SFFWorld's Fantasy Review of 2009

[Hobbit]

Our usual summary's up, HERE, including RobB's and my comments.

Thought you might want to comment about our quality choices (or poor taste!) here.

Thoughts

I will say that the article was actually written a while ago, though odd additions kept coming up to surface. We've tried to stick (mainly) to the new stuff this year, though I still snuck in a couple of oldies that are new this year. And Randy M. gets a well-deserved mention in there too.

I've also not been watching our thread that includes what you thought were your favourites in 2009 in the thread HERE.

But I'll take a peek now and see if there's any similarities. I suspect there will be.


One more thing: No doubt one of the 'events' this year has been the ongoing success of the Twilight saga but we mentioned that last year. Were we wrong to ignore it this year?

Reading the article back now I can't see a lot of urban fantasy in there, though I know that I, for one, tried and read a few during the year.

For me at least, nothing really stuck out particularly for me there. I know that it has been mentioned before that we don't do that much urban fantasy at SFFWorld but we try. Thought I'd better mention that for those of you looking for comments about the latest Laurell Hamilton, Patricia Briggs, Lili St. Crow, you're not going to find much there. Sorry.

In our defense, as usual, we do say that it's not a definitive year list.

Over to you. Perhaps you can tell us what we should've read this year, but didn't! I'm interested in any urban fantasy books you tried and liked, too.


One last, last thing: The SF article will be along in a couple of days.

Happy New Year everyone!

Mark

[Luke_B]

I'm surprised the new Pratchett didn't get a mention. It's received solid reviews in professional publications and I thought it was very good. I suspect neither you or Rob read it. It was a really poor year for epic fantasy in my opinion, but I also thought it was a poor year for SF&F generally. Ken Scholes also probably deserved a mention in your end of year round up, but again I guess he wasn't read. Bakker, Deas and Brett do nothing for me. I stll haven't read Grossman but it sounds like the type of thing I would dig. I'm certainly on the Abercrombie bandwagon. I also liked Kate Griffin's book. I was really disappointed with Drood after loving The Terror. Look forward to seeing your comments on science fiction. I really struggled to find anything to read in that genre published this year (maybe it's dying ). I guess ultimately I disagree with the tone of optimism in this round up - however, understand why you guys like to keep it upbeat - but still hope 2010 is much better year.

[Hobbit]

LOL. Thanks Luke. There's always something I think about later and the Pratchett is one, for me anyway.

Must admit I haven't read it: As it involves football, I suspect it'll be a 'not' for me. Never been a cause of interest for me, that.

There is an interesting point of some of the recent Pratchett reviews I've seen, here in the UK anyway, and one I think that Terry would be not happy with; and that is how much the reviews have moved from discussion/criticism about the book to Terry as 'that nice bloke with Alzheimers: we should make the most of him whilst he's around.'

The knock-on effect of that has been, I think, for people to be afraid to criticise him or the book. I'd be interested to hear what people who have read the book think.

I really struggled to find anything to read in that genre published this year

Well, it's a good point. Do others think the same? I know that there's been no Rothfuss, no GRRM etc etc, but IMO there is good stuff out there.

I think I would say that there's perhaps been no obvious stand-out books this year, head and shoulders above the rest. For example, though I liked Grossbart, I can see that it is a book that may divide opinion: some will love it, others will hate it, in equal measure. And as much as I enjoyed Joe's Best Served Cold, I can see why some might not like it.

I guess ultimately I disagree with the tone of optimism in this round up - however, understand why you guys like to keep it upbeat

But I can always find something I like, even if its old reprints! I guess I keep it upbeat because I tend to write about stuff out there that I've liked (even when others haven't!)

I wouldn't say that the year's been totally upbeat, though: there are books there I haven't enjoyed (Under the Dome, for one!) and we have mentioned some of those along the way. There's no ulterior motive though, other than that.

Mark

[Rob B]

As for the upbeat tone, in these things I tend to only mention the books that pleased me. Books that disappointed me, in no particular order on the fantasy side:
Soulless by Gail Carriger, How to Make Friends with Demons by Graham Joyce, Death's Daughter by Amber Benson (I couldn't get past the first 40 or so pages)


I haven't read Pratchett or Ken Scholes's releases for this year.

