An authors betrayal

[LobsterFeng]

Yeah I agree. I'm not homophobic either, but there's seriously no evidence in the books that say that Dumbledore is gay. (Well to be fair there isn't really any that supports him being straight either but whatever.)

But my point is, Rowling only did it because she wanted publicity, and she implying that Dumbledore didn't like Harry like a son (which is how I interpreted it) but he liked to hang around Harry because he's gay. Again, I'm not trying to be homophobic, but I remember her saying something along the lines of "That's why Dumbledore cares about Harry so much." I mean WTF?

I sincerely doubt that she said that.

Gay =/= pedophile. For all your insistence that you're not homophobic, that's an awfully offensive mistake to make. If she did say that, which I don't think she did, I'm willing to bet that you took it completely out of context. She probably meant that it's the reason why he cares about him so much as a son, because he can't have any of his own.

And I knew this would come up eventually. Look I knew that that's not what she was implying at all, I just meant that she really worded it badly. And my main point was that she only did it for publicity so way to miss that.

 

[Gasaraki]

Wait, so... if a character dies or if the book has anything but an 'and they all lived happily ever after' ending, then it sucks?
Are you eight?

Yeah I agree. I'm not homophobic either, but there's seriously no evidence in the books that say that Dumbledore is gay. (Well to be fair there isn't really any that supports him being straight either but whatever.)

But my point is, Rowling only did it because she wanted publicity, and she implying that Dumbledore didn't like Harry like a son (which is how I interpreted it) but he liked to hang around Harry because he's gay. Again, I'm not trying to be homophobic, but I remember her saying something along the lines of "That's why Dumbledore cares about Harry so much." I mean WTF?

I sincerely doubt that she said that.

Gay =/= pedophile. For all your insistence that you're not homophobic, that's an awfully offensive mistake to make. If she did say that, which I don't think she did, I'm willing to bet that you took it completely out of context. She probably meant that it's the reason why he cares about him so much as a son, because he can't have any of his own.

And I knew this would come up eventually. Look I knew that that's not what she was implying at all, I just meant that she really worded it badly. And my main point was that she only did it for publicity so way to miss that.

Yes, because the author of one of the most popular book series of the century, who's final book had just come out and who's movie franchise was still ongoing, definitely needed some extra publicity, eh? And I doubt that you knew that it wasn't her implication, or you wouldn't have used it as an argument.

 

[Rin Little]

Someone's never read any of George RR Martian's A Song of Ice and Fire series... Its so bad that some created this

Spoiler: What GRRM actually looks like, if you're curious

They're still the best series of books I've read.

I was actually going to mention those lol I watched the series on HBO before I read the first book and I kept freaking out at all the things that happened. Now I'm almost dreading reading the second book!

 

[GrimTuesday]

Someone's never read any of George RR Martian's A Song of Ice and Fire series... Its so bad that some created this

Spoiler: What GRRM actually looks like, if you're curious

They're still the best series of books I've read.

I was actually going to mention those lol I watched the series on HBO before I read the first book and I kept freaking out at all the things that happened. Now I'm almost dreading reading the second book!

Nah, don't dread it, embrace the pain for it will make you stronger. The books really are good, and they just get better (with the exception of A Feast for Crows which can get a little tedious at times). I actually loved the fact that GRRM isn't afraid to kill a main character its very refreashing when you look at the rest of the fantasy genre.

 

[Rin Little]

Nah, don't dread it, embrace the pain for it will make you stronger. The books really are good, and they just get better (with the exception of A Feast for Crows which can get a little tedious at times). I actually loved the fact that GRRM isn't afraid to kill a main character its very refreashing when you look at the rest of the fantasy genre.

This is very true. I'm already into A Clash of Kings and I'm really liking it. But when they first killed off Ned I was flipping shit! And two of my friends who've already read the series kept mocking me while I was going nuts lol

 

[manic_depressive13]

And I knew this would come up eventually. Look I knew that that's not what she was implying at all, I just meant that she really worded it badly. And my main point was that she only did it for publicity so way to miss that.

That's your fault for wording it badly.

You're still wrong. There's plenty to suggest that Dumbledore is gay if you look for it. Sure, it's not in your face, but it's there. The very fact that it was recieved so badly just shows what kind of society we live in. Why was it assumed he was straight? Why should him being gay matter at all? Besides, what would you take to be textual evidence of his being gay? Should Rowling have inserted a sex scene as proof? Should she have depicted a hundred year old man going out on a date with another man? Should Dumbledore have worn rainbow robes and waggled his dick infront of the children? How exactly do gay people act, that makes you believe that Dumbledore's behaviour in the book was decidedly not gay?

