[Alchemist]

This is similar to this thread (http://www.sffworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27191), so bear with me, but is more specific. The question is this: If you were going to write a Fat Fantasy series--that is, a multi-volume epic fantasy set in a secondary world--and wanted to be aware of what had and was being done in the field, which would be the "must read" books and series? In other words, what books/series are so important and defining and influential to the sub-genre of epic secondary world fantasy that anyone writing that sort of thing simply must read?

What I'm asking goes beyond personal tastes. For example, one might not like George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire, but it would be foolish to not see it as important and defining of this sort of fantasy.

And of course some are more or less defining than others. The Wheel of Time, for instance, has been more influential than The Sword of Truth, although both have been defining of the field. I would think that a book or two of Jordan's would be a "must read" for a Fat Fantasist while Goodkind is optional. And so on.

If you want, use two general categories: those books/series that are "must reads" and those that are "of interest but not crucial," or something like that. And go back as far as you want in terms of literary history, although my emphasis is on someone writing today, so 19th century fantasy might not be so important.

[ChrisW]

If one was truly putting personal tastes asidse the Wheel would become before Ice in order of impotance and before them both would be The stuff by Tolkien, Eddings, Feist, Brooks, Donaldson, Moorcock to name a few.

That's ofcourse if you want to be a commercial success. If ya just doing it for the art I'm sure some peeps will list more obscure stuff that no one reads.:)

Going cronologically from Tolkien onwards(sorry Bond) probably isn't a bad indication of influrence if you look at the writers authors list as there influrences. Whilst Martin and Jordan might be an indication of what people enjoyed most in the last 15-20 years they still don't have as much influrence as the older guys yet imo.

[TheImp]

well, you should read everything and anything, then develop your own style based on a wide range of experience with literature and your own tastes and personality. rather than just limiting yourself to BFF. i assume that much is a given though.

the obvious examples would be the wheel of time, a song of ice and fire, the sword of truth, and the lord of the rings.

other than that i'd suggest dune, malazan, kushiel's legacy, elric, night's dawn, the dark tower, gormenghast, the gentlemen bastards, the once and future king, and the first law trilogy. to name a few.

not all fantasy, but definitely valuable in learning about epic fantasy.

[ChrisW]

for a Fat Fantasist while Goodkind is optional

Why is Goodkind optional? He is the second most sucessful fat fantasy author in the last 15-20 years. You really arn't doing a good job of putting personal tastes aside. One can't just ignore someone who has been so succesful in the Fat Fantasy genre just because most people(seemingly) online loathe the guy and his books. There's a reason for his sucess and you'd be a fool to not to read them for two reasons. One being what made him so popular and the second being what he did wrong(apart from being a nob). Ofcourse with books being subjective and all it may be hard for you personally to identify what's right from wrong. After all there are plenty of people that say Goodkind and Jordan are hacks but there are equally as many who love them.

Oh and relying on online opinion only is bad. We make up a very small % of fantasy readers and are no where near representative of the broader community imo. If we were Martin would be outselling the bible;)

[TheImp]

in a perfect world ASOIAF would outsell the bible ;)

[Alchemist]

Why is Goodkind optional? He is the second most sucessful fat fantasy author in the last 15-20 years. You really arn't doing a good job of putting personal tastes aside....

Oh and relying on online opinion only is bad. We make up a very small % of fantasy readers and are no where near representative of the broader community imo. If we were Martin would be outselling the bible;)

I've never read Goodkind although have considered reading Wizard's First Rule but have always bypassed it because my sense is that it isn't to my tastes. However, my assertion has nothing to do with personal tastes, although I am familiar with his polarizing status. And yes, I realize how popular he is but I was calling him "optional" because he really came in the wake of Robert Jordan and didn't exactly create anything strikingly new, afaik. I'm trying to differentiate between "popular fat fantasies" and "ground-breaking or exemplary fat fantasies." Sword of Truth is obviously in the former category but not as much so in the latter, unless I'm missing something.

As for the second point, of course I'm not only relying upon online opinion. What I am doing is gathering ideas. The type of folks that inhabit forums like this tend to be voracious readers who have a broad knowledge of the field and thus may know of an author or book that I haven't heard of. If anything I'm trying to figure out if there are any fat fantasy series' that I'm not aware of, and any good or important ones that I haven't read.

[ChrisW]

Well there's nothing obvious about it if you haven't even read him. For that matter there's nothing groundbreaking about WoT or aSoIaF. It's all been done before and neither added anything new to the genre apart from making it fatter(in a good way) imo. So skip them aswell.

[Alchemist]

Well there's nothing obvious about it if you haven't even read him. For that matter there's nothing groundbreaking about WoT or aSoIaF. It's all been done before and neither added anything new to the genre apart from making it fatter(in a good way) imo. So skip them aswell.

Did I offend somehow? If I am in error please explain. The only thing that I said was "obvious" was that Sword of Truth is in the category of "popular fat fantasies" which is more than obvious; however, I can see how my sentence could be interpreted to include "but not as much so" in the category of groundbreaking or exemplary as being "obvious," which was not my intention. My point was simply that Sword of Truth is clearly popular but not so clearly ground-breaking or exemplary.

Here's a question: What is unique about Sword of Truth as opposed to other fat fantasies? What sets it apart?

[ChrisW]

You don't offend me you annoy me by passing judgement on a series you haven't read.

I'll answer your question with a question. What's unique about WoT and aSoIaF that sets them apart from SoT?

Oh right you can't answer that. My bad.

[Alchemist]

You don't offend me you annoy me by passing judgement on a series you haven't read.

I'll answer your question with a question. What's unique about WoT and aSoIaF that sets them apart from SoT?

Oh right you can't answer that. My bad.

Chris, you are completely off base with where I'm coming from--I am not passing judgment on the Sword of Truth and am actually rather neutral with regards to it with neither a positive or negative charge (one of the benefits of not reading it, evidently!).

My question was honest and out of curiosity--I'm asking you to tell me about the Sword of Truth, not bashing it. No need to see bad intentions where there aren't any.

What's this world coming to? ;)