Martin, Erikson, Jordan..Am I missing something??

[Winghead]

I admit, I have only recently started reading fantasy. I had read Harry Potter and LOTR, but never really bothered to look further in to the genre. I also read a couple Dresden books and thought they were fun. Upon looking at these boards, I noticed that the series that seem to be the most integral, or essential are George Martin's Song of Ice and Fire, Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time (mixed reviews but still essential) and Steven Erikson's Malazan series.

I haven't been able to make it through the first 100 pages of any of these first books without losing interest, yet I find myself devouring Terry Brooks' Shannara series without being able to put them down. Am I missing something? Is it just a matter of taste? I feel like the music fan that doesn't get modern Radiohead while the rest of the world is calling them brilliant and perfect.

 

[End Of Disc One]

100 pages in one of these books isn't much. They require some discipline to get through, but the payoff is well worth it.

 

[kirk]

100 pages in one of these books isn't much. They require some discipline to get through, but the payoff is well worth it.

I'm not entirely sure if that is the case with WoT. At least the payoff part.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Nothing wrong with the Shannara books, if those are what you like. Read whatever you enjoy and don't feel the need to justify your choices. In the grand scheme of things, all fantasy books are just books... not sacred scriptures.

 

[oasis seeker]

It could just be that you're not ready for them yet.

I started reading stuff like Tolkien, Shannara, Dragonlance, Belgeriad etc. and gradually my tastes changed and I craved different types of fantasy.

Just read whatever you enjoy and keep an open mind and an open eye as you venture on your journeys.

 

[pat5150]

It could just be that you're not ready for them yet.

I started reading stuff like Tolkien, Shannara, Dragonlance, Belgeriad etc. and gradually my tastes changed and I craved different types of fantasy.

Just read whatever you enjoy and keep an open mind and an open eye as you venture on your journeys.

I agree. . .

Patrick

 

[Winghead]

I don't think I;m not ready for them. I've read a lot of complex novels including many classics, and not felt this way. Malazan to me was the equivalent of reading Ulysses by James Joyce. I get the feeling that even the 5 star reviewers of that book that claim it as the greatest piece of literature of all time would fail if they had to write a test on it, and have no idea what is really going on. (no offence to those who do get it and think I'm completely off base)

I suppose These authors are not providing the escapist entertainment I am looking for when I read fantasy. Its one thing to be challenged, its another to require this form of discipline when reading. Terry Brooks has offered me that so far, and I might give Wheel Of Time a shot. As for Martin...I know he's supposed to be the most acclaimed in the genre, but I'm not feeling it either. I found myself skimming pages wondering when each chapter would end already.

As mentioned above..to each their own. Some people may love James Joyce. I prefer Dickens. Just taste I suppose.

 

[Pvt]

I admit, I have only recently started reading fantasy. I had read Harry Potter and LOTR, but never really bothered to look further in to the genre. I also read a couple Dresden books and thought they were fun. Upon looking at these boards, I noticed that the series that seem to be the most integral, or essential are George Martin's Song of Ice and Fire, Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time (mixed reviews but still essential) and Steven Erikson's Malazan series.

I haven't been able to make it through the first 100 pages of any of these first books without losing interest, yet I find myself devouring Terry Brooks' Shannara series without being able to put them down. Am I missing something? Is it just a matter of taste? I feel like the music fan that doesn't get modern Radiohead while the rest of the world is calling them brilliant and perfect.

This board and ones similiar to it doesn't represent the world. You're among groups of very hardcore fantasy geeks, with a scattered smattering of just regular fans mixed in. Nearly everyone here is automatically going to say they love GRRM and Erikson, Hobb, Tolkien and tell you how brilliant they are. That doesn't mean you have to love them, nor does it mean these authors necessarily deserve such unanimous praise. The hardcores simply have their own unique taste. However if you can stomach Tolkien I don't see any issue with WOT which is easily a hundred times more readable.

 

[End Of Disc One]

Malazan to me was the equivalent of reading Ulysses by James Joyce. I get the feeling that even the 5 star reviewers of that book that claim it as the greatest piece of literature of all time would fail if they had to write a test on it, and have no idea what is really going on. (no offence to those who do get it and think I'm completely off base)

Lol not quite...if you read slowly and use the appendices it's not that hard to follow. And I'm not a great reader; I always got average scores on the English sections of my standardized tests.

You do pick up a lot of details on a reread though.

