Fantasy authors you (and I) should NEVER read

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by wayrad

Oh, you mean like David Weber...

No. Weber is prone to the infodump, but he's better about where he puts them.

He doesn't normally break a mood of growing excitement by an infodump in the middle of the dramatic buildup.
______
Dennis

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Crusader

The Prince of Nothing Trilogy by R. Scott Bakker. I read all 3 books in a 2 week period since my local library had all three (a rare occurrence!). I struggled through the first two, determined to finish the trilogy and the third was just a total disappointment. The ending didn't bring any conclusion to the trilogy... most likely to leave things open for another trilogy to follow. I will definitely not attempt any further additions to the series.

I've heard some positive things about these and almost bought them in their paper editions when I was in the U.S.

So they really are that bad, then?

What makes them worth not reading, in your opinion.


Thanks,
Don

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Williams was a competant hack, adept at turning out copy the editor wanted. If I wanted to be snarky, I'd say "I read SF. Williams wrote SciFi." What he did wasn't at all to my taste, but it fit a number of other's palettes.


Pratt is also the author of what may be the best one volume history of the US Civil War.


Which? I like the Incompleat Enchanter series.

I'm also fond of _Land of Unreason_. The protagonist is stationed in Scotland during WWII, comes home from a night of drinking deciding he doesn't need more alcohol, and drinks the milk left out in the saucer for the brownies and replaces it with the scotch he didn't want to drink. He goes to bed, and awakens to discover he is being kidnapped to faery land by a bunch of drunken elves...


Yep. Editor George Scithers took S&S seriously, and people like De Camp were contributors.

George was an officer in the US Army Signal Corps for much of the period Amra was published, and managed the logistical issues of publishing Amra from places like Korea. (He retired as a Lt. Colonel in the '70s.) He also described amusing encounters with Army security, as they attempted to understand his fan activities, and things like his membership in "The Cult of the Nameless", a long running Amateur Press Association I was also involved in back when.


______
Dennis

It sounds like you've had some really great times with some of the greats.

I really enjoyed the arcane knowledge that appeared in Amra, especially from De Camp. I realize now that these professional writers contributed to Amra because of their love for sword-and-sorcery and for the (as I see it) growing Fantasy trend during that period of time.

There were a lot of sword-and-sorcery novels being published, and I read most of them.

I would love to see a return to form of this sub-genre, but perhaps I remember it so fondly due to being the right age (a teenager) when I discovered it. "Devoured" is a better word.

It was, as you surmise, The Incompleat Enchanter and other collaborations between Pratt and De Camp that just didn't ring right with me. I should probably go and pick up an ebook now and see how it strikes me.

By the way, Dennis, thanks for the interesting personal information you've provided in your recent posts to this Thread - I find your remembrances fascinating.

Have you thought of writing them down? This is a book I would gladly pay to read.


Don

[wayrad]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

No. Weber is prone to the infodump, but he's better about where he puts them.

He doesn't normally break a mood of growing excitement by an infodump in the middle of the dramatic buildup.
______
Dennis

These days, I feel like it's more that he seldom interrupts the infodump with a mood of growing excitement. I mustn't hijack the fantasy thread with SF though ...but don't get me going on Bahzell of the Bloody Brogue...

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by astra

Avoid (piles of turd):


American Gods by Neil Gaiman

American Gods was the my first Gaiman book, and I kind of liked it.

Reasons for "piles of turd"?

[montsnmags]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

...
By the way, Dennis, thanks for the interesting personal information you've provided in your recent posts to this Thread - I find your remembrances fascinating.

Have you thought of writing them down? This is a book I would gladly pay to read.

That's what I said, but I'm not sure he is willing to accept just how fascinating his snippets, anecdotes, knowledge and experienced insights are, even just as posts here at MR. I'd certainly buy it ebooklength. I'd then buy the signed pbooklength version too. (G'day, Dennis )

In the meantime...it's always interesting, Dennis. Thanks.

Cheers,
Marc

[nomesque]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I read Eddings' Belgariad with pleasure. I plowed grimly through the Mallorean. Folks back then were talking about how much they loved the Belgariad, and wished it would go on forever. By the time I finished the Mallorean, I felt like it had. The authorial strings were too evident in the Mallorean, as Eddings very carefully maneuvered his characters through every place on his world. The whole thing wound up feeling like paint-by-numbers fantasy. On the plus side, Eddings had likable characters and a flair for dialog. On the minus side, he had one cast of characters and one story to tell, and subsequent series were the same series with the names changed and the serial numbers filed off.

Uh huh. I loved the Belgariad as a teen. Then I read the Mallorean and thought, "Huh? Same supporting characters? What the hell?"

