Gardens of the Moon frustration

[firepanda]

First post and I need to let off steam
Anyway, I like to consider myself 'well-read', having read more 'proper-literature' than someone at my age has a right to. However, during my early teens, I was filled with a glut of cheesy fantasy books, not to mention four stories that have important human themes. (Tolkein, Jordan, Eddings and... Paolini: I used to think he was great.) I stopped reading fantasy at 15, but recently a friend encouraged me to start reading Abercrombie's books. I loved it and decided to start reading more 'low' fantasy series.
I have heard good things about Malazan and recently started to read GotM. Unfortunately, I have just found myself very lost. I could follow Paran's plot line and Sorry's but once Tattersail and the bridgeburners get involved, everything seems to go downhill. Part of the problem is that I have only vague ideas what Tattersail is. Sorcerer, mage or something else? What's happening? What happened? What is this in the big scheme of things? Worst of all, Erikson loves dropping names all over the place.
To sum it up, I have no idea what's going on. I think this may be the only book where the reader knows less about the universe a quarter way in than he did to start with. Is this just part of the books or am I imcompetent? Alternatively, I've heard there is a second series that goes with this universe, should I read this first??? Oh God... someone just help me...

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I can't help you; I've never read it - nor will I based on this, I can't cope with huge character lists. But my question would have to be why are you reading it, still? It doesn't sound like you're enjoying it, it sounds throughly confusing to you. Why not put it down, go get something else? That's what I'd do.

 

[HareBrain]

A lot of people rave about Erikson, but there are some that don't. I quite liked GOTM but felt the same confusion as you. I expected the "what the hell is going on?" question to be cleared up in future books. By the time I gave up, after completing Memories of Ice, it hadn't been, at least not nearly enough.

My advice: if you need to know what's going on, the series might not be for you.

 

[Lenny]

The Malazan Universe is most definitely high fantasy (though, due the immense cast list and saga-like qualities, it's usually classed as epic fantasy) and it is by no means an easy read.

As HB says, if you like to know what's going on at every single point, you'll have major difficulties with Eriksons' Malazan Book of the Fallen and, to a lesser extent, the companion series by Ian C. Esslemont - Novels of the Malazan Empire.

The beauty of both series, and the appeal to me, is that it takes work to realise what's happening. Eventually, you'll start having "A-ha!" moments as things fall in to place, but it will take many re-reads before you have the full picture; I've re-read the first seven books six or seven times, and each time I picked up on things I'd completely missed before. I need to do a full re-read now that the series has finished, and I'm certain that things I wasn't sure about will become clear and impact on things I read later on... which in turn will make things in previous books make sense when I go back through them.

On my first journey through the series, I found that it wasn't until the fourth book, House of Chains, that things started clicking.

My view of GotM, when I first finished it:

I finished Gardens of the Moon today, so I'll leave my thoughts. I prefer Deadhouse Gates over GotM, to be honest, but that might change on my re-read, which should start within a couple of hours.

Whilst good, GotM is a slow book. Everything finally comes together in the last two to three hundred pages or so, and which is also when it really kicks off.

I'm going to through my lot in with everyone else who's said keep reading - it really is worth it. I've never had a book leave me so exhausted by the end of it, but I'd definitely read it again, and when I do, I'm going to see 500 pages of tiny links between the five or six different groups and points of view before it all comes together.

If you do finish it, then try and get onto Deadhouse Gates. Longer by a couple of hundred pages, but everything seems to happen quicker. And there seem to be more fantastical ideas than there were in GotM. Without trying to give anything away, there's some brilliant scenes in warrens that I adored.

---

In short: at no one point during any of the ten books do you understand, for certain, what's going on. There are events in earlier books which have huge consequences in later books, and there are things that happen in later books that make you stop and think, "Hey, that's why [event] happened in [earlier book]!".

You've probably guessed by now that I'm one of those who raves about the series (both Erikson's and Esslemont's, seeing as they're intertwined). Obviously, I'm going to tell you to stick with it, but I'll also say: let go and allow yourself to be taken by the book. If you expect things to become clear, you'll hate the book, but if you can face the fact that it will take a lot of work before you begin to understand even the smallest part and instead find enjoyment in the plot, you might be able to hold on until the second book, Deadhouse Gates, which I think is one of the best in the series.

