Trudi Canavan - What do you think of her books?

[Panic_Fire]

Hi guys,

i want to know your opinion of her books,
so far i read 5 of her books,

The black magician trilogy, consisting of the following books:

- The Magician's Guild
- The novice
- The Highlord

The Age of the Five, this is also a trilogy consisting of the books:

- Priestess of the White
- Last of the Wilds
- Voice of the gods (i haven't read this book yet, because i can't get it in my country yet)

i am really curious as to what you think of her books, so please let me know.

Greets Panic_Fire

 

[dwndrgn]

I only read the first series, but I definitely enjoyed them. I'm actually going to begin reading Priestess of the White tomorrow.

 

[Scriven]

I haven't read them all myself, but I've had a glance in the bookshop and heard mixed things about them - that they're fairly entertaining, but derivative and cliched. Another run-of-the-mill YA fantasy series, I think.

I'm curious too, though - might check them out in the library some time, but doubt I'll rush to buy them.

 

[Kettricken]

I've read the trilogy, and thought is was okay. Not great, but an enjoyable read. The first book is i.m.o. by far the worst of the tree, so if you're planning to read it, and are dissappointed after reading the first book, try part two, it's much better.

 

[Mouse]

I've only read the Black Magician trilogy. I liked them, but not enough to want to read the Age of the Five trilogy.

 

[nixie]

I've read the Black Magician Trilogy and Priestess of the White, they where OK but nothing special

 

[Brys]

I've only read the first book of the Black Magician trilogy and it struck me as being a poor rip-off of Harry Potter in which Canavan attempted to use every fantasy cliche in existence. It wasn't spectacularly bad, but at its best it was mediocre. It was one of the worst books I've read this year.

 

[GOLLUM]

I got through the first 100 pages or so of that same book and couldn't see much point in continuing...

A fairly rare thing for me to do actually.

 

[dwndrgn]

I've only read the first book of the Black Magician trilogy and it struck me as being a poor rip-off of Harry Potter in which Canavan attempted to use every fantasy cliche in existence. It wasn't spectacularly bad, but at its best it was mediocre. It was one of the worst books I've read this year.

I'm curious as to why you would consider the first book a rip off of Harry Potter. The only elements that are similar that I can recall is that she is young and ends up going to a magical school. The schools are vastly different, the magical techniques are more intricate and defined and her entrance was not only hotly contested but continued to be while she was there, she has a large group of friends and family that love her whereas Harry Potter was considered a hero by everyone before they even met him, and he had no loving family or friends outside of school. Basics like 'they both go to magic school' and 'she's a young magic user' don't say rip off to me.

Considering cliches, I'm curious to know what bits were considered cliched. I don't recall much of anything that was timeworn or overused, but I may have just not noticed.

Now, don't get me wrong, I consider the HP books to be better than the Black Magician Trilogy, but I wouldn't consider Canavan's series to be a rip off of Harry Potter, I just don't see the outright similarities that would show that it was created to be her version of HP.

So, I'm just asking for some specifics. I prefer all generalities to be clarified so that I don't have to get all grumpy. Indulge me?

 

[Brys]

Ok, admittedly it was a bit unfair to call it a rip-off of the Harry Potter books, it just seemed to me to be an unoriginal novel which had the same general plot as the Harry Potter books (teenage orphan goes to magic school idea).

As for some specific cliches, here are a few I can remember off the top of my head:
Orphan has special magical powers.
Magic is based on willpower.
The Thieves' guild is incredibly well organised, kind etc.
Untrained magicians are hunted down by the Magician's guild.

For me it isn't so much that there are cliches there which annoys me, but the way they're used makes the story very predictable.

 

[dwndrgn]

So you found the story predictable and that is why it was one of the worst you had read all year. See, isn't that much clearer and easier to say? Goodness, did I just channel my mom or something? Anyway, thank you for clearing it up.

Orphan has special magical powers.

Well, this one has more excuse than most. People without the direct influence/protection of parents can have all sorts of issues: don't know family history, don't know family friends, don't get the chance to be taught certain things they should be - basically, using an orphan as a protagonist gives you so much leeway and so many options, that it happens to be a great starting point. This one's used in 75% of books in all genres.

Magic is based on willpower.

There isn't a magic system that I've read yet that isn't based on willpower - if they weren't there would be no way of controlling it.

The Thieves' guild is incredibly well organised, kind etc.

