[Sir Stephen]

Sir Stephen-- The Terry Brooks is an interesting story in that I've read the background of that story: The Wishsong of Shannara. Sorry but your comment made me shake my head because at least I understood where Brooks was coming from.

estranghero...

Unfortunatly I have read Wishsong of Shannara, I was 16 then and I was new to the fantasy scene so I didn't know better, then one day I grew-up and threw my unfinnished copy Talismans of Shannara on the ground saying "why am I reading this?".

However I'm not complaining about Brooks's presence. His story was a comedy masterpeice.

As for the debate on who is a "legend" and who isn't I dont think it matters, I actualy thought the tittle referred to the storys. You know fantasy-history-tales thus legends was a way of saying "short fantasy storys", but in a better way. Also its unrealistic to think that most well known authors would all agree to write a story especialy for this book. They were probably working on other stuff. That reminds me, JRR Tolkien is getting mighty lazy nowadays.

[estranghero]

SS:

Ah, mea culpa. I liked Wishsong when I was young but I wouldn't read it again now that I'm older. I just thought that the character Garet Jax was fascinating.

Kane:

Heh, the thing is we all have different perspectives - I choose a broad based genre appeal of speculative fiction, Mith prefers it tighter... It's all pretty much the same stuff when stripped bare though

Just wanna comment: it's very true that Silverberg is a Grandmaster in the Speculative Field. However, I always wondered what genre his Majipoor stories are as I've looked at their bindings and his earlier-published Lord Valentine books say SF while the early-Majipoor-history say fantasy.

I'm asking this question because Silverberg DID include a Majipoor story in the LEGENDS collection (which is supposedly a FANTASY anthology) while he put in a (does anyone know what universe?) story in the FAR HORIZONS collection (which is SCIENCE-FICTION). Now we can argue about whether these are SFF or speculative but the publishers were the ones who tagged the books as SF and F.

Anyway, after trying out a couple of books by Silverberg, I found him too dry. I'd probably go after Gene Wolfe's backlog first. (Or Jack Vance. Mmmm.)

[Mithfânion]

Read three more tales:

Feist's story in Legends I was quite good, The Wood Boy it was called I believe.The difference with the new story here in Legends II is that the old story actually had a storyline and emotional pull. This new one (The Messenger) is a very lazy effort from Feist, virtually plotless and not worthy of more than 2 out of 5 stars ( 2 stars because I still like his sober style and worldbuilding). Bad effort.

I've also completed the stories by Haydon and Martin. The Haydon effort didn't attract me, as expected, primarily because I found her worldbuilding too silly. A continent is ruled by a white dragon? WTF? I've heard so many bad things about her Rhapsody trilogy that I wasn't going to try it anyway , but this story wasn't very interesting and certainly didn't change my mind. Prose is decent, characterization isn't cardboard but still quite lifeless. 2 stars as well.

Martin's TSS was the best of the bunch, though I've yet to read Hobb, Gaiman and Brooks. I didn't think it was as good as The Hedge Knight, in fact I think it was his weakest story in the ASOIAF setting by quite a margin. The only thing I liked about it were the many references to the struggle between the Targaryens and the pretenders. I'm also beginning to dislike Dunk. He's just too dumb, too naieve, and I wish that he would somehow combine that tremendous physical strength with just a little bit of wit. Just not a very appealing character at the moment and it makes me wonder what sort of Lord Commander of the KG this guy could make. Egg is still interesting but he didn't come out of his shell as much as in THK. All in all, 4 stars out of 5.

[Mithfânion]

Kane,

It seems that you and I are actually much further apart than you think, which is ok; let's delve into that.

You state:

To compare someone like Tad Williams (who I adore by the way) or Robin Hobb/Megan Lindholm to Silverberg is suggestion that contrary to your suggestion Mith, we aren't taking an overall picture... if we were you'd be questioning the right of Hobb among others to be there...they are a long way from being legendary.

The idea of Silverberg's collection is to gather the "masters of modern Fantasy". Hobb and Williams are most certainly that, whereas Silverberg isn't. The idea is also to show parts from ongoing series and most ongoing multivolume sagas are being written by authors that aren't as old as someone like Silverberg, so these authors are going to be legends of the current generation.

Let's face it, if he hadn't edited the volume himself, Silverberg was unlikely to have been asked himself based on popular or critical acclaim of his Majipoor Chronicles.

Mith, unfortunately you rather miss one of the most important concepts of fantastic literature... it is the literature of speculation - indeed, many Science Fiction writers will argue that there is no such thing as science fiction, that in fact SF, Fantasy and Horror all fall under a single generic genre catagorisation, that of SPECULATIVE FICTION.

