Most Craptastic novels

[Datepalm]

It always seems to be that a lot of the Eddings hate here comes from the fact that it isn't GRIMDARK. And obviously something without graphic sex/rape and gore can't be good! Which is hilarious to me, since people here complain about how our genre is looked down on as a whole, and then look down on sub genres within there genre. It's light teen orientated fantasy for fucks sake. Of course most people here aren't going to like it, but you shouldn't look down on something for being what it set out to be. Bah, I'm ranting now. 

No, its more than that (And I grew up on Eddings and remember Garion and co. quite fondly.) I agree on gratutitous unexamined violence, FWIW, but Eddings actually had plenty of the heroes killing random enemies without a qualm, IIRC. The worldbuilding really is pretty unambigously racist and simplistic. I suppose I could look at it sort of subversively - a more dishonest author would have made all the mooks orcs or trollocs or whathaveyou, and therefore excused their wholesale slaughter by simply pointing out they're not human. Eddings had the guts to just make them foreigners. A straight line connecting him to KJ Parker, really. 

[Grack21]

No, its more than that (And I grew up on Eddings and remember Garion and co. quite fondly.) I agree on gratutitous unexamined violence, FWIW, but Eddings actually had plenty of the heroes killing random enemies without a qualm, IIRC. The worldbuilding really is pretty unambigously racist and simplistic. I suppose I could look at it sort of subversively - a more dishonest author would have made all the mooks orcs or trollocs or whathaveyou, and therefore excused their wholesale slaughter by simply pointing out they're not human. Eddings had the guts to just make them foreigners. A straight line connecting him to KJ Parker, really. 

Well I'm saying it isn't necessary racist, I was more using Eddings as a reference for a lot of the other things tha get bashed around here for not being violence heavy. Also that KJ Parker idea is terrifying.

[The faceless others]

To clarify, are these the qualifications for the most craptastic novels?

1. The writing is so bland and boring that you couldn't risk reading it while on the toilet for the risk of sleeping.

2. The author is preaching. . . no more like shoving his ideas into your throat like we are not capable of thinking.

3. And by doing the first two, the author acts like a dick.

If this is the case, I place Stanek for the crappiest writer. Try looking at the fabricated reviews in Amazon.com.

(Correct me if I'm wrong on the qualifications)

:leer:

[Dr Spoon]

Sally rubbed her stinging bottom. "Thank you, milord. Your firm hand has knocked all that voting and reading nonsense clean out of me."

"That's ok," King Dirk replied. "Now get me a beer, wench. It's been thirsty work killing the freedom-hating Horde of Harrabia."

I give up. I'll never compete with Ted Rockson.

Interesting point Grack21. I too find a lot of Grimdark kind've juvenile, like it's written for 10 year old boys. Realism is fine, but some writers seem to think that throwing in a rape-and-murder makes their fiction better instead of just more adult. Trying too hard just leads to war porn which is just as childish and less tasteful than Sir Shiny vs the Big Monsters or whatever.

I see the point about Eddings but I find it hard to dislike him still. He doesn't seem to have the same malice or sadism some other writers have. He just seems like a silly old guy instead. And before I knew better fantasy writers I did really enjoy his stuff.

[Galactus]

I think part of it is that you kind of feel that Eddings doese't believe what he's writing: He wants to sell books and tell a fun story, not to enlighten the world about his ethics. He's the anti-Goodkind in that respect.

He mentions a bit in the Rivan Codex (I think) that he essentially wanted to make money, and that he did plan things out a bit: Very deliberately crafted a Hero's Journey kind of story, etc. etc. (and checked out other "popular" stories that resonated with the age-group, Star Wars, etc.)

That's not to say the Belgariad doesen't have problems: It has a lot of them. But I think that peple often underestimate it because the end-product is so bland. It is bland, true, but a deliberate, highly polished kind of bland that somehow sucks you in, at least if you're the right ae and in the right situation.

[madking]

There is no God.

Battlefield earth number 3? No, no, surely there was some sort of clerical error yes that's it a clerical error, everything is fine (sigh)

[Mad Monkey]

The best part of that list is how blatantly rigged the "Reader Choice" (on the right) is. You look to the left, and you see a pretty reasonable collection of well-regarded classics chosen by the Board. You've got your Joyce, your Fitzgerald, your Steinbeck. Now, I'm not saying that everyone in the world has to like those authors, but most of us can at least agree that those are popular, well-regarded classics that have endured decades and are still considered relevant today. There's also an even variety of authors; you don't find the complete works of Fitzgerald all bunched up together at the top ten, for instance.