I'll admit that is is a pervasive and useful cliche. It's also kind of fun. Though, yes it is in 7 out of 10 fantasies written these days, so a bit overused.

Untrained magicians are hunted down by the Magician's guild.

Yes, another widely used one. One I could do without (unlike the Thieves Guild, which I enjoy).

Maybe I should start a discussion thread on cliches.

 

[Rosemary]

The Black Magician Trilogy wasn't too bad. Very easy to read and I too thought it was rather predictable.

I only read the review and a couple of pages, the first and one in the centre of the book, to know that I wouldn't like The Priestess of the White very much.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

There isn't a magic system that I've read yet that isn't based on willpower - if they weren't there would be no way of controlling it.

Well here I have to side with Brys, because it is a bit of a genre cliche for magic to be based mainly on willpower, when historically speaking magic was very seldom a matter of personal willpower, and yet nobody imagined that magicians had unlimited or uncontrollable powers.

In fact, making it principally a matter of willpower makes it a whole lot easier than, for instance, spending days or weeks on the rituals and purifications necessary to enlist the support of higher powers, or waiting for the aspects to line up correctly, or ... well, any of the other things relating to magical practices by real people who believed in what they were doing.

Although the willpower thing is very convenient for fictional purposes, because it allows the action to be condensed and the pace to step up.

 

[dwndrgn]

Well here I have to side with Brys, because it is a bit of a genre cliche for magic to be based mainly on willpower, when historically speaking magic was very seldom a matter of personal willpower, and yet nobody imagined that magicians had unlimited or uncontrollable powers.

In fact, making it principally a matter of willpower makes it a whole lot easier than, for instance, spending days or weeks on the rituals and purifications necessary to enlist the support of higher powers, or waiting for the aspects to line up correctly, or ... well, any of the other things relating to magical practices by real people who believed in what they were doing.

Although the willpower thing is very convenient for fictional purposes, because it allows the action to be condensed and the pace to step up.

Ok, maybe I'm not understanding here - so Brys was saying that the magic system is too simplified and doesn't have a backing power (such as gods or elementals or something exterior of the magic-weilder) other than the individual's personal strength. I read it as he was saying that it was based on the person's will - which means, the person does whatever needed to create whatever they are looking for and then wills it to happen, which doesn't preclude rituals and higher powers and external energy sources. Sorry, I was a bit confused I guess I took his words too literally (a common failing of mine and I'm constantly chided for it too; you'd think I'd learn).

Yes, this is definitely a useful tool for novels - keeping the action on pace and not boring the reader with laundry lists of 'eyes of newt' and 'phase of the moon' kind of things.

 

[Panic_Fire]

So i see,

i agree on the cliche deal,
but i don't look at that too much.

when i read a book, all it has to do, is take my mind off other things.
if a book is capable of that, it's fun to read, and i have had that with all her stories so far. they aren't spectacularly good, or special, to me they are really fun to read.

i already tought that most people had mixed feelings about her books.

 

[-putawaythosepliers-]

i actually really enjoyed the black magician trilogy - not got onto the age of five yet, but i didnt think it was that predictable. without spoiling, dannyls storyline was a bit of a surprise, and sonea and akkarin, and the ending of the final book...? need i say more?
true, there were cliches, but what book nowadays doesnt? i think there's no escaping them. and perhaps these weren't amazing, ground-breaking books, but i enjoyed them.
anyhoo!

 

[Wishful]

How dark are these Black Magician books really? I've read the first few pages on Amazon.com and I liked Canavan's writing style - but I found the atmosphere to be quite dark. There was no hint of the happiness found in many other fantasy books ("oh no, not another Harry Potter comparison," I hear you think ). But it's not a good idea to judge a whole book on the basis of a few pages.

Truth is: like Panic Fire, I read books to set my mind off other things. And that doesn't really work if the book's depressing.

 

[DarkIntentions]

I've read The Trilogy and really enjoyed it but the first book was a bit of a let down, it only really gets going after the 200+ page. Also it was one of those books, for me, where you get to the middle of the book come across the name Sonea (The protagonist) and wonder who she was.

 

[Panic_Fire]

hmm as i remember, sonea is the lead character in the books, i don't really know what you mean.

 

[Anomander]

I prefer the more recent ones - age of the five. I found the two books I'v read to be quite entertaining. The first series I didn't like too much