[polishgenius]

I just finished RotCG, and I liked it a lot. My opinion's pretty similar to Wry's - his slightly matter-of-fact prose means it doesn't have the glory of Erikson's best, mostly in the action department, but it's a better book, imo, than anything since Midnight Tides.

It has been very divisive though.

[Werthead]

I really liked RotCG, best Malazan book since MT at least. Although I wonder if this is because it's easily the funniest book out of the whole series IMO:

Spoiler

The bit where the Crimson Guard arrived back in Unta expecting for some reason to be greeted like liberating heroes when 95% of the population weren't even born when they were in charge was quite funny, and the closest the Malazan series overall has gotten to showing us what the 'normal people' are like. The Crimson Guard getting their asses run out of town and the city burning and blowing up behind them may be the comic highlight of the series to date, followed by the travails of the Chief Factor of Cawn. Then you have Iron Bars getting into a totally unnecessary duel with the Seguleh when he could have just said who he was in the first place and they'd have left him alone. The dramatic stuff was somewhat less successful though and all the messing around in the countryside with the giant rat-demon thing was unnecessarily distracting.

[iscariot]

...well, it's only been a year since my last post...

Fiona McKintosh
Great ideas - then she starts writing them down. Usually manages to hold things together through the first book (she's a trilogy girl) then everythign crashes and burns horribly in Book Two...

Hal Duncan
Vellum was the most unreadable, overrated piece of art-wank posing as Science-Fiction ever

Anne McCaffrey
While it is true that McCaffrey should be burnt at the stake for her many crimes, she has, on balance, earnt a measure of redemption for the early dragon books, Restoree, Decision at Doona, To Ride Pegasus etc...Then, however, there is the horror that is Crystal Line. Crystal Singer is a classic of its specific sub-genre. Killashandra is a potboiler (but kind of fun), Crystal Line, however, is reason fopr obscenity charges to be levelled...

Eddings
The Belgariad revivified epic quest ficiton and is justifiably regards as a YA Fantasy Classic - the Mallorean was readable and thereafter, the horror descends...

Feist
Oh dear God, WTF was he thinking with that last trilogy??? Actually, I'll argue for a complete lackof anything resmbling thought...plotting...narrative...character development....logic [internal, external or otherwise].

GRRM
Fuck You. Seriously. Books 1+2 of F+I were great - brilliant, in fact - then you started killing everyone within reach of your fucking pen. Seriously, how the fuck can you be taken seriosuly when you kill off your latest red-herring protagonist every 10th page??? I wonder if he has a radom bastard family member name generator on his PC so he doesn't run out of names. For that matter, he has probably invested pretty heavily in Geneaological software in order to keep things straight. Mind you, he doesn't actually have to have a narrative if every 10 page segment is a built in: Go character: yay Character: You're teh best character: you could win it all Character: Oh shit, Character, you died, too bad...."

The Tad Williams Award for going absolutely nowhere with a story
ummm....Tad Williams ...

-----
...and just a note on Steven Erikson...

We all love Steven Erikson for his complexity, his depth and his complex characterisation and narrative - that being said, Steven Erikson is almost unreadable if you don't like dense prose that - in a given 900 pg book - spends 80% of the story in convoluted exposition, loose end tying, red-herring laying or just generally being a notification of the fact that he's smarter than everyone else - before launching into a bravura ending.

I've noticed a real Erikson Superiority Complex that emanates from a lot of his readers - we need to be careful that we, as loyal readers DON'T confuse our particular passion for his style of writing as some form of literary elitism vis-a-vis the fact that fans of authors who are manifestly different in approach to Erikson whot write him off for the same things we laud him.

Sometimes, within genre it is difficult to compare the qualities of authors and even more difficult when comparing genres/ sub-genres that don't match - tell me, who is more brilliant Dr Seuss or Steven Erikson? Further, could Seuss write Erikson any more than Erikson could write Seuss?

This post has been edited by iscariot: 20 October 2008 - 01:34 AM

[lord of tragedy]

true. but would erikson actually want to write something that jim carey might end up making a film of. read a macintosh book once. fucking shite. so bad she makes kate elliot look talented. what the fuck was the crown of stars abouT?

[Trull's son]

I also hated crossroads of twilight....so bad....

