Memories of Ice

Title: Memories of Ice

3rd book of the Malazan Book of the Fallen series

Author: Steven Erikson

This book is more related to the first in this series. Several characters are introduced for the first time including new players. Familiar character present in Gardens of the Moon are also reintroduced. The plot of the series is finally presented here. The Crippled god shows up in the first part of the book. Whiskeyjack also returns, as well as Paran. This book serves as a turning-point to the story. It's filled with revelations about important characters, including the introduction of some of the young gods, elder gods and elder races.

The book begins with a flashback of an important event that took place sometime in the past. At this point in the series, the reader must have a sharp memory of the previous books and pay attention to the events that will take place thereafter. References to other characters and events are scattered throughout the series and the significance might be missed if the reader cannot recall them. Erikson gives a lot of hints, explanations and even repetitions for the readers to understand. He has also acquired another style. He uses italics to separate a flashback or a dream, or to express a characters thoughts, sometimes within a conversation. I admit the change of font hurts my eyes a bit but it's manageable. He overuses it sometimes and some of the characters could babble on and on. There is less action too than the previous two books. Most of the characters delve into self-examination. The pace of the narrative is not constant and most of the action is present only during the siege of Capustan and the battle at Coral.

The battle scenes are impressive as usual but there are scenes where some of the actions are described only in a few words to proceed immediately to the outcome of the battle. Erikson though was able to handle well the variety of the characters and the tribes or races. He was also able to focus on several characters as well. The outline of the pantheon and its origins are also explained, but he leaves enough mystery to make the readers want to know more. 

When I first read the book a few years ago, I did not pay attention to the emotions of the characters but the description of the war, and it horrified me. Reading it the second time gave me an opportunity to examine the characters closely and how they relate to war in general. Now that I think on it, I think the theme of the book is to examine what the mind and heart goes through in the midst of war. Two opposing features of humanity at their extremes can be observed. On one side are the people who fight for freedom and honor to survive and the other, people who are driven to embrace pain, terror and cannibalism to survive. But there are also those who make war because it's the only life they know. Others also exploit the opportunity to seek revenge or to seek salvation and find meaning in their existence. I can go on and on with the list. Erikson was able to show different thoughts and emotions that might go through someone's mind when faced with different choices. It is overall, a sad book. Most of the characters are portrayed in different degrees of despair, but also show them in their best qualities. When pushed to the limit, some people break, some embrace the pain and endure, while some would try to take away the pain and bring hope to others.

I was saddened by Whiskeyjack's death and the changes that happened to some of the characters. Some characters also discover new powers within themselves. Duiker also makes an appearance in the last part of the book but I don't think he has a big role anymore in the series. Some of the incidences that occurred in Deadhouse Gates are also explained in this book. 

Apart from the plot itself, there are more things that the book can offer. That is one of the things that makes this series great so far - a book that makes the readers think and reflect upon themselves.

The Ghost of Sparta: A Review of the God of War Series

Several adaptations of Greek Mythology in media have appeared over the years. Some were successful while the others have failed to represent the ancient Greeks. Among the most memorable I've encountered is this series. Not only was it able to illustrate the heroes, monsters and gods in myths, but also brought to the fore the often ignored question - what happens to the Greek pantheon after they defeated the Titans?

It is unique because the hero in this game is not a hercules-achilles-jason clone. The protagonist is a minor figure in Greek mythology. Kratos (Cratos) is a servant of the gods and one of Zeus' children, which is close enough to the real version (Cratos is not a child of Zeus, but one of his servants along with Nike). And unlike most heroes, he does not carry weapons to save humanity. He seeks revenge to cleanse his past. The series began when he sought to kill Ares, the God of War. 

He was finally able to kill Ares with the help of the other gods. The portrayal of the original god of war is quite accurate. His fellow Olympians despise him, even his mother Hera. Kratos served Ares for a while not knowing that the god was molding him to become a killing machine to do his bidding. Ares tricked Kratos into killing his wife and his child. Kratos finally realized that he was being used and thereafter sought to make Ares pay for his deceit. He did not want the power but no one else is fit to assume the title of god of war.

