[cortezthekiller]

Finished GotM last night. I'm not real good about saying deep, interesting stuff about things I read, listen to, watch, etc. But probably the best thing I can say about the book is this:

When I began the book, my initial intention was to read it, and take a book off to read something totally different, before continuing onto DG. About halfway through the book, my wife bought me copies of DG and MoI. Still I planned to read something else.

Last night I finished GotM, reading the last 100 pages or so and I probably have as many questions about the climax as the rest of the book (I have no clue wtf Azath is, for instance), but loved it. Put the book down, and picked up Deadhouse Gates and started it.

Other things -

• I don't generally like stories with a huge cast of characters, especially when many, many POV characters are used. In the end, I came to see it as a strength of GotM
• I generally don't like big door stopper books, but still enjoyed GotM -- I am aware that GotM is the thinnest of the series though and that does lead to some trepidation - lol
• Oddly enough, I read Pynchon prior to this and I think it actually helped prepare me for the complexity of Erikson's story...there's also a parallel in the conspiratorial nature of the stories.
• I don't regularly read fantasy, but most of the one's I've read have had a Tolkiensy feel. I like/(love?) Tolkien, but really found the departure a breath of fresh air.
• Love how the Lord/Son of Darkness is really not much different on the Evil/Good scale than most any other character in the book
• Despite some reviews/comments I've seen to the contrary, I found the prose/style to be of high quality. Erikson seems to have chosen a less is more approach to descriptive text here. I can go either way on that, so long as it is executed well. I think it was done well here.

So, that's it for now. On to Deadhouse Gates...I have pondered possibly re-reading GotM prior to reading MoI, but who knows. What I planned for after GotM, ain't exactly what happened...

[Darthjamo]

Happy to hear you've been sucked in. Your wife did you a favor, keep on reading, MoI will blow you away.

[worry]

I'd save the rereads till after you're done. I don't really think encyclopedic knowledge (or striving for it) really enhance the first read much. It's more stress than it's worth, and the fantastic stories at least as much as the world-building carry the series from DG on.

[Spoilsport Stonny]

Yeah, don't try to catch everything or get bogged down in the minutiae. At most, come to the forums if you have questions and feel free to start a new post or search the forum for the book you just finished for some answers. I would recommend the former, to avoid being spoiled, if that is a concern of yours.

[Anaximander]

cortezthekiller, on 22 January 2014 - 04:29 PM, said:

• Oddly enough, I read Pynchon prior to this and I think it actually helped prepare me for the complexity of Erikson's story...there's also a parallel in the conspiratorial nature of the stories.

Thomas Pynchon? The Gravity's Rainbow or Crying of Lot 49 guy? That guy will mess with your head--so if you can get through *him* you can probably get through anything.

[Spoilsport Stonny]

I think he was referring to Gomer Pynchon who used to write Chilton's for late model Datsuns in the 80's. Shit's deep.

[cortezthekiller]

I wasn't thinking encyclopedic knowledge…mainly just refreshing my memory after spending time away from the characters. Like I said we'll see after DG…It may be that I'll take a break for something else then.

And I haven't read Gravity's Rainbow…but yes that Pynchon.

This post has been edited by cortezthekiller: 23 January 2014 - 12:20 AM

[Tarthenal Theloman Toblakai]

1st off, your wife is pro! Second, glad you have been sucked into the world of Malazan! I would read the rest of the books rather than go back, alot of questions get answered on the way and when you do a re-read of the series you will understand a greater depth of the books and be happier for it. You also need to read the counterparts to the main series of 10 by Ian Cameron Esslemont (who co-created Malazan with Steven Erikson) in my opinion. They can be read after the main books but add some extra depth to the world and tell some awesome stories in their own right!

[TheRetiredBridgeburner]

*chants* One of us, one of us, one of u- too soon?

[melonhead]

Happy another one has been sucked in! The more you read, the more you will get sucked into the world of the Malazan Empire. Many more great books ahead of you, I'll tell ya that!
Funnily enough, Gravitys Rainbow is next up on my must read list. It looks like a great story.

[Garak]

It's never too soon.

*chants* One of us, one of us, one of us!

[cortezthekiller]

Tarthenal Theloman Toblakai, on 23 January 2014 - 07:34 AM, said:

1st off, your wife is pro! Second, glad you have been sucked into the world of Malazan! I would read the rest of the books rather than go back, alot of questions get answered on the way and when you do a re-read of the series you will understand a greater depth of the books and be happier for it. You also need to read the counterparts to the main series of 10 by Ian Cameron Esslemont (who co-created Malazan with Steven Erikson) in my opinion. They can be read after the main books but add some extra depth to the world and tell some awesome stories in their own right!

