Talk:Telnarian Histories

Portrayal of galactic techno-empire not too consistent or convincing
Not sure how to neutrally phrase this, but the first book at least was fairly widely criticized (among those who read it) because Norman wrote about a high-tech Galactic empire while not seeming to have very well thought-through ideas about its basic technological and organizational foundations (something which would have been necessary in order to present the various manifestations of the empire in the book in a somewhat believable and consistent way). AnonMoos (talk) 15:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There probably isn't any way to say that in a NPOV style. I said it in a highly opinionated style (here: ); the article points this out, but it's hard to talk about it in any detail without seeming to bash the series for its shortcomings. Wyvern (talk) 19:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, Scott -- if it were stated in a printed review, then we could quote the review, but I don't know that I'm diligent enough to search out such sources for a series which I only read 2/3 of the first book of (and didn't really like that). I'm still improving the font (at the same URL). Is it likely that you'll update your website again (or start a new one)? AnonMoos (talk) 02:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Other difference from Gor
The other main difference from Gor is that the Gor books have certain "fairy-tale" elements (as I've referred to them), such as stabilization serums (immortality potions), the almost complete lack of violence with permanent or fatal effects which affects anyone other than adult males, the technology restrictions of the Priest-Kings etc. When the the Telnarian series departs from these controlled closed-world aspects of the Gor books, it's mostly for the worse. AnonMoos (talk) 07:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)