Terry Brooks

[Stark Revenge]

So I've heard Terry Brooks mentioned as a fantasy writer and decided to look him up. I was looking forward to finding some good books to read only to find that at least the first book in his Sword of Shannara series seems to be yet another ripoff of LotR. What do you guys think? Are his books worth reading, do they get better and more unique or stay dull and cliche?

[Darth Richard]

Oh dear, I think I'll sit this one out.

[The Crow]

They suck.

Read LOTR instead.

[Werthead]

The Sword of Shannara is lazy, derivative and extremely badly-written. Brooks himself has said to sit it out and start with Elfstones, which is a much better book (though it's still not that great). I think his Shannara series, like Eddings's fantasy, probably works best for younger readers starting out in the genre. Coming to them as an adult may not be the best idea. The normal rec I've heard for adult readers is to start with his Word and the Void trilogy, which is more of an urban fantasy (and later retconned as an ancient prequel to the Shannara series). I'ver never read it, though I want to get round to it one day.

[The Crow]

Think of it like this, people say Eragon is a rip off of LOTR and STar Wars. What does that make Shannara?

[The Marquis de Leech]

The Sword of Shannara isn't simply an awful LOTR rip-off. It also opened the floodgates for brick-sized formulaic farmboy fantasy, and the book's commercial success in 1977 showed publishers that derivative crap would sell regardless of quality.

(It isn't the worst rip-off though. That title belongs to Denis McKiernan's Iron Tower Trilogy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Iron_Tower).

[Freshwater Spartan]

I enjoyed them when I was in middle school. If I had to read them today (many years later :) ) , I can't say how well they would stand up. They do tend to be reviled on this board. Start with the first trilogy. If you don't like the first 50 pages don't bother reading on.

[Stark Revenge]

The Sword of Shannara isn't simply an awful LOTR rip-off. It also opened the floodgates for brick-sized formulaic farmboy fantasy, and the book's commercial success in 1977 showed publishers that derivative crap would sell regardless of quality.

(It isn't the worst rip-off though. That title belongs to Denis McKiernan's Iron Tower Trilogy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Iron_Tower).

Isn't he the guy that wanted to make a sequel to LotR?

[naz]

Read them in the context they were written. Sword is certainly derivative, by all accounts, even the author's, but I enjoyed it in middle school, as did others. I really didn't know any better, to be honest. I thought Elfstones was significantly better and more original and poignant, and to some extent, the next two books, too. After a while, though, the Shannara series simply becomes a cash cow and the rest of the books are to be avoided at all costs.

Fantasy fans are quick to decry Brooks almost universally, yet praise works by Robin Hobb, for example, to no end. I find her work much more cliche and "immature", yet people love her. I don't know why. Maybe because she's not so obviously derivative of Tolkien in particular, but I find her books mind-numbingly predictable and clunky.

Your best bet is to read a summary of the first Shannara book for background, then dive into Elfstones and see how you feel. It's not deep or witty or intellectual or "gritty", but sometimes you just want your bread-and-butter fantasy cliche for nostalgia's sake before moving on to more modern and original fare.

[baxus]

"sword of shannara" is an even worse lotr rip-off than "the eye of the world".

i did enjoy it well enough when i was a kid but that's not saying much.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

They were among the first fantasy I read as a teen. Loved them then, not so much when I got older/better read

[MisterOJ]

I think Terry Brooks' Shannara books are very important for a couple of different reasons. First, is that they serve as great introductory books to the fantasy genre. I remember thinking when I was a kid that reading a fantasy novel would be cool. I was into that kind of stuff and it seemed to make sense. So, my first read was Lord of the Rings. It didn't go so well. The language and story just didn't appeal to my 12-13 year old self. But, when I read Sword of Shannara, I was immediately hooked. That book really made my love for reading (and reading fantasy) take off.

It was also the first really long book I read. So, the feeling of accomplishment when I got to the end of it was really pretty great too.

Also, (and I could be wrong about this, so correct me if I am wrong) wasn't that the first truly commercially successful fantasy series - like, ever? It sort of paved the road, so to speak, for the likes of Jordan and Eddings and everyone that came after. So, from a historical standpoint, it's quite significant.

But, yeah, it's not a great book just on the basis of literature.