And then you go to the right, and BAM! Like a handful of bloated ticks to the face, you get slammed with 4 Ayn Rand books and 3 books by L. Ron Hubbard (!) Sure, they made an attempt to round it out with To Kill a Mockingbird, which we all read in high school, but still. The fact that anyone thinks that Johnny "Goodboy" Tyler and Equality-123123123i310 (or whatever the Hell his stupid name was) even come close to qualifying as "good" characters, much less the protagonists of the best novels in the world shocks the conscience.

[williamjm]

What bothers me about Eddings... well, one of the things that bothers me about Eddings... is how racist it is. Everyone is human but nevertheless they all adhere to the personality decreed by their ironclad national stereotype. Our designated "heroes" slaughter people from the evil countries without a bit of regret while the author clearly approves. After all, the bad guy nations all worship an evil god as a state religion. The national hat of the bad-guy Thulls is stupidity and also big families. This is because Eddings tells us they descend from all-peasant stock. Yeah. (Meanwhile on the good guy side the peasant country of Sendaria's hat is practicality.) In The Malloreon we did get a few non-evil individuals from the bad guy countries, but the national hats continued to remain in force as before. And during the entire series there wasn't a Thull who'd graduated past stupid and disposable evil minion.

I did like Eddings a lot when I was a teenager, but I suspect this aspect would be one of the more problematic things if I did ever try to re-read it.

[Exa Inova]

To clarify, are these the qualifications for the most craptastic novels?

1. The writing is so bland and boring that you couldn't risk reading it while on the toilet for the risk of sleeping.

2. The author is preaching. . . no more like shoving his ideas into your throat like we are not capable of thinking.

3. And by doing the first two, the author acts like a dick.

If this is the case, I place Stanek for the crappiest writer. Try looking at the fabricated reviews in Amazon.com.

(Correct me if I'm wrong on the qualifications)

:leer:

Well, I think Goodkind will give him a run for his money.

I have no problem with Eddings. Some time ago when he died we had a thread about him and I feel the consensus was, he isnt that good a writer but he (and Tolkien) introduced a lot of us to the genre fantasy in a way so that we continued to love it. dont do a re read when you're past 18 but I for one have fond memories about his books and thank the man for it.

I agree that a novel isnt craptastic per se because of its political message. That said..............

The Naked Empire by the Yeard is (to me) by far the worst piece of crap Ive ever read and not because Im a lemming because is bad even by Badwrites' standards.

Things like: People armed only with their hatred for moral clarity fell bloodied, terribly injured, and dead.

or: Men behind Richard hit the line of evil's guardians with unrestrained violence.

What is this shit?!!?

Not to mention the most stupid deus ex machina ever when 'our hero' cures himself after being poisened by coming up with an antidote purely by tasting.

But luckily: Richard laughed. Owen laughed. Cara gave Marilee an approving clap on the back. And then all the men laughed.

[evanesco75]

Eragon. Talk about ripping off, and then some. And he made a pile of money too, didn't he?

Twilight.

The 'series' by Cassandra Clare (known Hary Potter fanfiction writer cum plaigarist), called City of Bones. My poor, well-meaning kid brother gave me the first one on my birthday, 'because you like this sort of fantasy shit', he said. Alas. It was horrific.

Then there are the 'great' works I find insufferably convoluted, self important or plain tedious. War and Peace, I'm looking at you!

[McGinnis]

Eragon. Talk about ripping off, and then some. And he made a pile of money too, didn't he?

To be fair, Eragon at least has a somewhat consistent "quality" to it - if you can go so far as to call it that. If you're among that tiny minority that hasn't seen Star Wars, or aren't quick to link the plots, then it's at least somewhat readable.

The prose, while nothing special isn't that bad. His writing style is unremarkable and generic at worst. Despite the fact that the story is completely derivative and loaded with the worst clichés, if you haven't read much fantasy before and aren't familiar with said clichés in the genre, it could conceivably be enjoyable.

It still doesn't fall under the category of books that Mad Monkey described so aptly with his sandwich analogy. It's a bad book, but it's still WAY too good to be called craptastic, although I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, personally.

[Grack21]

Man, this may be the first caffeinated beverage I've had in months talking but Naked empire is GREAT when you think its a parody!

[Mad Monkey]

Honestly, Eragon was bearable. The author was supposed to be really young when he wrote it, right? His main problems -- apart from blatantly lifting the plot of Star Wars and setting it in Generic Lord of the Rings-land -- are that his main characters are really unlikeable and he has no real understanding of diction. I think he does have promise though, in that he apparently still enjoys writing for it's own sake. As long as he still has that, there's still a possibility that he'll mature as a writer.

