NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.prophets-inc.com/his_works/ I dont know if any of you have read these books, the series is the greatest epic fantasy I've ever read, for me it even out plays J.R.R. Tokien and the Lord of the Rings.

His plots get awfully repetitive as time goes by.

http://www.prophets-inc.com/his_works/ I dont know if any of you have read these books, the series is the greatest epic fantasy I've ever read, for me it even out plays J.R.R. Tokien and the Lord of the Rings.

No one beats Tolkien. :mad:

His plots get awfully repetitive as time goes by.

No they don't, they're based on the same underlying event but every book is different.

I haven't read any of Goodkind's books, so I really can't say. It's been my experience, though, that after three or so books dealing with the same world or set of characters, a certain something goes out of the writing. King's Dark Tower series was probably two volumes too long. The Narnia books seem to have avoided that because the settings and characters changed. And, nothing personal, but I find cries of "The best author in the world!" amusing. Reminds me of the Emperor in Amadeus calling Salieri's opera "The best opera yet written!"

He's ok, but not great.

No one beats Tolkien. :mad:

I like Tolkien but he is old fantasy, it is not fit for fantasy readers of today. The movies didn't do it justice though, the book is much better than they pertrayed it. I still like Terry Goodkind better.

I dont know about Terry, but George Martin´s A Song of Ice and Fire books are amazing, and some do compare him with Tolkien.

He's ok, but not great.


Agreed, now Joe R Lansdale on the other hand, is fantastic.

No one beats Tolkien. :mad:

Except Dan Brown. :)

No one beats Tolkien. :mad:

Everyone who writes something that doesn't read like sand beats Tolkien.

judging by the covers, i don't like them :p

If anyone is looking for a new author, try brandon sanderson.

http://www.brandonsanderson.com

he has two books out right now: Elantris, and Mistborn. Mistborn is the first of a trilogy that is still in the works.


oh yea, and for people who don't like paying for things, he's currently writing a book called Warbreaker.

and as he writes it, he is releasing each chapter for free on his forums.

granted, it's still in a rough draft form, but the great thing is that after reading it, you can post your comments in the forums, and he'll read them. (making him possibly the most accessible author in the world)

I wouldn't piss on Goodkind's work if it was on fire.

Try Sheri S Tepper.

Sheri Tepper's excellent!

http://www.prophets-inc.com/his_works/ I dont know if any of you have read these books, the series is the greatest epic fantasy I've ever read, for me it even out plays J.R.R. Tokien and the Lord of the Rings.

I wouldn't piss on Goodkind's work if it was on fire.

Try Sheri S Tepper.

Everyone who writes something that doesn't read like sand beats Tolkien.

:eek: Philistine! :p

Sheri Tepper's excellent!

Yay! Someone else familiar with Tepper. :)

"A Gate to Women's Country", "Singer from the Sea" and "Raising the Stones" should be required reading.

('Stones' is my fave.)

In my personal opinion, the best author in the world is Piers Anthony. He is simply hillarious.

Goodkind's writing is alright, but nothing spectacular. I got bored after the first four books.

In my personal opinion, the best author in the world is Piers Anthony. He is simply hillarious.

I'm kind of the other way on this - I like Anthony best when he isn't being hilarious... like his 'Mode' books.

For seriously funny, you need to check out the guy that Anthony steals all his material from...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Pratchett

Doesn't look to be my genre. Give me Vollman or Palahniuk or Delillo any day.

As Grave said, Pratchett is probably the best comedy author around.

In terms of fantasy, I read a good series by Michael Scott Rohan called 'The Winter of the Worlds' or similar.

No one beats Tolkien. :mad:
Everyone does! Reading Tolkien is a torture!

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

Man.

Y'all are a bunch of fanboys.

Grow up and read some real literature.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

Man.

Y'all are a bunch of fanboys.

Grow up and read some real literature.What qualifies as real literature? Being difficult to understand? carrying several meanings, the casual reader does not detect? Being taught in school?

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

Man.

Y'all are a bunch of fanboys.

Grow up and read some real literature.