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Anthony is one of the best in the field at taking an idea and running with it, and there are earlier works I recommend. Unfortunately, he's one of the worst at knowing when to stop, and can run series into, and under the ground. The sterling example is the Xanth series. The first book, _A Spell for Chameleon_, was charming. The next couple were at least readable. Beyond that, the books became excuses for bad puns, long past originality or nything particular to say. AAnthony has discovered he can make a lot of money turning out Xanth retreads. I admire his motive: he's using the money to buy virgin land around him in Florida and keep it virgin and undeveloped, but I can't read the resulting work.

I quite enjoy the Xanth series for what it is - utter silly fluff. And I have a certain respect for an author who'll happily admit to writing fluff/pulp in order to bring in the cash. Hey, I write boring-as-batshit manuals, which are inflicted on relative innocents, to bring in a paycheck. I'd rather write Xanth novels *grin*

Originally Posted by CathalMagus

L.E. Modesitt, Jr.

(snip)

Does anyone know what his fantasy is like? I shudder to think, and I ain't gonna give him a third chance. (Thankfully I'd only borrowed the books of his I read, so I could return them at no cost to me and with an opportunity to chastise the lender - who had seemingly given them to me as a kind of prank!)

I quite enjoyed his Spellsong Cycle books, and hence bought a couple of his other books - in the Saga of Recluce series. ERK. Somehow he managed to keep enough action in the Spellsong books to keep me involved, even with the moral dilemmas and whinings about men... but the Recluce ones are best used as insomnia cures - good smack round the head with one will knock anyone out

[PhishStyx]

Originally Posted by nomesque

Uh huh. I loved the Belgariad as a teen. Then I read the Mallorean and thought, "Huh? Same supporting characters? What the hell?"

The phrase "as a teen" is the operative one there. They're fine for younger readers, reading them again as an adult would be painful to my brain.

[nomesque]

Originally Posted by PhishStyx

The phrase "as a teen" is the operative one there. They're fine for younger readers, reading them again as an adult would be painful to my brain.

I did carefully add that phrase That said, I often have 'brain-dead' times where I want very, very unchallenging reading, and the Belgariad would probably still suit me in those periods!

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Anthony is one of the best in the field at taking an idea and running with it, and there are earlier works I recommend. Unfortunately, he's one of the worst at knowing when to stop, and can run series into, and under the ground. The sterling example is the Xanth series. The first book, _A Spell for Chameleon_, was charming. The next couple were at least readable. Beyond that, the books became excuses for bad puns, long past originality or nything particular to say. AAnthony has discovered he can make a lot of money turning out Xanth retreads. I admire his motive: he's using the money to buy virgin land around him in Florida and keep it virgin and undeveloped, but I can't read the resulting work.
______
Dennis

Now this one I have to agree with. The Xanth novels became tiresome very quickly. I kept trying, but finally gave up.

Terry Pratchett's Discworld series also ended for me the same way. Loved the first three and then Meh..

[Crusader]

@Don: I wouldn't call them bad per se. They tend to be long-winded and the first two are basically used solely for telling/building the history of the characters. In the third the action finally starts to happen only to leave you completely frustrated and dissapointed at the unsatisfying open-ended conclusion.

It's been a while so I don't remember all the specifics, just that I was severely dissapointed.

[Slite]

Originally Posted by Bev

John Norman's Gor Series is for me the worst written fantasy series of all time. I'd be hard pressed to decide which I hated more, the content or the prose style.

Wasn't there some horrible, horrible, bad, bad movie starring Sean Connery as well?

I seem to remeber Sean in a pair of red "diaper" looking thingys?

[BlackVoid]

Originally Posted by Crusader

The Prince of Nothing Trilogy by R. Scott Bakker. I read all 3 books in a 2 week period since my local library had all three (a rare occurrence!). I struggled through the first two, determined to finish the trilogy and the third was just a total disappointment. The ending didn't bring any conclusion to the trilogy... most likely to leave things open for another trilogy to follow. I will definitely not attempt any further additions to the series.

I fully agree on this. I liked the first book, the 2nd one was OK, the 3rd a huge disappointment. In the 2nd book I thought in the 3rd things will speed up and the ending will be rewarding. But NO. The 3rd book degenerates into excessive whining by one of the protagonists and not much more. Even the subplots do not move anywhere. Too bad, because the characters and the world was really interesting.

[BlackVoid]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Oh, I forgot, I was supposed to add an author that I shouldn't read. Okay. Here it is. Robin Hobbs. I tried folks. I really tried. WASN'T GONNA HAPPEN. Depressing plots, long-drawn-out prose. Ugh. Just ugh.

Now with Robin Hobb even the world and the characters are bores, not just the story.

[astra]

Originally Posted by jgaiser

American Gods was the my first Gaiman book, and I kind of liked it.

Reasons for "piles of turd"?

I didn't like Gaiman's style at all.
The protagonist is a fool and you get tired of him 1/4 into the book as well as from others. There is no humour, the story and characters are flat and not interesting.
I just had to force myself through the story because:
a) so many people recommended it
b) to be qualified to judge the book
c) it was a long flight

I sort of liked Neverwhere that I read recently, but again it was just an OK book.