• Sentau
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I prefer wide sweeping and impressionistic views when it comes to tone and theme. Hints of intricate plots in passing are much more interesting

    I am not a literature student but aren’t hints of intricate plots in passing kind of an opposite to wide sweeping views because they will never give a wide enough view¿?

    • SSTF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Wide sweeping, as in a high level view that only briefly touches on things like these deep plots without dwelling on them.

      Many of the plots and pieces of lore in 40k were introduced intentionally as snippets that weren’t ever thought out fully. They were introduced to give the idea of plots existing and to create a tone. Later writers coming in and fleshing out those snippets often turned something mysterious into something convoluted.

      • Cypher@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Agreed and this is why the horus heresy book series was an awful idea.

        It has removed all nuance and discussion about the most important formative conflict in the setting.

        Now the war in heaven is the big murky historical conflict that set the stage…. But thankfully it is safe because it’s only Xenos.

        • Pleb@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’ve been thinking that for a while. But sadly it made them an ridiculous amount of cash. :/

          Also, some more hot takes from me:

          • The Horus Heresy books aren’t even that good.
          • The whole thing started turning bad when we took the fluff as “lore” in the first place.