Books you would never recommend to a non fantasy reader

[peterbound]

Rolling this one over from the rec's page, as to not piss the mods off.

There are certain books in our chosen corner of geekdom that may not be all that acceptable to the first time SFF reader. Please post those series that you think should be avoided when recommending to someone that is not a fantasy/sci fi geek, as it will only push them outside our fold.

1. The Dragonlance novels. Crap. Pure derivative crap. Might be alright for a 13 year old that loves some D&D, but not on here. Not to mention the books are flat out poorly written.

2. The Green rider series

3. Anything by Stanek

4. Mostly anything published by Baen. Bjould being the glaring exception.

5. The Yeard

6. Anything by Newcomb

Please feel free to join in. Let others know the types of series that should be avoided when trying to pimp out our love for SFF to others.

ETA: Took out some of the harsher language. Although i still hate the shit out of dragonlance.

[Contrarius]

Hmmm. I'd like to contribute to the premise presented by your subject line -- books I wouldn't recommend to a non-fantasy reader -- but NOT to the premise of your post -- worst books.

I personally would never recommend the Covenant books, or at least the first Chronicles, to a non-fantasy reader. I have a deep and abiding fondness for those books, BUT I think non-fantasy readers wouldn't have the literary background to fully understand them, and would probably be put off by them. But I don't think they're deplorable, flat-out stupid, filth, "worst", or any other perjorative you may have used in your post. I just think they're likely to require some pre-habituation for maximum appreciation.

[SkynJay]

Simon R Green's Secret History series. May have some redeeming features if you just want cheese, but bad modern fantasy by my measure.

[peterbound]

Hmmm. I'd like to contribute to the premise presented by your subject line -- books I wouldn't recommend to a non-fantasy reader -- but NOT to the premise of your post -- worst books.

I personally would never recommend the Covenant books, or at least the first Chronicles, to a non-fantasy reader. I have a deep and abiding fondness for those books, BUT I think non-fantasy readers wouldn't have the literary background to fully understand them, and would probably be put off by them. But I don't think they're deplorable, flat-out stupid, filth, "worst", or any other perjorative you may have used in your post. I just think they're likely to require some pre-habituation for maximum appreciation.

Agreed. Although they were the first fantasy series I read after The Incarnations of Immortality (another set of books i wouldn't recommend to a non fantasy reader), and i seem to have done alright

[sologdin]

probably shouldn't recommend the silmarillion to a non-specfic reader, unless you're some kind of sadist.

[SkynJay]

Hmmm. I'd like to contribute to the premise presented by your subject line -- books I wouldn't recommend to a non-fantasy reader -- but NOT to the premise of your post -- worst books.

I personally would never recommend the Covenant books, or at least the first Chronicles, to a non-fantasy reader. I have a deep and abiding fondness for those books, BUT I think non-fantasy readers wouldn't have the literary background to fully understand them, and would probably be put off by them. But I don't think they're deplorable, flat-out stupid, filth, "worst", or any other perjorative you may have used in your post. I just think they're likely to require some pre-habituation for maximum appreciation.

In that case I think id add Tyranny of the Night , Gardens of the Moon, and even Prince of Nothing. All are tough going at first to get into, just because of the complexity of the cast and/or world.

For some reason even though Martin has the complexity, i found him an easier read from the get go. May just be his initial pacing and character introduction.

[Liadin]

Going by what we would recommend to someone, just not to someone without exposure to fantasy, I'd probably avoid anything heavy on the speculative elements for the first rec. Mieville, for instance--the weirdness might put people off.

(Just lent my copy of AGOT to a non-fantasy-reading friend the other day.... we'll see how that goes. I warned her about the violence, gore, rape, and graphic sex. I forgot to warn her about the incest, zombies, torture, child murder and pervasive darkness. But it's not a book I'd expect someone to have a hard time with by virtue of being a non-fantasy reader, unless maybe they can't keep up with all the characters....)

[Grack21]

Ender's Game

[nickg]

Going by what we would recommend to someone, just not to someone without exposure to fantasy, I'd probably avoid anything heavy on the speculative elements for the first rec. Mieville, for instance--the weirdness might put people off.

(Just lent my copy of AGOT to a non-fantasy-reading friend the other day.... we'll see how that goes. I warned her about the violence, gore, rape, and graphic sex. I forgot to warn her about the incest, zombies, torture, child murder and pervasive darkness. But it's not a book I'd expect someone to have a hard time with by virtue of being a non-fantasy reader, unless maybe they can't keep up with all the characters....)

I agree, but I think i would also base my decision on the age of the reader. For example, if I had gotten to WoT at a younger age, I might be more fond of it than I am now. I dont see an adult, non fantasy reader enjoying something like that as much

[Datepalm]

Dragonlance and Enders Game I think of as gateway books, actually, at least for kids. They're exactly what I would give to a first time SFF reader, at least of the right (ie, under 16) age. Well, I wouldn't actually give them Ender's Game, but you know what I mean.