---

EDIT: Thought it worth a mention as well that the books, in the order that they are published (and consequently read), aren't necessarily in chronological order - events at the start of House of Chains, for example, happen before either GotM and DHG, events in the second half of HoC happen after DHG and the entirety of DHG happens in parallel with Memories of Ice.

You can read Erikson's series in chronological order, if you wish, but I think it spoils quite a bit of the magic.

When Esslemont's final three books are released (his fourth is out in a fortnight), it will be possible to read both series together in chronological order, though it will mean having three or fours books on the go at once as you'll need to pick out individual chapters from each.

 

[The Spurring Platty]

...
To sum it up, I have no idea what's going on. I think this may be the only book where the reader knows less about the universe a quarter way in than he did to start with. Is this just part of the books or am I imcompetent? Alternatively, I've heard there is a second series that goes with this universe, should I read this first??? Oh God... someone just help me...

Welcome! And no, you are not incompetent...the series is difficult, even daunting at first. The volume of characters can be overwhelming as are the multiple plot lines. Adding some confusion to this is characters, particularly gods, can have multiple names.

My first read in the series was Midnight Tides (roughly the fourth book). Main events took place on a continent new to the series, and to me it made for a more stand alone read. I still found it difficult to follow in places because I didn't yet understand the interaction between the normal characters and the gods/ascendants. Once you get a better feel for that and understand how people are motivated it becomes easier. But it certainly takes some dedication at first, especially to understand the pantheon of gods, warrens and just how the world works in general.

Other than those points, pretty much everything Lenny said.

 

[nixie]

I didn't find the confusing that a lot of people did with GOTM. I was sucked in the first few pages. No I didn't understand it all but I went with the flow and enjoyed every moment of the whole series. I still don't understand everything that went on but I've only reread the first 7 books once. Erikson is by far my favourite author.

 

[Fedos]

I'm a lot like Nixie. I was drawn to Steven Erikson by recommendations from members on other writing forums. A guy was basically saying that he had created something comparable to Tolkien, but in a more modern sense. While I went into Gardens of the Moon expecting to be utterly stumped I found it to be a supremely enjoyable experience, and now Steven Erikson is my favorite author right now. I've read up to House of Chains and I would rate them like this: Memories of Ice>Deadhouse Gates=House of Chains>Gardens of the Moon.

 

[firepanda]

'Kay then
*Big Breath*
I'm going to try again. Thanks guys.

...Could I ask though, what exactly is up with those houses ("house of shadows", "house of death" etc) and also what are warrens I keep reading about? They're portals, but apparently are linked with magic.

 

[Ross]

'Kay then
*Big Breath*
I'm going to try again. Thanks guys.

...Could I ask though, what exactly is up with those houses ("house of shadows", "house of death" etc) and also what are warrens I keep reading about? They're portals, but apparently are linked with magic.

You'll find out if you stick with it.

They are not "easy" books to read but I personally think they are well worth the effort.

 

[Brian G Turner]

So ... reading Erikson's Malazan series is a bit like reading George R R Martin's Song of Fire and Ice, then? Lots of building blocks to put together?

 

[Timba]

The first and only book I have ever put down without finishing it. Really did not enjoy the experience. I may come back to it, but I doubt it.

 

[HareBrain]

Lots of building blocks to put together?

Yes, but some are Lego and some are Sticklebricks, and you can never tell which are which.

 

[Lenny]

So ... reading Erikson's Malazan series is a bit like reading George R R Martin's Song of Fire and Ice, then? Lots of building blocks to put together?

I'd say that the Malazan series is an order of magnitude more complex than Martin's ASoIaF (Malazan has a much larger cast, is set on more than two/three continents, not to mention the different warrens, and the Universe has a far richer and more detailed history), but yes, they're both an exercise in very patient puzzle-solving.

As someone who started ASoIaF after finishing Erikson's series, I would be interested to hear the thoughts of people who have taken the jump the other way, though.

 

[nixie]

I started Martin before Erikson, well I like Martin I feel he lacks the complexity of Erkison. ASOIF for me is a unique twist on War of the Roses. Erkison, when I started the series was completely new, I didn't have anything to compare it with. Then I discovered Glen Cook and saw where he got his inspiration from.

