WrathOfTinyKittens Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Ok guys, didn't want to ask in a big discussion thread. Basically, I am in a reread of Malazan, building up to the last two books which I've not read. I have read Esslemont's first two but not the latest two. So... What is the reading order of all of the books? I remember that TTH spoiled parts of TRotCG (or the other way around?) but didn't know if savvier people knew the ideal order. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
End of Disc One Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 You'll likely get various answers but I'd say publication order is the safest, best way to go. RotCG before TtH. Some people don't think you should read any Esselmont books between DoD and TCG. If you want you can read both Stonewielder and Orb Sceptre Throne before or after those two books, or in publication order. I don't know yet if the newest book, Blood and Bone, spoils anything from TCG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overactive Imagination Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I've read night of knives and return of the CG, and I'm currently on TTH for the first time. I've decided to read all of Erikson's stuff first just because I like it a lot more. esslemont's books kind of ruined (not completely ruined.. just a little bit imo) a few awesome things that erikson created so i'm trying to avoid reading his stuff until i'm done erikson's.i like esslemont, just not half as much as erikson.but yeah publication order is probably the best bet for most readers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrathOfTinyKittens Posted December 4, 2012 Author Share Posted December 4, 2012 Thanks guys!OI - I'm a bit surprised by what you've said, since I personally prefer Esslemont's approach (not as philosophy-heavy as Erikson) and most commentators seem to think he's better at tying up the loose ends and sticking to a consistent timeline and such than Erikson... Both probably the result of better editing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memmorio Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 A series I really wanted to get into since there is so much material to read. Never really could get into it though. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 When you say Esslemont's first two, do you mean NoK and RotCG, or RotcG and Stonewielder? Because if the former, then read Stonewielder before tCG - it's not completely vital but there are elements which lead into it.Blood and Bone should be after tCG though. They essentially spoil each other as they occur at the same time, but the knowledge will have more impact on a reading of tCG than Blood and Bone which somewhat takes that knowledge into account. It might work better to read it after Forge of Darkness too, as it (in a very minor way) makes use of revelations made in FoD.Orb Scepter Throne can be read whenever, so long as it's after Toll the Hounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Having read about 300 pages of Blood and Bone, I would say that it relies somewhat on the reader having read FoD first, as there are some characters that appear in both and motivations are hinted at in the latter novel. As for reading order, I'd say first five Erikson, NoK, TBH, RG, RotCG, TtH, SW, OST, DoD, TCG, FoD, BaB. Almost publication order, with only OST moved up in order not to split the DoD/TCG sequence.But for those who complain about "philosophy"...There are those scenes involving Gothos and Osserc in the Deadhouse... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gormenghast Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Having read about 300 pages of Blood and Bone, I would say that it relies somewhat on the reader having read FoD first, as there are some characters that appear in both and motivations are hinted at in the latter novel.That's... unlikely? Do you really mean Forge of Darkness? Because I doubt Esslemont read that book when he wrote B&B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry. Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 That's... unlikely? Do you really mean Forge of Darkness? Because I doubt Esslemont read that book when he wrote B&B.Yes, I really mean that because... of the discussion of the Azathanai in further detail, particularly T'riss, some more on what drives Kallor, one of Gothos' titles, among others.Considering how closely the two have worked over the years with each other and in developing the setting, I would be more surprised that there was no communication between the two as to what would be the basic contents in each other's upcoming books than an agreement of sorts as to when certain information would be divulged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 That's... unlikely?It is, however, true. I wouldn't say it's relying on FoD - the things mentioned are key points in FoD, but minor asides in BaB - but there's definitely small details that won't get noticed if one hasn't read FoD first.I do remain baffled by your insistence on making authoritative comments about a series you're not up to speed with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
instantdeath999 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Since I'm considering a Malazan read sometime in the near future, would you guys say include the Esslemont books in a first read? Or they meant to be supplementary, or do they include the "main" Erikson books? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dietl Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 "include the Esslemont books"?Yes. Publication order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrathOfTinyKittens Posted December 5, 2012 Author Share Posted December 5, 2012 Yeah, and Night of Knives isn't great (though I enjoyed most of it), but RotCG was as good as any Erikson book IMO except maybe MOI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastard of Godsgrace Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Yes, definitely read Esslemont as well, in the order listed by Larry. B&B decidedly works better after FoD, even if the points mentioned are indeed minor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Balstroko Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 I read RoTCG after TTH so I did already know the outcome of Traveller's journey, but I think in many ways that helped out a lot, since Traveller was too shallow in RoTCG. It helped define his character a little better, knowing what his motivations really were. As to the epilogue of MOI, it doesn't really spoil anything from DG (as far as I remember), but the impact is lost if one hasn't read DG prior to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.