An Eddings Fan

[kalgarath]

I have been meandering through this site and finaly had to join just so I could post this message. It disheartens me to see so many people who are unhappy with the Eddings' newer works. I have repeatedly read that "the books are all the same with only new names for the characters." Perhaps I am in the minority, but the whole reason I choose an author is because I like his 'STYLE'. Yes it is safe to say that all of the Eddings fantasy books have strong simularities to his other fantasy works. That is his style, benevolent God vs. Evil, apocaliptic novels with a nice side of dry witt. That is why I pick them up and read them. Any author that you read is the same way. The difference is that Eddings has choosen the Fantasy style of writing and that is somewhat limiting unless you change the "rules" he uses for his worlds.
His modern works don't seem to be liked here very much either. Losers was more of a personal novel for me, it was set in Spokane, the same city both Eddings and I grew up in. I will admit Regina wasn't one of my favorite books, but it wasn't suppose to be the light hearted bantering book that the Eddings' fantasy books are. It was suppose to be dark and slower paced. I did however go "hmm.." when I finished it, and did enjoy the plot.
The only books I haven't read of the Eddings' are High Hunt, and the Rivan Codex. High Hunt because I haven't been able to find a copy and the Codex because as much I loved the Belgariad world I didn't want to rehash it all again. That was done nicely in the last two character titled books.

So I am impatiently waiting for the paperback version of The Treasued Ones to come out. But I am an Eddings fan, not just a Belgariad fan.

a fan...

 

[jcm73]

I'm with you! I recently read Regina's Song and thought that maybe he had made a mistake crossing over - I didn't think he should be doing the murder mystery style of book, but if I had read it not knowing who David Eddings was, then I think I would have enjoyed it for what it was. I was a little disappointed with it, because I'm SUCH a fan of his fantasy work. I haven't read High Hunt either, but have read the Rivan Codex. I enjoyed it because it is supposed to be a collection of his notes that he kept to keep his head around his world when he was writing the Belgariad etc. I found it interesting, and particularly enjoyed the journal of Anheg at the end! I'm finding the new books to be ok - I'd say not as enjoyable as the earlier ones. I really enjoyed Belgariad, Mallorean and the Sparhawk books also, as well as Belgarath and Polgara, and I was one of the (seemingly) few who actually enjoyed Althalus. I got a kick out of that book because it had his old spark in one volume! Very handy. Anyway, I'm getting into the new books, and looking forward to the next chapter.

 

[Liselle]

I totally agree with you. It really winds me up when people complain about Eddings like that - if they don't like his style they don't have to read his books! I think he is fantastic, and I love his style of writing. I like knowing that there's going to be a happy ending after investing all my time in a story.

 

[Princess Ivy]

it's great to have another point of view here, although i'm definatly in the "rehashed" camp, i do agree that his style of writing is very enjoyable. just wish he'd write something new. sigh

 

[talen]

i cant find anything bad about eddings i love the endings like "then she vanished" a very short quote from the ruby knight i love the endings theyre always quite friendly but confusing wanting you to read on

 

[Foxtale]

It is not his style on debate here, but rather his content. A consistent recycling of characters has nothing to do with style. It's either laziness or lack of imagination on his part, or perhaps he just feels comfortable with those characters.

I love his style, it's informal fantasy with slang. But I'm sick of the same characters with different names.

 

[sum1won]

I have to say that I am finding that his earlier books are his best. His newer ones may have better plots, but the dialogue is so awful as to more than make up for it. Its either sickeningly cutesy, or overly repetitive witty banter- regardless of how appropriate it is. Reginas song was very well written, edxcept for mch of the dialogue between mark and girls, essentially, Eddings seems to have trouble with people talking who are fond of eachother.

Oh, and he makes it a little too lucky- hsi charactars often wind up winning simply because they got some really good oppurtunities- and they are the only ones who do so. Its as if that their sole advantage over the opponents boils down to luck.

I like eddings, but he is no genius- hes on a level with, say, robert jordan- he rights pretty good stuff, but with some flaws.

 

[danny]

I am nearly 1/2 way through Pawn of Prophecy. It is so good!

 

[unique_dragonfly]

I have been a fan of Eddings since '83, and I love his books. The Belgariad and the Mallorean, and lets not forget the Elenium and the Tamulli. I read ROA, intresting ideas but it just didn't work for me. I haven't read the other series, but I really don't think he deserves the trashing he is getting. He will always be my favorite writer.