 

[Bond]

I admit, I have only recently started reading fantasy. I had read Harry Potter and LOTR, but never really bothered to look further in to the genre. I also read a couple Dresden books and thought they were fun. Upon looking at these boards, I noticed that the series that seem to be the most integral, or essential are George Martin's Song of Ice and Fire, Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time (mixed reviews but still essential) and Steven Erikson's Malazan series.

I haven't been able to make it through the first 100 pages of any of these first books without losing interest, yet I find myself devouring Terry Brooks' Shannara series without being able to put them down. Am I missing something? Is it just a matter of taste? I feel like the music fan that doesn't get modern Radiohead while the rest of the world is calling them brilliant and perfect.

Most of the modern world doesn't get Mozart and they call him a genius without question despite probably being unable to identify much more than Eine Kleine Nachtmusik or the Overture from the Marriage of Figaro if even that. Don't worry about it. Some fantasy series are easier to read and get into than others. What separate the three you see mentioned most often is the sheer size and scope of their fantastic vision. Sometimes you need to whet your appetite. Consider the smaller fantasy series you seem to enjoy now as appetizers before the main course. If after a while they all seem to start reading the same then maybe it is time to move on to larger things.

 

[Winghead]

I think Brooks' stuff is pretty epic, and I find myself at the edge of my seat. I wouldn't call it an "appetizer". I haven't gotten all the way through, but I think the idea of "Word and Void" being the prequel to Shannara to be quite brilliant, and a very creative concept.

 

[Rexington]

I myself started on the Shannara series and I still enjoy it. I went from Shannara to LoTR. Then Raymond E Feists' Riftwar series. Then David Eddings four original series. Then WoT. I highly recommend reading all of the first book when you start a series, especially WoT. I am now on Sanderson's Mistborn series and I love it. I haven't read Martin or Erikson yet. Good luck on whatever you do though. I hope this helped.

 

[barfly]

Nearly everyone here is automatically going to say they love GRRM and Erikson, Hobb, Tolkien and tell you how brilliant they are.

not to digress from your perfectly valid point, that this is a fairly hard-geek-core group etc etc, but i think there is good evidence to say that adulation for your author list is far from universal here.

true, there are few serious detractors from Tolkien, and GRRM is widely embraced. but from what i've seen Erikson and Hobb have much softer support, here and in general, and i'd include myself in the "less enthusiastic" part of that crowd. ditto for a number of the other "big" names bandied about on these forums, but that's beside the immediate point.

[begin rant]

as i read it Winghead's point was to question the widespread praise for the three named authors and question his difficulty if finding what was so great about them. i've been reading fantasy for almost forty years and frankly i agree, i have the same trouble.

i don't see the point in pressing through 100s of pages of uninspiring work to find the supposed treasures buried elsewhere. who's got the time for that? is it just because they couldn't find anything to watch on TV? for my money that's just bad or mediocre writing: either cut the padding and crap or be judged on the dreck you've left for us to wade through.

as i see it part of the reason our beloved genre is treated like the unwelcome cousin of the literary world is that we as fantasy readers are so universally undemanding and accepting of sub-par efforts. few other fields of work are excused with things like "you've got to get past the first 250 pages, then it really starts to get pretty okay". seriously? do people really have that much spare time on their hands?

imagine if you asked about a new film and people said "don't worry so much about staying awake that first hour, the second hour has some really great scenery." what would be the chances that you'd ever bother to give it a second thought, never mind shelling out your time and money to see it?

i think fantasy lit needs to be held to higher standards than "read half of it just so you can read the other half of it". in screenwriting there's a general rule that if you don't have your audience "by the balls" in the first five pages (5 minutes) then you don't have them at all. something like that might be a good thing for us fantasy readers.

personally i give a book or series 50 pages, very generous imo, and if it's not happening by then i'm done. i know no one really cares a fig about my particular way of reading -- nor should they -- but my point is that good writing should be good pretty much from the start, not after 100s of pages of unedited bumff.

so yeah, some of the oft applauded shouldn't be, at least not so much. but then again maybe fantasy readers in general just have longer lives and lower standards than other folks.

[end rant]

 

[Arkeus]

as i see it part of the reason our beloved genre is treated like the unwelcome cousin of the literary world is that we as fantasy readers are so universally undemanding and accepting of sub-par efforts. few other fields of work are excused with things like "you've got to get past the first 250 pages, then it really starts to get pretty okay". seriously? do people really have that much spare time on their hands?

Or maybe it's more "you have to read enough to get an idea about the atmosphere", and not "it then gets pretty ok".