[Mentalist]

one name mising from the list
John Marco
I've forced myself through "Tyrants and Kings", trilogy but the story is literally summarized on the back cover of the book
I managed to keep myself going thorugh the book with the consolation that half the characters are insane, and I'm getting some insight (I'm a psychology major), but in retrospect, that possible "plus" fades in comparison to everyhting that's wrong with the book. and it's ridiculously simplistic--all of book 2 you see the main villain sitting back, telling us how his grand design's coming along flawlessly. so, obviously, you expect that at some point it will all cone crashing down. but that's the thing--IT DOESN'T!!! you sit there and watch as he gets away with what he's supposed to, leaving the supposed protagonists (who are all so tragically flawed it makes you sick how stupid they are) sit back and "learn their lesson"


I'm both terrified nad tempted to pick up the first volume of his second triligy "Eyes of God", just to see if there's any at all improvement.
maybe I will at some point. but it will not be ANY time soon. like, not the next 5 years or so.

[Use Of Weapons]

Mentalist, on Oct 20 2008, 04:58 AM, said:

I'm both terrified nad tempted to pick up the first volume of his second triligy "Eyes of God", just to see if there's any at all improvement.
maybe I will at some point. but it will not be ANY time soon. like, not the next 5 years or so.

No. I tried _Eyes of God, and couldn't reach the end, for all the reasons you state above. And I hadn't read any of his others, so I didn't have the warning.

[Werthead]

John Marco should definitely be on the list.

Quote

Fuck You. Seriously. Books 1+2 of F+I were great - brilliant, in fact - then you started killing everyone within reach of your fucking pen. Seriously, how the fuck can you be taken seriosuly when you kill off your latest red-herring protagonist every 10th page??? I wonder if he has a radom bastard family member name generator on his PC so he doesn't run out of names. For that matter, he has probably invested pretty heavily in Geneaological software in order to keep things straight. Mind you, he doesn't actually have to have a narrative if every 10 page segment is a built in: Go character: yay Character: You're teh best character: you could win it all Character: Oh shit, Character, you died, too bad...."

Seriously, this happens like three times in the entirety of the first four books. And one of them comes back. And only one of them could be considered a protagonist, and I thought he was going to die after about his third chapter in AGoT. I thought the first book of making it clear who the three main protagonists were (Dany, Jon and Tyrion), and they're all still going strong.

Quote

what the fuck was the crown of stars abouT?

From what I recall, it was about religious intolerance, the rights and wrongs of hereditary power and an attempt to chronicle the rise of a 'proper' messiah. Actually, the last bit she did pretty well. Elsewhere the series didn't really achieve the things she wanted it to. It's fairly middling, and only noteworthy as it's the only one of the big 1990s epic fantasies that is actually finished (apart from Goodkind).

[iscariot]

Werthead, on Oct 21 2008, 03:44 AM, said:

Seriously, this happens like three times in the entirety of the first four books. And one of them comes back. And only one of them could be considered a protagonist, and I thought he was going to die after about his third chapter in AGoT. I thought the first book of making it clear who the three main protagonists were (Dany, Jon and Tyrion), and they're all still going strong.

exaggeration for effect

Even then, I have spoken to several people here - in NZ, not list members, obviously, who agree...YMMV

[ch'arlz]

iscariot, on Oct 20 2008, 02:50 PM, said:

Even then, I have spoken to several people here - in NZ, not list members, obviously, who agree...YMMV

Not worst fantasy in any respect, but Janet Hospital's Oyster damped any desire I had to visit Australia.

[iscariot]

ch'arlz, on Oct 21 2008, 08:31 AM, said:

Not worst fantasy in any respect, but Janet Hospital's Oyster damped any desire I had to visit Australia.

:grin: Confusing NZ and Aus is grounds for being fed into Starveld Demerlain through a difractional grating

[ch'arlz]

iscariot, on Oct 20 2008, 04:09 PM, said:

ch'arlz, on Oct 21 2008, 08:31 AM, said:

Not worst fantasy in any respect, but Janet Hospital's Oyster damped any desire I had to visit Australia.

:grin: Confusing NZ and Aus is grounds for being fed into Starveld Demerlain through a difractional grating

I suppose I am confused by your reply. Oyster's setting is the Australian Outback. A dry, dusty and deadly place, according to Hospital.

