Fantasy authors you (and I) should NEVER read

[clockworkzombie]

Fictionwise say that any US citizen is not affected in anyway by regional restrictions and that Canadian citizens are denied access from 5 to 10 percent of titles.

[sabredog]

I would suspect Australasian purchasers are even further restricted.

My pet hate is the Thomas Covenant series.....Not my cup of tea at all.

[cearbhallain]

Originally Posted by sabredog

I would suspect Australasian purchasers are even further restricted.

My pet hate is the Thomas Covenant series.....Not my cup of tea at all.

If I had read those as an adult, instead of the teenager I was when they came out, I would not have bothered to finish the first one. As it was, I kept a slip of paper in each volume on which I would write down the unfamiliar words. Once the book was finished I looked them all up. It was a novelty at the time to be reading something with unfamiliar vocabulary. Now I realize that it was just one more way to pad out a novel. Maybe someone here knows: Was Donaldson paid by the word?

Let me add one moment of "fairness". At the time, I hadn't really explored the idea of the anti-hero, and Thomas Covenant is an interesting example as he stumbles through an unfamiliar world wielding power he has neither earned nor understands. The theme is consistent, he lives in an insular reality and he's not immediately changed by being dropped into a different world. He's not a "big picture" guy and at 15 that is very easy to relate to.

[sherman]

BTW, to those people wanting to by the Gor books from fictionwise - they are all Multiformat ebooks, and therefore there should be no geographic restrictions on those titles.

I checked, and there is no mention of geographic restrictions listed in any of the Gor book (or any other multiformat book) descriptions.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by cearbhallain

If I had read those as an adult, instead of the teenager I was when they came out, I would not have bothered to finish the first one. As it was, I kept a slip of paper in each volume on which I would write down the unfamiliar words. Once the book was finished I looked them all up. It was a novelty at the time to be reading something with unfamiliar vocabulary. Now I realize that it was just one more way to pad out a novel. Maybe someone here knows: Was Donaldson paid by the word?

Did you count how many he got wrong?

Someone else I know had a dim view of Donaldson's use of the practice: if you want to use unfamiliar words, at least use them correctly. Gene Wolfe is an example of someone who does. Donaldson, alas, has a less stellar record.

But no, he didn't get paid by the word. Magazines pay that way. Book publishers do not.

Let me add one moment of "fairness". At the time, I hadn't really explored the idea of the anti-hero, and Thomas Covenant is an interesting example as he stumbles through an unfamiliar world wielding power he has neither earned nor understands. The theme is consistent, he lives in an insular reality and he's not immediately changed by being dropped into a different world. He's not a "big picture" guy and at 15 that is very easy to relate to.

I read the first three Thomas Covenant books with reasonable pleasure, largely because they weren't Yet Another Tolkien Clone. I read the second set with a sort of grim determination to finish them. I've felt no desire to reread them, nor read for the first time anything else Donaldson wrote.
______
Dennis

[cearbhallain]

Did you count how many he got wrong? :P

By the time I looked them up I no longer knew the context in which he'd used them, so no. Now that I'm grown up and pedantic...

But no, he didn't get paid by the word. Magazines pay that way. Book publishers do not.

I know, I was being a snot.

I read the first three Thomas Covenant books with reasonable pleasure, largely because they weren't Yet Another Tolkien Clone. I read the second set with a sort of grim determination to finish them. I've felt no desire to reread them, nor read for the first time anything else Donaldson wrote.

I don't remember if i even tried to read the first book in the second series. I may have because that's about the time my dad discovered the series and I do remember him telling me how good it was. I think I would rather re-read Atlas Shrugged then pick up a Donaldson.

[basschick]

i couldn't agree more!

Originally Posted by Xanthe

Addressing the topic of the thread:

Anything Laurell K. Hamilton has written after "Obsidian Butterfly" in her Anita Blake series.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Xanthe

Addressing the topic of the thread:

Anything Laurell K. Hamilton has written after "Obsidian Butterfly" in her Anita Blake series.

I'll third that.

And, a few years ago, her (then?) husband kept track of her like a well-heeled p*mp. He was aggressively obnoxious in an obsequious sort of way - we've all met this kind of person. (Think about the beginning "The Shining," by Stephen King, for this kind of personality.)

I find her books horrible and with a single-minded stench attached to them. I've seen better character development in Yoko Ono's five-minute film, "One," which is nothing more than a slow-motion sequence of a match being struck.


Don

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Ea

This is exactly how I feel about LOTR. I did know and like the story beforehand though, but this reading is quite different from the ones I've done before.

Did you read it in a translation before?

Though, if the story appears to somehow resist the reader, it's probably better put it off for later - or not read at all - better to concentrate on something else. I have been waiting for some years for Thomas Mann to get more approachable - I'm still not there, but I have the feeling it will be worth it in time.

The question is whether the story is resisting the reader or the other way around.

I've spent time on occasions looking for a way to approach a story: a mental hook upon which to hang my interest and make it into something I wanted to read.

Edit: that idea of standing back and letting the work speak for itself is much the same way I try to approach art - especially modern art. Oftentimes I find it pays off not to rush.

I see similarities between literature and art, in the sense that you normally can't try to apply objective standards.

Criticism of a book is an example. Before you can attempt to say whether the book is good, you have to understand what kind of book it is. The question becomes "What kind of book was the author trying to write, and how well did she succeed in the attempt?" A lot of criticism fails because it misses the mark in determining what kind of book it is, so any judgments about success of failure are perforce invalid.