Also, Fantasy actually doesn't have that bad- look at how many series people are going to defend by saying "it gets better after season 5" and so on?

But, yeah, i do agree that you shouldn't foce yourself to read something if you dislike the beginning.

However, if it's just confusion or some such... well, no.

 

[ChrisW]

I haven't been able to make it through the first 100 pages of any of these first books without losing interest

Question, was it just that nothing interesting had happened yet or the actual writing style? If the first, at what point did you give up in each of those books? What had actually happened?

 

[barfly]

Or maybe it's more "you have to read enough to get an idea about the atmosphere", and not "it then gets pretty ok".

point taken. for me it's usually that the writing style is very much not to my tastes -- one could read that as a euphemism for "bad" -- or the thing is just long-winded and/or dull.

as i say, i've been reading fantasy for a long time. i think i can tell when someone is actually building something (like atmosphere) and when they are just treading water trying to figure out how the "go" button works. or they are just treading water with little hope or vision to do much else.

look at how many series people are going to defend by saying "it gets better after season 5" and so on?

yup, true that. whatever works for them i guess. personally, there is no way on big daddy's green earth i am going to sit around for 5 seasons, or 5 books or whatever, to wait for it to "get good". next!

my wife keeps saying "life is too short for bad books" and i think that pretty much sums it up for me.

 

[Bear]

If I'd used being immediately hooked as my criteria for continuing a book, I would have missed out on many of my favorite books of all time. Some of the best things I've ever read took some time to get used to, or had a slow beginning.

That being said, if I'm not in a patient mood, it isn't the best time to read something that requires some patience. It all just boils down to what you're looking for at the time.

 

[Evil Agent]

I think it depends on when (and at what age) you start reading fantasy. I started with Tolkien at 16, but then I read a LOT of authors before finally reading Jordan (loved it), then Martin (loved it even more). Erikson took me several attempts before I finally got into it, and I still find his books much more challenging.

If you're enjoying Brooks, then just keep going with it. If/when you feel ready for something different, maybe look at these other authors again.

 

[rsullivan9597]

I have to agree

[begin rant] few other fields of work are excused with things like "you've got to get past the first 250 pages, then it really starts to get pretty okay". seriously? do people really have that much spare time on their hands?
[end rant]

I myself, and have read many posts from people who are "struggling to get through" one book or another. Reading is suppose to be entertainment and I've actually found myself avoiding certain reading because it was just too much "slogging". It is largely a question of style as one person's slog is another person's "richness". I really struggled with Johnathan Strange and Mr. Norell and had to eventually give up. I think Wingman's taste runs to lighter fare and there is nothing wrong with that.

Read what you like - there is plenty of fantasy out there that would fit your tastes. I myself sometimes turn to YA stuff (like The Bartimius Trilogy) which I found very enjoyable.

 

[Third Eye]

I admit, I have only recently started reading fantasy. I had read Harry Potter and LOTR, but never really bothered to look further in to the genre. I also read a couple Dresden books and thought they were fun. Upon looking at these boards, I noticed that the series that seem to be the most integral, or essential are George Martin's Song of Ice and Fire, Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time (mixed reviews but still essential) and Steven Erikson's Malazan series.

I haven't been able to make it through the first 100 pages of any of these first books without losing interest, yet I find myself devouring Terry Brooks' Shannara series without being able to put them down. Am I missing something? Is it just a matter of taste? I feel like the music fan that doesn't get modern Radiohead while the rest of the world is calling them brilliant and perfect.

First of all Radiohead is far from perfect. In fact Sigur Ros does "Radiohead" style music far better than Radiohead.

It would be arrogant of me to say you are missing something. Missing out on something might be apt but that is just an opinion. At the end of the day the primary reason people read is for entertainment/enjoyment. Some of us prefer to read literature that is more complex and/or challenging but that again is a matter of taste.

Martin and Erikson are excellent authors but both present very different approaches to Fantasy. I am excluding Jordan because I absolutely despise the Wheel of Time series on every conceivable level.

Both Martin and Erikson are similar in that they have created MASSIVE worlds. You may prefer something like Shannara because it is smaller in scope and written in a more straight forward manner. Lots of magic, discernible good guys and bad guys, etc.

I would say there are other authors worth reading in the genre who write far more complex stories than Brooks but keep the scope smaller. Sean Russel's Swans War Trilogy is one of my all time favorites. Robin Hobb's Farseer Trilogy might also appeal to you.

Bottom line read what makes you happy.