[mjolnir]

Looks like a fine list to me. I mean, it's not exhaustive or anything, [as if anything could be], but it doesn't pretend to be and it's got good books on it. I haven't read as much that Hobbit and Rob mention as I would like, though of course I've got my own list of authors I think would be at home here, [not that our good reviewers have time to read everything]: I'll join the Scholes-should-have-been-acknowledged crew, as though I wasn't swept away I do think it's potentially a major new series. And I really, really wish more people would give Daniel Abraham's Long Price books a try, [the fourth and last of which, The Price of Spring, was released this year.] And I'm sure some people will be along remarking on the absence of Jeff VanderMeer's Finch, which sits on my shelf, waiting. Still, we seem to hit many of the high notes here. Oh, and I appreciated the inclusion of not only the review links but also the link to the bookclub for The Catherynne Valente novel. I will have to check that out, as I found Palimpsest a very interesting book.

Not to be an interfering swine, but I noticed a couple little mistakes. The oddest thing is this here about The Judging Eye:

In January we started well, with R. Scott Bakker?s prequel, The Judging Eye, .... the first of the two part Aspect-Emperor (the duology itself is the third in a sequence of related series following The Prince of Nothing) ...

The Judging Eye isn't a prequel, The Aspect Emperor is the second in Bakker's series of series, not the third, and it is evidently now definitely three novels rather than a duology.

I also think that the Brett book's titles in its two releases in the US and UK might be wrong way round, but I'm not quite sure.
________
Zx14 vs hayabusa

[Luke_B]

Rob - I guess my comment about "upbeat tone" was a reflection on your statement that it was "another good year for fantasy". People seem to say this every year and it has lost a bit of meaning for me. I know some got a lot out of fantasy this year, particularly epic fantasy with The Judging Eye, The Painted Man (US), another wieghty Erikson, and so forth, but none of this rocked my socks. So fo me - not a particularly good year. Sure, I found stuff to read, but nother superlative. Your upbeat tone doesn't surprise me because this sort of end-of-year round-up is something a celebration and a bit of a slap on the back, which is fine. It's not really a critical overview of the year that's been. I do prefer this format - you and Hobbit shootin' the breeze - to the way you've done it the last few years. And the review has given me renewed resolve to read the Magicians thanks to your endorsement and to pick up Mark Charan Newton’s Nights of Villjamur and The Sad Tale of the Brothers Grossbart by Jesse Bullington.

[Seegee]

That actually depressed me. It was such a poor year, unless you really liked anthologies. No wonder I'm rereading books.

[Cranky Hamster]

There is an interesting point of some of the recent Pratchett reviews I've seen, here in the UK anyway, and one I think that Terry would be not happy with; and that is how much the reviews have moved from discussion/criticism about the book to Terry as 'that nice bloke with Alzheimers: we should make the most of him whilst he's around.'

The knock-on effect of that has been, I think, for people to be afraid to criticise him or the book. I'd be interested to hear what people who have read the book think.

IMO Unseen Academicals is legitimately a good Pratchett book. Maybe not among his all-time greatest, but it is very solid, entertaining, and includes cameos from all his Ankh-Morpork cast without stretching too obviously to do so. If the Alzheimer's has any negative effect on his ability to put together stories, it's not evident in this book. I don't think there's much to criticize; assuming you like Pratchett's style in the first place, it's a strong entry in his body of work.

As for whether 2009 was a strong or not-so-strong year in the genre... eh. I think it was about average. Some great books, some not-so-great books, a fair run down the middle. When people say it was a good year or a poor year, I tend to think that has more to do with the individual reader than the actual books on offer that year, unless it's a crazy standout year like 2006.

[NickeeCoco]

Well, it's a good point. Do others think the same? I know that there's been no Rothfuss, no GRRM etc etc, but IMO there is good stuff out there.

I think the same way. I only read a couple of books that were new to this year, and I was a little disappointed. While I enjoyed Abercrombie's Best Served Cold, I found it to be a little more of the same [as the First Law]. I wanted him to bring something new into it, but he didn't. There's some interesting plot lines that were left dangling, so I'll continue with his next book to see what happens, but I wouldn't mind if he brought a little more thematic change to the table.

For the most part, this year was spent reading authors that were new to me, not new books.