When he finally acquired the throne however, the other gods realized he was a less merciful lord than Ares. He demanded more blood and even went to participate in the war himself. The gods put into motion the plans that they had all along. They took Kratos' power so Zeus can kill him. He was able to escape Hades' grasp and this time he turned his eyes to Zeus. It was then revealed in God of War 2 that he was the son of the lord of Olympus. Zeus sought to prevent the cycle of patricide by taking Kratos' life. In the last stages of the game,  the Ghost of Sparta has slain another god and Zeus escaped. The Titans sought Kratos' help. Gaia promised to Kratos that he was going to get his revenge. Kratos was able to kill the sisters of Fate and went back in time when Zeus waged war against the Titans.

God of War 3 begins with the Titans' assault on Mount Olympus. Several gods gathered to oppose them: Zeus, Poseidon, Hades, Hermes and Helios. Kratos has slain Hera, Hephaestus and Hercules on his way to Zeus. It was in this part of the series when Kratos discovered the Titans were using him as well. This led him to decide to annihilate the Titans as well. Kratos also discovered that when he opened the box of Pandora to slay Ares, he released all the evil things trapped inside it. This corrupted Zeus and the other gods. What Zeus has been fearing all along was stirred awake and blossomed into an obsession. He knew in hindsight that what he did to his father Kronos, his son will do to him as well.

When he finally killed Zeus, the antihero of this series realized that revenge alone cannot cleanse the deeds of his past. His nightmares still haunt him. As Kratos lay dying, he was drawn into a vision that involved his family, Athena and Pandora. It was then he realized that he also released Hope when he opened Pandora's box, and that Hope was the key to forgiveness. He cannot undo his sins, but he has to forgive himself and ask for forgiveness from his victims. Athena tried to take this power, revealing that she wanted the throne for herself. But Kratos refused, taking with him Hope.

God of War

I thought at first that the inclusion of the legend of Pandora was odd. It will take a journey through all three games to understand this however, and God of War 3 was able to account for the holes in the plot. 

The first boss fight was a classic. I enjoyed the battle with the Hydra which comprised of a few stages. Monsters in classic mythology were present and represented fairly well. The graphics are stunning. The producers of the game did their research well. I enjoyed most of the fight scenes and the puzzles are more challenging than the next two games.

One of the highlights is the trip out of Hades. The rolling logs were frustrating. In my opinion, this installment in the series had more challenges than the next two.

God of War 2

When I realized where the story was going, I thought that it will ruin the whole series. It was not clear at first but when Zeus killed Kratos, I realized that it was going to be interesting from that point. The first boss fight was huge as usual, figuratively and relatively. The last few battles in this game were interesting. As far as I know, I don't recall any adaptation of Greek mythology that involved the annihilation of Clotho, Lakhesis and Atropos - the sisters of Fate. It is common belief that they are more powerful than even the gods. Gaia also got into the fray. She helped Kratos escape Hades and told him that to kill Zeus, he has to change what the Fates have decreed.

He was about to kill Zeus using the Blade of Olympus, but Athena got in the way and she was killed instead. The game ends with a scene of Titans climbing up Mount Olympus.

Like the first game, the musical score, voice acting and graphics are well done. More mythological characters are involved. The puzzles are easier though.

God of War 3

The first boss fight involved Poseidon. It seems much easier than the first two games however and I'm quite disappointed when I realized that there would be no battles near any body of water after that. Slaying every god was a bit shocking to me. The fight with Hermes was easy too, and the puzzles are less challenging. The main focus it seems was on the story and the art. To their credit, this game has the best art I've seen so far. The moving environments were superb. 

Towards the end of the game, the revelations were shocking. Kratos is more emotional than the first two games and I cannot help but feel pity for him. He shows his deep loneliness and despair, which can only be cleansed by blood. This game was able to account for the legend of Pandora's box and the tradition of patricide among gods if the player has some exposure to Greek mythology. I can't help but say that everything makes sense. These and the story of Kratos' life however led to a heartbreaking conclusion to the game. 

***

Most people think that Kratos' character is too one-sided, and that the game isn't different from all the other hack-and-slash types. Most would also say that using mythology makes it an interesting game. I once read a comment from a player that Greek mythology lovers would not appreciate it because it destroys the Olympians. From my perspective however, it makes sense. From what I know of classic mythology, it's likely to happen. But Zeus has no heir and there are no challenges to his power other than the Titans imprisoned in Tartarus. Gaia might still harbor hard feelings though. 

