Steven Erikson vs Robert Jordan

N

Nostra

Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
9
So I find myself in the possession of both these first books in a long serie:

The Eye of the World by Robert jordan (Book One of the Wheel of Time)

and

Gardens of the Moon by Steven Erikson (Book One of A Tale of the Malazan Book of the Fallen)

And I can't decide which serie to start! Any advice? :)
 
As much as I would like to say start with Jordan, I can't. The first book is really good, but I haven't been able to bring myself to finish the series. I'm not sure I will.

I've only read Gardens of the Moon so far, but I did enjoy it very much. Once I get deeper into the series I may have other opinions.
 
Jordan is pretty easy to read. Not too many PoVs, simple plot etc. The story does, however, slow down a lot around book six. And, personally, I've come to hate most of the PoV characters :D

Erikson, on the other hand, is rather full on. Huge complex plot lines that carry across the entire series, a vast number of PoVs, and an amazingly detailed world. I love it. Some hate it. He hit his peak with Memories of Ice and pretty much kept up at the same level of quality (I know some people didn't like Toll the Hounds, but to me it was one of the best. I will admit that parts of Dust of Dreams did seem to drag a little bit, though *cough* Badalle *cough*).

Anyway. I'd say start with Gardens of the Moon. If you end up being one of the people who hates it, you can just move on to Wheel of Time. If you find you love it, though, you'll probably love the rest of the series just as much.
 
Chaoticheart said:
I know some people didn't like Toll the Hounds, but to me it was one of the best. I will admit that parts of Dust of Dreams did seem to drag a little bit, though *cough* Badalle *cough
Click to expand...
I thought I was the only person who thought this - glad to know I'm not alone!

I'd echo the 'start with GotM' comments. If you can live with not having all your questions answered in the first book, if you can deal with being chucked in at the deep end, if you're prepared to go with the flow and let it carry you along for the ride, you might get sucked in the same way I did. You might not, of course, in which case go with Jordan.

If you like GotM, read Deadhouse Gates. If the end of that book doesn't make the hairs on the back of your neck stand on end then maybe the series isn't for you ;)
 
I'd go with Robert Jordan first. You've got further to go with his series but in my view there are less bumps along the way.
 
Here's a thought: What have you read and enjoyed before? Once you answer that question, I and others will be better able to answer your question!:):)
 
What Clansman says is the most sensible.

For my thoughts I love Jordan, love Erikson, for me it depends what you are after. I found the first Jordan book a dream to read; while on the other hand Gardens of the Moon was a nightmare. I struggled throughout and only moved on to the second as I had bought the first three Erikson books as part of a deal. As far as those went it was the second book where the magic happened and I was won over (and it retroactively improved the first book).

Jordan does slow as the books go on, but it is still an engaging read, it's more that he is stretching events out when he does not need to.

My decision, I'd read Jordan first, using it as a foundation for Erikson.

(I'm currently reading Toll the Hounds and it's the first Erikson that has slowed me down since GotM)
 
Personally I made it to book 8 of WoT before I gave up in frustration, Erikson - I am still struggling to finish book 2 but I must say he is the one I will go back to as I hear the rewards are worthwhile. I have just too much stuff I want to read first

So I think I'd read GoTM by Erikson and see what you think, if you hate it after 1 book try Jordan, it might take you to book 6 of WoT to start struggling
 
I've read all the books for both authors and would agree that Wheel of Time is easier to read than the Malazan Book of the Fallen, especially the first books. But I believe in the long run, Steven Erikson's books are the better of the two.
 
Here are some series I enjoyed in the past:

- George R R Martin: A song of Ice and Fire
- David Eddings: The Belgariad series & The Malloreon series
- Peter F Hamilton: The Night's Dawn Trilogy & The Commonwealth Saga
- Robin Hobb: The Farseer trilogy
 
That is quite a mix, Nostra. GRRM is complex, character-driven, cynical and full of politics and twists, and is generally a low fantasy. Eddings is by contrast a very simple high fantasy (i.e. lots of magic, but no "elder" races), and is a bit adolescent now, compared to the grittier stuff that is being released now (the Belgariad was released in the early 80s, when I read it). I haven't read Hamilton or Hobb.

