Help
Are you saying that I'm not only representing myself but all members of the forum who once had blowjobanimationavatars? In that case, I'm sorry. (Me rikey your avatar!)
For less elitist fantasy I prefer Eddings, Feist, and Salvatorre to Weiss, Hickman, and especially to Brooks. Piers Anthony used to be a favorite (Incarnations of Immortality, Split Infinity...)
There's no reason to knock Oxford. George W Bush has a BA from Yale and an MBA from Harvard and no one would question his intelligence. Right?
What are your thoughts on Terry Brooks?
#22
Qorten 
- Sergeant
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 74
- Joined: 30-May 05
Posted 22 June 2005 - 12:03 PM
@Drinks In Bars I was, don't know, fourteen, fifteen maybe, when i read the first two books. I never even heard of Martin or Erikson, so at that time, it wasn't that bad. maybe, if I reread them now, I'd think otherwise.
#23
tickhill43
- Sergeant
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 72
- Joined: 26-June 03
Posted 20 June 2005 - 02:33 PM
quote:Originally posted by Arkmam:
Actually, fantasy would probably be a bigger hit if brooks had been a better writer. As it was, many probably read his book first, and decided it was utter crap and never touched something similar again.
Brooks almost did this to me. I read Sword of Shannara when I was a youngster and thought that it was one of the worst peices of drivle that I have ever read. It has no redeeming features; awful quality of writing, characters that barely qualify as 1D let alone 3D and a plot so boring and predictible it could have been written by a senile smackhead with Parkinsons.
The only amazing thing about his work is that it is not the worst fantasy ever written (cough Maggie Furey). Needless to say after sword i've never read any of his other work and do not intend to.
#24 Guest_Dark Daze_*
Posted 29 June 2005 - 04:33 AM
The important thing for me about the lack of originality isn't whether an author infringes on the orininal author's rights, it's whether the derivative work is overly familiar and/or predictable. Sword of Shannarra isn't like that! Why? Because Brooks is a genius. Brooks is to heroic fantasy what Donaldson is to pretensious drivel. Terry Brooks is as essential to the world of fantasy as pop up books are to children's literature. Can you imagine the literacy rate if little children had to read books without things popping up at them???
#25
Arkmam
- Titanium Nipple
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 444
- Joined: 14-February 05
- Interests:Reading, playing board games, taking walks
Posted 20 June 2005 - 07:42 AM
I intended to write a rant on how much I dislike this author, but when I saw Ainulindale's post, I decided it was not necessary. I agree with all of earlier mentioned writer's points, and wish him a happy week 
"If you got dragnipur'd, chaos would move closer."
- Ancient Malazan insult
- Ancient Malazan insult
#26 Guest_Jay Tomio_*
Posted 20 June 2005 - 11:18 AM
quote:Terry Brooks is to fantasy what Faulkner is to American fiction.
Whoa!
#27 Guest_Dark Daze_*
Posted 30 June 2005 - 08:56 PM
quote:Originally posted by Marduk:
And dear DD: did you know John Kerry actually graduated with almost the exact same GPA as our retarded commrade bush? just a tiny tidbit of lovable info.
No.
I also don't think of Bush as stupid.And I basically invited Supersuavesteve to bring up his supersuave interview by calling Elvi's education into question. He wasn't being pretentious. He was just setting up his next booty call.
#28 Guest_Optimus_*
Posted 25 June 2005 - 09:49 AM
I bought Sword a few months back and I couldn't even finish it.
About the same time I got the most recent Fiest book and liked it.
Yeah...
About the same time I got the most recent Fiest book and liked it.
Yeah...
#29 Guest_Binadas_*
Posted 19 June 2005 - 06:37 PM
IMHO Brook's best works were the early ones. I have not read everything. But the first Shanara trilogy was good. The ast five books are so to come out have been easy, fun reads. I loosely group him with Feist in terms of quality. However, I feel his elves & dwarves and some other non-human characters behave just like humans (at least in the stuff coming out lately) which dissapoints. I read Brooks when I have nothing from Erikson, Martin, Baker or a few other of my favs to read. I do like that his story spans many generations.
ZZZZZZZZ-Chief
ZZZZZZZZ-Chief
#30 Guest_FizbansTalking_Hat_*
Posted 19 June 2005 - 01:18 PM
What are yoru thoughts on Terry Brooks and his Shannara world and his other books. Just wondering since I post quite a bit at his forum, cheers.
#31 Guest_johnturing_*
Posted 30 June 2005 - 01:36 PM
@Itkovian - thanks for the advice, amidst this flaming war.
@Marduk - isn't all fiction escapist? The whole point of fiction is escapism to some extent, and fantasy is no more escapist than most other novels. The only novels which are perhaps less escapist than most are historical fiction novels, but calling fantasy escapist is like saying fantasy novels are novels.
Also, you say all fantasy is bad. Have you read anything by Gene Wolfe, Mervyn Peake, M John Harrison, Michael Moorcock, Fritz Leiber or China Mieville? They're all considered to be very good writers within fiction as a whole, amongst the best, and I don't see how other fiction is better just because it isn't fantasy."derivative" - doesn't really describe these authors, or many others within the genre. Have you actually read some of these "elitist" authors then? (Tolkien doesn't count)
By the way, Oxford has roughly 55% state school entrants, 45% private schools - it isn't only for rich children, unlike the best American universities, because it is still largely a state funded system. I'm going to apply there next year - it's one of the best universities in the world, especially so in teaching, if not quite as much on the research side.