You said yourself there's no evidence to suggest Dumbledore is straight. Is it possible that she said he was gay because, I don't know, that's how she imagined the character? I sincerely doubt she anticipated the uproar that it created. People wanted to know why he was never married, and they were asking about certain character traits, so she explained the reason for these things. If Dumbledore being gay gave her a lot of publicity, that says more about us as the audience than it does about her.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

I'm fairly certain David Eddings was trolling all of his fans with The Dreamers.
The first three books in the series were bad enough, with crappy characterisation and dialogue, and with most of the actions taken by the characters rendered completely pointless by the end of each book, but the last book was by far the worst.
At the end

Spoiler

they kill the bad guy (a kind of bug-overmind thing) and one of the gods realises that everything that happened could have been avoided if the bug had been destroyed years ago. So he goes back in time, kills the bug, and everything that took place over the course of the four-book series is erased (except for the death of a god, but no one liked her anyway).

It was just... wow. It was such a terrible series, one that I forced myself to read only out of loyalty to the author, and I thought that it couldn't get any worse... but amazingly, it did.

David Eddings' sequel series just read like big fuck yous to fans of the originals. The Mallorean? Pretty much a rehash of The Belgariad, only not as funny and he left Berek behind.

 

[LadyRhian]

It wasn't inside the story itself, unless I missed something incredibly subltle but...

[sub]I take it as non-canon. Not that I'm a homophobe, its just that I never read him that way.[/sub]

Other than that one, no author has really given me too much of a gut punch yet.

Well, tbh, he's not portrayed in much of a sexual way at all in the first six books, so... saying it's OOC doesn't really fit, exactly.

 

[HT_Black]

Read the Eisenhorn series. Just...any given story.

Congratulations, you now feel dirty and unsatisfied.

 

[LadyRhian]

Yeah I agree. I'm not homophobic either, but there's seriously no evidence in the books that say that Dumbledore is gay. (Well to be fair there isn't really any that supports him being straight either but whatever.)

But my point is, Rowling only did it because she wanted publicity, and she implying that Dumbledore didn't like Harry like a son (which is how I interpreted it) but he liked to hang around Harry because he's gay. Again, I'm not trying to be homophobic, but I remember her saying something along the lines of "That's why Dumbledore cares about Harry so much." I mean WTF?

I sincerely doubt that she said that.

Gay =/= pedophile. For all your insistence that you're not homophobic, that's an awfully offensive mistake to make. If she did say that, which I don't think she did, I'm willing to bet that you took it completely out of context. She probably meant that it's the reason why he cares about him so much as a son, because he can't have any of his own.

Or that Dumbledore knew what it was like to be an outcast with hardly any family...

 

[Canadamus Prime]

They're not "betraying" you. Writers kill off characters for many reasons. You sound really paranoid, like it's some kind of personal attack on you.

Pretty much this. The author isn't writing the story specifically to satisfy you. As hard as it may be to accept, the Universe does not revolve around you.

 

[LadyRhian]

Being an author myself, I don't necessarily view an ending I don't like as a "betrayal". If I don't like the ending of a book, I just don't read that book/series again, and if they keep writing endings I don't like, well, I'll stop reading that author. There have been tons of endings of books that put me off. The epilogue of Deathly Hallows being just one of them.

 

[justnotcricket]

The only book series that ever made me completely rage was the Animorphs, it ended up being one of those oh look let's just start randomly killing people left and right, yea that's done...uhhh gotta find a way to this series, throw a bunch of random crap together....done!

Wow, this. I loved that series when I was a kid, but it ended so...badly... Basically I think it went on for far longer than it should have.

I do agree with whoever it was here who said that you shouldn't really feel betrayed by an author - that if they've made you care that much about a character, then they deserve credit for being a powerful writer. There is a lot of truth in that. Some authors do seem to just randomly do things, and that does irritate me sometimes. But often, if I have a visceral reaction to a book, when I've recovered, I will admire that author all the more.

