George R.R. Martin/Robert Jordan [Brandon Sanderson]/Terry Goodkind/Steven Erikson

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Geralt

The producers of the TV series have been told the ending by Martin. So it's some consolation that we will have the knots untied in some form of the other. If for any reason the book series ends up being unfinished it will at least have some conclusion in the TV series.

Perhaps Sanderson (being a young man) can finish it when Martin dies.

[Geralt]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Perhaps Sanderson (being a young man) can finish it when Martin dies.

Sanderson's style of writing may have been appropriate for him to finish Jordan's work, but it is completely wrong to finish Martin's.
Sanderson is on the opposite spectrum. He doesn't write gritty and he doesn't write sex, all things abound in Martin's work. Abercrombie would be 100x better choice if he could hold off on the humor that is characteristic of his work.
Nonetheless, in case Martin dies, I think the series will remain unfinished. IIRC he is against anyone finishing his works.

[mgbino]

Originally Posted by Geralt

Sanderson's style of writing may have been appropriate for him to finish Jordan's work, but it is completely wrong to finish Martin's.
Sanderson is on the opposite spectrum. He doesn't write gritty and he doesn't write sex, all things abound in Martin's work. Abercrombie would be 100x better choice if he could hold off on the humor that is characteristic of his work.
Nonetheless, in case Martin dies, I think the series will remain unfinished. IIRC he is against anyone finishing his works.

I would think that Daniel Abraham or/and Ty Franck would be the ones to finish ASOIAF if anything happened to GRRM. They surely both know how it ends, are close friends and business partners with GRRM, and Abraham already has experience writing the characters (he's the author of the graphic novel adaptation).

[Geralt]

Daniel Abraham is an excellent choice considering his own writing style as well. But would GRRM be ok with anyone doing it? Im not so sure.

[GlennD]

Originally Posted by Geralt

Sanderson's style of writing may have been appropriate for him to finish Jordan's work, but it is completely wrong to finish Martin's.
Sanderson is on the opposite spectrum. He doesn't write gritty and he doesn't write sex, all things abound in Martin's work. Abercrombie would be 100x better choice if he could hold off on the humor that is characteristic of his work.
Nonetheless, in case Martin dies, I think the series will remain unfinished. IIRC he is against anyone finishing his works.

Robert Jordan wrote the ending of the WoT early on in the series, and had it stored in a safe deposit box. His wife was under orders to destroy it should something happen to him. This was well before he became ill, of course. Then he became ill and had a change of heart.

(Hard to source this, I remember reading it back in the day when there were signing reports posted during Jordan's book tours.

But...
http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=70
Question
If you were unable to complete the series who would finish it up?
Robert Jordan
(Very strongly) No one. If something happens to me I have a friend who has agreed to go over to my house and format my computer three times. I am the only person going to finish this series or no one is. (I guess this blows all you Piers Anthony people out of the water!!))

I don't doubt there are discussion threads out there about who could finish the series if Martin doesn't. (But Piers Anthony? Really?)

[taosaur]

All three prominent series in the OP (which is to say, not Goodkind) have landed briefly on my TBR and then fallen off. Malazan is still a "maybe," though the military focus and the ebook pricing are both major turn-offs. Jordan's books I've instinctively avoided all my life, but based on Sanderson's praise, I started the first WoT on audio and found it intolerable within the first 30 minutes. The characters were just too absurd and operatic, and the world as unimaginative as all the covers and blurbs I'd left on the shelves at used-book stores over the years had suggested.

When it comes to epic fantasy, it seems like I'm firmly in the New School: love me some Sanderson, Rothfuss and Lynch, and even more boilerplate stuff like Butcher or Modesitt, but when I try to dive into the old canon, it ranges from tedious to laughable. I slogged through The Belgariad a few years back, and the best I can say for it is it was sometimes so-bad-it's-good, like an Ed Wood movie: ideas so superficially considered that they verge on incoherence, values that would be offensive if they weren't presented with such imbecilic earnestness, and totally unaware of its own absurdity.

[dickloraine]

So you haven't read Martin and Erikson (which are totally different to Jordan) and heard 30 minutes of WoT, where Rand is on the way to the village. How can you say anything about the world building, if you only have seen some woods?

[taosaur]

I'm not saying I have an informed opinion of Jordan's work, just that I went into it with every intention of plowing through sooner or later to the Sanderson volumes, and it immediately turned me off. Also, a decent chunk of that 30 minutes was a melodramatic wizard-battle prologue with lots of cringe-worthy, stilted dialogue.

[mgbino]

Originally Posted by taosaur

I'm not saying I have an informed opinion of Jordan's work, just that I went into it with every intention of plowing through sooner or later to the Sanderson volumes, and it immediately turned me off. Also, a decent chunk of that 30 minutes was a melodramatic wizard-battle prologue with lots of cringe-worthy, stilted dialogue.

I'd say to give it a chance past the prologue. While the Wheel of Time, as a whole, has a lot flaws, there are parts of it that are incredible. Once Jordan got in his groove (probably books 2-6), he wrote some damn fine fantasy. Not saying you'll like it, but there is a reason why it's one of the most popular fantasy works ever.

[DrNefario]

I've read at least one book by all four authors. As the world's leading authority in what I like , here are my conclusions.

In the "yes" camp:

George R R Martin - Enormously influential, and pretty great, but unfinished. I think waiting for the end is a foolish exercise, given that it's already out there influencing everything, and the first three books, especially, will always be excellent even if the next book is "and then he woke up, and it was all a dream."