Grow up? Sometimes one looks for something out of literature, sometimes one looks for something else. I can enjoy reading Shakespeare, I can enjoy reading Asimov, I can enjoy reading Pratchett. It depends what I'm looking for at that particular time.

Have you read Tepper? (Since that is the author I suggested...)

If not - how can you judge what is 'real' literature... when you haven't read it?

I'm kind of the other way on this - I like Anthony best when he isn't being hilarious... like his 'Mode' books.

For seriously funny, you need to check out the guy that Anthony steals all his material from...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Pratchett

YESSS Terry Pratchett is the best author in the world. He snipes Terry Goodkinds face in:sniper:

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

Man.

Y'all are a bunch of fanboys.

Grow up and read some real literature.

meh...he's okay. Nothing to orgasm over, however.

and please, be so kind to define "real" literature...seeing as critics and authors can hardly do so (especially with the current blur between "high" and "low" cultures, and considering those constructs only arose with Poe and are not stagnant), I think you'd have trouble.

meh...he's okay. Nothing to orgasm over, however.

and please, be so kind to define "real" literature...seeing as critics and authors can hardly do so (especially with the current blur between "high" and "low" cultures, and considering those constructs only arose with Poe and are not stagnant), I think you'd have trouble.

The classic example for me, would be Gilbert and Sullivan - considered 'low' art in their time, and a satirical ploy for the cynical affections of the plebescite - now considered something of a highbrow repast for the middle and upper class...?

Terry Goodkind: Bleh. The writer is obviously into the 'take' side of S&M, and I get so fucking tired of the deus ex machina. Oh, Richard is in trouble? Don't worry. He'll pull some sort of random miracle out of his ass and save the day. Don't mind the fact that he's done the same damn thing in the last five books.

Pratchet wasn't impressive. Tedious would be a better word.

I've never understood how people can subject themselves to this drivel when there is so much beautiful fantasy out there.

Try 'A Song of Ice and Fire' by George RR Martin. It'll blow your fucking mind. I seriously don't have the words to sum up how well-written, immersive, and enthralling this story is. The first book is 'A Game of Thrones'. Buy it. Love it.

David Gemmel's 'The Rigante' - Great series, about a 'Keltoi' tribe and their struggle against a Roman-like empire. Gritty and good.

Naomi Novik's 'Temeraire'. A fun little alternate history of the Napoleonic wars, with aerial combat! ON DRAGONS!

The classic example for me, would be Gilbert and Sullivan - considered 'low' art in their time, and a satirical ploy for the cynical affections of the plebescite - now considered something of a highbrow repast for the middle and upper class...?

Compared to broadway musicals/other shows, yes. Compared to real opera, no.

Compared to broadway musicals/other shows, yes. Compared to real opera, no.

I'm just talking to perceptions - the sorts of responses I would get when I attended a Gilbert and Sullivan evening were the sort of looks usually reserved for those choosing to spend an evening at a gallery, or a wine bar.

(Not that there is anything wrong with spending an evening at a gallery, I've done that too...)

The classic example for me, would be Gilbert and Sullivan - considered 'low' art in their time, and a satirical ploy for the cynical affections of the plebescite - now considered something of a highbrow repast for the middle and upper class...?

heck, even Shakespeare wasn't particularly "high class"...Ever look at the Globe Theater? The entire floor was standing room for lower class people.

The Waltz? Yeah...preachers spoke out against the new dance craze at one point.

Movies, once a pleasure for the wealthy, are now a common event for all.

Melville and Hawthorne? Yeah...guess what? No one read them. Moby-Dick completely ruined Melvilles career...no one read him untill the Melville/American Renaissance revival in the 20's.

It happens all the time. Actually, one of the few things I truly love about modernism and moreso about post-modernism is the argument that these "high" and "low" cultures don't exist, and the work that has been done to break down the barrier. You don't need a guide to appreciate a painting or book...you just need to look at it for yourself and see what you can get from it.

I'm just talking to perceptions - the sorts of responses I would get when I attended a Gilbert and Sullivan evening were the sort of looks usually reserved for those choosing to spend an evening at a gallery, or a wine bar.

