Never ... ever ... ever read The Farseer Trilogy!

[cearbhallain]

Originally Posted by Iridal

Night Angel Trilogy highly recommended . You might want to consider Brent Weeks' second series as well. The first book was published recently: The Black Prism.

The Black Prism was perhaps the best book I read last year. I also read the Dragon Keeper books at the same time. While the Dragon Keeper story was engaging and fun, the Black Prism was a true gem - it's a story that misleads you at every turn. If you want some light entertainment with a bit of feminist social commentary, read Robin Hobb. If you want to risk breaking a jaw (because it fell to the floor) read the Black Prism. They're both so engaging that it won't take up that much of your life if you can't decide and read it all.

[DiapDealer]

The Soldier Son Trilogy was the only Hobbs I've read that I can say I absolutely did not like (I've not read her very latest stuff). There were many elements of those three books that were fascinating, but the main character invariably spoiled my enjoyment at every single turn.

To anyone who felt FitzChivalry had few redeeming qualities... the character of Navare—Why Are You So Fat?—Burvelle from those three books is the biggest, whiniest turd of a protagonist I've ever come across... in any genre.

But to end on a positive note: Hobbs' short story from Martin's Warriors Anthology was one of my favorites in the entire collection.

[Xoanon]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

To anyone who felt FitzChivalry had few redeeming qualities...

I thought he was a totally sympathetic character myself, given all the demands put upon him and the sacrifices he made for the good of his family. The more obnoxious elements of her female fanbase on the other hand, are completely without redeeming qualities.

She was originally planning to write more about FitzChivalry after the last book (there is a strong hint of this in the last couple of pages), but she received so much vitriolic hate mail about him not shacking up with The Fool that she gave up on the idea.

[DiapDealer]

I thought he was a totally sympathetic character myself, given all the demands put upon him and the sacrifices he made for the good of his family.

Oh, I agree. I loved Fitz, myself—the interaction between himself and the Fool were my favorite parts of the book(s), in fact. I was just trying to put things into perspective: if you didn't like Fitz... wait'll you get a load of Nevare Burvelle.

[GlennD]

Originally Posted by Xoanon

I thought he was a totally sympathetic character myself, given all the demands put upon him and the sacrifices he made for the good of his family. The more obnoxious elements of her female fanbase on the other hand, are completely without redeeming qualities.

She was originally planning to write more about FitzChivalry after the last book (there is a strong hint of this in the last couple of pages), but she received so much vitriolic hate mail about him not shacking up with The Fool that she gave up on the idea.

I rather liked Fitz as well, and the reasons for some of his more unappealing traits are part of the storyline and well explained. He's certainly a much more emotionally fulfilled by the end.

I'd never heard about the hatemail because of the Fool....but I think the Fool explains pretty well why being a 'couple' with Fitz would never work.

Spoiler:

Partly Fitz's preconceptions about love, partly the very profound physical and emotional differences between them. They ARE different species after all...and the Fool would live for many lifetimes long after Fitz is dead.

I'm content with Fitz's story being done....but I'd be fascinated to see the Fool's story continue.

[GlennD]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

if you didn't like Fitz... wait'll you get a load of Nevare Burvelle.

Amen! I've rarely 'met' a less sympathetic character. I delayed reading the Soldier Son series after near-hating the first book. I finally waded through it out of respect for Hobbs' writing....but I don't think I'll ever go back and read them again.

[TheLongshot]

Originally Posted by GlennD

Amen! I've rarely 'met' a less sympathetic character.

Worse than Thomas Covenant?

I also enjoyed the Farseer trilogy, tho I think the last book drags heavily. I know it was kinda a chore to get through that book. You can understand where Fitz comes from with a lot of his decisions, tho you wish he had made different ones at times.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by TheLongshot

Worse than Thomas Covenant?

Debatable. But in my opinion... definitely.
They're in the same class though.

[missimpossible]

Oh god, these books. I read the first one when I was about fifteen and was mildly entertained, found the second one a slog, and the third one was good... until the end. I don't know, they WERE good, and pretty well written, but they were also so angsty and it all started to seem a bit ridiculous after a while. I'm sort of tempted by the other trilogies out of sheer curiosity but I have a TBR list that goes into the hundreds so I'll avoid for now.

I did like the Fool though.

[GlennD]

Originally Posted by TheLongshot

Worse than Thomas Covenant?

I liked Covenant in the second trilogy. In the first chronicles, he's really carried along despite himself. Not to mention he's a big jerk and then some. In the second trilogy, his motivations are far more altruistic and he's far more likeable.

[GreenMonkey]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Oh, I agree. I loved Fitz, myself—the interaction between himself and the Fool were my favorite parts of the book(s), in fact. I was just trying to put things into perspective: if you didn't like Fitz... wait'll you get a load of Nevare Burvelle.

I enjoyed the Soldier Son trilogy, but unlike Fitz, who eventually gets his shit turned around, at least a little, I never felt like Nevarre did.

Fitz I think accepts his place and his role at points. He gets comfy with what he needs to do and at times excels despite his Skill disability or things stacked against him. Sure he screws up sometimes, but sometimes he succeeds.

I felt like Nevarre fought it all and never stopped fighting. I respect that - I'm a very stubborn individual - but man, at some point you have to stop and think things through a little, instead of just being stubborn.

[BlackVoid]

I agree, but I actually stopped midway through the first book, it was so dull, it hurt.
There is really nothing original in the book or the setting, unless a very annoying, whining, miserable loser protagonist counts as one.

I will not touch anything by Hobb again. Anything recommended by people who liked this is also highly suspicious.
Similar authors who are also highly regarded but equally dull:
C. J. Cherryh
Connie Willis

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by GreenMonkey

but unlike Fitz, who eventually gets his shit turned around, at least a little, I never felt like Nevarre did.

The hope that he would get his shit turned around was part of the reason I finished all three books of Soldier Son. Like I said, I enjoyed many things about the series (the world, the conflicting cultures), but Navare and his "Magic Obesity" just got tiresome. It wasn't his fault... we get that... all the characters around him should've "got it" as well." The fact that many parts read like a dietitian's planner didn't help.

Originally Posted by BlackVoid

Anything recommended by people who liked this is also highly suspicious.

That's a bit harsh.

[BlackVoid]

Just a bit

A good book has to pull me in, preferably from the start. But if it fails to do that halfway through, then I am out. The Farseer trilogy fails miserably.

[TheLongshot]

Originally Posted by GlennD

I liked Covenant in the second trilogy. In the first chronicles, he's really carried along despite himself. Not to mention he's a big jerk and then some. In the second trilogy, his motivations are far more altruistic and he's far more likeable.

I stopped reading in the first book of the second trilogy, because I finally had enough of Covenant.