 

[firepanda]

*Barges rudely into conversation, ignoring what has been going on for the last 4 posts*

Into the third part now The only way to describe reading this is bizarre. I feel like I'm clutching desperately at the character through who's eyes I'm reading as they hurtle through the plot at breakneck pace. (I've just finished reading WoT-- the middle books aren't so bad the second time round by the way). This is considerably larger in terms of complexity than anything I've ever read before. Would anyone else compare it to Catch-22? The timeline seems to jump about much the same way, forcing the reader to piece together a blurry concept of the world.

Ahem, sorry about that. Please continue.

 

[C Of K]

You're the only person I've ever seen barge rudely into the conversation that he started.

Congrats on sticking with the books. I've heard great things about them, but even listening to the audio version was a chore for me, and I didn't get very far. I just couldn't find anything simple about Erickson's writing. Having twisty and turning plots is all well and good, but when my tongue and mind get tangled in knots trying to puzzle out words, names, and locations, I get burned out really fast

I might have to mature a little before I tackle this one again.

 

[Null_Zone]

Personally reading the books was a bit like being stuck next to that drunk guy at a part who insists on telling you all about the really cool D&D campaign he's in and the really cool 15 level elven warrior. Sure it all makes sense to him and if you spend long enough listening then the context will develop, but other wise it's just rambling.

Not really a surprise though as it is based of the guys roleplaying campaign.

 

[Bugg]

In short: at no one point during any of the ten books do you understand, for certain, what's going on. There are events in earlier books which have huge consequences in later books, and there are things that happen in later books that make you stop and think, "Hey, that's why [event] happened in [earlier book]!".

You've probably guessed by now that I'm one of those who raves about the series (both Erikson's and Esslemont's, seeing as they're intertwined). Obviously, I'm going to tell you to stick with it, but I'll also say: let go and allow yourself to be taken by the book. If you expect things to become clear, you'll hate the book, but if you can face the fact that it will take a lot of work before you begin to understand even the smallest part and instead find enjoyment in the plot, you might be able to hold on until the second book, Deadhouse Gates, which I think is one of the best in the series.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I read lots of comments, before reading GotM, from people who found it confusing, couldn't finish it, etc. When I read it I couldn't understand why - I was hooked from the first page and was swept along by it. I think maybe those negative comments I read had some kind of reverse psychological effect on me. I went with the flow, and loved it so much I went out and bought the next two books straight away.

I re-read it last year, having read all the subsequent books in the series, and it was almost like reading a different book. Whether this is good thing or a bad thing depends on what you want from your reading, I guess. Very few books have had the ability to make the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end, but Erikson's did that on numerous occasions. In a way, it saddens me that so many people can't get past the first book, because the next five or six books are among the best I've read, with all Erikson's frustrations and idiosyncrasies intact. In another way, I don't really care what other people think of it. I like Marmite, too

Edit: I started reading Martin after starting Erikson. I enjoyed both, but I think Malazan is a hell of a lot more fun. Probably a strange thing to say, given the unanswered questions and ongoing plot lines in each book, but I also like that each of Erikson's books seems to have a proper beginning middle and end, telling a particular story within his overall tale - the result being that there are usually self-contained set-ups and pay-offs in each book, whereas Martin is obviously dealing with one main story, meaning each book (other than the first) feels like a 'middle' without a beginning or end. That's not a criticism, just a difference as I see it.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Now reading Gardens of the Moon, about 150 pages in.

Got to admit, I'm baffled by any suggestion that it's hard to read or confusing - so far it's seemed very simple and linear - mostly one POV, with a couple of supporting ones.

The most "confusing" part of the book is that the world building so far doesn't appear based on northern European mediaeval culture, but we've seen plenty of other fantasy writers do this.

It's also missing some absolutes - ie, why is everything set up the way it is, and how is everything set up to end? But I figure that's the point of having one or more books - to tell that story.

There is a lack of character introspection and world building detail to fill it out and provide clear context - but again, it's telling its own story, rather than trying to filch from Tolkien and his own archetypes, so not sure why some people are struggling??

Also - so far, quite underwhelmed by the cast list size and level of detail - think GRRM was far more complicated here. On what I've read so far.

Perhaps I've simply not read enough as yet?

 

[Brian G Turner]

Got to admit, I'm baffled by any suggestion that it's hard to read or confusing - so far it's seemed very simple and linear - mostly one POV, with a couple of supporting ones.

Meh, scrub that - just been dumped with a load of different Darujhistan POV's.