 

[Inkidu]

This is the third time I feel as if an author has betrayed me. After the whole thing with douglas adams and the hitch-hikers guide I though I wouldn't recover. Ayn Rand Stabbed me a couple of times with some of the unneeded punishment of the characters in her books.I mean Eddie of all people in "Atlas Shrugged"? Catherine and Peter in "The Fountainhead"? Thats cold, I mean I get she is trying to make her objectivism philosophy clear and all but, ouch. And now I have suffered quite possibly the greatest betrayal of all.

My favorite Author of all time was R.A. Salvatore. I have finally been able to get my hand on a copy of "The Ghost King" I swear to fucking god that ending was so brutal it wasn't even funny. Then with renewed hope that something would change I read "Gauntlgrym"....SERIOUSLY?

I can't take it any more. Every series I ever come to love, I feel like the author ends up betraying me in one massive compulsive act wrought upon their keyboard simply to increase sales.

So what about you guys? You ever hit a spot in a beloved series or book where you felt like the author just spat right at your face? If so when? What book? Details are fine as long as your prepare potential readers for spoilers.

Stop reading them? You're speaking of character death and I have to say get the hell over it. I wish more authors would kill off beloved characters, and kill them off as indiscriminately as is possible.

You know why? Newsflash! People die, they die unexpectedly when everything is going for them, they die and it wrenches out your soul. It's not fair, it's not right but it's what happens more often than not.

Spoiler: examples for Night Angel Trilogy and Codex Alera series

If you don't kill of characters you end up with lackluster crap or elements in a story like what happened to Brent Weeks' Night Angel Trilogy. That being that Kylar was such a flip-floppy untroubled pantywaist who was so morally un-tortured that Weeks literally had to bring back Durzo Blint from the grave, from the freaking grave! Just to make the story cool again.

Or you end up with with Jim Butcher's Codex Alera series. No one who is remotely good and or at least redeemable is ever killed off. It became a good guys win evil loses. Which is such a shame because The Dresden Files is so good at having characters die.

I suppose though you should feel betrayed, but you know what? You're supposed to! Congratulations uninitiated, you're no longer so! Have some cake.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Spoiler: Raymond E Feist - Midkemia Universe

Why?! Just why did you kill off Miranda in such a poxy way, huh?! She's a powerful mage, at least let her fight some, for fuck's sake!! Sure most of the main cast dies at some point, but why did she have to fall over so easy?!

 

[Amethyst Wind]

Timothy Zahn, ruining Outbound Flight by putting Obi Wan and Anakin on it, in his earlier books, which pre-date the prequels, where he introduced Outbound Flight, there was no mention of this, 10 years later, suddenly there's movie-Jedi in my expanded universe.

No thank you Tim, no thank you.

Also, I'd say most authors who right too many books for the same series, no matter who you are, you can't indefinitely maintain the quality of the ideas in the books and the writing will suffer.

Captcha: tedKlnv.

It's true, I do envy Ted Keil.

 

[SarahSyna]

I only consider it a betrayal if the author destroys the story/characters, or in the ending just doesn't do them any justice.
See the Anita Blake books for a good example. The originally chaste and moral heroine becomes a serial rapist who decides a married man should die for not sleeping with her. Needless to say, that was not natural character progression.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

The only book series that ever made me completely rage was the Animorphs, it ended up being one of those oh look let's just start randomly killing people left and right, yea that's done...uhhh gotta find a way to this series, throw a bunch of random crap together....done!

To be fair, the ***** didn't kill that many of the characters I spent 50 books reading about.

But 50 fucking books! Good books! I really wish they were bad just so that I wouldn't been that disappointed. And this is the ending we get? Ok the bit with the all-powerful whats his name when rachel died was pretty good, but nowhere near good enough to excuse a fucking cliff hanger!

I literally threw the book out of a third story window.

when I was younger this series was the single most traumatic thing in my life, honestly, these character, nay these people that I had grown to bloody admire, to truly be inspired by their quest against tyranny get butt fucked and die, the ones that don't all end up either alone with a normal life or with irreparable mental damage...

Actually that seems to be the result of a lot of real life rebellion soldiers, huh, way to stick to realism.

Man that is ironic considering the series.

And the series was pretty traumatising anyway. Think about the setting, the yeerk and especially morphing. That's some fucking disturbing shit. In one of the books one of the main character is tortured for several chapters.

 

[Soraryuu]

Since we're talking about killing off characters, I just have to pull this thing out...

Spoiler: HUSSIE!

But on topic; I really don't feel like I've ever been betrayed by an author.
This coming from one that doesn't read as many books as he'd like to. (Gotta do something about that...)