I admit I was a bit sad when I had to kill several heroes along the way. Theseus, Hercules, Perseus and characters like Icarus, the Gorgons, Prometheus and others were also present. Artemis disappeared in the next two games as well. And instead of Apollo, they chose to have Helios as the god of sun. Mythology-wise it is accurate, but Helios was a Titan and not an Olympian. The series involved almost all the important figures in mythology although most of them end up dead.

I recommend it for people who appreciate a good story. It also helps to brush up on mythology. The gameplay isn't the best but that alone is not the only criteria to judge a good game. The music, voice acting, graphics and animation are the best I've seen so far. Overall I'll give it a 9 out of 10 rating.

God of War = 10 out of 10

God of War 2 = 9 out of 10

God of War 3 = 8 out of 10

Deadhouse Gates

Title: Deadhouse Gates

2nd book of the Malazan Book of the Fallen Series

Author: Steven Erikson

Unlike Erikson's first book in this series, this book gives the readers a more intimate view of the Malazan Empire. The story is told through the point of view of a few selected characters. Erikson still lapses with his habit in the first book of switching to one point of view to another in the same paragraph or chapter. Deadhouse Gates is more compact, more personal and more emotional than Gardens of the Moon. The book foreshadows what is to become of the empire.

Here we meet new players along with familiar characters from the first book. It focuses on five main stories, although they are only a small part that makes up the plot of the series. Each story is told in one unique perspective, the most notable of which is Duiker's narrative of Coltaine's march. The other narratives revolve around the following characters: Icarium, who the readers will meet for the first time. His story is told from the perspective of his friend Mappo; Felisin, who is mentioned in the first book as one of Paran's sisters; Kalam's journey to attempt to assassinate the Empress; and the journey of Apsalar, Fiddler and Crokus. The objectives are not so clear to the trio at first though.

Among these five journeys we see a triangle that will foreshadow future events in the lives of the characters. As mentioned in the first book, Apsalar was once possessed by Cotillion. Her conflicting memories will force her to choose what kind of life she wants to lead after such a discovery. This marks the one side of the triangle. The characters are faced with problems in which finding the solution is not as easy as selecting one from the other available choice. 

Kalam finds that he has conflicting loyalties between his homeland and the Empire that he serves. When he has finally confronted the Empress, he found that the solution is not as easy as it seems. The same goes for Mappo who is torn between his duty and his love for his friend. Kalam and Mappo make up another side of the triangle. Decisions still must be made as long as one is aware of the consequences. Mappo is in a way betraying the task given to him for the sake of friendship. The same goes for Kalam. Although it was not stated in the book, I think he realized that killing the Empress will not undo the past and will just make things more complicated. That to rule an empire, one must be both brutal and merciful. 

The last character to complete the triangle is Felisin. In the early parts of the book, she is shown to be content with her situation. She endures because she knows no other way. She embraces pain because she thinks that is all she will ever get. This conviction is strengthened when she is chosen as Sha'ik Reborn. She thinks she is renewed because she found support in her convictions and she found a way to finally get her revenge. However she does not realize that this is not a renewal. She does not yet fully comprehend the role she is about to take, yet she accepts it. Unlike the other characters in the triangle, she has resigned to whatever fate has given to her, and relying on her strength and experience to endure the consequences.

My favorite part of this book is Duiker's account of Coltaine and his army. The characters insights makes a powerful narrative that is unmatched (in my opinion) in this series. The fact that it is told from his perspective alone makes it brilliant. The reader gets to look at war from the point of view of a scholar and a soldier who participates in the events first hand. Duiker's observations switch from an objective assessment to a personal reflection of the horrors of war. The reader is forced to reflect about the events and how it relates to them.

The book also provides a more detailed description of the Azath and the shapeshifters. Fewer ascendants are mentioned in this book, which makes it more colorful because most of the characters are humans. The fighting scenes are better than Gardens of the Moon, although there isn't much to be said about Erikson's knowledge in tactics. There is also a good lengthy fight scene involving Kalam and assassins, as well as battles in the sea. 

There is only one flaw I have observed. Towards the end of the book, Erikson should have at least provided a short paragraph from the point of view of soldiers within the walls of Aren as they looked upon their comrades outside. I do not see any point in resurrecting Duiker as well, although it was not intended at the start. The character loses its purpose and his death becomes meaningless, although he carries the first-hand account of the journey.