My thought was to read them (incl. ICE books) in the order that they are listed in the threads here on the forum...I believe that is roughly publication order (?)

[Spoilsport Stonny]

cortezthekiller, on 23 January 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

Tarthenal Theloman Toblakai, on 23 January 2014 - 07:34 AM, said:

1st off, your wife is pro! Second, glad you have been sucked into the world of Malazan! I would read the rest of the books rather than go back, alot of questions get answered on the way and when you do a re-read of the series you will understand a greater depth of the books and be happier for it. You also need to read the counterparts to the main series of 10 by Ian Cameron Esslemont (who co-created Malazan with Steven Erikson) in my opinion. They can be read after the main books but add some extra depth to the world and tell some awesome stories in their own right!

My thought was to read them (incl. ICE books) in the order that they are listed in the threads here on the forum...I believe that is roughly publication order (?)

This is the most rewarding, in terms of storyline.

[Abyss]

cortezthekiller, on 23 January 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

Tarthenal Theloman Toblakai, on 23 January 2014 - 07:34 AM, said:

1st off, your wife is pro! Second, glad you have been sucked into the world of Malazan! I would read the rest of the books rather than go back, alot of questions get answered on the way and when you do a re-read of the series you will understand a greater depth of the books and be happier for it. You also need to read the counterparts to the main series of 10 by Ian Cameron Esslemont (who co-created Malazan with Steven Erikson) in my opinion. They can be read after the main books but add some extra depth to the world and tell some awesome stories in their own right!

My thought was to read them (incl. ICE books) in the order that they are listed in the threads here on the forum...I believe that is roughly publication order (?)

Yep. Ample threads on the subject but basically published order but w/ICE's NoK between MT and TB, and his RCG before TtH.

And welcome!
I tend to agree w pushing ahead and then doing the reread later. A lot of rereads happen because of time spans between publication, but you have 15 awesome books ahead of you!
Rereads are awesome, because each book adds a level to what came before.

[Gabriel Chase]

cortezthekiller, on 22 January 2014 - 04:29 PM, said:

I found the prose/style to be of high quality. Erikson seems to have chosen a less is more approach to descriptive text here. I can go either way on that, so long as it is executed well. I think it was done well here.

That is precisely one of the things I absolutely loved about the book, along with exciting descriptions of life in big cities like Darujhistan and Pale.

[-colten-]

i finished gotm last week, and i really really liked it. but for some reason i've kind of stalled in dg so far. only reading about 30 pages a day, where i finished gotm in a little over a week. i think the new cast to start a sequel kind of threw me off.

[Kanese S's]

cortezthekiller, on 22 January 2014 - 04:29 PM, said:

Finished GotM last night. I'm not real good about saying deep, interesting stuff about things I read, listen to, watch, etc. But probably the best thing I can say about the book is this:

When I began the book, my initial intention was to read it, and take a book off to read something totally different, before continuing onto DG. About halfway through the book, my wife bought me copies of DG and MoI. Still I planned to read something else.

Last night I finished GotM, reading the last 100 pages or so and I probably have as many questions about the climax as the rest of the book (I have no clue wtf Azath is, for instance), but loved it. Put the book down, and picked up Deadhouse Gates and started it.

Other things -

• I don't generally like stories with a huge cast of characters, especially when many, many POV characters are used. In the end, I came to see it as a strength of GotM
• I generally don't like big door stopper books, but still enjoyed GotM -- I am aware that GotM is the thinnest of the series though and that does lead to some trepidation - lol
• Oddly enough, I read Pynchon prior to this and I think it actually helped prepare me for the complexity of Erikson's story...there's also a parallel in the conspiratorial nature of the stories.
• I don't regularly read fantasy, but most of the one's I've read have had a Tolkiensy feel. I like/(love?) Tolkien, but really found the departure a breath of fresh air.
• Love how the Lord/Son of Darkness is really not much different on the Evil/Good scale than most any other character in the book
• Despite some reviews/comments I've seen to the contrary, I found the prose/style to be of high quality. Erikson seems to have chosen a less is more approach to descriptive text here. I can go either way on that, so long as it is executed well. I think it was done well here.

So, that's it for now. On to Deadhouse Gates...I have pondered possibly re-reading GotM prior to reading MoI, but who knows. What I planned for after GotM, ain't exactly what happened...

Similar to my initial observations. There will be more info about the Azath, though often sparse, at least at the time. Erikson tends to leave it up to the reader to put things together.

I think Erikson and Esslemont were tired of the whole Light/Dark equating to Good/Evil dichotomy, so they decided to make it a bit more complicated and ambiguous.