do suck, yeah. But I think that about all of the genre - in fact, about all writers in any genre. A lot of people aren't to my tastes, or I think they write poorly/averagely, and fail to hold my interest.

 

And as an interesting note, I can pretty much guarantee you that Dan Abnett has surely been hunted by other publishers over the years, desperate for him to do work for them.

 

...and ADB shows enormous promise (really enjoyed Cadian Blood).

 

Ta, dude.

 

I'm pretty impressed you've joined up on the B&C and are actually posting. It's really nice to see an author take a proactive responses with the community. I've been waiting for Soul Hunter since it was announced and your blog cracks me up. If the novel is written half as well as your blog posts, I'll have aquired another good BL novel.

[Dark Apostle Thirst]

What does A-D-B stand for?

 

Anyways, next time I hit the bookstore I will look for Soul Hunter. I haven't herard of it before, but people seem to be saying it is pretty good, so I will check it out.

[onipunk]

I really enjoy Abnett's work, but it's not just the quality of the writing I admire (as a writer), it's the speed, and how he manages to maintain the quality despite being hyper-prolific. If I'm as fast a writer as he is I'll be happy.

[Ju'kosian]

What does A-D-B stand for?

 

Anyways, next time I hit the bookstore I will look for Soul Hunter. I haven't herard of it before, but people seem to be saying it is pretty good, so I will check it out.

 

A-D-B = Aaron Dembski-Bowden.

[Dark Mechanicum]

I've been looking up the rest of Dan Abnetts work in Marvel and Torchwood. Its interesting to read.

 

@Kodanshi: Having just re-read that book today....oh yea. Its funny.