I think it was a well-written book. The maps and geographical descriptions of the battle scenes are easy to picture out. His development of the characters are much better and more in-depth than the first book. One thing I like most is that it did not involve a lot of non-human races and gods, therefore it was a more personal and emotional experience. It's a sad book too. Erikson was able to capture the different faces of what a person can become when pushed to the limits. He has shown that there can be cowards and heroes among us.

Good Dog, Good: A Tribute to My Four-legged Friends

I read a passage in Dean Koontz's book, The Darkest Evening of the Year, that loving dogs is a 'penance for all the other illusions we allow ourselves and for the mistakes we made because of those illusion'. We take them in knowing that a dog's life is short. The inevitability of losing a friend would force us to share their joys and pains. Their death reminds us that whatever we do with our lives, we can only do it once. Death is not at all that bad because it humbles us. It reminds us to cherish those we love, including creatures who repay us with love and loyalty.

My mother Rhoda has always been fond of dogs. We grew up with a proud half-breed spitz named Dogart. I remember when me and my mother took him home. He was in an open red plastic bag and everytime he crawled on my mother's lap at the back of the bus on our way home, I would giggle with delight. He was furry and ferocious even as a puppy. I remember he bit me once when he was having his dinner and I tried to stroke his head. He was a good dog nonetheless. I named him Dugal after little Prince Cedie's dog. But my mother and my Aunt Lydia thought it was 'Dogart'. The name stuck, but he was indeed a prince's dog. He never complained even if he rarely got any chance to go out of the house. He stayed with us for eleven years (died October 10, 2004), and until now I regret that I never had the chance to show him that we loved him.

A neighbor gave us a frightened little dog. Dogart was still with us at that time and we had a hard time keeping him away from Timmy. She was a naughty but lovable friend. Children used to play with her and it seemed she would never get tired of chasing us around the house. She was clever too and we could never keep her leash on. She would sneak past the gate and explore the subdivision. She was already a few months old when we took her in and she was already used to the life of being a scavenger. Even she got enough food, she could not shake away the old habit. I remember she had such beautiful eyes, though there's a glimmer of naughtiness in there sometimes. Timmy gave us our first few puppies. It was an exciting thing to see. We were up all night when she gave birth.

We lost Timmy two years after we met her (March 13, 2004 to January 2006). We believe the pound took her but we did not try to look for her at that time. She left us with some puppies.

A year before that, Timmy gave us Tabby and Chubby. They loved to play as well like their mother. We lost Tabby on November 6 and Chubby on the 10th of 2005. Another lesson learned. Unlike Dogart, the puppies did not get the usual vaccines. The traitor was parvo.

When Timmy was lost, we had a few puppies at that time. Three of them were left to our care: Manu, Dunkin and Chubby (the 2nd). They looked very different from each other. Manu has white fur and brown spots. Dunkin looks like a Dachshund. He had white fur too but with brown and black spots. Chubby looks like a Doberman. They're a wild bunch.

Dunkin loves to play but hates being cuddled. He ripped and punched holes through our shorts, towels hanging on the clothesline. He'd grab for your socks as soon as you take them off, and would race you to the door. Sometimes he'd hold you down with his powerful forelegs that you can't even move. The last few days that we were with him, was full of games and laughter. We were playing with bubbles the night before a mysterious illness took him. He was weird after that. He chewed the legs of wooden tables and chairs and pulled out some plants. I let him out of the house one night because he was trying to get out and I couldn't sleep with all the noise. It was the last time I saw him. I blame myself for what happened.

Several months after that Chubby gave us some puppies. We left two of them and gave away the others. A perpetually frightened Manang and a playful Minnie filled the house once more with puppy noises. Within a year, Minnie gave birth to two cute puppies, Zilong and Ryu Bii. Zilong lasted only for a few weeks, but his sister Ryu Bii stayed with us for several months until parvo took her. We still didn't learn our lesson. We were confident that they'd be alright because we took care of them. Ryu Bii was spoiled. She ate five times a day and everytime she complains about something, we comply. A few minutes before she died she managed to wag her tail when she heard my voice. That broke my heart. The little rascal was close to me and she would follow me around if she could still walk at that time. I held her paw until her last breath.

We never had puppies again after that. And just this year on October 13th, Minnie passed away.

