Re: Anyone read Stirling's latest?

"Georgiana Gates" <ramrod@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:47ffe294$0$9834$a726171b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Rick wrote:
>> "John Schilling" <schillin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>> news:n49nv3lurna3u5dm113rcugripa07itm8i@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> On 06 Apr 2008 19:05:42 GMT, "Dan Goodman" <dsgood@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ravenlynne wrote:
>>>>> prestorjon wrote:
>>>>>> I've been burned by him recently.  Both Conquistador and Sky People
>>>>>> were short on plot.  I saw one review which said that Crimson Kings
>>>>>> was better than Sky People.  Has anyone read it?  Is it worth
>>>>>> taking a look at?
>>>>> Nope.
>>>>> I made most of the way through Dies the Fire, and decided that this
>>>>> author isn't for me.
>>>> Try something better by him:  Island in the Sea of Time.
>>> That's actually the book that convinced me not to ever read any more
>>> Stirling.
>>>
>>>
>> No accounting for tastes, but I thought the ISOT books were excellent. 
I 
>> have re-read them at least a dozen times since they came out and I
always 
>> wind up feeling sad that there is no more to read when I get to the
end.
> I read ISOT and I rate it the best novel ever set in Nantucket. That
puts 
> it ahead of Moby Dick, except that I couldn't stand Moby Dick.
>
> I think Eric Flint's 1632 series is far superior to ISOT.

1632 was entertaining, but the characterization was a bit cardboard and
the 
dialogue was a bit wooden.  While ISOT's characters weren't classically 
deep, they were memorable and definitely not stereotypes.  In no way would
I 
ever say 1632 was superior to ISOT, but YMMV and all that...