On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Matthew Hunter wrote: > On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 10:36:31AM -0600, David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b at dd-b.net> wrote: > > "Casey Rousseau" <casey at trinityhartford.org> writes: > > > As for Kurtz, yes, I was explicitly recommending the first two trilogies. > > That's about right. Either that or just the first 1. I'd be very > > doubtful about anything past that, anyway. > > That's odd. IMHO they get better, rather than worse. > Particularly the first trilogy -- it's very rough, obviously an > early and unpolished set of books. This is the consensus among Deryni fans. The author herself has said on numerous occasions that she'd like to take out a number of elements from the first trilogy that she only put in because she "thought they had to be there." > But then, I am a bit of an occultist myself, so I speak Kurtz's > language regarding the endless use of ritual magic by the Deryni. > That's such a large component of the later books that anyone not > on her wavelength would find it rough going. I'm not interested in the occult at all, and I enjoy all the Deryni books. I am interested in medieval history, though. I think that might be another core audience for her. -Dennis