Dogs, although feared by a lot of people, are not called 'man's best friend' if not for the love, loyalty and intelligence they have shown us. They don't stare at you with cold, reptilian eyes and tell you 'I'm your master. I was descended from a line of ferocious hunters. Therefore you should pamper me'. Yet they have shown abilities that are beneficial to humanity. They are not independent creatures, but whose to say that independence doesn't have its downsides. They can be fierce, but they can also be vulnerable. Qualities that is also found in us, and it is no wonder why a lot of people attribute human-like qualities to dogs. They don't seek to be your equal, but they want to be a friend.

Death is never easy, and so is life. We go about our affairs even if we can see the reaper from the corners of our eyes. It is easy to ignore the creatures we call pets because they never complain and ask for anything. I live with regrets, but I also live with the good memories. Telling myself what I could have done would not bring back lost time. And that no matter how I cared for them and think they are special, I have learned to accept that they would still be taken from me. I don't wanna be selfish. They lived a good life with us, and they gave us joy that would always stay in our hearts. I'd like to think that perhaps they're on a mission to make another family happy. 

Gardens of the Moon

Steven Erikson's debut is one step ahead of most fantasy series today. By creating a world that does not borrow concepts from Tolkien, he was still able to mold memorable characters and a unique universe in this first book of the Malazan Book of the Fallen series. When I first read the book not more than two years ago, I was amazed at how he was able to develop not just one but a dozen characters in a few pages without sacrificing the need for pace and action. His experience as an anthropologist and archaeologist served him well. Though not obvious, some of the concepts have similarities in several myths, but he was able to twist them and make them unique to create the book.

The first few chapters might be confusing because his point of view is not consistent. But as the story progresses, the reader will soon get used to his style. The characters themselves are fascinating. However, the reader is not forced to follow just one main character in the series. I thought at first that Ganoes Paran had this title, but as the reader finds out later, he is just one of the many players in the endless tug-of-war between gods and men.

Some of the 'races' have similarities to groups of creatures that are usually present in fantasy books, but Erikson gives them a different twist. The concept of early races giving birth to the young races, including humans, is not a unique idea though. The pantheon is also unique. Each god, or Ascendant, have different qualities although they are very much like the meddling Greek gods. The reader will find the Warrens especially fascinating (Wanna know what they are? Better if you read the book yourself). The cosmology will be explained bit by bit later on as the series progresses. More characters will also come into play. Among the most memorable are the Bridgeburners, and my the first favorite character of the series, Anomander Rake.

Erikson gives enough time to focus on some important characters and takes us into what goes on in their minds, and the emotional storms that they go through even if the point of view is inconsistent. He doesn't make the reader feel like a voyeur by focusing only on what goes on outside. I was able to peek into their minds and share their sentiments. I think that's what made me like the series from the very start. It does not just have the traditional elves-dwarves-mages-dragons stuff. It has some of that and more.

The plot of the series itself isn't clear at the first book however. And the reader is led to believe that the series involves only the Malazan Empire and its enemies, and the gods who have interests in the affairs of mortals. The book can stand for itself though. The fight scenes are not bad, though not the best ones I've read so far. The pacing is fast, but the direction of the story is predictable. Overall, it's still a good book even after reading it a second time.

I'm glad Erikson decided to write a book, and my fiance shared it with me.

I'm giving this book a 9 out of 10 rating.

Intensity

Instead of writing a formal review of Dean Koontz's Intensity, I decided to discuss what I feel about the characters of the book, specifically the antagonist, Edgler Foreman Vess. If you're familiar with most of Koontz's suspense/thrillers, youd find Mr. Vess, as he calls himself, more intriguing than most. His musings about his extraordinary senses and intellect remind me of the antagonists from the Face of Fear. 

It made me wonder when he said that any kind of experience is neutral. Pain, when embraced is the same as its opposite. The intensity of the moment is what defines life. Koontz goes on to discount this claim of course, using the heroine of the story, but I still wonder. Pain after all, makes our joys and triumphs more meaningful. We will never appreciate the beauty of things without the ugliness that surround them. Chyna, the protagonist, also said that it's easier for most people to act cruelly than to do good even if doing good is the easier choice. This is a result perhaps of the reptilian essence that's still within us according to Vess. I refuse to think we're driven alone by our biological impulses, yet I do not deny that most of us act selfishly to survive. If it is for your own good, then why is it bad? Not everyone's interests can be heard anyway. Yet why do we strive to care for other people? Why did Chyna save the captive girl from Vess' twisted world even if she had a chance to escape from he very start?

