Favorite Fantasy Series (High or Low)?

[jcp]

To list some that were either not mentioned or not said too often upthread:

Lois McMaster Bujold's Chalion books.

The Farseer and Tawny Man books by Hobb.

The Sarantine Mosaic, by Guy Gavriel Kay.

The Weirdstone of Brisingamen, by Alan Garner.

The Old Kingdom Trilogy, by Garth Nix.

And they didn't end as well as they began, but the Kingdoms of Thorn and Bone books by Greg Keyes.

 

[Brainster]

Here's a webcomic fantasy I stumbled across this evening called Gaia. There's some occasional clunky writing but the sequential art is excellent and the story is entertaining so far.

 

[tim]

I just finished John Lenehan's "Shadowmagic" series. I've been in hospital following major surgery and I needed a fantasy series that was funny in places and had a story to tell. I emailed Lenehan and told him I compared his trilogy with "Glory Road" by Heinlein and I got a very nice email back thanking me and wishing me speedy recovery.

 

[Brainster]

Wizard's First Rule (the first book in the Sword of Truth series) is without question the worst book I have ever read. Just jaw-droppingly awful.

You have certainly led a fortunate literary life, then. I'm reading it now, and while there are a few awkward spots--the whole bit with "silent thunder" for example--overall it's an entertaining if derivative work. It is certainly nowhere near as bad as the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, for example.

 

[Damien Evans]

You have certainly led a fortunate literary life, then. I'm reading it now, and while there are a few awkward spots--the whole bit with "silent thunder" for example--overall it's an entertaining if derivative work. It is certainly nowhere near as bad as the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, for example.

LOL, good one!




You were joking, right?

 

[Brainster]

LOL, good one!

You were joking, right?

No. To be honest I have to wonder how many books one could have read to rate Wizard's First Rule as the worst. My over-under is in single digits, unless one really started with a solid great works list.

Again, while I'm enjoying the book (about 300 pages in), it's not high on my personal lists, and like I said there are some bits that clunked. But the idea that it's the worst book ever? Anybody who says that has never read Tom Clancy's Patriot Games among others. Have you ever read the Thomas Covenant books?

 

[Damien Evans]

No. To be honest I have to wonder how many books one could have read to rate Wizard's First Rule as the worst. My over-under is in single digits, unless one really started with a solid great works list.

Again, while I'm enjoying the book (about 300 pages in), it's not high on my personal lists, and like I said there are some bits that clunked. But the idea that it's the worst book ever? Anybody who says that has never read Tom Clancy's Patriot Games among others. Have you ever read the Thomas Covenant books?

Yes. I found that, while I did not like the main character, they were well written. Would I re-read them? Probably not, but that doesn't mean the actual writing isn't good.

 

[Skepticemea]

No. To be honest I have to wonder how many books one could have read to rate Wizard's First Rule as the worst. My over-under is in single digits, unless one really started with a solid great works list.

Again, while I'm enjoying the book (about 300 pages in), it's not high on my personal lists, and like I said there are some bits that clunked. But the idea that it's the worst book ever? Anybody who says that has never read Tom Clancy's Patriot Games among others. Have you ever read the Thomas Covenant books?

I've read Patriot Games. I like the bit where The Prince of Wales shoots the terrorists in the face and that.

It's a terrible book, but I enjoyed it. WFR is a terrible book that I didn't enjoy, but ended up reading the other books up to the point the torture dildoes made an appearance.

 

[KarlG]

I recently read Brandon Sandersons Mistborn series and really enjoyed it.

 

[tim]

I recently read John Lenehan's "Shadowmagic" trilogy and found it just what I nneded, bearing in mind I was lying in bed following major cancer surgery.
It's funny and amusing in a sort of "Glory Road" sort of way, but exciting as well. Quite a page turner for me at the time (three weeks ago).
A big plus too to Lenehan - in the credits was his email, so I dropped him a line to say thanks - and got a charming and considerate email in reply.
http://www.shadowmagic.co.uk/

 

[TragicMonkey]

Yes. I found that, while I did not like the main character, they were well written. Would I re-read them? Probably not, but that doesn't mean the actual writing isn't good.

The word "incarnadine" is something even a writer of exceptional quality should use only once in a lifetime. Shakespeare, perhaps, and Thackeray might get away with using it twice. It appears multiple times in the Covenant books. Often enough to be inappropriately hilarious. Often enough to lead one to suspect the author had a "word a day" calendar and never recovered. Even if all the other flaws in these books were fixed, the overuse of the same handful of obscure vocabulary words pretty much wrecks the whole thing. No two people in the cosmos would independently think the words "incarnadine" for "red", and "carious" for "bad teeth", or "condign" for "appropriate". It's been years since I read those books and I still recall those particular words being overused. That's how much they stick out.

