Why is Erikson like Marmite? (please, non-fans too!)

[Rane Longfox]

You either love him or hate him. I've yet to find someone who is ambivilent about the Malazan series.
"Hate" is a bit of a strong word for it. Dislike is more like it...

The common theme seems to be the first book. People either love it, struggle through it, or just give up after the first few hundred pages.
Is Gardens of the Moon a badly written book? Or does it just take a certain type of reader to enjoy it? Is it just more intellectually challenging to understand what he's going on about? Its certainly not a light read


I understand that there are two camps on this, but what I still don't get is why. Such a dramatic split of opinion must have some reason behind it.

I merely seek enlightenment

 

[GOLLUM]

Personally I think some people at least don't like his first book and possibly give up because its too much like sheer hard work in both a literary and intellectual sense.

Also the fact that it is such a complex story both in plot, world building and its conceptions of magic etc.. and the fact that Erikson doesn't make it easy for the reader to follow what's going on intially tends to put a lot of people off. The fact this is the first book in the series and therefore being a setup book for such a detailed story doesn't exactly allow for all concepts to be fully or perhaps adequately fleshed out as it were; a victim of its own complexity. Something that can be a bit off putting to readers.

Basically the real genius IMHO of Eriskon is revealed in the later books but as these people have already given up before the end of Book 1 they are not made aware of this.

Also YES not everyone enjoys these types of EPIC tales with multiple plot lines, characters etc.. so I'm sure this factor also comes into it.

All I can think of for now.....

 

[red_temple]

Hmmm.... Having read only the first book, I'd say that the first book is definitely the key to the whole thing. And for me, the part I struggled with was the characters. I need multi-dimensional characters that I become personally attached to in order to make me really love a book/series. GotM took a little while to set this up (200 pages or so). At the beginning, the book introduced them (a LOT of them), but we didn't really get to know them until towards the end. I'm glad I hung in there, though, as I found it a very rewarding read overall. And I am *really* looking forward to DhG now.

 

[SEF]

The set-up does slowly build and the Gardens of the Moon breaks plenty traditional fantasy conventions and offers little explanation for that or itself. But those explanations do come and rewards for those that stake it out are immense. I loved the book, it does not lack intrigue and mystery for sure. Don't give up on it even though things seem alittle aloof or complicated. Circles draw tighter. Have faith.

 

[hodor]

I have to say I struggled through Gardens of the Moon sort of like when I was younger I struggled through The Hobbit. IMO Erikson had soooo much to put out on to the table in the telling that alot of readers are just uterly bewildered by either confusion or ambivolence to characters. The first book, for me, was not about characters so much as it was about developing everything that was going on into a story that could start with Deadhouse Gates.

I recommend to any potential or reader who has given up to KEEP GOING! Gardens of the Moon is just a prelude and the end of the book is great; never the less the next book and those to follow are even better!

 

[red_temple]

Holy crap! It's Hodor. I thought you were dead. Or in prison. Nice to see you are still out there and able to type!

And I wholly agree. I have only read Gardens of the Moon so far, but it was fantastic and pays off big if you stick with it until the end. Can't wait to dive into DhG, but I've got a few other books in my queue at the moment.

 

[hodor]

AYE I am still around and I check in from time to time when I have time. With the baby I have had less time and with work even less.

You will LOVE Deadhouse when you get to it; it deviates from Gardens of the Moon a bit to where you are reading a parallel storyline but yet you will find yourself far more involved in this book.

 

[red_temple]

Ahh yes. New babies will chew up your time like a hungry pig. Mine is now 10 months old and things are becoming a little more sane now. I hope all is well with your little one. Mine is doing very well provided I give her complete and udivided attention at all times.

 

[hodor]

Exactly... tis why I don't have time to get on much and post; I can get on and browse for a few seconds and then something comes up. Good to here yours is doing well! Ours is 6weeks now and she is doing very well also.

 

[Tsujigiri]

I find his style easy to read and I find the storylines interesting and the characters absorbing...

 

[SEF]

I find his style easy to read and I find the storylines interesting and the characters absorbing...

Excellent!

 

[GOLLUM]

As everyone seems to be saying each book improves and builds upon the earlier one.

No secrets that Eriskon is my fav fantasy author of all time and YES Book 1 is really just setting us up for the rest of the series. Book 3 Memories Of Ice is still the pivotal book for me in the series in that it was this book that really revealed Erikson's genius in terms of his magic systems and world building, the point at which I decided he was the best of the best.

Over and out...

 

[polymorphikos]

I'm lukewarm on Erikson, myself. I enjoyed Gardens, but it had one too many a deus ex machina and seemed to be trying to pass-off poorly-explored stock cliches as highly original. The characters were also unrealistic and clunky, and the dialogue poor, and he blew the expositions.

That said, an excellent example of how to blind your reader with fireworks and laser shows. Worth a look.

 

[GOLLUM]

I'm lukewarm on Erikson, myself. I enjoyed Gardens, but it had one too many a deus ex machina and seemed to be trying to pass-off poorly-explored stock cliches as highly original. The characters were also unrealistic and clunky, and the dialogue poor, and he blew the expositions.