@Marduk - isn't all fiction escapist? The whole point of fiction is escapism to some extent, and fantasy is no more escapist than most other novels. The only novels which are perhaps less escapist than most are historical fiction novels, but calling fantasy escapist is like saying fantasy novels are novels.
Also, you say all fantasy is bad. Have you read anything by Gene Wolfe, Mervyn Peake, M John Harrison, Michael Moorcock, Fritz Leiber or China Mieville? They're all considered to be very good writers within fiction as a whole, amongst the best, and I don't see how other fiction is better just because it isn't fantasy."derivative" - doesn't really describe these authors, or many others within the genre. Have you actually read some of these "elitist" authors then? (Tolkien doesn't count)
By the way, Oxford has roughly 55% state school entrants, 45% private schools - it isn't only for rich children, unlike the best American universities, because it is still largely a state funded system. I'm going to apply there next year - it's one of the best universities in the world, especially so in teaching, if not quite as much on the research side.
#32 Guest_Dark Daze_*
Posted 28 June 2005 - 06:26 PM
quote:Originally posted by The Great and Masterful Yoda:
@dark daze - huh?
Like the Sphynx I am.:
You write with all the eloquence of a sixth grade drop out.
Jamaicans speak with more clarity.
You sound like an idiot because of the way that you talk.
Take your pick.
#33 Guest_Narrefisse_*
Posted 30 June 2005 - 07:52 PM
quote:Originally posted by Brys:
By the way, Oxford has roughly 55% state school entrants, 45% private schools - it isn't only for rich children, unlike the best American universities, because it is still largely a state funded system. I'm going to apply there next year - it's one of the best universities in the world, especially so in teaching, if not quite as much on the research side.
I wasnt denigrating Oxford, and I cant exactly see how you got that from what I posted. I was merely maligning people who think that the fact they can interview, or even be accepted means something to anyone but dear mumsy and dadda and themselves. As far as I've ever been concerned, show me a degree or piss off.
#34 Guest_johnturing_*
Posted 29 June 2005 - 01:58 PM
quote:
Brooks, Original idead!!! oh come on you're kidding right? Tolkien must have been spinning in his grave when Sword of Shanara was released.
If I remember correctly, the whole point of the Sword of Shannara series was that it wasn't original, and it was made purely to make the fantasy genre popular so that it could prove money could be made out of fantasy. It wasn't designed to be a good novel, but to be a bestseller (so it achieved its aim).
I like Feist's novels (especially his Empire series and Riftwar saga, less so the others), even if they aren't quite as good as the likes of Erikson, GRRM, Mieville, Bakker, Moorcock etc, but I haven't read any of the others. I have a Terry Brooks book on my shelf (the first of Scions of Shannara - I didn't realise it wasn't the original series at the times, and it was recommended),but I'm wondering whether I should bother reading it, from what I've heard.
@Dark Daze - I may support your opinions on most authors, but there is no need for personal attacks on fans of those authors. Maybe Elvirath just hasn't had the opportunity to read better authors, so she just has her favourite fantasy books as the best she's read. That would be logical, and I'm sure there is a lot of worse novels out there than Brooks'.
#35
drinksinbars
- Soletaken
-
- Group: High House Mafia
- Posts: 2,162
- Joined: 16-February 04
Posted 22 June 2005 - 02:25 AM
qorten- the sovereign stone trilogy are by far their worst series, the first one is utterly boring for almost the entire book. it only picks up at the very end!!!
#36
Folken
- Never throw your life away so easily
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 2,908
- Joined: 11-September 04
- Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posted 25 June 2005 - 06:20 PM
Elvi's getting all mad...never seen her like that...
*huggles*
*huggles*
<div align='center'>You must always strive to be the best, but you must never believe that you are - Juan Manuel Fangio</div>
#37 Guest_Binadas_*
Posted 21 June 2005 - 09:04 PM
quote:Terry Brooks is to fantasy what Faulkner is to American fiction.
LMAO!!!!!! Great one!!
I actually like the Elfstones of Shanara but then I was in 5th grade when I read about them.
ZZZZZZZZZZZ-Chief
#38 Guest_starnberg_*
Posted 28 June 2005 - 11:30 AM
I thought Sword of Shanara was good but that was before I read Jordan's early Wheel of Time books. Still he told the whole story in one book which is more than can be said for Jordan.
#39 Guest_FizbansTalking_Hat_*
Posted 30 June 2005 - 01:43 PM
Wow, I never expected the thread to come this far.
I think that Brooks is good for what it is. It's light fantasy for younger audiences and/or introductions into the fantasy genre. I read it before I was exposed to Martin, Erikson, Tad Williams, Donaldson, King, etc, the big fantasy writers, and at the time it was exactly what I wanted, it was fun, it was light and fast, but as I've matured, so have my tastes and with a growing intellect you want something more, something with grit and intensity.
Different strokes for different folks, cheers.
I think that Brooks is good for what it is. It's light fantasy for younger audiences and/or introductions into the fantasy genre. I read it before I was exposed to Martin, Erikson, Tad Williams, Donaldson, King, etc, the big fantasy writers, and at the time it was exactly what I wanted, it was fun, it was light and fast, but as I've matured, so have my tastes and with a growing intellect you want something more, something with grit and intensity.
Different strokes for different folks, cheers.
#40 Guest_Reave the Just_*
Posted 23 June 2005 - 02:46 AM
I read the firsat three Shannara books as a young lad (12/13) and loved them. In fact I still have fond memories and looking back, they were perfect for me at that period of my "literary development".
A grown adult readin them....... hmmm I'll make no comments
A grown adult readin them....... hmmm I'll make no comments