(Not that there is anything wrong with spending an evening at a gallery, I've done that too...)

Yes, agreed. It's always been a higher form of light entertainment.

Compared to broadway musicals/other shows, yes. Compared to real opera, no.

So now, in one thread, we have "real opera" and "real literature," and no precise definition of either.

Speaking as someone who's a fan of both musicals and operas, I'm curious if anyone can quantify for me what makes, say, "Sweeney Todd" more "lowbrow" than "La Nozze di Figaro."

(I'm also curious, accordingly, as to precisely how Terry Pratchett is more "lowbrow" than Jonathan Swift, or how Tolkien is more "lowbrow" than Tennyson.) ;)

http://www.jacquesmoitoret.com/assets/images/1015_james_joyce.jpg

You all lose.

Michael Moorcock. The name says it all.

Everyone who writes something that doesn't read like sand beats Tolkien.
You must be illiterate, I love Tolkien's writing style.

So now, in one thread, we have "real opera" and "real literature," and no precise definition of either.

Speaking as someone who's a fan of both musicals and operas, I'm curious if anyone can quantify for me what makes, say, "Sweeney Todd" more "lowbrow" than "La Nozze di Figaro."

(I'm also curious, accordingly, as to precisely how Terry Pratchett is more "lowbrow" than Jonathan Swift, or how Tolkien is more "lowbrow" than Tennyson.) ;)

Generally the difference is the musical complexity and influence, and what type of audience it is aimed at. My statement of 'real opera' was more comparing G&S, which I'd describe as 'operetta', to something by Wagner. Having said that, the definitions are blurry at best, its like the old classical vs popular music debate.

You must be illiterate, I love Tolkien's writing style.

It isn't my favorite, but I don't see whats so horrible about it.

You must be illiterate, I love Tolkien's writing style.
has nothing to do with being literate or not it has something to do with having taste (<FLAME DELETED>).

Generally the difference is the musical complexity and influence, and what type of audience it is aimed at. My statement of 'real opera' was more comparing G&S, which I'd describe as 'operetta', to something by Wagner. Having said that, the definitions are blurry at best, its like the old classical vs popular music debate.

Indeed. :) My question wasn't even aimed specifically at you - I just find the idea of categorizing things without knowing exactly why or how you're categorizing them very silly, especially when there's an implied or explicit value judgment. As a devoted fan of Broadway musicals and opera (and "genre" fiction and "classic literature"), I enjoy poking the snobs in all four camps into explaining to me why their preferred genre is "better," as it often leads to replies as bizarre and nonsensical as "Anything with dragons in it can't be real literature" or "If all the songs are in English, it's less...artistic." :p

Indeed. :) My question wasn't even aimed specifically at you - I just find the idea of categorizing things without knowing exactly why or how you're categorizing them very silly, especially when there's an implied or explicit value judgment. As a devoted fan of Broadway musicals and opera (and "genre" fiction and "classic literature"), I enjoy poking the snobs in all four camps into explaining to me why their preferred genre is "better," as it often leads to replies as bizarre and nonsensical as "Anything with dragons in it can't be real literature" or "If all the songs are in English, it's less...artistic." :p

:) Yes, opinions implied as fact are always annoying. People look for different things in art/literature. In music itself I look for complexity and emotional response, thus why I often find popular songs uninteresting because the music has been relegated to a state of repeated chord sequences behind the words which never give the same level of emotional response to me. But, I could never assert that popular songs are somehow 'bad' for that reason, they simply appeal to different people.

If anyone is looking for a new author, try brandon sanderson.

http://www.brandonsanderson.com

he has two books out right now: Elantris, and Mistborn. Mistborn is the first of a trilogy that is still in the works.


oh yea, and for people who don't like paying for things, he's currently writing a book called Warbreaker.

and as he writes it, he is releasing each chapter for free on his forums.

granted, it's still in a rough draft form, but the great thing is that after reading it, you can post your comments in the forums, and he'll read them. (making him possibly the most accessible author in the world)

Thanks for the link, it sounds quite interesting. And reading some of the descriptions in the books, the books sound quite original, which is great in the fantasy genre (which is usualy a copy of Tolkien).

