OT-Black Company

[Xietor]

heh. My sense of humor is not apparent at times. I was kidding about a hero named Pug or Calais.

But I do take issue with your condemnation of Feist. Some of his work is not good(talonhawk stuff), but Jimmy the Hand was one of my favorite characters.

Edit-Edi, my comment was directed at Wranna's dislike of Feist, not your comment immediately above mine. sorry for the confusion.

[Wrana]

Time to return to this dope...

HoneyBadger:
I can give you a very accurate list of the finest fantasy writers in the past 100 years, but I'm sad to say that not every one of them, at every given instance, is enormously readable. They're profound, deep, compelling, etc. but sometimes, yes, one just wants to escape, and not think all that terribly hard, while being taken on a tour of a world unlike our own ...
even enjoyed Jordan. They aren't they best thing that ever came down the pike, but on a given day they occupied my brain in ways beneficial.

Well, that's too bad. As I've said probably, I consider some books usually included in classics to be overrated - or having had their popularity based on situation in society at the time and not on their literary value...
And I also have read trash fantasy aplenty, but the 3 you mentioned are just too crappy for my palate. Maybe I'm spoiled for choice by having relatively much Russian trash fantasy at hand - many of which are of generally better quality, but unfortunately weren't (and won't be I think) translated into English. Also, there is always Robert Ervin Howard - and not only his fantasy, which I think isn't the best among his works...

And even if people are reading crappy fantasy, they're still reading, and it's still fantasy, and that's a good thing in my book.

I'm not so sure that it is much better than reading nothing - especially as you somehow consider a fantasy better in some obscure way than, say, SF. I don't know whether you have read "Silver Eggheads" by Fritz Leiber which was a warning against brain-munching reading, besides being a very funny and well-written book of its own. But if you didn't, look for it (if yes, just remember how he calls such products and how he descibes procedures used to craft and sell them).

Edi:
After the first book of Serpentwar, Feist's writing started to get seriously stale. I loved the original Riftwar saga and the Empire trilogy he cowrote with Janny Wurts (who is one of my favorite authors, though she can be pretty wordy sometimes).

I don't know, I've just seen very bland language, with any characters speaking the same. And it wasn't particularly original either... Don't remember which of the books this was - I just understood that he's generally not worth reading unless I have absolutely no other choice... Thank you for mentioning other authors - I'll probably make some sort of list from this discussion to look up those that might be interesting.

Xietor:
But I do take issue with your condemnation of Feist. Some of his work is not good(talonhawk stuff), but Jimmy the Hand was one of my favorite characters.

Maybe you take this issue further by arguing for him? Something like originality, quality of text-work, storyline-work... It would be appreciated. Understand, I'm not completely against "dice-rolling" fantasy - there are times when my brain won't absorb much , but even among these, Feist doesn't look particularly good.

Endoperez:
Tolkien helped make fantasy popular. He was one of the first. That means he made many mistakes that he would have been critized about had he not been one of the first popular ones. I think LotR could be written much better.

Agree. I also dislike his attitude on some questions. And you will probably agree that even in his times, many elements could be made better... actually I think that as a writer R.E. Howard was better - or would be if he lived to Prof. Tolkien's years.

It could be written worse, as well. Unfortunately, someone decided to prove it true and wrote LotR, worse. Warning: bad fantasy ahead!

Another example is Terry Brooks. He's not quite so obnoxious at it as he uses less copy-paste... but it remains copy-paste nonetheless, though he didn't repeat it all.

HoneyBadger : I like to call it "fantasy accounting"

Well, there is virtue in such. Just remember Asprin's MYTH Inc. series - though I prefer earlier ones which are more conventional fantasy... Another example is Lawrence Watt-Evans. It's just that Feist can't make it interesting...

Aezeal:
seriously in most your post I only see things you don't like except the black company and hobb and tolkien it seems..

You are wrong. I don't particularly like Tolkien.

I don't see why hobb is so much better than most writers you don't like.. I don't even see why it his books are "for those who like fantasy dark".

Well, what you don't see isn't my problem, is it? And Robin Hobb is a woman, by the way.

I can see why you'd like Tolkien better than some writers that where mentioned (Martin) but I just disagree.. on so many points Martin is better.

