[Roland 85]

Title and idea stolen without permission of the original authors :D

So, this topic is about the decline (perceived or real) of the Malazan Book of the Fallen series. It's mildly rant-oriented, but I'd appreciate it if we could keep it civil.

I have a little chip on my shoulder where Erikson is concerned, tbh. The first three books of the series turned my perspective of fantasy upside down. I was utterly in love with it, I breathed this world. I still do, to an extent, where books 1-5 are concerned. Then the most weird thing happened: Erikson turned my perspective of bad fantasy upside down too, by managing to mess up different elements with every new installment.

The Bonehunters was basically a big chunk of nothing-happening with two 100-page gorgeous action-sequences in it - one in the middle, and one in the end.

Reaper's Gale was filled with plot-threads ending in the most ridiculous ways - the Sengar parents' one for example -and generally gave the impression that Erikson simply didn't know what to do with so many characters. Also, this was the first book where nothing happened for the ENTIRE length of the novel, until the obligatory convergence in the end.

Toll the Hounds's structure was painful to the extreme (and from what I hear, it has been kept in Dust of Dreams) - five pages of one character - jump to the next, five pages of the new character - jump to the next. With the first two and a half pages of every entry filled with the character's emo-introspections. Repeat ad nauseum. And again - 800 pages of build-up usually lead to disappointment, and I don't think any amount of Epic Ancient Revelations And Mighty Godlike Powers Converging could balance that much inaction.

Also, Erikson seems to me to have lost the balance between rich language and overstyling, and what used to be beautiful to me, is now just tediously loquacious. Plus, of course, the nihilist philosophizing on the pointlessness of pointlessness and the death of dust and dust of death and so forth is way too much like a late Frank Herbert rambling for me to be able to care.

I say all of this with the admission that I still like the Malazan series, and the only reason I haven't read Dust of Dreams yet is because I'm waiting for The Crippled God to get closer. I am also planning a reread with the hope that I will be able to appreciate books 6-8 more the second time around. It's just that the magic is - for now at least - gone for me.

[Bastard]

Epic Fantasy <insert series title> Decline Discussion

[End Of Disc One]

I strongly disagree on The Bonehunters. I thought that novel was full of awesome events with hardly any slowness. Granted it's more of a transition novel and not structured like the others; it's more a series of events than a build up and a climax.

And Dust of Dreams definitely does not follow the structure of Toll the Hounds. Toll the Hounds was unique in the series. Dust of Dreams is more like a mix between The Bonehunters and Reaper's Gale, but in my opinion more focused.

I was hoping this topic wouldn't happen when I saw it discussed in another topic.

[Roland 85]

@ Bastard: I guess you're right. But by book three, the Wheel of Time had already lost some momentum. Sword of Truth stopped being good after the second book. basically EVERY good fantasy series just declines after running for too long. But Malazan gave promise of being unique. I mean, I can't think of another series where book FIVE is my favorite. It just seemed like Erikson had a really solid plan for each of the ten installments. And then it turned out he kinda didn't.

But anyway, not forcing anyone to participate. If there is no interest, the topic will die by itself.

@ End of Disc One: Yes, I think that's my first problem with The Bonehunters. It was a bridge book, and up until then I trusted Erikson not to write one of these.

[Bastard]

I guess you're right. But by book three, the Wheel of Time had already lost some momentum. Sword of Truth stopped being good after the second book. basically EVERY good fantasy series just declines after running for too long. But Malazan gave promise of being unique. I mean, I can't think of another series where book FIVE is my favorite. It just seemed like Erikson had a really solid plan for each of the ten installments. And then it turned out he kinda didn't.

But anyway, not forcing anyone to participate. If there is no interest, the topic will die by itself.
But really, can you think of any long Epic Fantasy that hasn't suffered from criticisms of decline? It's almost gotten to the point were we have to start taking it as a given that it will happen and go from there.

[Roland 85]

I can't. There isn't one. Which brings us to the question why authors keep starting those...

[Bastard]

I can't. There isn't one. Which brings us to the question why authors keep starting those...
Because contrary to popular believe in the world of the internets, the majority of the people who read the books still like them and they sell fairly well.

[Alchemist]

Long epic fantasy series are awesome. But they also suck. We've got a conundrum here, because many people like stories that won't end, a formula popularized by television, but it is very very hard to do it without "jumping the shark."

But how many long epic fantasy series are there? This site (http://fantasyguide.stormthecastle.com/series/series-index.htm) lists 74 fantasy series, but I wouldn't call all of them "long." If we define "long epic fantasy series" as consisting of at least five books in a roughly contiguous story line, we can narrow that down a bit. We would exclude many series that take place in the same world at various times, like the Shannara books or the Magic of Recluce books. We're probably left with somewhere between one and two dozen series, depending upon what you think qualifies. These include but are not necessarily limited to:

The Wheel of Time - Robert Jordan
The Sword of Truth - Terry Goodkind
The Malazan Book of the Fallen - Steven Erikson
The Belgariad & Mallorean - David Eddings
The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant - Stephen Donaldson
The Runelords - David Farland
Crown of Stars - Kate Elliott
The Dark Tower - Stephen King
Harry Potter - JK Rowling
Wars of Light and Shadow - Janny Wurts
The Deathgate Cycle - M. Weis and T. Hickman
Kushiel's Legacy - Jacqueline Carey
A Song of Ice and Fire - George RR Martin (only four books so far, but the fifth is on its way)

I haven't read all of them, but which ones do people think work well as a long series?

[Roland 85]

I already mentioned Harry Potter in this regard in another topic. It is perfect to me, with the possible allowance of book 6 and 7 having some redundant parts. Opinions on The Dark Tower seem to be polarized, but I haven't read the last two books. Still, the fifth one was my favorite. Belgariad pretty much sucked from part 1, so I wouldn't even comment on further installments. I think Wheel of Time is sort of the emblematic example of a fantasy series gone VERY wrong. It's too early to say about Martin and I haven't read the rest...

Nobody is making any comments on MBotF though. I wouldn't mind some discussion on books 6-8 (and 9 too, even if I can't participate). I sort of felt the quality dropping very suddenly between Midnight Tides and The Bonehunters and I'm wondering why that happened.

[End Of Disc One]

Well one thing the later books of Malazan have in common with that the earlier ones don't is the philosophical discussions. I'm pretty sure that started in book 5 though, it's just that book 5 was shorter and more focused than the later books. I'd even argue that book 5 had more philosophical ramblings than book 6 did.