 

[Princess Ivy]

I have to say that I am finding that his earlier books are his best. His newer ones may have better plots, but the dialogue is so awful as to more than make up for it. Its either sickeningly cutesy, or overly repetitive witty banter- regardless of how appropriate it is. Reginas song was very well written, edxcept for mch of the dialogue between mark and girls, essentially, Eddings seems to have trouble with people talking who are fond of eachother.

Oh, and he makes it a little too lucky- hsi charactars often wind up winning simply because they got some really good oppurtunities- and they are the only ones who do so. Its as if that their sole advantage over the opponents boils down to luck.

I like eddings, but he is no genius- hes on a level with, say, robert jordan- he rights pretty good stuff, but with some flaws.

i agreed to the end! at least eddings finishes!!!!!!!

and unique dragonfly, i personally am not trashing him. i enjoyed the earlier books and frequently re-read them, however, there is no doubt that his later ones are just rehashes. well writen, but rehashed non the less.

 

[Talysia]

It's good to know that so many people like David Eddings' style. Even though I have a few problems with some of the characters, especially in some of the more recent books, and the ways in which certain characters are represented, I still think there's a certain charm to his writing.

 

[Rosemary]

I much prefer his older books and love re-reading them. His style of writing seems unique and I think the traits he has given his characters are marvellous. I particularly enjoy his dry wit and the inter-play between the characters. Even Althalus was enjoyable...

 

[YeOldeWolf]

The problem with writing epic heroic fantasy is that the stories are, by definition, enormous and enormously complex. The Belgarion books take up nine full volumes with many, many characters populating it. How many characters can one person be expected to come up with before tripping over one's self? How many twist plots can there actually BE in heroic fantasy? Ask Joseph Campbell, he wrote the book on mythology. So, the genre is self-limiting when you get down to it. I can't imagine even Tolkein coming up with an ENTIRE other reality that does not overlap on his original. But as someone has already said, if you don't like the book ... put it down. Eddings' Belgarion books are very dear to me and yet I have never finished even one of his other novels (though my daughter has). I like to think that there is room for everyone on this stupid planet of ours as long as we give each other space. That's what I am doing with Eddings.

 

[Harleyquin]

Again I'm in the camp of love the STYLE but intellectually get very disappointed at the content.

Let me explain my reasons for complaints I have

The Belgariad set the pace and tone and I personally still have it as my No 1 fave book - yes there’s "better" out there but not for me.

The problems with Eddings are everything post the Belgariad, I’m going to be a little indulgent with the size of response but I want to be clear the problems I have.

If you strip away the characters the Mallorean is Exactly the same story as the Belgariad – the only real changes is the location. Instead of chasing the Orb in the Belgariad were chasing his Son… there’s LOTS more similarities in the books and if you take your time you can even see the key events in the Malorean shadowing the Belgariad.

Its almost impossible to argue that the Mallorean was not the plot of the Belgariad just with a few minor tweaks.

I loved both series but I had to keep ignoring these similarities, also the whole base of the Mallorean was irritating as the first series was supposed to be the decider of the war against light and dark… yet we find it isn’t really. There’s a lot of fantastic stuff in the Mallorean such as the daemons – if Eddigns had not bothered with the war of light and dark just having the daemons trying to take over the world would have at least been a nice change.

Ok Skip to the Elenuim and again were revisiting the SAME plot again – like the Mallorean it’s the same story with a few additional twists. The Tamulli was a re-write of the Mallorean…

As for the characters we will pick Polgara from the Belgaria and Sephrenia from the Elinium – there the same person – almost word for word character for character it’s the same person. This is a huge issue for people. Ok I can forgive this to a degree because I’ve not read many authors who write different series in an unrelated world that don’t have a lot of similarities… the issue I have though is not that the characters are the same as before , but that they inhabit the same roles as they did.. AKA the wise and beautiful woman with supream power is the matriarch – the petulant schoolgirl in the would be spouse of the hero etc.

"...and the Codex because as much I loved the Belgariad world I didn't want to rehash it all again." Here you've even said it yourself.

Now going back to the point of style though… Intellectually I get fed up with the repeating story, the repeating characters...

but the style “"THE WATERFALL DROPPED endlessly into the chasm that had claimed Ghwerig, and the echo of its plunge filled the cavern with a deep-toned sound like the after-shimmer of some great bell." just grabs you.

His descriptive abilities are sublime – they totally and absolutely draw you in so your hooked from the word go… its just saddening to some of us that with the vast talent for words he had the stories and characters where always limited to what had gone before.

