[Harvester]

Some readers call the Malazan planet Wu. It's not in the books though.

This post has been edited by Harvester: 05 April 2010 - 11:42 AM

[Salt-Man Z]

Yeah, it's basically an unofficial nickname.

Oddly, there's also a poet named "Wu" who provides some of the epigrams for the chapters.

[Illuyankas]

It's from an old interview or something, basically SE and ICE used to call the world after the name of a doctor in a Steely Dan song, but changed it later. I googled some Steely Dan songs, and found a song called Doctor Wu. Since I am a lazy man, naming the world after a two letter word appealed to me so I posted it here. And then half the board started complaining it was a stupid name and SE and ICE don't even use it any more and whinge whinge whinge bitch bitch bitch IT'S JUST TWO LETTERS AND EASIER TO TYPE YOU ASSES

[Avious]

Of course it is far to big and complicated.

You have several dozen acendents and gods, with even more religions, at least 100+ detailed characters with backgrounds, countless realms, 11 races off the top of my head, two distinct forms of magic (hold and warren), many holds and warrens themselves, characters with many different degrees of powers in several different areas, many of which are considered the 'best they've ever seen' by whoever currently has the FPV, a detailed history ranging at least 300,000 years, seven different continents, almost all with a story on it, many many cities, several distinct storylines within each book, three distinct storylines for the books themselves, and a FPV that is wrong regularly.

To claim that this fantasy is anything but complicated would be an insult to the authors.

[Sinisdar Toste]

i'd just like to see the "far to" removed from that statement. its makes it sound as if that detail is somehow robbin the series of its value. which is just crazy talk

[Vesper]

Having read all of J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings-universe works (including the Silmarillion and the Unfinished Tales) I was thoroughly accustomed to absorbing information until the story made sense. There were certainly points where this was a necessary skill in GotM, but they were sparsed amid amazing scenes such as a floating mountain stopping in its slow rotation so its master could SHOOT SORCERY, a showdown between the aforementioned lord and massive hounds who had previously massacred a large portion of a coast, a running battle between dragons and an unchained tyrant, and a duel between a demon lord and... once again, the lord of Moon's Spawn.

The fact that the "grind", as I like to call the chapters and chapters of plot, was focused on such intricate details as I had studied in university courses -- geography and archaeology, simply made the read fascinating. There were times where I had to go back and re-read because I had read the page once for the anthropological stuff, and needed to again for the plot significance. With this much information compacted into mere pages I was easily impressed.

My only complaint regarding the series is that Erikson really seems to go out of his way to give horrifying, gruesome... and sometimes downright ignominious deaths to some of the more beloved heroes.

Spoiler

Coltaine, Brukhalian, Whiskeyjack, Duiker (revived)... and those are just in the first three books

I realize that it's closer to reality (Trotsky and the Icepick, Che Guevara peppered with bullets, Cicero's head and hands being nailed to the Rostra in Rome, etc), but I'm not wanting to read about characters I like dying like punks... give me Gandalf slipping from the bridge of Khazad-dum's recently broken edge... broken under his staff as he stood against the Balrog; or Leonidas after launching his spear through the God-Emperor's cheek and holding his sword in defiance of the innumerable Persian arrows; or V finally collapsing from his bullet wounds after ripping through Creedy's entourage to strangle him ... at least, that's how it went in the movie...

Give me heroes who die heroically. I feel bereft of proper closure if it doesn't work out...

[Benn Greenbow]

I just finished GotM. I have to say that I almost stopped reading it a few times, but I knew, like many of you have said, that this book was just the beginning of the big picture, so I wanted to stick with it and be rewarded with the future books. I know if I did a reread I would pick up on a ton of more stuff. As it is, I think I will move on to DG. I am excited about reading it, as many of you have said that the writing improves. Not that I'm knocking GotM, it was pretty damn good writing. I think I'll stick with this series. I'm glad I finished book 1.

[Garak]

Glad you're sticking to it. Just hang on tight because the ride is about to get really wild.

[Rolland]

Avious, on 07 April 2010 - 04:01 AM, said:

Of course it is far to big and complicated.

You have several dozen acendents and gods, with even more religions, at least 100+ detailed characters with backgrounds, countless realms, 11 races off the top of my head, two distinct forms of magic (hold and warren), many holds and warrens themselves, characters with many different degrees of powers in several different areas, many of which are considered the 'best they've ever seen' by whoever currently has the FPV, a detailed history ranging at least 300,000 years, seven different continents, almost all with a story on it, many many cities, several distinct storylines within each book, three distinct storylines for the books themselves, and a FPV that is wrong regularly.

To claim that this fantasy is anything but complicated would be an insult to the authors.

Sure it's complicated, everyone who reads the first few pages will get that; but is that a bad or a negative thing....

IMO 100% No!

The level of detail and complexity of the story (epic) is what separates MBoTF from other works of fantasy. (well that AND the fabulous story and host of memorable characters)

Should complexity and length be considered negatives?

For people who want a casual/easy read...perhaps.

But for others (like myself) who enjoy such it's pinnacle of fantasy fiction

This post has been edited by Rolland: 08 April 2010 - 06:31 PM

[Avious]

Rolland, on 08 April 2010 - 06:30 PM, said:

Avious, on 07 April 2010 - 04:01 AM, said:

Of course it is far to big and complicated.

You have several dozen acendents and gods, with even more religions, at least 100+ detailed characters with backgrounds, countless realms, 11 races off the top of my head, two distinct forms of magic (hold and warren), many holds and warrens themselves, characters with many different degrees of powers in several different areas, many of which are considered the 'best they've ever seen' by whoever currently has the FPV, a detailed history ranging at least 300,000 years, seven different continents, almost all with a story on it, many many cities, several distinct storylines within each book, three distinct storylines for the books themselves, and a FPV that is wrong regularly.

