Just reading through Tigana - which is fantastic! So much so that I thought I may dedicate to the Fionavar triology. Thing is, Hobb is on my must read list too !
Can anyone whom has perhaps read both, comment on the pro's and con's of each set of novels? which did you prefer, and why?
And what genre differences are there - ie. magic, political intrigue, mellee battles?
Thanks for any help - i'm sitting here and cant decide!
This may be a cop-out, but you can't really go wrong with either author.
I would say Kay's work is a bit more grounded in reality, as he bases much of his work on genuine historical periods.
The prose of both authors is great, possible edge to Kay.
Hobb is perhaps one of my favorite authors, so I can't really say anything other than good things about her work. Her work is more fantastical, more fantastical creatures and magical elements. Not to say that the magical element is overbearing, just more noticeable in her work. I also think she is a good deal better at characterization and drawing real characters.
I think I'd probably give the edge to Hobb, but I really enjoyed GGK's Sailing to Saratium and Lord of Emperors. I haven't picked up Fionavar yet, but I did see a pristine copy at a local used bookstore. The Sarantine Mosaic duology was definitely more political intrigue with a little supernatural mixed in.
Just flip a coin to decide, I don't think you will be disappointed with either author.
Hobb without a DOUBT. Fionvar is AWFUL. I didn't even finish it. Flat, unbelievable characters, predictable storylines. Ick. A far cry from his other work, IMO.
I didn't like Fionvar either. Flat characters, erratic pacing, predictable (me and Crysania are on the same page). Kay has written some good books, but this one was not it (I quit during the Summer Tree though, so I can't comment on the second two in the trilogy--and I wouldn't want to). His later books are much better, though. Try Lions of Al-Rassan, if you want a stand-alone.
So I'd go with Hobb. She's a bit on the introspective side sometimes, and her books aren't exactly fast paced, but I really enjoyed the Farseer trilogy regardless. Her character development, whether you love or hate the characters, is quite strong--Burrich and the Fool were really outstanding to me. In general, though, people either love or hate Hobb, so you're probably guarunteed to get a reaction.
While I will certainly agree that Fionavar is not Kay's best work, I would place it far above anything put out by Hobb. I find Hobb to be extremely boring, but that's just me. I simply don't appreciate her approach to world building. I finished the entire Assassins trilogy and felt that it was pretty weak overall. I recall Fionavar having a very rough start...I myself didn't like the beginning of it at all, but I stuck with it, and felt well rewarded by the end of the trilogy. I'm not sure how much weight I would place on the opinion of someone who didn't read through the entire series and finish it. Reading the first 50 pages of a 1000 page epic, then saying 'it was awful' doesn't really mean much.
Enjoyment of the Fionavar Tapestry depends upon one thing, whether you believe in the old myth that if a person was transported from our world to a fantastical world, he/she would lose his/her grip on sanity. Personally, I pretty much believe that most people would hold up well so the start of the Summer Tree which had this element didn't get in my way much.
Oh and yeah, I liked the books a lot. The first does have a rough start but by mid book, the pace picks up rapidly and doesn't stop till the end of book 3.
So should we overlook the poor first installments of a trilogy?What reason do the reader's have in continuing if you're opening novel is poorly written and predictable? Should we plow on simply because we've already started it? No. My rule of thumb is, if you can't grab a reader within three hundred pages, then you must not be doing something right. Kay failed here. I quit the Summer Tree with only 100 pages left because I simply didn't care enough to see how it turned out. Luckily, I'd read some of his later work and had already developed an appreciation for him.I'm not sure how much weight I would place on the opinion of someone who didn't read through the entire series and finish it. Reading the first 50 pages of a 1000 page epic, then saying 'it was awful' doesn't really mean much.
As for Hobb, if you're looking for elaborate world-building, these are not the books for you. They are thoroughly character-driven, the world taking a backseat to the protagonists. I found this refreshing, even if I thought Hobb was a tad too introspective at times. The abundance of world-building so common in a lot of high-fantasy does not interest me. Even Tolkien, the most famous world-builder around, bored me with the excessive detail.
But keep in mind, Dystran, that most high-fantasy does not appeal to me (Donaldson and Tad William's didn't do it for me either...I did like Martin though). If you really enjoy that style, ignore previous comments.
I didn't get through it either and I can safely say it's crap. You asked for opinions - we're giving them to you. My opinion is that it was so boring and awful that I couldn't even GET THROUGH IT.
Hobb has GREAT characters. If that matters to you more than swashbuckling, then you might enjoy her work. I can see how her world can get dreary and you really don't see much of it at all, till the third book. But her strength is character and to me there was a frank and lovely realism in the writing that pulled me in.
