[nordic_shields]

does anyone else think that 'The sword of shannara' trilogy by Terry Brooks, is not all that good. i read it, and really enjoyed it, but in retrospect, it really wasn't that brilliant compared to a lot of fantasy books.

and from reading the synopsi of his following shannara titles, all the storylines seem to be based around the same thing.

don't get me wrong, i liked it, i'm just wondering if it is worth getting any of his other titles.

[Hobbit]

I guess it depends on your perspective, nordic.

There's a lot of people out there whose first experience of Fantasy was not Lord of the Rings, but The Sword of Shannara.

Many of them have gone onto other things and then found that Shannara is rather formulaic and cliched. IMO the books tend to repeat similar themes and ideas again and again. (Notice how much the protagonists escape by the skin of their teeth? :) ) Not to mention Shannara: the next generation. :rolleyes:

Which way should we see it? Possibly grateful that an interest in Fantasy was started there but also grateful that they've kept reading and found other material better.

There are many who have enjoyed and look back on them with a warm glow of nostalgia. Others have found things that they prefer more - our recommendation thread covers a lot of those.

Hobbit

[Ouroboros]

I'm very much in agreement with Hobbit's sentiments.

One of the early Shannara novels which I had a good time for, however, was 'The Elfstones of Shannara'. What struck me at the time was that it contained a surprisingly potent horror element, and had the feel of a chase novel. Worked surprisingly well.

With that said, perhaps if I went back and read it over now I'd have a different perspective on it again.

Much of the recent Brooks' series have totally passed me by, I can't motivate myself to read them when there is so much else to choose from on the market at the moment.

[Wizz]

If it wasn't for Terry, I may never have read all the other incredible books that I soon discovered after my Shannara experience. :cool:

I don't think Brooks is the best out there, but you cant nay say what the man has done for the fantasy genre that's fosho! Personally I still enjoy reading Terry's work, I'm a lot older now, but its not like it takes me a very long time to rip through his stories, and for the most part I enjoy them. I just finished reading his soon to be released novel Armageddon's Children and I'll tell ya, its a fresh and new taste for old school Brook's fans. It's not a Shannara novel, but it is. It takes place before Shannara began, after the great wars...basically it connects Brooks Word/Void trilogy (his best work IMO) to his Shannara stuff! Its dark, its a pretty bleak book in scope...post apocalyptic stuff...very good and worth the check out for anyone that has enjoyed Brook's in the past. Check it out at the end of August. :)

[Rob B]

I find Terry Brooks a very frustrating writer. I like the premise of Shannara, a future earth changed into a magic-laden land. Hell, Jack Vance practically invented the premise and many others have done interesting things with the premise.

Brooks's execution and delivery; however leaves a bit to be desired. The Heritage series wasn't too bad. I couldn't get past the first in the Jerle Shannara series, too much of the deja vu all over again.

But his importance in the overall genre can't be dismissed.

Will I give Armageddon's Children a chance? Possibly. I've still got Running with the Demon on the to read pile.

[Eventine]

Hobbit and Rob have provided a pretty good summary of what I feel about Brooks as an author.
He was one of the first BFF authors I read, and at the time I greatly enjoyed his work. As time went on though, I found it less appealing. There were two reasons for this: the first being that as a reader my tastes had evolved, and I didn't find the Shannara books were as entertaining. This was compounded by the second reason, which was the re-use of some plot elements and character types across the Shannara series (I also called it quits on Shannara after the Jerle Shannara books).
I do maintain that the Word and Void books are worth a read for the Brooks detractors who see him as nothing more than a Tolkien clone. It has been a long time since I read them, but I do recall enjoying the first and finding it a refreshing change from his BFF offerings.

[Evil Agent]

I read the first book, The Sword of Shannara, maybe 4 years ago. I was 23, and had already been reading fantasy for 7 years. I had already read Tolkien about 3 times, as well as Eddings and Jordan and Martin. For this reason, the book did nothing for me. It was a pretty bad experience.

I HATED the blatant rip-offs from Lord of the Rings, and even though I hear that the second book (Elfstones..) is better, I will never read it.

[Eönwë]

I'm very much in agreement with Hobbit's sentiments.

One of the early Shannara novels which I had a good time for, however, was 'The Elfstones of Shannara'. What struck me at the time was that it contained a surprisingly potent horror element, and had the feel of a chase novel. Worked surprisingly well.

With that said, perhaps if I went back and read it over now I'd have a different perspective on it again.

Much of the recent Brooks' series have totally passed me by, I can't motivate myself to read them when there is so much else to choose from on the market at the moment.


I was about to write a series of comments about the Shannara series, but realized that Ouroboros here had already said almost everything I had planned to. I've read all but the most recent Shannara novels, and The Elfstones of Shannara stands head and shoulders above the rest; it was a highly entertaining read, and is the only Brooks novel which I've reread and enjoyed. Not a masterpiece at all, but it doesn't try to be. Even better, it can easily be read alone without ploughing through the infinitely-more-famous Sword of Shannara, which it greatly eclipses in quality. The subsequent Shannara novels (Wishsong and the Heritage of Shannara series) aren't terrible but aren't great, and everything since then has been ugly.

Brooks' primary contribution to the genre is the well-documented popularity of The Sword of Shannara, which was the first fantasy novel to be a NY Times bestseller and in many ways is directly responsible for the commercial viability of all fantasy these days.

[Yobmod]

Even when i first read them as a child, i thought Sword of Shanara was clumsy. Elfstones and Wishsong were an improvment, however the later books (2nd trilogy?) were back to being very poor IMO. Their relationship to the original trilogy is about the same as that of all of Eddings later books to the Belgariad; the same plot / world / characters.

I do remember liking the worldbuilding in some ways. Lots of series hint at them being far future / past version of the real Earth, but Shanara was the first i read that made it explicit, and posited a science fantasy origin of most of the races.
The varying tides of magic and technology was an interesting premise for the first couple of books too, but again got overused.

[Blog_the_troll]

I read SOS many years ago, before I read LOTR, and liked it so I read all the follow ups and liked them also. Never thought of a connection between SOS and LOTR until I read peoples comments on here.
I read A knight of the word but didn't really like it, can't put my finger on why, perhaps it's the modern day setting.