Btw, I liked the cover of Mistborn a lot. It really stands out from most of the others from the genre, that usually look like crap.

And I´ve talked about George´s Martin A Song of Ice and Fire series, but Ill talk about it again (and add to Pantera description): Get it. Its awesome. Original writing style, a lot of well built characters, very interesting story and four worthy books released, from a total of seven (it really doesnt drag). Get the first book, Game of Thrones, and you will probabily get hooked in some of the first chapters.

Get the first book, Game of Thrones, and you will probabily get hooked in some of the first chapters.

Anyone who isn't totally enthralled after reading a Tyrion chapter I condemn as a fascist motherfucker.

Everyone does! Reading Tolkien is a torture!

Only for the illiterate.

I dont know about Terry, but George Martin´s A Song of Ice and Fire books are amazing, and some do compare him with Tolkien.
I wouldn't compare him to Tolkien, but I read the first couple of books and they weren't bad. They did start to drag a bit though, and he was intent on killing the good guys off as fast as possible and turning the bad guys into caricatures.
At least that's what it felt like to me.

I wouldn't compare him to Tolkien, but I read the first couple of books and they weren't bad. They did start to drag a bit though, and he was intent on killing the good guys off as fast as possible and turning the bad guys into caricatures.
At least that's what it felt like to me.
My boyfriend feels somewhat the same way. I like those books a lot, though they're not my favourite, but he says "they're like a damn soap opera."

i read Wizards First Rule, and was rolling my eyes at the cliches within twenty pages - the main character (Richard Cypher) is a Conveniently Orphaned Boy In A Small Insignificant Village *surprise* he's the Saviour Of The World But Doesn't Know It Yet - he meets a Random Woman In Trouble in the first chapter who *surprise* becomes his Love Interest - a few chapters later he goes to see his Wise Old Friend who *surprise* is the Most Powerful Wizard In The Land (and who only has one curse word: "bats!") - the Obligatory Great Villain Who Everyone Else Is Taken In By has a stupid giveaway name (Darken Rahl)... i was amazed there weren't any Orcs
formulaic and simplistic

My boyfriend feels somewhat the same way. I like those books a lot, though they're not my favourite, but he says "they're like a damn soap opera."

Lol. Yes, you can feel that Martin´s history as a screenwriter has some direct influences on his writing style. But I love it. I have the same feeling I had when watching the first season of Lost, specially the way present and past experiences blend so well in each chapter.

About killing the good guys and making the bad guys charicatures, that is why he is so good. You see, THERE ARE NO BAD OR GOOD GUYS. Its fantasy, yes, but the people are real. THere is not just black or white, and everyone is a shade of gray. The way you see them depends on the opinions of the characters, not an universal truth like in LOTR or Harry Potter.

For me, that is what makes his books stand out. And considering he does kills main characters, that just makes everything beter, because you dont know just what the hell is going to hapen next. I´m sick of shity happy happy endings.

All I know is that on the cover of my copy of "All Quiet on the Western Front" it proclaims it to be "The Greatest War Novel of All Time". I'll take it's word for it.

(Because not doing so would mean I'd have to read other war novels. Ugh.)

The classic example for me, would be Gilbert and Sullivan - considered 'low' art in their time, and a satirical ploy for the cynical affections of the plebescite - now considered something of a highbrow repast for the middle and upper class...?

Just as Shakespeare was still considered popular - even vulgar - entertainment even into the nineteenth century.

Anyway... Goodkind? I've got two or three of his books, but I can't remember whether I ever got round to reading any. If I did, obviously they didn't leave a lasting impression. (Then again, if I bought several I must have read and liked at least one...)

One of the best authors ever has to be Joseph Conrad. A true genius with the English language... and it wasn't even his native language! So far I've read Lord Jim, Heart of Darkness, Youth and The End of the Tether.

Except Dan Brown. :)

*thwap*

Tolkein is a master, but he has limitations; namely, an inability to extricate christian morality from his narrative.

However, Terry Pratchett may well be the most technically consumate and effective authors of the modern era.