[thecryptile]

When I was a kid, I liked Magic Kingdom For Sale: Sold better than The Sword of Shannara.

[Arataniello]

If you absolutely HAVE to read one of the Shannara books, Elfstones is the least worst of them.

[Myshkin]

So I've heard Terry Brooks mentioned as a fantasy writer and decided to look him up. I was looking forward to finding some good books to read only to find that at least the first book in his Sword of Shannara series seems to be yet another ripoff of LotR. What do you guys think? Are his books worth reading, do they get better and more unique or stay dull and cliche?

I think that's a little unfair to Brooks; I believe it's the first ripoff of LotR. Brooks was ripping off Tolkien before it was cool.

[thecryptile]

Terry Brooks was the pioneer of imitating Tolkien. The Landover books are imitating CS Lewis IMO.

[SpaceChampion]

Isn't he the guy that wanted to make a sequel to LotR?

He wanted it, and wrote it too ("The Silver Call" duology -- imagine Gimli created from his magical ability to remember every step he ever took a map detailing the path the Fellowship took from the west entrance of Moria to the east exit, and two centuries after LOTRs two of Sam's descendants who were caretakers of the Red Book of Westmarch or "There and Back Again" memorized the map and were asked by the next reincarnation of Durin to come along on a mission to clear the west entrance from the inside so they can bring an army in to kill all the Goblins and retake Moria). But then McKiernan had to go back and change the details like names and back history so it was his own ripoff world instead of fan fiction.

[Stark Revenge]

He wanted it, and wrote it too ("The Silver Call" duology -- imagine Gimli created from his magical ability to remember every step he ever took a map detailing the path the Fellowship took from the west entrance of Moria to the east exit, and two centuries after LOTRs two of Sam's descendants who were caretakers of the Red Book of Westmarch or "There and Back Again" memorized the map and were asked by the next reincarnation of Durin to come along on a mission to clear the west entrance from the inside so they can bring an army in to kill all the Goblins and retake Moria). But then McKiernan had to go back and change the details like names and back history so it was his own ripoff world instead of fan fiction.

I haven't heard many LotR sequel ideas, but this one dosent sound bad. If Tolkien had written a story like that I would've read it.

[Shryke]

Read them in the context they were written. Sword is certainly derivative, by all accounts, even the author's, but I enjoyed it in middle school, as did others. I really didn't know any better, to be honest. I thought Elfstones was significantly better and more original and poignant, and to some extent, the next two books, too. After a while, though, the Shannara series simply becomes a cash cow and the rest of the books are to be avoided at all costs.

Fantasy fans are quick to decry Brooks almost universally, yet praise works by Robin Hobb, for example, to no end. I find her work much more cliche and "immature", yet people love her. I don't know why. Maybe because she's not so obviously derivative of Tolkien in particular, but I find her books mind-numbingly predictable and clunky.

Wha??:huh:???

Your best bet is to read a summary of the first Shannara book for background, then dive into Elfstones and see how you feel. It's not deep or witty or intellectual or "gritty", but sometimes you just want your bread-and-butter fantasy cliche for nostalgia's sake before moving on to more modern and original fare.

The first few Shannara books aren't bad in the way that, say, Eddings isn't bad for what it is. I didn't even think Sword of Shannara was totally awful and at least the ending is a unique twist and interesting.

But they aren't by any means good. They are generic and cliched and mediocre.

I think Brooks looses his touch (what there was of it) somewhere in the 4-part Scions of Shannara series and never recovers.

I remember thinking the first few of his "Magic Kingdom for Sale!" series were good for a lark back in my early teens.

[Samalander]

Shannara - A fine example of not knowing when to stop. Somebody take away his typewriter before he gets to great-grandchildren of Shannara.

Word and Void - Decent urban fantasy trilogy. Neat idea in having visions of the future dictate actions in the present. Middle book is very meh... But why did he have to tie it to Shannara?!

Landover - Not bad for its kind (ordinary man from earth finds himself in a magical kingdom). The level of books is uneven, but is at times amusing and original. Starts off fine, but the last two books were bitterly disappointing. Strongest in the middle, as the 4th installment, The Tangle Box is surprisingly deep and complex. Possibly the best book Terry Brooks had ever written. Also - a 14 year wait for the last installment! And we grumble about GRRM...