Robert Jordan - I admit that it's a pretty long time since I actually read one of these (I haven't read the last three books, by Sanderson), and a colleague, who is re-reading the whole series at the moment, says they start out kind of YA-ish, but it's a decent enough series that starts strongly, and (I hear) finishes strongly, with a bit of a sag in the middle.

In the "no" camp:

Terry Goodkind - A (different) colleague of mine who shares similar tastes discovered this series a few years ago while on holiday, and came back raving about how great it was. I borrowed the first book from him, found it a bit obvious and uninspired, and didn't read any more.

Steven Erikson - A lot of people really love this series, but it just didn't work for me. I had a lot of problems with the first book. I did eventually finish it, after taking a break to read something else, but have no real inclination to read the second one. I didn't much like any of the characters, or understand their motivations. Several elements seemed to be retconned after the fact as the book went on. There was an arms-race of ever more powerful beings that just became a bit laughable. There are whole plot strands that just end up nowhere. If all you have are explosions, then explosions become surprisingly uninteresting.

[Dr. Drib]

I'm continuing to read everyone's posts and the various takes on these 5 major players.

Thank you.

[DiapDealer]

I don't give authors whole books to "find their groove" (or even to get their groove back.The promise of "it gets better" has never been enough for me to slog through more than a hundred pages or so if nothing is grabbing my interest in that time.

I'm not expecting anyone to keep me continually riveted or anything (although some have), but whole books that leave you feeling, "meh?" Nahhh. Not for me. The really, really long series' have always made me feel like I'm being asked to pay some sort of weird boredom dues to be entitled to enjoy its "good parts."

The promise of the best ending in the world wouldn't entice me to keep slogging through whole books just to get to it.

Of the authors/series you specifically mentioned, I've only read GRRM. I loved the first three books of ASoIaF and hated the fourth. So I quit. I'll be perfectly content to let the TV show tell me how it ends (and it will do so long before George does). No risk of another 1000 page snoozefest by taking that route.

Fans of Malazan take great measures to warn potential new readers that they might find the first book "difficult." But they consistently rave about the rest. And it's complete.

The most diehard WoT fans will admit that there's a not-all-that-tiny swathe of books in the middle that will try your patience (but that Sanderson wraps it up well).

As for Goodkind: has anybody actually read all of the SoT series and loved it? It seems even fans of the first books lost heart before the end.

So if you're bound and determined to read one of them, I say read Malazan. It's finished; and aside from the (potentially) rocky first installment, I've heard no fan of the series mention any significant drop in quality/enjoyment in the later books. None of the others can say the same.

I, of course, would be stalking the elusive standalone fantasy. The pain is shorter-lived when my expectations aren't met.

[mgbino]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I don't give authors whole books to "find their groove" (or even to get their groove back.The promise of "it gets better" has never been enough for me to slog through more than a hundred pages or so if nothing is grabbing my interest in that time.

I'm not expecting anyone to keep me continually riveted or anything (although some have), but whole books that leave you feeling, "meh?" Nahhh. Not for me. The really, really long series' have always made me feel like I'm being asked to pay some sort of weird boredom dues to be entitled to enjoy its "good parts."

The promise of the best ending in the world wouldn't entice me to keep slogging through whole books just to get to it.

Of the authors/series you specifically mentioned, I've only read GRRM. I loved the first three books of ASoIaF and hated the fourth. So I quit. I'll be perfectly content to let the TV show tell me how it ends (and it will do so long before George does). No risk of another 1000 page snoozefest by taking that route.

Fans of Malazan take great measures to warn potential new readers that they might find the first book "difficult." But they consistently rave about the rest. And it's complete.

The most diehard WoT fans will admit that there's a not-all-that-tiny swathe of books in the middle that will try your patience (but that Sanderson wraps it up well).

As for Goodkind: has anybody actually read all of the SoT series and loved it? It seems even fans of the first books lost heart before the end.

So if you're bound and determined to read one of them, I say read Malazan. It's finished; and aside from the (potentially) rocky first installment, I've heard no fan of the series mention any significant drop in quality/enjoyment in the later books. None of the others can say the same.

I, of course, would be stalking the elusive standalone fantasy. The pain is shorter-lived when my expectations aren't met.

Quick note: Malazan isn't completely finished. Erikson is writing a trilogy set before the main 16 book sequence (the first book is already out), and Esslemont is still working on more (time period unknown) books.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by mgbino

Quick note: Malazan isn't completely finished. Erikson is writing a trilogy set before the main 16 book sequence (the first book is already out), and Esslemont is still working on more (time period unknown) books.

Well yes, there's always going to be more room for more books in that world, but "The Crippled God" is still being billed as the final installment of the Malazan Book of the Fallen series, no? That 10 book series is complete unto itself. I'm sure Esslemont's contributions are wonderful (perhaps even integral), but they're not listed as part of the Book of the Fallen series... which is billed as "finished." At least for the time being.

[mgbino]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Well yes, there's always going to be more room for more books in that world, but "The Crippled God" is still being billed as the final installment of the Malazan Book of the Fallen series, no? That 10 book series is complete unto itself. I'm sure Esslemont's contributions are wonderful (perhaps even integral), but they're not listed as part of the Book of the Fallen series... which is billed as "finished." At least for the time being.

No, the main arcs that started in the first couple Erikson books concluded with Assail by Esslemont. Erkison's 10 books don't stand alone from Esslemont's in any way. Major plot events wrap and are introduced in Esslemont's and Erikson's books. Labeling Erikson's books as some type of core series was a very odd move on the part of TOR.