Tolkien is one of my personal favourites. He is a true master of the written speech. Ursula Le Guin also ranks quite highly amongst my preferences, as does Ayn Rand. I love her writing style. Nietzsche, Nozick and Huxley also endear me to their style. Hans-Hermann Hoppe would be the person I'd consider the best author in the world, so far as I am concerned.

Everyone does! Reading Tolkien is a torture!

Only for the illiterate.
Exactly.

surrely not as good as Captain WE Johns

Anyone who isn't totally enthralled after reading a Tyrion chapter I condemn as a fascist motherfucker.

Well, I can see that is going to keep me awake nights with worry... :rolleyes:

Tolkien is one of my personal favourites. He is a true master of the written speech. Ursula Le Guin also ranks quite highly amongst my preferences, as does Ayn Rand...

And then it all went wrong. I was nodding along in agreement until you did that...

Anyone who isn't totally enthralled after reading a Tyrion chapter I condemn as a fascist motherfucker.

http://media.lawrence.com/img/photos/2005/04/07/inigomontoya_t180.jpg
"That word you keep saying -- I do not think it means what you think it means."

And then it all went wrong. I was nodding along in agreement until you did that...
Not a fan of Rand I gather?

If we take 'author' in its widest sense then I'd go for Woody Allen. If I'm not being an annoying smart-arse then Bill Bryson has a strong claim.

I've read his stuff, and he can write well, but his blatant politics get really fucking annoying after a while. I much prefer Robert Jordan and Jacquiline Carey.

Also, what is with all the people named "Terry" in fantasy?

Terry Goodkind
Terry Pratchet
Terry Brooks.

Anyone else ever think that was kinda funny/odd?

Dr. Seuss

Dr. Seuss

You win the thread.

Gods, I hate Goodkind. I read his first two books.

The first one (Wizard's First Rule) wasn't bad - had some odd bits, but generally a solid entry. It even ended well.

The second one (Stone of Tears) was basically exactly the same book over again with different characters and settings, but the plot progression didn't change at all.

the series is the greatest epic fantasy I've ever read

And the worst I've ever read, easily.

Usually I stop reading before it reaches Goodkind heights.

The second one (Stone of Tears) was basically exactly the same book over again with different characters and settings, but the plot progression didn't change at all.

You got him right there. And about three or four books before I did.

Tolkien is one of my personal favourites. He is a true master of the written speech. Ursula Le Guin also ranks quite highly amongst my preferences, as does Ayn Rand. I love her writing style. Nietzsche, Nozick and Huxley also endear me to their style. Hans-Hermann Hoppe would be the person I'd consider the best author in the world, so far as I am concerned.
Le Guin is wonderful. She was a guest lecturer in a course I took at University - great source of information about writing generally.

Le Guin is wonderful. She was a guest lecturer in a course I took at University - great source of information about writing generally.
She is. Extremely original writer, and one that I came across completely by accident (she isn't too well known in Europe). I think she's on par with Tolkien, on some levels. I like how she weaves in rather complex, thought-provoking themes into her works. Which have you read?

http://www.prophets-inc.com/his_works/ I dont know if any of you have read these books, the series is the greatest epic fantasy I've ever read, for me it even out plays J.R.R. Tokien and the Lord of the Rings.

Ian Fleming FTW!

Sorry, but here is the greatest author in the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Roth.

I don't know about best, but in so far as Fantasy goes I have found Margaret Weis to be a pretty good author, particularly her Dragonlance material.

I'm going to pick a blind, dead guy that didn't even write down his own material: Homer. Failing that, Virgil.

Just as Shakespeare was still considered popular - even vulgar - entertainment even into the nineteenth century.
Hell, even to this day, they are fairly vulgar. As The Nazz put it to me, finding a sexual reference in Shakespeare is about as difficult as falling down when drunk.

http://www.prophets-inc.com/his_works/ I dont know if any of you have read these books, the series is the greatest epic fantasy I've ever read, for me it even out plays J.R.R. Tokien and the Lord of the Rings.

I didn't like the Lord of the Rings too much. I don't really like fantasy that much in general, actually. I definately prefer the vivid imagery of Ray Bradbury.