Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Glasslands Review (SPOILERS)
  • Subject: Glasslands Review (SPOILERS)
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Glasslands Review (SPOILERS)

Didact's Reprisal -
Now is the time of our unworlding
One final effort is all that remains
And I am not afraid
We shall fulfill our promise
We fight for the grace of the Mantle
And this time none of you will be left behind


Posted by: Primo84
The moral absolutism is where Nylund's writing takes a nose dive. Everything is in concrete, black and white terms: it's all for the good of humanity. Every morally questionable thing done in his stories, while maybe questioned by the person committing them at first, is soon to be discarded for the reason that it's being done with the best of intentions.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I don't know whether it's not addressed in depth because it eluded him intellectually or because it just didn't fit with the story's theme, but the morality wasn't a heavily discussed theme in any of Nylund's work. It's okay though, because if I had to compare Eric Nylund's work with anything, I'd say it reminds me of a decent action movie. It's entertaining, and the pieces are all there, it's just lacking depth.



I found Ghosts of Onyx to be about Halsey's way to cope with the deeds she has done, along with the event leading up to it, Halsey's kidnapping of Kelly in First Strike. Halsey's hand in destroying the Forerunner crystal may have also been part of this as well.

In any case, the issue that I find is in how Traviss interprets Halsey. (Now, I'm welcoming you to disagree with me fully here: I have not read the book and I only have Traviss' interview to go by, and I'd really love to be wrong) It seems that Traviss treats Halsey as a person who feels little to no fault in her actions; to me, it always seems guilt has always been on Halsey's mind when she's around the spartans. But like I said, I don't have the book to go by, and I honestly hope I'm wrong. The only source I have to go by is in this snippet of Traviss' interview:

"Not even a serial killer sees himself (or herself - let's not be sexist) as evil. Their world makes perfect sense to them. I don't inject my opinions or steer readers.."

  • 11.02.2011 6:50 PM PDT
  • gamertag: MGTrey
  • user homepage:

The Seventh Column demands it.

Tumblr|Twitter

Posted by: Primo84


I would rather a much more fresh approach at the moral implications of the S2 project, if it had to be such the star of the show. I understand how another perspective would be important in further showing how polarizing an event it is, but repackaging the same bullet points of the ordeal and presenting it instead from an unfavorable PoV, and doing that alone, isn't very interesting. Osman literally just read out what we as readers have known since FoR, and had these characters we're supposed to care about give their opinions on it. It's interesting, but it was presented poorly and for far too much throughout the book with little development on the dynamic. It just got stale. On top of being jarring and uninformative from a lore perspective.

I liked some aspects of Glasslands, and even thought it had a lot of potential but just fell flat on its face. Lucy's little subplot, while beginning stupidly, became rather adorable and introspective. That was the best the characterization got, especially when the book hit its highest note with the punch scene. That was rather well done.

But Glasslands never got moving. Nylund left the gang in a literal Forerunner playground, and they are out without much fanfare or exploration. I suppose Traviss is leaving the majority of the Forerunner exposition to the Greg Bear trilogy, but still, that was a missed opportunity.

The book was at its best when the characters interacted fluidly. The build up for the Mendez-Halsey fight was organic but amounted to little: the main payoff from the outburst was more information we already knew. And it's hard to care for Halsey in relation to Miranda. It's just so out of the blue in the book.

However, circling back to the new characters, they were vessels. It was established rather early. This is why I found so much objectionable in your original post: you lauded the characterization but I found it monotonous and uninformative as well. I was waiting for something to happen with Osman but her actions belied the hype: I was expecting much more from her throughout Glasslands than I got. Especially because she voices such strong opinions in her head but doesn't take much action or start it.

I suppose you could say wait for the next book, but that doesn't make me feel better about what was left on the table for Glasslands.

I'm not against characterization and a slower and more methodical story. I loved Cryptum. But Glasslands missed the mark on too many occasions, especially when it came to the characters and the universal lore. It had its moments, but they came too few and far between.