[iscariot]

ch'arlz, on Oct 21 2008, 09:15 AM, said:

iscariot, on Oct 20 2008, 04:09 PM, said:

ch'arlz, on Oct 21 2008, 08:31 AM, said:

Not worst fantasy in any respect, but Janet Hospital's Oyster damped any desire I had to visit Australia.

:grin: Confusing NZ and Aus is grounds for being fed into Starveld Demerlain through a difractional grating

I suppose I am confused by your reply. Oyster's setting is the Australian Outback. A dry, dusty and deadly place, according to Hospital.

OK - I originally read your response mentioning Australia vis a vis my original notion that I was in NZ...meh

[MecnunK]

I have lost interest in anything GRRM now but come on first 3 books are not simply good but a deliciously good piece of writing that keeps you wanting more..killings and all and yes I was disappointed when 2 of my fav characters got killed as well..beautifully balanced was each book IMO however the same cannot be said for AFFC which is just piss poor in comparison(die-hard fan boy ravings notwithstanding) , it is almost like a different author wrote it or Martin got a dose of Jordanites...I am pissed that the piece of work that gave him the fame , he has chosen to set aside in favour of fucking around ..maybe he just ran out of ideas contrary to his various blog mumblings..but yes overall I agree with the sentiment fuck you Martin but perhaps for different reasons.

[lord of tragedy]

read marco's first book. pants. wert i'm sorry the crown of stars showed flashes of talent but its editor should be shot.
robert newcombe anyone?

the briar king was dreadfully disappointing too. does it get better after the first book?
tad williams latest series is a crime against humanity

This post has been edited by lord of tragedy: 21 October 2008 - 12:09 AM

[Mentalist]

lord of tragedy, on Oct 20 2008, 08:06 PM, said:

read marco's first book. pants. wert i'm sorry the crown of stars showed flashes of talent but its editor should be shot.
robert newcombe anyone?

the briar king was dreadfully disappointing too. does it get better after the first book?
tad williams latest series is a crime against humanity

"Charnel prince" introduces one of the most interesting plot lines I've ever read in a fantasy series.
and as far as I remember, there's a lot less Anne.

I enjoyed the series in general, but the last book "Born Queen" seemed rushed.

[Aooga]

To me a bad book is one that you just cant force yourself through and would rather abandon the series than force yoruself through it. In my case:

1. Hal Duncan - Vellum. waht a pretentious convulated load of crap.
2. Terry Goodkind - Pillars of Creation...'nuff said

incidentally I made it through 'Crossroads of Twilight'. I have no idea how I mananged that but am glad 'cause 'Knife of Dreams' wasn't half bad.

[Werthead]

iscariot, on Oct 20 2008, 07:50 PM, said:

exaggeration for effect

Even then, I have spoken to several people here - in NZ, not list members, obviously, who agree...YMMV

What's viewpoint got to do with it? Fact, far more major protagonists have died in Malazan than in ASoIaF, even discounting the tedious resurrections.

Quote

the briar king was dreadfully disappointing too. does it get better after the first book?

No. The first book is the best and then it goes downhill after that, as about five people on this forum told me before I started reading it and then took great delight when I had to agree with them. That said, I have a morbid fascination with reading the final book when it comes out in paperback as it's supposed to be especially horrendous.

Quote

wert i'm sorry the crown of stars showed flashes of talent but its editor should be shot.

I think I'm broadly in agreement with you on this. Good moments interspersed with lenghty moments of tedium. And a stronger edtiorial hand was definitely needed.

Quote

robert newcombe anyone?

Indeed. The Fifth Sorceress does seem to be the most widely-slagged-off genre book since The Eye of Argon, and at least Argon has in its defence the fact that it was self-published. Having said that, Bilsborough's The Wanderer's Tale seems to be catching up with it fast.

[lord of tragedy]

fifth soceress was rubbish. oh! we missed one. what a plot. the publishers seemed to hype him up alot. is it a failure of quality control that allows something like that to be published and therefore we have it rammed down our necks while they try to atone for their mistakes? the more fantasy i read the less publishers seem to me to know about it.

any opinions on the annals of lindhorm?

[lord of tragedy]

fifth soceress was rubbish. oh! we missed one. what a plot. the publishers seemed to hype him up alot. is it a failure of quality control that allows something like that to be published and therefore we have it rammed down our necks while they try to atone for their mistakes? the more fantasy i read the less publishers seem to me to know about it.

any opinions on the annals of lindhorm?