To claim that this fantasy is anything but complicated would be an insult to the authors.

Sure it's complicated, everyone who reads the first few pages will get that; but is that a bad or a negative thing....

IMO 100% No!

The level of detail and complexity of the story (epic) is what separates MBoTF from other works of fantasy. (well that AND the fabulous story and host of memorable characters)

Should complexity and length be considered negatives?

For people who want a casual/easy read...perhaps.

But for others (like myself) who enjoy such it's pinnacle of fantasy fiction

Of course not. Its one of the few series I actually think about outside of reading it in a while. Everything you say I agree with, I was just commenting on that because others from pages back were trying to downplay the complicatedness of the series.

[Benn Greenbow]

Garak, on 08 April 2010 - 09:08 AM, said:

Glad you're sticking to it. Just hang on tight because the ride is about to get really wild.

Cool, man, I can't wait!

[Rolland]

Avious, on 08 April 2010 - 10:54 PM, said:

Of course not. Its one of the few series I actually think about outside of reading it in a while. Everything you say I agree with, I was just commenting on that because others from pages back were trying to downplay the complicatedness of the series.

ah I see, thanks

[Osserc - Lord of the Sky]

beru, on 16 March 2010 - 11:35 AM, said:

gardens of the moon is a hard book to read the first time, manly beacuse (as you said) of the little info you get, but as you read the following books you will get a more compleate picture of the Malazan world.

When I first started GOTM, (in fact up to halfway through the novel) I didn't understand one thing, until all the characters' plotlines started coming together. I noticed the same thing in DHG, even though I understand the Malazan world alot better now.

In the end, I would say that the series is NOT to complicated, unless you never get used to SE's style of writing.

[Benn Greenbow]

After getting into DG, I can see Erikson's style starting to bring things together in a more concrete plot line. I can see how he introduced the beginning of many different characters and threads in GotM. I wonder how quick I can read DG, then it's on the book 3,4,5...lol, just kidding(or not).

[Pig Iron]

Anyway, experiencing >> understanding. Though trying to understand can be great fun too

[Quick Randy Adaephon Delat]

I've said this before and I'll say it again. I compare the MBoTF books learning a language on the fly. As you are learning, you can pick up bits and pieces of conversations, get the general idea but you will miss some things. By the end of the series, you are fluent in the language, and if you go back to the beginning, its like a light turns on and almost every chapter has an "aahhhhh" moment. So worth it!

[Be'Njahmeen]

The book is big and complicated, but if you just push on through and trust that everything will be explained it all works out in the end. If you don't get all the details it just adds to the vastness and mysteriousness of the whole thing. rereading might help too, but I don't know if I can make it through the series if I have to read everything twice. the list of characters is very helpful for remembering who's who.

[Osserc - Lord of the Sky]

Axil, on 16 March 2010 - 11:30 AM, said:

I've only read book one, and this is my second fantasy series, so I'm by no means an expert. That said, I found it very hard to visualize Erikson's world in my mind. There are way too many locations with not enough description. The magic system is fascinating but, again, not enough description (For example, at major plot points in the book, main characters are throwing around jars with demons in them. wtf? where did that come from?).

The more I read the more I came to the realization that Erikson created a world too complex to set a story in. This became especially apparent at the ending, which was way too fast and random. It seemed like solutions were being pulled out of thin air and that magic was being used as a crutch. I'll be giving Deadhouse Gates a try, mainly because I'm impressed with the imagination shown in the books, if not the storytelling. So far, the series isn't my style, though.

the thing is, with SE, is that he makes the reader think a little, instead of giving you all the information flat out. that's what i love about the series, is that every reader has their own version of the malazan world inside their head. unlike some simple fantasy books like... even Eragon.

and if you arent ready for the malazan series, (as you said it was only the second fantasy series you've ever read) i recommend you read some books with more straight forward plotlines. not easier books, but more straight forward ones.

Some good series's are: The Lord of the Rings, The Sword of Truth, or The Abhorsen Trilogy. but believe me, the first 2 examples arent easy books

[Garak]

The Sword of Truth .... the Sword of Truth....isn't that the one with the chicken that is EVIL INCARNATE!

"Hissing, hackles lifting, the chicken's head rose. Kahlan pulled back. Its claws digging into stiff dead flesh, the chicken slowly turned to face her. It cocked its head, making its comb flop, its wattles sway. "Shoo," Kahlan heard herself whisper. There wasn't enough light, and besides, the side of its beak was covered with gore, so she couldn't tell if it had the dark spot, But she didn't need to see it. "Dear spirits, help me," she prayed under her breath. The bird let out a slow chicken cackle. It sounded like a chicken, but in her heart she knew it wasn't. In that instant, she completely understood the concept of a chicken that was not a chicken. This looked like a chicken, like most of the Mud People's chickens. But this was no chicken. This was evil manifest."-- Soul of the Fire

[Primateus]

I actually used to like The Sword of Truth. And the first book is still very good. But as I got further into the series I started to wonder. I studied some philosophy and politics and went "wtf?"

In anycase, that wasn't the deciding factor for why I rather dislike that particuliar series today. It's just too damn preachy! And the hero is practically infallible. That's just no fun.

oh well.

I like SE's style. It's positively mindwrenching. I must admit that this is the first time ever where I have had to reread passages in a book because there was something I didn't quite understand.

That is good!

I'm used to reading more simple stuff like Raymond Feist. Which is also good. But unfortunately, while his stories are usually good, his work does not make me think like SE does.