Aegon the Unruly...

[Commonmind]

Or Aegon the Unworthy... After our little fire-side thumb-wrestling match the other day I was wondering if you might have any recommendations as well. I'm asking this here because so far what I've read of Martin I've enjoyed quite a bit, but I do not normally read one book at a time and as I've finished some of the books on my list over these last few days I'm itching to start up another alongside ASoIaF. Anyone else is welcome to give recommendations as well, and the only reason I called you out was because I liked your mentality; reminds me a bit of myself.

I would like to stay within the Fantasy genre and with a larger epic series as these types of books are keeping my interest at the moment.

Series I've read so far.

Weis and Hickman - All of the Dragonlance novels, including sidestories. Death Gate and most of Weis's solo work.
David Drake - Lord of the Isles
Robert Jordan - The Wheel of Time
All of Tolkien's work.
Terry Goodkind - The Sword of Truth
Terry Brooks - Most of the Shannara books
Everything Salvatore, including the Cleric Quintet and other FR books not authored by Salvatore.
Quite a few of the Eberron books, the Lost Mark being one of my favorites.
Most of McCaffrey's work (not her son)
Martin (of course) - though I just started I'm about half-way through and having a blast.
M. Moorcock - the Elric Saga
Friedman - the Coldfire books
And doubtless others I'm forgetting...

So, anything not the above... lol

 

[Koopa]

Hobb, Bakker, JV Jones

lesser degree, Cecilia DartThornton, Judy Fischer, Maggie Furrey

I have to make a serious objection against the threadname though, His name is not worthy

 

[Wiggum]

I'm a huge proponent of Robin Hobb, first set is The Farseer Trilogy.

Katherine Kerr's Novels of Deverry and the Westlands are worth a look.

I enjoyed Jennifer Roberson's Chronicles of the Cheysuli.

 

[Commonmind]

Hobb it is...

 

[Aegon the Unworthy]

I am completely the wrong person to ask...

I cant get into reading most SciFi anymore, I feel Ive outgrown most of what I would be tempted to read...

Weiss and Hickman, Salvatore, Brooks, Goodkind, Donaldson, Eddings, Le Guin, Moorcock.....I cant pick these books up anymore, theyre just not sophisticated enough....

Currently on my desk to be read is Roots of Strategy Book IV: by Jablonsky (This one covers military air defense at maritime, so I think I can offer some insight to countering the dragons at sea...) and in my bathroom is Limited Conflict Under the Nuclear Umbrella: Indian and Pakistani Lessons from the Kargil Crisis by some guy named Tellis....so I guess thats what Im reading.....(and Boaz wonders why I enjoyed Shogun)

But Ive heard good things about Hobb and Bakker....

 

[Aegon the Unworthy]

Hobb, Bakker, JV Jones

lesser degree, Cecilia DartThornton, Judy Fischer, Maggie Furrey

I have to make a serious objection against the threadname though, His name is not worthy

And he can call me whatever he wants KiwiMouse...its just a nickname after all

 

[Koopa]

actually that part of the post had a double-meaning

 

[Aegon the Unworthy]

actually that part of the post had a double-meaning

I think I speak for everyone when I say, your cleverness, once again, amazes me...

 

[that old guy]

You might want to try a few of the Recluce books by L. E. Modesitt Jr. or perhaps even give King's Dark Tower series a shot. Though the first two books are much better than what follows, IMO.

I'm probably the only person on the planet who couldn't stand M. Scott Bakker, I guess. Yes, it was well-written, yes, you could tell he put a lot of thought into developing his fantasy world. The only problem is that I was not the slightest bit entertained. The books, at least as far as I got (which was midway through the second book), were just relentlessly depressing. Lots of over-described violence, lots of nasty sex, including rape type stuff. I guess I can sort of see why someone might like saying they've read him, but I just can't believe anyone actually enjoyed the act of reading him. And since I only read genre fiction to be entertained, he was one I gave up.

Oops. Sorry for that bit of a rant. Hell with it, I'll let it stand.

 

[Koopa]

I think I speak for everyone when I say, your cleverness, once again, amazes me...

I have no doubt

 

[Commonmind]

You might want to try a few of the Recluce books by L. E. Modesitt Jr. or perhaps even give King's Dark Tower series a shot. Though the first two books are much better than what follows, IMO.

I'm probably the only person on the planet who couldn't stand M. Scott Bakker, I guess. Yes, it was well-written, yes, you could tell he put a lot of thought into developing his fantasy world. The only problem is that I was not the slightest bit entertained. The books, at least as far as I got (which was midway through the second book), were just relentlessly depressing. Lots of over-described violence, lots of nasty sex, including rape type stuff. I guess I can sort of see why someone might like saying they've read him, but I just can't believe anyone actually enjoyed the act of reading him. And since I only read genre fiction to be entertained, he was one I gave up.

Oops. Sorry for that bit of a rant. Hell with it, I'll let it stand.

I've read King's Dark Tower series (save the latest book, still sitting on my shelf) and his Eyes of the Dragon. I guess I associate him so much with Horror Fiction that I forgot to include it. It was well-written and I enjoyed it, but he was writing with his usual flavor and for me it left a little to be desired in that respect.

 

[Funky Cthulu]

I've read King's Dark Tower series (save the latest book, still sitting on my shelf) and his Eyes of the Dragon. I guess I associate him so much with Horror Fiction that I forgot to include it. It was well-written and I enjoyed it, but he was writing with his usual flavor and for me it left a little to be desired in that respect.

