Talk:Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter

Series quality decline

Perhaps someone could include commentary on the significant decline of quality of these books over the course of the series?

Unlikely, as that is a subjective statement. If there are sourced editorial reviews that suggest this, it might be mentioned. — Jeff Q (talk) 29 June 2005 11:06 (UTC)

Yes, in fact I would hugely disagree. I would say that if anything, the books have gotten better. Xinoph 17:16, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Yea Gods.

• This is hilarious. It's all personal opinion. I'm so over hearing everyone bashing Laurell K Hamilton and the way the series has developed. D'you think maybe there's a reason for it? Such as, this is exactly how she wanted it? Honestly.. if you don't like it, don't read it!

Please, please do not say "if you don't like it, don't read it". It's not the attitude that any of us.. "critics" lets say, agree with. Most of us absolutely love the first few books. However, we think there is definitely a decline in the plot/characterisation as the series moves on. We KNOW that LKH can write better, and we simply don't understand why she doesn't (there's also miscellaneous stuff about her blog, but I digress). If not a section on the "quality decline" perhaps a section on the development of fan views.

Please, please stop discussing personal opinions about this series. This is a discussion page for the content of the article, not a blog. Please also consider that nobody on this page can accurately state who "us" is or claim (without sources) how many of "us" think one way or another about any subject. And please remember to sign and timestamp your postings by adding four tildes (~~~~) to the end of your text (which Wikipedia converts into a dated signature) as a common courtesy and an aid to understanding who is saying what when. Thank you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Literary criticism

It occurred to me that a wiki page about a very popular series of novels should probably have more than a bare description of characters and the books in it. For instance, a description of conflicts or themes in the books might be in order. However, that seems like something that should come from reference to literary criticism. E.g. One might reference a critique of the novels' attempt to explore the issue of what makes someone human (the later repeated notion that Anita is no longer sure what is human or not). Or also, some description as to why (presumably from critics) the series is popular.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find any easily (any google searches seem to only turn up review pages on commercial sites). Is someone else perhaps better at this kind of search? If I was near a university, I would do a lit search, although the odds seem slim that the books have been reviewed in anything but things like the nytimes or such. Most everything I can find (such as the "editorial reviews" on amazon) are pretty much very shallow or just fawning ("best blake yet!" type comments)

R343L 14:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

If you use Copernic Agent Professional, like I have on my home computer, it actually shows a lot of results that aren't found using only one search engine. As for the indepth summaries of the books, why not start working on it with me? I was thinking that the entry was about the bare minimum as far as Anita's series goes. I myself am quite happy with the series, and recommend it to all who I believe will enjoy it. While the online reviews are shallow, I believe that one who has read the series more than once will be able to write a better revies that some one who has only read it once, and is not such a fan. R343L, you do have a point on the "fawning" issue. They do seem to fawn over it a bit too much, ja? I only wish that we could have the same fan-base attempts at the Meredith Gentry series...--Aeris of Iniquity 01:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

It takes about 10 minutes on Google to find several different review sites that all tell more or less the same story: The series starts strong, but bogs down in its latter third due to a decrease in characterization in favor of sex, gore, sex, wish fulfillment, sex, sex, angsty whining, and sex. It is not difficult at all to find a review of say, Narcissus in Chains, in which the critic pleads for a return to the charm and wit of the earlier books and wonders why it all went so very, very wrong. Of course opinions do differ, and these views shouldn't be presented as fact, but they are not by any stretch of the imagination an insignificant part of the way the series has come to be viewed by much of the fanbase of particular niche of fiction. I think it is a perfectly appropriate addition to this page to state that many fans (and I include myself in this group) were disappointed by direction the books took around book 8 and 9, and state the perceived faults of the later installments. That wouldn't be the article itself making a value judgment, it would just be noting that many people did. Ross Taben 04:43, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Citing literary criticism is appropriate — if it comes from a reliable, published source per Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Any website that allows ordinary users to post opinions, however well-written and even accurate, is not considered suitable source material for Wikipedia. (That's why Wikipedia cannot use its own articles as direct sources for other articles; we editors are only supposed to be composing material based on reputable sources.) Far too often, people seem to think — incorrectly — that if a there's a lot of Google buzz, something is citable. Find solid published sources and cite them. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:40, 3 February 2006 (UTC)