 

[Damien Evans]

The word "incarnadine" is something even a writer of exceptional quality should use only once in a lifetime. Shakespeare, perhaps, and Thackeray might get away with using it twice. It appears multiple times in the Covenant books. Often enough to be inappropriately hilarious. Often enough to lead one to suspect the author had a "word a day" calendar and never recovered. Even if all the other flaws in these books were fixed, the overuse of the same handful of obscure vocabulary words pretty much wrecks the whole thing. No two people in the cosmos would independently think the words "incarnadine" for "red", and "carious" for "bad teeth", or "condign" for "appropriate". It's been years since I read those books and I still recall those particular words being overused. That's how much they stick out.

He did eat the dictionary.
http://www.gdiproductions.net/srdamd/

 

[Wudang]

I think I posted this before https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups=#!topic/alt.humor.best-of-usenet/NhXIgaPM-2A

You know the main problem with Thomas Covenant? He pants too much.
Now, probably my memory is exaggerating; it's been a few years
(decades?). But mention Thomas Covenant and I instantly think of a
character who rarely will "say" anything, but instead prefers to "pant" it.
The vocabulary use was a trip, too...

"Some coffee, Mr. Covenant?"
"No!" he panted, glaring. The gelid liquid was anthraciously black,
atramentous, nigrescent as his carious and macerated soul. "No," he
groaned. "Do you hear? I will not!" Shaking, he fumbled for his empty
mug, clawing at it with numb hands like blocks of rotted wood. Finally,
gasping, he closed his fingers on the malefic vessel, upending it, then
ramming it downward to the table again... violently stopping the
irrefragable, ineluctable maw with intransigent formica. The sudden
whipcrack sound threw a refulgent oriflamme of pain across his sight,
and he closed his eyes with a febrile shudder. "No," he whispered. No
more. No more.
"All righty then, I'll be right back with your check!"

...or something like that. (I didn't manage to get "suppurating" and
"chancreous" in there, or, more's the pity, "roynish".)

 

[jcp]

The word that always stuck in my head from Donaldson was "argent." The swords are argent! The light is argent! The key to my Nissan is argent!

I guess I never pain enough attention to know if his ring was also argent, which would have been rather funny.

 

[luchog]

The word "incarnadine" is something even a writer of exceptional quality should use only once in a lifetime. Shakespeare, perhaps, and Thackeray might get away with using it twice. It appears multiple times in the Covenant books.

Donaldson has a Masters in English, and an inordinate fondness for archaisms. That doesn't bother me, as I have an inordinate fondness for archaisms. Having read a considerable amount of both Donaldson and Goodkind, I cannot imagine a world where Goodkind at his best could ever be considered better than Donaldson at his worst. While Donaldson's characters may be reprehensible at times, or exhibit epic levels of angst; at least they're reasonably realistic, and character dialog matches the characters' origins and personalities. He's a good storyteller, and can create a consistent world that operates on consistent principles; instead of pulling ridiculous plot devices out of his various orificies as Goodkind is so fond of doing.

And as grim and brutal and angsty and impenetrable as Donaldson's prose can get, at least it is blissfully free of demonic chickens.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I've not read Goodkind, I wasn't comparing them. I was just taking an inchoate frangible stab at the ethervercous disfusions of the cachylmadical Donaldson and his purfluvient prose. Which is, damn it, contagious.

 

[catsmate]

You have certainly led a fortunate literary life, then. I'm reading it now, and while there are a few awkward spots--the whole bit with "silent thunder" for example--overall it's an entertaining if derivative work. It is certainly nowhere near as bad as the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, for example.

Mmmm, my take is that Donaldson is fairly consistently bad while Goodkind has gone from mediocre to awful quite rapidly.

 

[Damien Evans]

The word that always stuck in my head from Donaldson was "argent." The swords are argent! The light is argent! The key to my Nissan is argent!

I guess I never pain enough attention to know if his ring was also argent, which would have been rather funny.

His ring was White Gold. It's a rather major plot point.

 

[TragicMonkey]

His ring was White Gold. It's a rather major plot point.

It's typical of the works that the most magical object is something tacky. Sauron wouldn't be caught dead with a white gold ring, even if it were twice as powerful as his own and came with a tray of eclaires.

 

[Skepticemea]

It's typical of the works that the most magical object is something tacky. Sauron wouldn't be caught dead with a white gold ring, even if it were twice as powerful as his own and came with a tray of eclaires.

"Behold the 9ct Russian Wedding Band of W00ting!"