That's something that I feel people like Stanek don't have; Stanek doesn't seem to enjoy writing. While he is apparently very prolific, if you actually look closely at his books you'll realize that he only wrote one book, which he split into four books by making the margins really wide, then published that same series three more times under three separate names. Stanek wants to be thought of as a novelist, but he doesn't seem -- in my opinion only, of course -- to actually enjoy the craft of writing books. He did the actual book part as quickly and as carelessly as he could, so he could do the part that he really enjoys: shameless self-promotion. Even Goodkind never did that.

Authors like Ayn Rand are not quite as bad in my opinion. She published a bunch of non-fiction espousing her philosophical outlook. Then she wrote a bunch of novels in which characters start talking almost like philosophy textbooks. I don't think that Ayn Rand was as hackish as Stanek, but I had the sense that she was only writing her longer works as novels only to teach her philosophy rather than to tell an entertaining story. I don't think that there's anything dishonest about that; allegories and parables are a well-regarded part of literature (although I will note that most parables are not novel-length!!) but personally I can't stand reading stories like that. Be didactic if you must, but include an entertaining story to take the edge off (and convey your message more convincingly; I don't know anyone who actually trusts the wild-eyed lunatic preaching the End of the World!).

[The Evil Hat]

I'll make a confession: I loved Eragon. Really loved it. I read it in two days, the fastest (at the time) that I'd read anything but Harry Potter. Mind you, I was quite young at the time, and all the fantasy I'd read was those two and LotR, but still.

I'm sorry, board.

:bawl:

[Mad Monkey]

Dude, don't cry. It's just a book. I'm a fan of Harry Potter even though most people here don't like it (for good reasons, by the way). As long as it's not child porn I don't think people should feel guilt or shame over liking any form of entertainment.

[Grack21]

I'll make a confession: I loved Eragon. Really loved it. I read it in two days, the fastest (at the time) that I'd read anything but Harry Potter. Mind you, I was quite young at the time, and all the fantasy I'd read was those two and LotR, but still.

I'm sorry, board.

:bawl:

Aw don't fell bad, I've read all of Lackey's Valdemar books, and still do for some reason I can't figure out.

And I read David Weber too, but I find that less shameful.

[SkynJay]

I'll make a confession: I loved Eragon. Really loved it. I read it in two days, the fastest (at the time) that I'd read anything but Harry Potter. Mind you, I was quite young at the time, and all the fantasy I'd read was those two and LotR, but still.

I'm sorry, board.

:bawl:

I have confessed before that I read the entire Sword of Truth series. I would not recommend it to anyone, but it was my first "epic fantasy" outside of Lord of the Rings(i was very much a a sci-fi fan). And yes, it gets worse as it goes, but i wanted to know how it ends, damn it. Thank God i found Martin and Abercrombie by accident, or i may have tried the next "recommended" reading at the local borders and got sucked into god know what.

[The faceless others]

I always forgive the authors if its his/her first or second book, I mean most clumsy writing starts with their first right? But if the author repeats that in his lets say fifth book, "Thou shall not be forgiven!". Examples are yup Eragon, Sword of Shannara, Sword of truth I'm not sure about this one, and a lot more.

Now, we all read a few books like Harry Potter, or LOTR, or Eragon, and even Valdemar (I confess I read all of them, and am proud of it. :D). Most good books these days are a bit hard also, so when I'm a bit depressed, I will always choose a few easy reads just to keep my mind off the problems, and what do you know most of those a bit easy books are the so called childish types. :D

[Grack21]

I always forgive the authors if its his/her first or second book, I mean most clumsy writing starts with their first right? But if the author repeats that in his lets say fifth book, "Thou shall not be forgiven!". Examples are yup Eragon, Sword of Shannara, Sword of truth I'm not sure about this one, and a lot more.

Now, we all read a few books like Harry Potter, or LOTR, or Eragon, and even Valdemar (I confess I read all of them, and am proud of it. :D). Most good books these days are a bit hard also, so when I'm a bit depressed, I will always choose a few easy reads just to keep my mind off the problems, and what do you know most of those a bit easy books are the so called childish types. :D

Yeah, sometimes you wanna get away from all the GRIMDARK and just read a book about magic horses, dammit!

[AverageGuy]

You can't actually end a book mid-sentence or mid-word

Sure you can! Just toss around words like Kafkaesque, and then declare yourself to be Real Literature which happens to have dragons man-sized cockroaches in it.