It's an intense book, and one of the best I read from Koontz. His ability to make the readers think and see both sides of the story still amazes me even after so many years.

I'm Sorry, Minnie

I'm sorry I failed you as a friend

I'm sorry I could not do anything to ease your pain

I'm sorry that your cries for companionship and comfort

are ignored at night

I'm sorry we complained

I'm sorry we could not fulfill your expectations

We tried to do everything

but we lost the battle

Yet you never gave up

Hope sparkled in your eyes everytime

a loving hand soothes you

We did not see it coming

You were so full of life and joy

You liked to play

You loved me even if sometimes I wasn't such a good friend to you

You greeted us with a wag of tail

everytime we approach you even if you're in pain

I'm sorry we could not do anything

Why did it have to be you

You were loved

You were special

Just like all dogs

I'm sorry our efforts failed

You will always be remembered

Thank you for being a good friend

Thank you for the smiles,

for every wag of tail, for the happiness you brought,

for being naughty while you're waiting to be fed,

for being cute even if you have bad teeth

I should be angry at Fate for taking you

I should be crying because it's so unfair

But it won't bring you back

Thank you for sharing your life with us

Thank you for being such a good dog

Farewell Minnie girl.

Why I Like Reading

Most of the people who know me from my high school days to the preset think I've always been obsessed with books. I wouldn't call it 'obsession' and I've never started reading books (from cover to cover) since I read Edith Hamilton's 'Mythology' when I was thirteen.

I never read my textbooks, or my notes for that matter. But I've started taking writing seriously when I was ten. I never expected my teachers and classmates would find my essays interesting. When I started earning better grades without taking a lot of effort, not that I've always had bad grades but I was considered a mediocre student, it made me want to read my books. For most writers (and honor students), exposure to reading materials precede or result to a good writing or an excellent grade. It was the other way around for me. I started quite late, but it wasn't too late.

My mother bought me my first paperback as a birthday gift. At that time I was immensely interested in mythology and folklore, specifically Greek. I started expanding my horizons a year after. I explored history (mostly topics not discussed in class), archaeology and anthropology. My obsession with the latter two was spurned by the abundance of National Geographic magazines at home. There were plenty of books in my high school library that were interesting but are not usually discussed in class. I started borrowing novels by Agatha Christie later on. And while I was reading one of her books, I recalled one book we had at home that I never got to finish. I looked for Dean Koontz's 'Lightning'. By that time I was already reading philosopy and psychology. There was also one book that I found very interesting. It was called 'Soul on Ice' by Eldridge Cleaver. It was the first autobiography book I read. The most interesting parts were the last few chapters of the book where the writer talked about his philosophy in life.

You may be wondering why I bothered to mention the kind of books I read at that time. Although I was fifteen, our country's curriculum does not offer the kind of opportunity for learning that other countries do. Most kids here are rarely familiar with most classic works. To be able to read them, you would have to look for the materials yourself. And so I read whatever book or journal I can find in the library.

My parents were avid readers too. My mother named me after a character in a romance novel. My father owns most of the books at home before me and my sisters started collecting our own. It was his copy of Koontz's 'Lightning' that introduced me to the wonderful world of that writer. And I think I got his interest on politics, warfare and history too.

I never read books that were related to class. I found some of them shallow and repetitive. Thus began my habit of not-studying-my-lessons-unless-it-has-to-do-with-numbers. I don't just randomly pick books as well. If I'm in the right mood, I might try a new genre or topic.

I'd have to point out as well that although I'm huge Koontz fan, I'm not particularly fond of the suspense/action/horror genre. I've read more textbooks and journals than novels as well. But I always keep an open mind.

When I got to college, I had more money to spare for books so I started collecting some that I can't find in libraries. I also got into poetry and I found more time to write (although I get lazy from time to time).

I started late but I don't think my life will be complete without books anymore. Although it's just one of my many hobbies, I put as much passion to it as when I draw or play video games. It lets me see the world through different perspectives, and not to mention, help keep my lazy mind well-oiled and in good condition.