  • 11.02.2011 7:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: MGTrey
  • user homepage:

The Seventh Column demands it.

Tumblr|Twitter


Posted by: Im SteelAssassn

Posted by: Primo84
The moral absolutism is where Nylund's writing takes a nose dive. Everything is in concrete, black and white terms: it's all for the good of humanity. Every morally questionable thing done in his stories, while maybe questioned by the person committing them at first, is soon to be discarded for the reason that it's being done with the best of intentions.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I don't know whether it's not addressed in depth because it eluded him intellectually or because it just didn't fit with the story's theme, but the morality wasn't a heavily discussed theme in any of Nylund's work. It's okay though, because if I had to compare Eric Nylund's work with anything, I'd say it reminds me of a decent action movie. It's entertaining, and the pieces are all there, it's just lacking depth.



I found Ghosts of Onyx to be about Halsey's way to cope with the deeds she has done, along with the event leading up to it, Halsey's kidnapping of Kelly in First Strike. Halsey's hand in destroying the Forerunner crystal may have also been part of this as well.

In any case, the issue that I find is in how Traviss interprets Halsey. (Now, I'm welcoming you to disagree with me fully here: I have not read the book and I only have Traviss' interview to go by, and I'd really love to be wrong) It seems that Traviss treats Halsey as a person who feels little to no fault in her actions; to me, it always seems guilt has always been on Halsey's mind when she's around the spartans. But like I said, I don't have the book to go by, and I honestly hope I'm wrong. The only source I have to go by is in this snippet of Traviss' interview:

"Not even a serial killer sees himself (or herself - let's not be sexist) as evil. Their world makes perfect sense to them. I don't inject my opinions or steer readers.."


Nah, she's pretty self deprecating in her thoughts. I wouldn't say her being guilt-free is accurate of Halsey in Glasslands at all.

  • 11.02.2011 7:43 PM PDT

Brains beats brawn get used to it

Fear the Red Comet

Variety is the spice of life.
Long live games.
Death to all fanboys.


Posted by: Im SteelAssassn

Posted by: Primo84
The moral absolutism is where Nylund's writing takes a nose dive. Everything is in concrete, black and white terms: it's all for the good of humanity. Every morally questionable thing done in his stories, while maybe questioned by the person committing them at first, is soon to be discarded for the reason that it's being done with the best of intentions.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I don't know whether it's not addressed in depth because it eluded him intellectually or because it just didn't fit with the story's theme, but the morality wasn't a heavily discussed theme in any of Nylund's work. It's okay though, because if I had to compare Eric Nylund's work with anything, I'd say it reminds me of a decent action movie. It's entertaining, and the pieces are all there, it's just lacking depth.



I found Ghosts of Onyx to be about Halsey's way to cope with the deeds she has done, along with the event leading up to it, Halsey's kidnapping of Kelly in First Strike. Halsey's hand in destroying the Forerunner crystal may have also been part of this as well.

In any case, the issue that I find is in how Traviss interprets Halsey. (Now, I'm welcoming you to disagree with me fully here: I have not read the book and I only have Traviss' interview to go by, and I'd really love to be wrong) It seems that Traviss treats Halsey as a person who feels little to no fault in her actions; to me, it always seems guilt has always been on Halsey's mind when she's around the spartans. But like I said, I don't have the book to go by, and I honestly hope I'm wrong. The only source I have to go by is in this snippet of Traviss' interview:

"Not even a serial killer sees himself (or herself - let's not be sexist) as evil. Their world makes perfect sense to them. I don't inject my opinions or steer readers.."


She still blames herself for a great many things and continues to question and argue with herself on whether her actions are right or if they're damnable. It's in line with how she feels about herself and her actions in TFoR, First Strike, and Ghosts of Onyx.

  • 11.02.2011 10:30 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2