You paid for a product. You got a product. That is the end of the matter in its entirety.
Werthead Send a noteboard - 18/09/2009 09:03:05 PM
Gaiman's "contract" analogy is bad. There is a quasi-contract theory that is used in situations like this - reliance. Martin makes statements about a schedule of printing and we rely on them. I don't think Martin owes me the next book for my "$10" as Gaiman puts it, failing to realize that those of us who buy hardcovers pay more. However, under reliance theory he owes me a refund of the books that I bought in reliance that he would finish on time.
No, he does not. There is no contract, there is no reliance theory, there is nothing of the sort involved. It is a pure retail transaction and absolutely nothing else. The only way it could be anything else is if you somehow paid for ADWD, TWoW and ADoS ahead of time and never got them. This has not happened.
A product was produced. You bought that product. You bought that product knowing that a meteor could flatten the producer's house tomorrow and you would never get the next part. You bought that product knowing (or fully capable of finding out) that it was part of a series of products that was as yet incomplete. You chose to get invested in the series before it was completed, in a genre littered with examples of series that were never finished, or spiralled out of control and took five times as long to complete as it should have done.
This is a genre where you can have the most reliable, regular author in the world who releases a book every year for years on end, and then suddenly they're taking three years per book (Rowling, Jordan, Donaldson). You can have a very reliable and fast writer who suddenly gives up on the series halfway through for absolutely no discernable reason (Gerrold), or due to family issues (Rawn). You can have a brilliant series which simply doesn't sell, so the next book is cancelled and you're left high and dry (Kearney).
When you buy a book, regardless of if is labelled as Book 4 of 7, the only guarantee you have is that you have is that you have bought that book. The next book might never come out.
If you don't want to be in that position, then you should have waited until the series was completed before buying it.
Now I understand why everyone has been bitching about a Dance of Dragons....
18/09/2009 12:36:21 AM
- 1175 Views
It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two.
18/09/2009 03:10:35 AM
- 472 Views
Re: It's not just that. He split A Feast for Crows into two. *NM*
18/09/2009 04:04:06 AM
- 373 Views
Titles
18/09/2009 04:15:24 AM
- 439 Views
Ok, Martin is published by Bantam...replace "Tor" with "Bantam"
18/09/2009 05:43:51 PM
- 461 Views
Nope, still doesn't work.
18/09/2009 08:49:09 PM
- 431 Views
I would recommend you re-read my post - you're confusing me with someone else
18/09/2009 10:24:24 PM
- 396 Views
Remember what The Neil said: "GRRM is not your bitch!" *NM*
18/09/2009 07:32:47 AM
- 340 Views
I don't give a shit what Neil Gaiman thinks
18/09/2009 05:35:54 PM
- 360 Views
Gaiman = The Most Overrated Author of the New Milennium. *NM*
20/09/2009 12:33:10 AM
- 320 Views
In your opinion, of course. *NM*
20/09/2009 01:28:33 AM
- 311 Views
Yes, and this entire thread deals with opinions.
20/09/2009 01:52:21 AM
- 306 Views
I see the reason in that.
20/09/2009 02:13:46 AM
- 489 Views
I haven't even finished reading A Clash of Kings and I'm a touch annoyed by Martin already
20/09/2009 02:35:32 AM
- 421 Views
I can see my rule of not reading series that have not been finished is paying off.
18/09/2009 11:00:37 AM
- 327 Views
Sometimes ...
18/09/2009 05:07:18 AM
- 397 Views
Sometimes...Neil Gaiman should be thrown into a meat grinder.
18/09/2009 05:49:56 PM
- 438 Views
You paid for a product. You got a product. That is the end of the matter in its entirety.
18/09/2009 09:03:05 PM
- 394 Views
Was this well out of line, by any chance?
18/09/2009 10:25:57 PM
- 430 Views
damn you are rude *NM*
18/09/2009 10:51:19 PM
- 300 Views
Gosh. This is pretty tiring.
18/09/2009 11:25:51 PM
- 444 Views
So this guy still hasn't been banned yet, why exactly?
19/09/2009 04:13:05 PM
- 398 Views
Get off your high horse. Someone disagrees with you. Deal with it. *NM*
20/09/2009 12:35:24 AM
- 292 Views
No, this guy is breaching the forum rules on attacks and insults.
20/09/2009 02:57:20 AM
- 334 Views
Oh please. Grow some thicker skin.
20/09/2009 03:26:33 AM
- 333 Views
You think this behaviour would have been tolerated on Wotmania? It definitely would not have been.
20/09/2009 03:31:20 AM
- 368 Views
"It" would have been. "It" was.
20/09/2009 05:45:14 AM
- 368 Views
Nope, I'm someone simply a hell of a lot better informed about the situation then you. Deal with it. *NM*
19/09/2009 02:40:07 AM
- 316 Views
I'd agree with you except for the fact that there was the 'promise'. *NM*
19/09/2009 05:59:21 PM
- 253 Views
Gaiman would just turn the episode into an amazing graphic novel as he died. *NM*
19/09/2009 01:06:30 PM
- 314 Views
That's the most valid point of the argument.
18/09/2009 11:54:26 PM
- 368 Views
Agreed.
19/09/2009 03:02:48 AM
- 350 Views
Now to me that supports Tom's point about 'reliance theory'.
19/09/2009 05:55:28 PM
- 370 Views
But a promise was never made.
19/09/2009 06:04:55 PM
- 361 Views
I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise."
19/09/2009 07:14:30 PM
- 331 Views
Who is GGK and where is his article? + my opinion on Martin
19/09/2009 07:55:01 PM
- 375 Views
This is where the great divide comes into play
19/09/2009 08:10:09 PM
- 358 Views
I think he should take a page out of RJ's book
19/09/2009 08:36:55 PM
- 398 Views
Re: I think we're hung up on the definition of "promise."
19/09/2009 08:04:53 PM
- 340 Views
Exceptions prove the rule...
19/09/2009 08:42:39 PM
- 331 Views