davetherave

i never really liked Dune and i didn't like lord of the rings either. Although i did like the hobbit.

I think that epic style of writing just doesn't appeal to me, i find it boring.

Rahvin

Dune - never read. Thought about it, but it never took my fancy. Maybe I should...

Lord of the Rings - Read it. Dissapointed, although I couldn't say specifically why. Probably just my taste in books.

Anne Rice - read most of them. They're good books, although they do cater for a narrow audience, but that's just beacause of the subject.

And Velo, You're absolutely right. It's not about the charcters, it's about the story, and the story is largely irrelevant now. It's too specific to the time it was written in.

__________________

Short Tooth

I agree, no matter how great the writer it comes across as pompous.

__________________
Dear mother, I'll come home again

Rahvin

I realise that "the point of a story is to entertain" is a generalisation. Most stories are written purely to entertain and grab readers. Some stories are written with some form of deeper message. However, not many people will sit and read through a book that they don't find entertaining, just to see that message. That may well be superficial, but hey, that's society today.

Most authors do focus on characters. However, this doesn't stop them from having a well developed, insightful, plotline. Focusing on the characters and their development and portrayal makes the story easier for the reader to visualise and imagine. They can identify with the characters and relate their experiences to their own.

Take (and I'm loathe to do this, especially as there's already a thread for it, but it's the easiest way of showing my point) the "Wheel of Time" by Robert Jordan. I'm not comparing that to Great Expectations, but simply using it to make a point. The world is described in incredible detail, like in Great Expectations, but so are the characters. The reader can easily identify with the characters, even in a fantasy setting, and this is the main reason that the series is still readable (after all, would you read 10,000 pages of description?)

Key part for me there is "Well written". Dickens' work, while well written overall, doesn't focus on the charcters enough for them to be well written. Identifying and not identifying with charcters is just a matter of the reader's perspective. However, what I was trying to get across with those words is that the charcters have depth, the reader could see tham as an actual person, not just a plot device.

Most (pretty much all) books are about the charcters. They focus on the charcters' interactions, troubles, triumphs, all that, and it is all about the charcters. Dickens writes about the setting, and the characters are simply a means of exploring that setting. (but we've covered that already, so I'll leave it there)

__________________