I was really into the Dark Tower series up until the last 3 books. It was a massive disappointment - I would rather believe now that the last 3 just didn't exist, and I can then imagine my own ending. I also found Eyes of the Dragon incredibly juvenile. Maybe my disappointment is heightened by how high my expectations were, but I lost all patience when King started writing himself in as a character. A better author might have made it work, but I found it very pretentious and a pointless distraction to the plot.
/rant

 

[Boaz]

FC, sorry to rehash bad memories, but can you clarify on King breaking the fourth wall (where an author/artist inserts himself into the work)? It's been twenty years since I read Eyes of the Dragon and my memory is hazy, but are you saying King was the king, one of the princes, or the evil wizard? Thanks in advance.

 

[Culhwch]

I'm probably the only person on the planet who couldn't stand M. Scott Bakker, I guess.

You're not the only person. Though you got further than me, I ditched it after a hundred or so pages.

 

[Werthead]

R. ScottBakker's Prince of Nothing Trilogy and Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen series are, critically at least, the other two of the 'Big Three' epic fantasy series around at the moment. Both have their critics, but I felt both work very well and are highly interesting works, certainly far more sophisticated than Donaldson or (laughs) Goodkind. There is a streak of nihilism in Bakker which I think turns people off, but it is an intellectually stimulating and often wonderfully-written series, but granted one that deals with the darker side of human life.

Paul Kearney's excellent Monarchies of God series is also recommended.

 

[Funky Cthulu]

Dark Tower summary *spoilers*

FC, sorry to rehash bad memories, but can you clarify on King breaking the fourth wall (where an author/artist inserts himself into the work)? It's been twenty years since I read Eyes of the Dragon and my memory is hazy, but are you saying King was the king, one of the princes, or the evil wizard? Thanks in advance.

Hi Boaz,

It wasn't in Eyes, it was in his more recent Dark Tower series. And he didn't use a kind of substitute character for himself, he actually wrote HIMSELF in.
I'll explain. In the Dark Tower series, there are numerous worlds out there, closely parallelling each other. And they all depend on the fate of the central world, and each world feels the echoes of the others, but have taken different paths from major events. So he referenced some of his earlier works - f'r'instance, the world where his characters live is (set some hundreds of years later) where the 'Captain Trips' virus wiped out 99% of the population - the same world (or close) as the one in his novel 'The Stand'. So, of course, his motley band work out how to travel between the worlds, and must save them from the Crimson King by following this quest to reach the Tower (the axis of the universe, sort of), blah blah blah.

And in one of the worlds, the 'central' or 'most true' world, they encounter Stephen King. The writer. And they find a series of books called "The Dark Tower" series, which is about THEM, our world hopping heroes. So they're amazed and frightened, because it's all correct, just unfinished. They rush off to meet King, which an oracle has advised them to do, and find him on the verge of not finishing the series, because he's lost his inspiration. It's clear his characters exist independently of the writer, but King has been chosen to document their travels by some divine power, and just thinks he invented the whole shebang.

So King is pretty freaked out when his characters turn up (they discover they don't like him much either, which King (as the real life author...see how confusing this gets??) seemed to think he deserved brownie points for - "Hey! I made myself complex and flawed! This isn't just some self congratulatory Mary-Sue ego trip!") and they have an akward chat about the importance of continuing to document their journey and sell it as fiction. Because King and his writing is integral to the success of good over evil.
Then the Crimson King tries to knock King off by having a drunk guy run over him with a panel van (sound familiar?) and he almost dies, Roland and co save his life whilst erasing any memory of their interaction from King's mind. So, King (the character) just knows he has to finish the novels but is blind to the bigger supernatural implications.

I don't know of any other writer who has done this, but there's probably someone out there, or several someones who have done this. I'm sure there are readers out there who loved the concept, and felt King did it well. I felt it was a gamble that failed.
So, the first 3 - 4 books were highly enjoyable, for me. The others (in fact, most of them published after King's accident) feel rushed and weak.

 

[Koopa]

The books of bakker are the crusades with fanasty.
i rather like the plot twist at the end of book 3
also i like about the fact that anasurimbor is shown as the godlike hero, who to the people is not just some hero who defeats the baddies (aka Belgarion) he is godlike to them.

I can see why people turn away from he dark side (look i made a star wars reference), but the crusades where a lot like that.

 

[Commonmind]

I was really into the Dark Tower series up until the last 3 books. It was a massive disappointment - I would rather believe now that the last 3 just didn't exist, and I can then imagine my own ending. I also found Eyes of the Dragon incredibly juvenile. Maybe my disappointment is heightened by how high my expectations were, but I lost all patience when King started writing himself in as a character. A better author might have made it work, but I found it very pretentious and a pointless distraction to the plot.
/rant

It's been too long since I read Eyes of the Dragon, but it was written as if he intended it for a younger audience, which obviously wasn't the case. From the first few pages you got this children's book theme (in the narrative as well as the writing style), and although it does get a bit darker, especially when they lock (Peter?) in the tower, it doesn't seem to get any more... mature. As for the Dark Tower, I completely agree, and like I said, I thought it left a little to be desired and part of that came from King writing in his normal convention; which is to say that he sometimes seems to pull plot randomly from a hat on occasion, throwing in odd twists and turns that are beyond nonsensical for a particular book. I like King, so I don't want to make this seem like a cudgeling, this is purely my opinion of this and some of his other more eccentric works.

 

[Wiggum]

Wolves of the Calla was decent, I actually thought Song of Susanna was pretty f'ing brilliant, The Dark Tower made me want to rip my eyeballs out.

AN ERASER?!?

You've got to be kidding me.

 

[Boaz]

Thanks for the clarification FC.

All crusades should include some f'NASTY!