Such as?

and if you dont'read the books I recommended it's your loss not mine..

Well, actually it's my gain - I see who recommends which books and choose to not spend my time on those. I should probably thank you!

nordlys :
Kate Novak. Along with Jeff Grubb.

Thank you. Though I probably won't seek it out now anyways, but still thank you. Do you remember someone else from those T$R slaves actually worth some time?

Most people mistakenly treat gaming fiction as literature. It was never supposed to be one. Gaming fiction = in-character gaming accessory. Embrace this fact, and TSR novels become highly enjoyable, no matter how boring the stories, bland the characters and mediocre the writing are.

Well, it actually depends on what your palate can stand. And I personally am not interested in descriptions of the world badly thought out (read: Forgotten Realms ). And what interest can they really have? If they have all those "merits" you mentioned, the only thing which can be interesting are fantasy countries/cultures. But by the virtue of his/her talent (or lack thereof) your average storyhack just can't do juistice for them too! Also, a quality of "in-character gaming accessory" can also vary widely. Just compare those of T$R authors with, say, short stitches in WarHammer Army books (wholly resulting from Games Workshop having enough sense to pay real writers!) - or flavor texts in Dominions units/countries/spells!

[nordlys]

Wrana said:
Thank you. Though I probably won't seek it out now anyways, but still thank you. Do you remember someone else from those T$R slaves actually worth some time?

I found Prince of Lies and Crucible: Trial of Cyric the Mad very good. Generally, James Lowder and some Ravenloft authors are better than the rest.

Well, it actually depends on what your palate can stand. And I personally am not interested in descriptions of the world badly thought out (read: Forgotten Realms ). And what interest can they really have?

Places, events, people.. In novels they are displayed more vividly than in rules-filled proper accessories, so I read them just for that. Exploring the development of gaming universes (many ones) is sort of a hobby of mine, and novels do fill a lot of gaps the dry rulebooks leave behind. They don't have to be talented, they only have to be canon!

Also, a quality of "in-character gaming accessory" can also vary widely. Just compare those of T$R authors with, say, short stitches in WarHammer Army books (wholly resulting from Games Workshop having enough sense to pay real writers!) - or flavor texts in Dominions

I've read some WH40k novels, and didn't found them any better than typical D&D fiction. I guess there is a reason half of those real writers used pseudonyms while writing for GW As for Dominions fluff, it is fascinating enough, but a single paragraph copypasted between related units hardly describes an universe in detail in space and time... as a matter of fact, it could use a solid shelf of Dominions fiction to fill the rest in!

[HoneyBadger]

I'm actually agreeing with you, Wrana, in case you missed that part.

I'm just explaining that first of all, getting people interested in reading is probably a good thing.

And bad sci fi (or future fantasy) isn't necessarily any better, or any more realistic or accurate, than bad fantasy.

Once again from the top: I'm NOT a fan of Robert Jordan, George Martin, Raymond Feist, Terry Brooks, Terry Goodkind, or David Eddings. I am familiar with their works, however, because I read them probably 10 years ago or more, and they do have their good qualities, generally concerning their earlier works, and in their attempt to recreate/reinvigorate the fantasy genre, by infusing it with as much creativity as they're capable of. I no longer bother reading them, because their works have become bloated, unimaginative, uninspired, and stale, and in some cases graphically violent and pornographic, in such a ham-handed way, vulgar way, that it's actually a turn-off. I simply find that I have better things to read.

I'm also not a real big fan of Tolkien or Piers Anthony, but I'll still re-read The Hobbit every few years, and once in a great while I'll read one of Anthony's more bizarre non-Xanth novels, if only because of how truly kooky they can get.

As far as Russian novelists go, I realize that Russia has a long and impressive tradition, and we are starting to see more translations over here in the 'States. I sadly have almost 0 background in the Russian language, although my mother did take Russian language courses when she was in highschool.

If you could recommend some works that have been translated, or better yet, translated, and made freely available on the internet (it's great advertizement, especially for relatively unfamiliar authors, and testing shows that it increases, rather than reducing, sales of hard copies), then I'd happily spend time seeking them out. Until then, it does little to *say* that the Russians have a better space-program, er novel, until it can be quantified with proof

[nordlys]

Wrana said:
The girl who'd written Curse of Asure Bonds isn't bad, but her name slips me and it's not very good by itself.