Anything thats too heavily mired in genre deconstruction or convention I would red - First Law, for example (The Heroes might be more accessible, i'm not sure.) or some very technologically dense space opera ala Alistair Reynolds or the Quantum Thief. Its not so much the concepts, (I don't understand anything in the Quantum Thief) I think theres a kind of acquired skill of reading SF, in knowing to make the "what if..." bits meld with the story.

[Curethan]

I wouldn't recommend that stuff in the OP to any reader.

And if they were fantasy readers I would recommend they actively avoid them unless they were interested in developing a critical language.

[Phostopheles]

5. The Yeard

BLASPHEMY!

There are roughly as many books I find bad enough to never recommend as there are books that are so good I feel compelled to recommend them. In general, SFF is worth reading for some reason or other.

That said, what I would never recommend, and in fact would actively prevent people from reading:

Twilight

Eragon

Anything by Anne Rice

Anything by Orson Scott Card

They are all gateways, but let's be honest, there are much better gateways. And Rice and Card are everything wrong with humanity.

[russjass]

It would depend on the type of non-fantasy reader. If it was someone with an open mind then it would be something like WoT, and I would encourage them to explore from there to Martin. But if it was a typical non-fantasy reader, who is adamant that fantasy is not good, "orcs, dragons, magic and all that shit", and you know that any book you recommend is going to be used by them purely to prove their own opinion of fantasy then I would never recommend WoT, Martin or the First Law. Even though all the typical tropes are used very differently to typical fantasy, they are still there.

I would rec something like Lies of Locke Lamora, something that is outside the usual.

[Grack21]

Well, I wouldn't give Ender's Game to anyone, cause I wouldn't want them to think I'm a Fascist Mormon who supports genocide.

[Contrarius]

Well, I wouldn't give Ender's Game to anyone, cause I wouldn't want them to think I'm a Fascist Mormon who supports genocide.

Are you really gonna judge every author by their politics and/or religion? Are you only going to read those whom you judge to be pure of heart? Where are you going to draw the line on author acceptability?

[Grack21]

Are you really gonna judge every author by their politics and/or religion? Are you only going to read those whom you judge to be pure of heart? Where are you going to draw the line on author acceptability?

When there Politics/Religion is blatantly obvious in everything they right, yes. When their ideas are mind numbingly awful and EVIL, yes.

So, when someone says we need to arrest all the gays and kill all the muslims, you'll excuse me if I don't want to read his/her work.

[Contrarius]

When there Politics/Religion is blatantly obvious in everything they right, yes. When their ideas are mind numbingly awful and EVIL, yes.

So, when someone says we need to arrest all the gays and kill all the muslims, you'll excuse me if I don't want to read his/her work.

One thing that impresses me about Card is that most of his work does NOT make his personal politics or religion blatantly obvious. I agree that some of his political and religious views are objectionable...but I wouldn't agree with various political or religious views held by many other authors, either. And I'm not about to go researching each and every author before I read their work, just to be sure they pass my personal purity test. Can you honestly say that you are aware of the personal views of every author you read? Can you, for instance, name other popular Mormon f/sf authors so that you will be able to avoid them? Have you researched all the homophobic authors currently on the market?

[Seli]

In general I would not recommend anything that cannot be read as a standalone to a non-sff reader.

I would not recommend books I did not enjoy.

But so much depends on the reader, I'll have to know them a bit to dare give recommendations (does not count for random people on the web, they'll have to think for themselves)

[The Sand Snake]

Dragonlance and Enders Game I think of as gateway books, actually, at least for kids. They're exactly what I would give to a first time SFF reader, at least of the right (ie, under 16) age. Well, I wouldn't actually give them Ender's Game, but you know what I mean.

Anything thats too heavily mired in genre deconstruction or convention I would red - First Law, for example (The Heroes might be more accessible, i'm not sure.) or some very technologically dense space opera ala Alistair Reynolds or the Quantum Thief. Its not so much the concepts, (I don't understand anything in the Quantum Thief) I think theres a kind of acquired skill of reading SF, in knowing to make the "what if..." bits meld with the story.

I agree. When I was around like 12 or 13 I read Dragonlance and enjoyed it. Its the main reason I got into other fantasy novels as I got older, example asoiaf. I think they're good books to get a young teen interested in fantasy.

Looking back now nearly all of the novels in Dragonalance are poorly written but I dont mind reading the original Chronicles once every three or four years.

[Grack21]

One thing that impresses me about Card is that most of his work does NOT make his personal politics or religion blatantly obvious. I agree that some of his political and religious views are objectionable...but I wouldn't agree with various political or religious views held by many other authors, either. And I'm not about to go researching each and every author before I read their work, just to be sure they pass my personal purity test. Can you honestly say that you are aware of the personal views of every author you read? Can you, for instance, name other popular Mormon f/sf authors so that you will be able to avoid them? Have you researched all the homophobic authors currently on the market?

You mean like Brandon Sanderson? Who I enjoy?

And if you think Card's personal politics and religion isn't blatantly obvious in his work, then you've either never actually read any, or are willfully ignorant.

Edit: And I don't have to research Card's views. He shouts them off of rooftops.