Based on this, I'd suggest Jordan's WoT first. It is definitely an easier read, and is linear in its progression. Despite its slowness/bloating problems from book 7 to 10, it is fairly good stuff, and Jordan comes back to form in book 11 before Sanderson takes the series to a new height in books 12 and 13. The last book, A Memory of Light, will be released Jan. 8, 2013. You should be able to read the whole series by then.

Erikson is anything but linear, and is perhaps the most confusing writer I have ever read. However, his story is excellent. Ian Esselmont's books must be included with Erikson, as they flesh out some very important parts of the narrative. Despite this, he is often the ignored co-creator of the Malazan world. I loved his Night of Knives, and the Return of the Crimson Guard was as complex and confusing as any Erikson novel, if not quite as well done. Gotta love those Wickans!
 
They are wildly different stories told in very different ways.

The only thing you can do is read the first few chapters of each and see which one pulls you in quicker.
 
Personally, unless you're a fantasy veteran I don't think Erikson or Jordan are the best choices. One is complex and hard to read, the other isn't hard to read but isn't that good later on.

Why not go for something approachable but still complex enough to be highly rewarding? So:

GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire
Robin Hobb's Liveship Traders trilogy

Otherwise Paul Kearney's Monarchies of God, or Joe Abercrombie's First Law trilogy.

Coragem
 
Well, if you're going to pick between the two regardless, I'd say go with Erikson just based on how much more I've enjoyed that series. The first two Wheel of Time books were amazing in my opinion (in fact they are my shared favorites of the series--I've read up to book 7). But then things began to take a turn for the worse in book 3, the plot slowed down immeasurably for instance and Jordan just literally changed the complexion of his series. I've often wondered which writer would be my current favorite between Erikson and Jordan if Jordan had maintained this feel from the first two books.

Erikson on the other hand is exhilarating throughout. I've read up to the fourth book in the series but took an extended break now I'm reading it over again (just finished the third book Memories of Ice) and I can't say enough great things about Erikson. I was drawn to Erikson by a poster on another writing forum who was basically saying that Erikson had created something akin to a modern Lord of the Rings.

Erikson is trained as an anthropologist and archaeologist and this shines forth in his works, bringing a kind of sweeping mythology and history into this series. It also doesn't hurt that the man has a very capable imagination. I find myself blown away by the reveals and events that take place in his books.

If I had to rate the books that I have read I'd go like this: Memories of Ice>Deadhouse Gates=House of Chains>Gardens of the Moon. Which is why I would encourage you if you don't take to Gardens of the Moon to press on to Deadhouse Gates, as it really is a fantastic and thrilling read. Ok, hope this helps.
 
For me both the writers are best at their own place. Erikson is more complected. He always playing with characters. For example Erikson deliberately began the Malazan Book of the Fallen series mid-plot rather than beginning with a more conventional narrative.
On the other hand Robert Jordan is more simple and straight. But the situations created by him is even more dense.
You can start with any of the series taste will be pure.
 
It would seem obvious to just read both of them at the same time.
 
Haha. As much as I'd love to read them both at the same time, that doesn't work for me :)

I've decided to go for Erikson (also flipped a coin for it and Erikson it was :p)

Thank you all for the great tips on the writing style of both authors!

@ Clansman: You really should read Robin Hobb, I lvoed the Farseer trilogy!
 
Nostra said:
Haha. As much as I'd love to read them both at the same time, that doesn't work for me :)

I've decided to go for Erikson (also flipped a coin for it and Erikson it was :p)

Thank you all for the great tips on the writing style of both authors!

@ Clansman: You really should read Robin Hobb, I lvoed the Farseer trilogy!
Click to expand...

Flipping a coin is the answer to any decision: in that split second before the coin actually lands you know for certain what it is that you really really want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Werthead Rejoice, A Knife to the Heart by Steven Erikson Reviews & Interviews 5
The Bluestocking Steven Erikson - Anomander Rake and Point of View Writing Discussion 0
Werthead The Malazan Book of the Fallen by Steven Erikson Reviews & Interviews 27
The Bluestocking Steven Erikson LIVE on Google Hangouts on Air Steven Erikson 17
Brian G Turner Steven Erikson 3 part interview Steven Erikson 0

Similar threads


Back
Top