I don't miss that concept of literature Kane, I'm very well aware of it. It's just that it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Yes, there is speculative fiction. And yes, that is the umbrella for Fantasy, science fiction and horror. That is all fine and dandy but this is a Fantasy collection, in particular. The front and the spine of the book states "Eleven new works by the masters of Modern Fantasy". In it you will find no horror, should normally find no
SF or any other subgenres, just Fantasy. Just as "Far Horizons" is a Science fiction collection, just as Gardner Dozois's yearly collection is a science fiction collection and Ellen Datlow's yearly horror collection is a horror collection. They are all part of speculative fiction as well but still stick to their subgenre. And that is the idea of Legends as well. It's not that I prefer Fantasy to be a tight genre, like you say I do, it's just that I actually look to what the book is supposed to be about and then find myself disagreeing with non-genre selections (Gabaldon, Williams).

[Steven Savile]

Well Mith you'll have to go back and read the original remit about the anthology series then - it is masters of modern fantasy, but it wasn't essential that they worked in the most well known world, hence Williams' choice to do Otherland this time out. He is still a master of modern fantasy. Hobb, for all her success in the UK doesn't sell particularly stellar amounts in the US, and Martin, for all his success in the US just doesn't move in anywhere near the same numbers in the UK. He's notably outsold by David Gemmell for instance.

Let's look at the line ups:

Stephen King tells a tale of Roland, the Gunslinger, in the world of The Dark Tower, in "The Little Sisters of Eluria."

Robert Silverberg returns to Majipoor and to Lord Valentine's adventure in an ancient tomb, in "The Seventh Shrine."

Orson Scott Card spins a yarn of Alvin and his apprentice from the Tales of Alvin Maker, in "Grinning Man."

Raymond E. Feist's Riftwar Saga is the setting of the tale of "The Wood Boy."


TERRY GOODKIND tells the origin of the Border between the lands in the world of The Sword of Truth, in "Debt of Bones."

GEORGE R.R. MARTIN sets his piece a generation before his epic, A Song of Ice and Fire, in the adventure of "The Hedge Knight."

ANNE McCAFFREY, the poet of Pern, returns once again to her world of romance and adventure in "Runner of Pern."

Robert Jordan relates crucial events in the years leading up to The Wheel of Time in "New Spring."

Ursula K. Le Guin adds a sequel to her famous books of Earthsea, portraying a woman who wants to learn magic, in "Dragonfly."

Tad Williams tells a dark and enthralling story of a haunted castle in the age before Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn, in "The Burning Man."

Terry Pratchett relates an amusing incident in Discworld, of a magical contest and the witch Granny Weatherwax, in "The Sea and Little Fishes."

That's volume one - and every single author here is a genuine living legend of the fantasy field...

Who have we got in the second?


Robin Hobb:
George R.R. Martin:
Orson Scott Card:
Diana Gabaldon:
Robert Silverberg:
Tad Williams:
Anne McCaffrey:
Raymond E. Feist:
Elizabeth Haydon:
Neil Gaiman:
Terry Brooks:

These are pretty incredible line-ups Mith, I mean sales wise with the exception of Haydon these are the heavy hitters... Gabaldon sells by the bucketload, but I really can't discuss as I don't know the series - others have said not fantasy, but it is sold in my local SF store so I don't know - but Orson Scott Card is a massive seller for his SF and Fantasy, The Alvin Maker books were incredibly successful during their release - though of course the term legend doesn't actually mean massive sales are necessary, I believe they help... Notable absences from the line-ups have to be David Eddings, who is a modern legend, Stephen Donaldson, both of whom are pretty much genre defining icons, Michael Moorcock, who you might argue about due to the term modern, but in this instance I don't think the remit was "over the last 5 years" and more like over the last 25, in which case Moorcock is still a giant... My feeling is that you want today's best sellers, but Silverberg also talked in his original mandate about dealing with legends, and with completed works, guys with genuine history - we may love Steve Eriksson, Lynn Flewelling, Michael Stackpole, Mark Anthony, James Barclay, Casiel Mor, and others, but these are all writers at the beginning of the careers, long steps from being legends... to be a legend you have to have walked the walk over the long haul, not just over the first half of your series... and you have to have effected things...

Maybe we are a long way apart - at the end of the day, with 2 exceptions in Haydon and Gabaldon, I think that is a legendary line up... and like it or not the Marjipoor books still sell, have been reissued many times, and nominated for awards...

[Steven Savile]

Oh, and Ellen Datlow's annual book is: The Year's Best Fantasy & Horror seems the genres overlap nicely there... the most famous magazine in print today is The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction... seems to me that editors are full aware of a massive overlap...