And though Bear and I agree on Fionavar and Hobb, I happen to adore Tad Williams MST series and salivate over my hero, Donaldson. You're not going to get some all-knowing seer on here that's going to tell you what is exactly going to appeal to you. So... I think you might want to just read the first chapter of both and see what draws you in.
While I can certainly see why this was pertinant to what I thought of Fionavar, it honestly wasn't the only reason the book failed for me. The plot that was unfolding was tremendously tedious IMO - and that had nothing to do with the characters reactions to being transported.Enjoyment of the Fionavar Tapestry depends upon one thing, whether you believe in the old myth that if a person was transported from our world to a fantastical world, he/she would lose his/her grip on sanity
Last edited by Crysania; July 4th, 2003 at 01:35 AM.
In what way was the plot tedious?
Primary disclaimers: this is an old thread, I haven't read either of these authors, and "it was awful" is the kind of blunt-cut criticism I hope never to be guilty of.Originally Posted by Blackfish
But I gotta say that reading 50 pages of *anything* tells you something important. Forget complicated storylines and deep characterizations for the moment; can this person write? Are the sentences nicely shaped, does the grammar check out, are the metaphors--if there are metaphors--strike you as original. Is the talk good. Do you want to spend 1000 pages with someone who uses the language in the way that this person uses the language.
Stories can and have been recycled. How a story is told is always, for better or worse, unique.
I had forgotten that the fionavar tapestry was once well respected on this board. Today, it seems like nobody takes it seriously anymore.
I think someone on this board recently went so far as to say that it - along with Eddings' Belgariad - 'felt like it was written by a fifteen year-old'.
What a load of crap
Hobb, Hobb, Hobb. Unquestionably.
I have not read any work by Kay except Fionavar, but I was told it was a masterpiece. I read several reviews, including one that called it "beautiful" and my father liked it a lot, with the one caveat that he thought the characters adjusted to the new world too quickly. In my view that was only the tip of the iceberg.
A guy at work told me it was the best fantasy he had ever read (which I later found out means nothing to me as he and I could not have more differing views of good fantasy).
The one strongly negative review I read was from a guy whose opinion seemed so far removed from my own on other books/series that I discounted it. I re-read it after reading the series and found myself agreeing with nearly every word.
I have listed my faults with Fionavar in other threads, and I'm too tired to re-hash them here. Suffice it to say that I agree with everything said about how it felt like it was written by a twelve-year-old. I also hated hated hated the way characters suddenly had knowledge (knowledge which had eluded elders of that world for centuries) as the situation required them to, with no prior hints at such knowledge, nor any notification to the reader that such knowledge would be necessary.
Hobb's work was wonderful. Her writing really is beautiful, and in fact that was the strongest thing about her books-and I don't often say that about my favorite authors. When I praise Martin, for example, it's often in spite of his prose, which is pretty basic.
The character of Fitz is so fully-formed and real. I have never felt so transported inside the head of a character. All of his actions, even the stupid ones, were understandable because we got to know Fitz like he was our best friend. The other characters were similarly wonderful.
Definitely Hobb! I'll add my voice and say that Fionavar was pretty awful. AND, I finished the entire trilogy, so I'm definitely qualified to give an opinion on the matter.
Some later GGK is pretty good (Tigana, A Song for Arbonne, Lions of Al-Rassan), but Fionavar was not good. It definitely had its moments, but those good things are what shine in Kay's later work. The flaws of Fionavar overshadowed everything else, in my opinion, and finishing the trilogy was a true chore. It's one of the only times this forum gave me a recommendation I didn't like (however, as someone else said, these days this forum seems to have a more negative opinion of Fionavar).
Hobb, on the other hand, is one of my top 3 authors of all time. The Farseer Trilogy is one of the most moving works I've ever read.
Fionavar is magnificent. I rank it as one of the best books I have ever read. I loved those characters, Kay's gift for drama, the wonderfully tense one-on-one fights, the Arthurian tie-in actually worked, the tragedy surrounding all of these characters. Lancelot vs the Curdardh, Galadan Wolflord vs Cavall, Pwyll Twiceborn, Dave, Kim and her Baelrath, seriously I love this series. Good guys die. The fate of the world is really at stake. The evil is genuinely foul. Heck it even has the Wild Hunt and Thor the Norse God, not to mention flying Unicorns. Great younger characters like enigmatic Finn or Darien, born of the rape of Jennifer by Rakoth Maugrim himself. Aileron the swordmaster who has to watch his brother die in such a fight. The story is full of "if only's".
I found nothing to dislike here.
Last edited by Mithfânion; February 27th, 2008 at 03:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks