[Angelique]

Is this author good? I've never read any of his books. What are they? Also, what is each book about? If I want to read one of his novels, which one should I start with? Are the books from a certain series? Thank you for any help. :)

[Richardb]

Lots of mixed opinions on Modessit on this board. I personally like most of his (her?) works. I enjoyed the older recluce books, starting with the Magic of Recluce. Stylistically, these books are a bit different, and Modessit has a tendency to focus on sounds as part of describing things. I actually like this, though I know it drives some nuts. By Magic of Recluce and see what you think. The writing and story telling in all the other books is about on the same par, so might as well start at the beginning.

[Angelique]

Thank you, Richardb. I'll look for that book.:)

[Blizzaurel]

I started reading Modesitt and I got really confused and bored after the first 100 pages. Personally, I thought it was terrible, but maybe if you stick through it, it gets better?

[Richardb]

At about 100 pages you had the gist of it... if you were not enjoying the writing at that point, you are not going to see much new. As I said before, Modessit seems to elicit a lot of polarity in opinions. I really enjoy the recluce books, the spellsinger books... not so much.
I look forward to hearing your opinion Angelique.

[CrazyReader]

I read some of his books a few years ago. I really loved the first one The Magic of Recluse?? But I thought the others were pretty boring. I think I quit on the 3rd or 4th book.

[clong]

I generally enjoyed the Recluce books, although after a while they started to feel like the same story told over and over again. I haven't read the more recent books which focus on white magic wielders, but I have seen some pretty enthusiastic reviews. I was rather disappointed with the spellsong books. I have also read a couple of his scifi books, one of which was decent and the other of which was weak.

He has a discussion forum over at the internet book database of fiction that has attracted a lot of fans to that board--folks who think he is the greatest fantasy writer going. I usually find myself pointing out his weaknesses there, and pointing out his strengths everywhere else. I would say that one thing I consistently admire about his writing is that his characters always face difficult decisions, and have to live with the consequences of their actions. Few, if any, of his books end with what you could call a completely happy ending . . . even in victory there are painful prices to be paid.

[Hobbit]

Sure I've said this elsewhere round here, but having read the first few Recluse books I thought they were pretty good, though undemanding. Lots of typical fantasy tropes there, but good page turners - once I'd got used to the writer writing in sound effects. Comfort reading, but hardly breaking the mould of the genre. Reading them all close together would not be a good thing, though.

I've heard (but not really read them myself) that his SF is a bit more 'out-there'. Anybody confirm or deny?

*BOING!*

Hobbit bounces off.......

[Yobmod]

I read the first few recluse books and the first half of the soprano sorceress book. I thought both series were absolute rubbish.

Recluse was a bit interesting to start (the order / chaos magic system), but the charaters acted very stupidly, the split between good and evil seemed completely arbitary, the plot was retarded boy acts a bit awkward, so his parent and village have him sent to a war zone in a different country, he invents guns on the battlefield, to kill people who are generically evil just cos of the type of magic they use.
I would say it was just averagely bad, except that sequels were THE SAME BOOK again and again.....

Soprano sorcesress was just a middle-aged divorcees lurid fantasy. Useless and boring old woman is sommoned to a magical land, where she is the most powerful sorceress ever. Conveniently her magic causes her to drastically lose weight til she's a size 6 or less, then a spell 'backfires' and gave her a magic facelift (look, no scars!).


And both were badly written and characterised. :p

[clong]

Hmmmm. Well, I do agree (as already stated) that there are elements of the Recluce books that feel repetitive. But your characterization of the plot sounds like a combination of part of the first and part of the third books, (but not the second, which is set in a jarringly different geo-political environment, and written in the present tense). Reading farther into the series I would have to argue that ethical issues in the Recluce world are actually fairly complex (with those in power, whether white or black magicians, frequently being corrupt). I'm not going to claim that Modesitt is the greatest fantasy writer out there, but I think your criticisms are a bit perfunctory.