I like modern art, but won't always pretend to know what it "means". The question is rather what emotional effect it had on me. And sometimes the effect is less emotional than cerebral, like an installation I went to some time ago where the artist was creatively dividing the space in which the installation was presented, exploring the manner in which our perception of the space was altered. This sort of thing can become visceral, like the exhibit where the space you could enter had no] right angles.
______
Dennis

[RolandD]

Originally Posted by cearbhallain

I don't remember if i even tried to read the first book in the second series. I may have because that's about the time my dad discovered the series and I do remember him telling me how good it was. I think I would rather re-read Atlas Shrugged then pick up a Donaldson.

The first three Covenant books were readable, it was in the second three that I grew to hate Thomas. I put down White Gold Wielder with 100 pages to go. I just didn't care what happened. That was over 20 years ago and I haven't regretted it.

[basschick]

i guess it proves that everyone has different tastes

i love the graveyard book.

Originally Posted by dragonbone

OK, everyone is going to hate me, but...... the last 3 books of The Dark Tower series. Also that horrible Graveyard Book by Neil Gaiman.... does that count?

[bbusybookworm]

Originally Posted by basschick

i guess it proves that everyone has different tastes

i love the graveyard book.

While I've not yet read the Graveyard book (Too much on the read pile) I've found that I personally find his writing a mixed bag. I actually came to read him with Good Omens and his Sandman series, though did enjoy American Gods somewhat, though not the sequel as much.

[AndrewH]

Originally Posted by jaxx6166

I also lost my mind somewhere through Brent Weeks' "Way of Shadows"

I loved Brent Weeks' whole Night Angel trilogy. The Way of Shadows was well-written, fast-paced (after the first few chapters), plot lines were well-controlled, and character development was excellent.

As to the topic, I couldn't stand the first Thomas Covenant book, and didn't try the rest. As stated elsewhere in this thread, the enormously painful choice of words was... enormously painful. The whole, "This is all a dream, so I'm going to behave like an ass" was completely unbelievable.

A fantasy writer I haven't yet seen named is China Miéville. Oh, I liked Perdido Street Station and might even recommend it, but avoid the rest of his books. If you thought Stephen Donaldson was bad about using obscure words from the thesaurus, wait till you read Perdido Street Station, The City & The City, or Kraken. His thesaurus-abusing prose gets worse and worse with each book, as do his British colloquialisms. I suspect his next novel, Embassytown, will be completely indecipherable.

If you can get past the language, Perdido Street Station was a mostly fun steampunk fantasy... though the spider should have been cut from the story. However, The City & The City was just stupid. Michael Moorcock said it was based on string theory physics, but he obviously didn't read it. If he had,

Spoiler:

he'd have noticed that breaching in Besźel and Ul Qoma was entirely a social issue, not a matter of crossing dimensions or some other nonsense.

Kraken was even worse; I don't even know where to begin. Interesting concept, poor execution. I will say this though, the guy has imagination.

[EatingPie]

Originally Posted by bbusybookworm

While I've not yet read the Graveyard book (Too much on the read pile) I've found that I personally find his writing a mixed bag. I actually came to read him with Good Omens and his Sandman series, though did enjoy American Gods somewhat, though not the sequel as much.

When I was a kid, I belonged to a mail order Science Fiction book club. The best title award went to a book called Where Time Winds Blow by Robert Holdstock. Worse book I ever read -- and I was in the like "likes everything" stage of life! Absolute garbage, said I'd never read another book by that guy again.

Fast Forward to college. Mythago Wood was so good, I wrote a paper on it (got an A!), gave it to several people, and was introduced to the Hero With a Thousand Faces concept. Absolutely one of my top-10 fantasy novels!

It took two years for me to realize that Holdstock was the guy who wrote that horrible book from my youth. And how did I come to this realization? The sequel to Mythago Wood, a book that tried to incorporate Joseph Campbell's Masks of God concept and failed miserably at that... as well as story and character! A level of awful that I had only experienced once before in life... hey... wait. a. second... The same guy!

Writers can be hit and miss. Incredibly hit and miss. I still am surprised when someone I like produces a bad book (or someone I dislike does the opposite), but that's the way of things.

-Pie

[Anke Wehner]

Originally Posted by sherman

BTW, to those people wanting to by the Gor books from fictionwise - they are all Multiformat ebooks, and therefore there should be no geographic restrictions on those titles.

I checked, and there is no mention of geographic restrictions listed in any of the Gor book (or any other multiformat book) descriptions.

When I poked around their help/FAQ section, I came across them mentioning explicitly that no Multiformat books have region restrictions.


Regarding hit-and-miss authors... I gave some Gaiman books a try after reading Good Omens. I liked American Gods OK, but most of what else I tried (including Sandman) had too much of a "this is DEEP and MYSTICAL" vibe that put me off.

I really like most Dragaera books by Steven Brust, but never got more than a couple of pages into Cowboy Feng's Space Bar and Grille.

Regaring Stephen King's last Dark Tower books, I don't mind the self-insertion so much (I read Neverending Story as a kid. Fiction and reality interacting is a topic that interests me), but that they were anticlimatic and badly crafted, what with previously powerful antagonists more or less evaporating, and such.


I got some kind of collected Elric novel at some point, and wouldn't recommend it. Too dark and bleak and violent.

Jasper Ffordes Thursday Next novels I'd love to like - the setting is wonderful - but the I can't read a name like "Jack Schitt" without cringing at the stupidity, and pages With. Writing. Like, This. were terribly grating, too.

I suspect I'd find a lot of older fantasy and science fiction grating due to even more ingrained sexism than is normal for modern works. For example Joan DeVinge's Snow Queen had as a major plot thread built around the fact that there was exactly one woman in the police force, and nearly all of her colleagues resented that, which nowadays sounds weird, and as a plot point is frustrating.