I still like Eddings, its just I think a great tallent got SO close to the target, but ultimately a little too much laziness in plot makes you feel a little let down after a while and by time youve read the last part of the dreamers, emotionally its like finding your favourite toy from childhoold at the bottom of a closet thats had a leak and the toy is mangles and only a shadow of the thing it was making your heart break just a little more inside

 

[Wayward Ho!]

I tend to agree with the majority here, I absolutely loved the Belgariad. I still do in fact, but the Mallorean and Elenium left me scratching my head a little. Okay, fair enough, it could be said that the shadowing in the Mallorean is intentional and part of Eddings' grand design, but there is such a thing as too much. In some ways I wish I had never read it, as the Belgariad on it's own is a classic. Sometimes sequels aren't needed or just don't work, as Tolkien found when he briefly dabbled with a sequel to LoTR.

With the Elenium, it was the characters that bugged me, it just seemed as if the ensemble cast from the Belgariad was rolled out again. It's almost as if Eddings' characters are like a theatre company, with the same actors playing different parts in different plays. That's not always a bad thing of course, the problem in this case however is that the actors were just so memorable in the first production. So when the curtain opens, and the actors walk out, you can't help but think. 'Hey! There's Henry Vee... but hold on... isn't this Hamlet?'

That's not to say I didn't enjoy the Mallorean and the Elenium though. Eddings is very good at holding the reader, his books are hard to put down. My problem is that I began to find him increasingly hard to pick up.

 

[ghost8772]

well I notice just about all of you skipped the rivan codex. I made a brief foray into it, and it struck me as not a rehash of the books they had written but a breakdown of how beginning authors might choose a genre and begin writing, as well as tips of how one might build up the story.

yes, the belgariad and Mallorean are tales with similar purposes and metaphysical landmarks, even the CHARACTERS recognised that. several paragraphs of discussion on that topic alone. the only thing they didn't go into was whether or not the author was going to kill one of them off. As it was said the epic quest is limiting. and lets face it there needs to be SOME sort of variety of job skills in an adventuring party to even have some sort of success... the characters are supposed to make the difference, however here is where the difficulty lies. how much of a differing of personalities can a person make and make convincingly? yes, the waspish tempered, imperious, willful, matriarchal leader, the smart mouthed rogue, the blood thirsty warrior, the reluctant hero..... sounds like a tarot deck actually, only need the fool and have a decent set going.


something of a rant here...

Granted I read the Tamuli once and decided never again. not because of the repitition, or because the character personalities were nearly identical to previous books, but because of the.... ephemeral nature of "final" that they put into the story... the ultimate power of the universe was put away at the end of the elenium, too scary for all people, but oh gee, I think we need it back, so chop-chop lets go get it.....too many changes in characterization. yes, they went to foreign lands, and that might have made a difference, but sheesh. and it all came down to the level of "why didn't they just click their heels together three times......" I think the phrase of it is "Gary Stu" they took him up to that level. and it wasn't fun anymore.

I think my enjoyment of the world of Belgarion and all was that as the books went in successsion (all twelve) the writing style deepened and expanded. the Pawn of Prophecy was just engaging enough to get attention and hold it, but as the stories progressed the depth of storytelling did as well, almost like someoen growing up sees more of the universe than they did earlier. I enjoyed that part of the stories.

ok enough ranting and rambling will let someone else take it up now.

 

[Kevia]

Well, you won't catch me ranting. I've been reading Eddings for at least 20 years. I've enjoyed everything I've read. I reread most of it at least once a year. I not only love his fantasy books, but also 'Regina' and 'Losers.' Unfortunately, I've never been able to put my hands on 'Hunt.' Maybe someday. I don't expect it to be "deep" or anything like that. It is pure entertainment. Yes, some of the characters are sort of repetitive. So? I liked them the first time and I still liked them the second time. I like some of the books better than others and so reread them more often. They are a good, light, escapist read - exactly what I want them to be when I read them! (Whoops, I guess this did turn into a sort of rant, didn't it?)

 

[Orian]

I've always enjoyed reading David Eddings novels. As I've said in other posts here, similarities to me are a minor thing. The development of a character, the path they choose is always uniquely different in every Eddings novel.

I will agree with the statement you made that the reason I read most of the books that I do is because of the style of writing, though of course there are other factors that impress upon me.

 

[dekket]

I was under the impression that the similarity between characters from the different series was due to design, rather than laziness.
Isn't there somewhere in The Rivan Codex that discusses character selection in Epic Fantasy?