Kate Novak. Along with Jeff Grubb.

Just not bland and not foolish, which is more than can be said about most "dice rolling" fantasy. It's also probably out of print by now.

Most people mistakenly treat gaming fiction as literature. It was never supposed to be one. Gaming fiction = in-character gaming accessory. Embrace this fact, and TSR novels become highly enjoyable, no matter how boring the stories, bland the characters and mediocre the writing are.

[HoneyBadger]

Not really. Typing is typing. The difference is in what sells, and the bigger, thicker books carry-literally-more weight than short stories, and therefore more emphasis for the readers to empathise with the story/characters/plot, and want more of the same.

[JimMorrison]

And as has been pointed out in reference with the Wheel of Time, a reduced sense of obligation. Once the decision is made to NOT end on a third book, you can keep stringing people along forever. Even if the author dies early (not to make light of that per se, or to blame him for dying) or sales eventually fall off because the writing has gotten so bad, and so irrelevant, you have still conned 10 million people into paying 20$, 30$, maybe $50 for this stuff. If combined sales of a series top $100 million for unsatisfying junk, then what is the incentive for the publisher to find some brilliantly written, but short and controversial (AND unorthodox) story, that won't even hit best seller lists, let alone break $1 million in sales? They do not want quality, they don't care if in 20 or 30 years a book is considered a classic, and a revolutionary writing - they're making decisions to make themselves wealthy NOW, and nothing else, it's just business.

I can't believe this is still an argument.

(Also I can't believe I went to do something else, and this post sat here unsent for 5 or 6 hours. O.o)

[MaxWilson]

Isn't that the way publishing has always been? The reason Dickens' novels are so interminably long is partly that he was paid by the word.

-Max

[HoneyBadger]

Oh and I loved the first Black Company book. Good voice and great use of battlefield magic! The part where the guy with the flying carpet is dropping these green strands down on the enemy, and the threads are cutting people up and leaving horrible, bright green wounds, that was honestly gruesome. I wish there had been more background on the original Taken, though.

[Wrana]

Though the thread became probably too long for any sane person to read , I have currently found the time to accomplish this! Thanks to all who mentioned authors I haven't read already.
Thanks also for reminding about Margareth Weis. Though she's not on par with Barbara Hambly or Caroline Cherryh, she writes well enough. And while she started from very humble beginnings of T$R book-hack, she had overgrown this. Her later books stink of melodrama, though, sometimes. But generally good-written and enjoyable. I personally like Star of the Guardians cycle most, though it's not fantasy and so slightly OT here...
Another case of gaming-company-books-done-well is, of course, production of Games Workshop. Here they seduced some already known British authors into writing some books using a world where their game takes place as a shared universe. I enjoy Jack Yeovil = Kim Newman particularly, but Brian Craig (don't remember actual name) is also good. This series is generally worth to read (maybe less so for those who don't play Warhammer, but still good nevertheless) and dark fantasy is what World of Warhammer is all about!
Considering maps - it's probably good idea, though Martin's would hold no interest for me! Glen Cook didn't place official maps in any of his books afaik, but there are good-quality ones produced by fans. There is good map of Turtledove's World of Videssos also...
As for publishers - well, I generally agree with HoneyBadger's idea, but must point out that I had to take part in preparing some few books for publishing and it's really exact & boring job. Few authors would make this work willingly - and especially make it well.

HoneyBadger said:
Leif, the Mahabharata is a trilogy consisting of approximately 1.8 million words. I don't think they had personal computers and word-processors 2400 years ago.

Well, and Iliada is ten times smaller and ten times better! But here we can't blame poor quality on publishers' establishment - it's just a case of graphomania. Which isn't rare among self-publishers, unfortunately - but I can't say that it's less common among authors liked by publishing houses, too. What I can add to this is that even recommendations by good authors on a back page doesn't garantee the quality of the book - sometimes I doubt if these authors are even aware that their names are placed there. But maybe it's just money - or even just good personal relationships...