Re: OT-Black Company
 

Agreed though I would put it on equal footing with JR's stuff. Unparalleled character development. I read the first one in 1996 and lamented the next wouldn't be out for a coon's age. When it did come out I'd forgotten about the series (my retrograde amnesia). Now I'm rereading the first one thanks to a chance Father's Day gift from my step kids and looking forward to finishing them in succession.
-SSJ

Re: OT-Black Company
 

Eclipse is a very strong word, when referring to a pioneer in a field.

I mean, in some circles if you were to say "Hawking is such an amazing mathematician, his work completely eclipses Einstein!" - well, you might get stuffed into a particle accelerator. >.>

Re: OT-Black Company
 

Thanks for all the advice!

Jordan and martin were both very strong starters, but neither was the equal of Tolkien. Tolkien told a masterful story that actually had an ending. Yes he had sub plots, but they never distracted him from the main theme and he tied them all up nicely and concluded the series.

Jordan actually died before he finished his series, which began to decline from a lack of vision. Martin has too many subplots as well, and is having a hard time finishing his story.

Re: OT-Black Company
 

The first book of SoIaF was so revolutionary, so full of hope and promise, that it literally took my breath away, but sadly, the rest of the series hasn't lived up to that. It's still very good, and contains a lot of very high notes, but the greatness of the first book is diluted by too much grub-work and wordiness. Martin, in my opinion, should have sat on the sequils, ignored publishers' demands, and even avoided signing with a publishing house until each book was as refined and good as he could make it-and retained some very strong editorship. It's a lot like the Matrix-it starts off eye-popping, but then degrades into an effort that still looks good, still intrigues, but disappoints as well, and ultimately, feels rushed and half-baked.

Re: OT-Black Company
 

You guys are crazy. lol

George RR Martin owns us all.

Re: OT-Black Company
 

Tolkien's greatness-and yes, I do appreciate his work a lot, although I think it has a lot of major faults as well-was the completeness of his world, and his willing and constant refinement and expansion on a central theme.

He also had the twin joys of a relatively new genre to work with, and make inroads into, and some real masters of that genre (Dunsany, etc) to be inspired by.

Re: OT-Black Company
 

RenoJustin: I like GRRM, but honestly, he's not the best writer that ever came down the pike. His strength is in writing fantasy for adults, and that's good, but he's still writing the same tired old fantasy as everybody else. It's got some innovation, but it's got a lot of flaws too, and they're big, obvious flaws.

Re: OT-Black Company
 

GRRM and Jordan both are awesome storytellers. The 1st 3 books of Jordan's were among the best ever. As were GRRM.

But you must be judged on the work in toto, not on bits and pieces. And the end is considered a very important part of most stories!

Re: OT-Black Company
 

Jordan's books weren't even worth reading to the end. I made it to around book 8 on the strength of the original setting, but it got so wordy and confusing-even after I shelled out 40$ for the world-book-and frankly, annoying, that I gave up on it completely.

Re: OT-Black Company
 

Well, this surely goes beyond the initial topic, but nevertheless:
Agreed with you and HoneyBadger that definite ending surely improves the writers' work. Tolkien, of course, was in a position better than that of modern commercial writers. Actually, what an approach such as theirs can bring is seen in Cristopher Tolkien's "sequels". And as Robert Asprin has written to his fans: "It's quite difficult to remain funny continuously for six books". And in less light-hearted genre it's possibly more difficult still. However, the recipe is simple: not to write soap operas. There ARE even modern writers who upkeep such a principle. I had already named some. And Martin & Jordan... they possibly don't even see the problem. Glen Cook surely does - and he makes memorable endings. That would be enough to say that those two aren't even close to him in work quality. However, I disagree about "very strong starters" - very strong relative to what? And what their "strength" consists of? They are quite primitive - and in Martin's case main plot is borrowed (& he doesn't do justice to his material, from my point of view)...
What did you see as "revolutionary"? Remember that this was written after Dixon's Saint Dragon, for Cthulhu's sake! "Grub-work" I surely see, but greatness?! And as for "ignoring publishers"... It takes character, man! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
Please speak for yourself. I, for myself, is completely nonplussed. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif
And you speak thusly after Tanith Lee??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif And what I've heard said about his "innovation" is using real world history as framework for his story. As I've said, I prefer actual chronicles. And in any case, Turtledove does this so much better! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif Though even for Turtledove, who IS a real historician such method HAS caused much laziness in making his own material of late... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif Which shows what it does for a writer. Though I'm not sorry for Martin in this case.