[Mithfânion]

the most famous magazine in print today is The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction... seems to me that editors are full aware of a massive overlap

Your point being that............there is overlap. Ok, acknowledged, never denied by anyone in this thread as far as I can see. This is the same as your point regarding speculative fiction.

Yes, there is overlap. Datlow's collection of Fantasy and horror may then have Fantasy and horror just like the mag can have sci-fi and Fantasy. That is what these editions are for. Silverberg's Fantasy Legends collection can't have sci-fi, obviously, since it is not a multiple genre collection or a collection that is about speculative fiction tales as a whole. If this continues to be unclear I think it's best to drop the topic (otherwise I just have to refer you to the book itself which makes quite clear what it is, the cover does not say it is showcasing eleven masterpieces from spec fiction for instance).


About the line-ups, yes, these are big names, and on the surface you'd be hard pressed to say that certain authors don't fit in there. On the surface I'd only exclude McCaffrey (sci-fi) , Gabaldon ( historical romance novelist) and Silverberg (not a Fantasy legend). However reading the collection I found that several of the authors underperformed, or in the case of Williams, were allowed to submit non-genre offerings.

Regarding the line-up of Legends I, yes, seems like a good group to me. Anyone would have individual candidates for improvement but overall, good group, again I'd quibble with entries by old-timers McCaffrey and Silverberg, especially as they are well past their prime.

Re:your point regarding Hobb/Martin/Williams

It was I who said these are masters of Fantasy in the first place so it's odd that it is now you who is telling me that Williams is *still* a Fantasy master. Did anyone say he isn't? As for Hobb and Martin, these are both very big sellers on the Locus charts that I've seen so they definitly qualify in the commercial sense as well. They surely outsell new Silverberg offerings for instance....

[Steven Savile]

PERN is fantasy, period. For YEARS it was best selling fantasy. That earns the right of legend status - that and the fact Anne inspired a slew of 'dragon fantasy'.

As to what the series is about I suggest you READ THE INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME ONE - masters of fantasy writing both in their familiar worlds and in some cases venturing into less familiar ones. Seems pretty straightforward then that Williams can happily use Otherland, a crossover SF Fantasy world, which is still more fantasy that SF however you want to butter it, and fit that remit. You are the one who wanted to go to the book, it answers your question right there.


Like it or not Silverberg is a legend of Science Fiction, Fantasy and Horror, his grandmasters awards have been for just that, the crossover. He may be primarily known for his SF but the Marjipoor books have been recieved with both critical acclaim and sales. The combined sales figures on the series support that. The fact is you don't like Silverberg so you question his right to be there. I personally think it is an editorial faux pas to include your own work, but as was said in numerous locations including PW when Legends came out, that is unless your name is Robert Silverberg.

The comments you made about the age of the writers of the series - utterly spurious.

BUT you have one excellent point: underperformance...

This is the crux of it.

Why have these guys underperformed?

Now, I've heard other editors talk about it, but never Silverberg, but the argument I've seen presented makes perfect sense... you save your best material for your own work - how much money does one make for a slice of Legends? lets say 20c a word, plus commensurate royalties... which is very good for an anthology, but...

20c a word, George Martin writes a 25,000 word novella, which will earn him:

5,000 USD before royalties click in...

What kind of contract do you think Goodkind is on? Or Jordan? Or...? Goodkind earned a 1 million deal on Wizards First Rule - where on earth does 5,000 or even double it to 10,000 US fit into the equation of his income? Knock off agency percentages, taxes etc, and where is the value in these legends of the field writing the story in the first place? In truth there isn't any...

Those 25,000 words could be a fifth of their next multi-series novel... and earn them 50,000 or more...

So how does someone persuade them to take part...

You have to be offering something - Silverberg offers prestiege. He is a grandmaster, recognised by all four of the leading writers associations in Speculative Fiction, and moreso, he is recognised as such BY ALL OF THE WRITERS CONTRIBUTING. They want to be attached to the project and it sure isn't for the money.

He drew them in, and not for the money...

The only writer I don't see as genre appropriate is Diana Gabaldon, but that is from other people's comments, I have never read her.

[Steven Savile]

And the comment about Williams was me trying to clarify to you that even though he has written an Otherland story he still qualifies under your requirements for the anthology.

The thing about anthologies is, even if you love all of the writers in there, even including the amazing Dangerous Visions and Kirby McCauly's semina Dark Forces, you are not going to like more than 75% of them statistically... it just doesn't happen.


(Mind you, just to put things in perspective, in 2000, my own anthology Redbrick Eden beat Legends into 3rd place in the British Fantasy Awards, which I was kinda pleased about :) )

[Erfael]

You two seem to be getting pretty fired up over this. Is it really important to try to change the other's mind on this point? It seems to me that what you guys are arguing about is pretty minor, even in our little corner of the literary market.