That said, an excellent example of how to blind your reader with fireworks and laser shows. Worth a look.

Don't forget GOTM was something of a set up book for the rest of the series.

Maybe you could give Deadhouse Gates and Memories Of Ice a go before passing a final judgement.

Then again to be realsitic no book is going to make eveyone happy LOL!

All the best ciaoo...

 

[SEF]

I'm lukewarm on Erikson, myself. I enjoyed Gardens, but it had one too many a deus ex machina and seemed to be trying to pass-off poorly-explored stock cliches as highly original. The characters were also unrealistic and clunky, and the dialogue poor, and he blew the expositions.

That said, an excellent example of how to blind your reader with fireworks and laser shows. Worth a look.

No, Erikson slowly bleeds expositions into the story, he would have readers get more familiar with world and characters on a on-hand basis without drowning them in exposition.

Poorly explored stock cliches? You're meaning of this labelling is unclear to me, as the books progress Erikson expands and explores greater depths of his history and world including characters themselves.
Some of my favorites sights were Tremorlor, Morn, Seven Cities, The Nascent, Drift Avalii, an ancient city in the Raraku desert etc. Erikson is a former archeaologist, and he builds a very rich panoramic world that juxtaposes ancient myth and race with present hidden mysteries and political intrigues.

Characters unrealistic and clunky? Individuals within a fantasy collective involved in a continual conflict because of the Malazan campaign, immersed in a world far more alien in rule and law I don't think Erikson did poorly at all. And the dialogue can be fabulously witty and/or involving. The translation is sufficient and dynamic enough.

It only gets better beyond Gardens of the Moon. I promise.

 

[GOLLUM]

SEF,

You've very eloquently and clearly stated what I've tried to allude to in the past regarding Erikson's Malazan series. You're obviously a fan!

Over and out...

 

[SEF]

Why thank you Gollum!

Erikson is my favorite fantasy author and this is my favorite series too. One of the difficulties of explaining to new readers is hey, us veteran fans don't have all the answers ... yet. The series has a strong convergence of tense and he has put an extraordinary amount of detail into the series.

 

[GOLLUM]

Hooray another Erikson lover!! HE HE...

Yep he's my fav fantasy author (mostly what I read) of all time with his Malazan series. Having said that there are some other EPIC fantasy writers who are pretty darn good like George R.R. Martin, my No .2 of all time. Erikson has obvioulsy put a hell of a lot of detail down already with more to come. I've only got Tolkien ahead of him in terms of the sheer weight or depth of world building and how much time he would have spent on developing it. I know he's said before that he has boxes of notes in his garage on the world he's created so given time he may end up with more than the great one..

Do you have a fav let's say top 6 EPIC fantasy writers (or maybe your top six fantasy authors per se) you can briefly list here? I'd be most interested in seeing them...

 

[Brys]

You either love him or hate him. I've yet to find someone who is ambivilent about the Malazan series.
"Hate" is a bit of a strong word for it. Dislike is more like it...

The common theme seems to be the first book. People either love it, struggle through it, or just give up after the first few hundred pages.
Is Gardens of the Moon a badly written book? Or does it just take a certain type of reader to enjoy it? Is it just more intellectually challenging to understand what he's going on about? Its certainly not a light read


I understand that there are two camps on this, but what I still don't get is why. Such a dramatic split of opinion must have some reason behind it.

I merely seek enlightenment

I think Gardens of the Moon is an excellently written book - and that's the problem people have with it. A poorly written book is often much easier to read, while numerous plots with no clear side to support and a decent level of language puts people off. The first time I found it relatively hard going, getting all of the world into my head, which is far more complex and realistic than most fantasy worlds, but on the re-read I found it much easier to read. I think that everyone should try to finish this book, because the other books in the series are so good. The problem with Gardens of the Moon, after just re-reading Deadhouse Gates, is that it lacks any truly memorable scenes which all the others possess. Erikson is my favourite fantasy author (though admittedly, I've had only a limited experience of fantasy), and even my favourite author, because he manages to give you an intellectual read as well as entertainment. He also has extremely memorable characters - from any one of his books I can usually think of (though not always remember the names of) more excellent characters than your average fantasy has of named characters who actually do anything important.
I have heard very little of these "Hate" people you describe though. Most people who have got through Gardens of the Moon either midly dislike it or like it a lot, but pretty much everyone who's read DG or the later books is greatly in favour, from what I've seen, anyway.

After Erikson, Martin and Mieville follow closely, with R Scott Bakker not far behind, though I've only read the first of his books so far.

 

[SEF]

Two frontrunners of strong distinction would be:

1. Steven Erikson
2. George R R Martin

Then following these things get muddled, I suppose Stephen R Donaldson, China Mieville, Robert Holdstock, and mayhaps Robin Hobb for overall strength and integrity. And maybe capped off with R Scott Bakker, I've enjoyed his writing immensely but had struggled through The Darkness That Came Before. Great writer nonetheless.