October 9th, 2008, 09:03 AM
Memories of Ice -/- House of Chains
I have just finished Deadhouse Gates. The next book MoI shifts back to Genabackis then the 4th book shifts again back to Seven Cities to continue the SC arc.
Can they be read in reverse order without spoilers/confusion?. I would rather continue the SC arc while it is still fresh in my mind.
Last edited by Skywarp; October 9th, 2008 at 12:57 PM.
October 9th, 2008, 10:27 AM
Some characters appear in both story lines so there's no way you could read them like that without some spoilers.
Originally Posted by Skywarp
October 9th, 2008, 11:07 AM
No. House of Chains expands past the end of Memories of Ice, and some characters and elements from the ending of MoI are mentioned in HoC.
Originally Posted by Skywarp
You'll also want to read HoC before Midnight Tides, as the only linking point between MT and the rest of the series is one character who appears in HoC.
October 9th, 2008, 01:51 PM
I would read them in order. It will make more sense as you continue on in the series. Although I agree that there is quite a bit of jumping around. Something you get used to - like reading Shakespeare.
October 9th, 2008, 02:53 PM
Events in MOI occur somewhat contemporaneously with events in DH, so those two books could probably be read in either order. But as others have said, HOC follows both books timewise and it would be hard to understand (and would contain serious spoilers) if read out-of-order.
October 9th, 2008, 10:12 PM
Definitely read Memories of Ice first, but I would actually suggest reading Midnight Tides before House of Chains. The one linking character, who is new, gets almost no time in House of Chains so I tended to gloss over his bits. If I had read Midnight Tides first his story would have resonated more with me since it was a character that I recognized, not some random Tiste Andi(or whatever color he was) that was just thrown into the story for no apparent reason.
Originally Posted by Werthead
October 10th, 2008, 03:48 PM
Michigan's point immediately above is a good one to consider, and that is what makes the Malazan books such a great reading experience. Trull Sengar gets slight coverage in HOC, but MT is his entire backstory. Same with Karsa Orlong in DH, whose backstory appears in HOC. The great thing about the Malazan series is that bit characters and small points brought up in one book often turn out to have major impacts in subsequent books.
Now that I think about it, I'd disagree with Michigan and recommend reading the books in order. The appearance of seemingly unrelated characters and events is what makes the series such a great unfolding journey of discovery. One never knows if they might pop up later in an expanded format and be more significant than originally thought.
Last edited by Whiskeyjack; October 10th, 2008 at 04:22 PM.
October 10th, 2008, 06:37 PM
One main difference between Trull and Karsa is Karsa didn't really do anything important when he was just a bit character and he was hanging out with characters you were already introduced to. Trull was a small time character hanging out with other small time characters, made the whole sub plot very hard to follow. I don't mind all the skipping around Erickson does, or at least I have gotten used to it, but I think this one was a mistake.
Originally Posted by Whiskeyjack
October 10th, 2008, 07:54 PM
to answer the first question, definitely MOI first since they both happen more or less at the same time. Actually MoI was supposed to be book 2 in the serie but Erikson actually lost the first 3-400 first pages after an accident (wth his computer i think) and so he decided to start over with a new book instead of trying to rewrite the other one. Just a little tidbit Erikson shared with us in an interview before. It might also explain why MoI is such an excellent book since it was written twice.
October 10th, 2008, 08:04 PM
Thanks for the responses. Have begun MoI in earnest.
The author forums seem to have been removed so might aswell ask here.
What is the difference between an ascendant and a god?. Gods are also classed as ascendants but most ascendants are not accounted godhood.
Regular ascendants seem to be for the most part mortals who gained immortality while at the same time are often extremely powerful of their own accord/ability. Regulars also seem to favour corporeal existence in the material plane while many gods usually reside mostly in their warrens.
Thinking about the path of hands line suggests you have to be the owner/ruler of your own personal warren to be classed as a god.
Yet Cotillion plays second fiddle to Shadowthrone in the same warren but they are both classed as gods.
Is there a definitive difference.
Last edited by Skywarp; October 10th, 2008 at 08:07 PM.
October 10th, 2008, 11:00 PM
as with many things in the malazan universe, nothing is cut in stone but it appears that gods require followers where simple ascendants, while often having them, dont require them and do not gain power from their devotion.
Tags for this Thread