I bought the first book of Malazan. Was it stupid?

[polishgenius]

It's a fact that every thread about Erikson gets constantly trolled,

Often by you.

[The Marquis de Leech]

I agree that Bakker and Erikson are (broadly) trying to do the same thing, but I think the former is far more character-focussed than the latter. With ASOIAF being character-driven, I think Martin readers are always going to find Bakker easier to relate to than Erikson.

[Gormenghast]

I agree that Bakker and Erikson are (broadly) trying to do the same thing, but I think the former is far more character-focussed than the latter. With ASOIAF being character-driven, I think Martin readers are always going to find Bakker easier to relate to than Erikson.

Yeah, that's true.

But then you also read complaints about Erikson's philosophy/introspection parts, and Bakker is way more dense about those.

[Jo498]

I have never read any of the Malazan and the criticisms let me hesitate. But the first Bakker Volume is comparably straightforward, if one accepts a handful of difference PoV and the respective "breaks" in narrative. Sure, the connection of both prologues to the rest remains not clear for half a book or so and there are several unexplained things. But it does not at all feel like disconnected meandering. So while there are certainly things one could fault Bakker for, I do not think lack of plot is one.

[Pilusmagnus]

Often by you.

Tell me more about Gormenghast. I am interested about why everyone seems to hate him.

Gormenghast, you as well can tell me why everyone seems to hate you.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Tell me more about Gormenghast.

It's a gothic-flavoured fantasy series by Mervyn Peake. Very densely written but very rewarding. ;)

[Gasp of Many Reeds]

The Malazan books are like a medieval tapestry or one of the paintings of Bosch or Brueghel. A lot going on, much beautiful, much grotesque, quite a lot of symbolism but also plenty that's fairly tangible and easily grasped. Sometimes, there's a bit too much going on and a bit too much fancy and not enough narrative. So not so much something you need training for as a bit of patience. But then again I appreciate plenty of people haven't got what I got out of it.

[Gormenghast]

Oh, and I have a little challenge to propose to Pilusmagnus.

Forget the Malazan series. Pick up instead Forge of Darkness, one or two chapters is enough even in that case. Or Bauchelain and Korbal Broach (but this would be a slightly different story).

The challenge is simply to read one or two chapters from Forge of Darkness, and tell us if it's the same unreadable stuff as with Gardens of the Moon.

[Errant Bard]

Tell me more about Gormenghast. I am interested about why everyone seems to hate him.

Gormenghast, you as well can tell me why everyone seems to hate you.

You are aware that this subject is going to get the thread locked, right?

[Pilusmagnus]

You are aware that this subject is going to get the thread locked, right?

Well I want to know why everyone despises him. He looks like a good guy. Right Gormenghast?

Anyway, I returned the book to Blackwell's so I don't care if this thread is locked. YOLO!

(My humour is bad isn't it?)

[Darth Richard II]

You know, I like Bakker, but I would never in a million years call those books character driven.

[HexMachina]

Well I want to know why everyone despises him. He looks like a good guy. Right Gormenghast?

Anyway, I returned the book to Blackwell's so I don't care if this thread is locked. YOLO!

(My humour is bad isn't it?)

It's non-existent, not bad.

[Pilusmagnus]

It's non-existent, not bad.

Thought so.

[Darth Richard II]

Gormy, from what I understand, used to talk smack to malazan haters and act like people were too dumb to understand them, then it turned out he hadn't read them yet.

[Werthead]

Remember that discussions about individuals and other websites are likely to get threads locked if they start leading to acrimony.

Yeah, that's true.

But then you also read complaints about Erikson's philosophy/introspection parts, and Bakker is way more dense about those.

I disagree. Erikson has a lot more about philosophy going on, but he targets a much broader range of subjects and engages with them to a shallower degree. Bakker has a few philosophical ideas/themes and then interrogates them in a lot of depth. Also, even in the wordier parts of the original trilogy (he dials down the introspection a lot for the second trilogy), Bakker usually is careful not to let any philosophical engagement go on for more than a page or two before breaking off for something more plot-driven or character-related. Erikson, OTOH, is happy to have much longer digressions on philosophical matters which do bog down the narrative and pace.

Neither are Goodkind and neither have 75-page screeds about topics (and both Erikson and Bakker are writing about far more interesting subjects), but I do think Bakker handles his philosophical subjects better than Erikson does, or at least better than Erikson does from the mid-series onwards.

You know, I like Bakker, but I would never in a million years call those books character driven.

Not to the same extent as Martin, no. But Bakker is a lot more character-driven than Erikson, I think.

[HouseLark]

The Malazan series is very patchy. Some of it is downright awful but some entries in the series, like Memories of Ice, are wonderful. The biggest problem is structural; it's hard to get invested in any particular characters since the leads change almost on a book-to-book basis and the few characters that are in every book aren't actually that interesting. On top of that, there's very little seeding of the finale throughout the series which is indicative of a writer that didn't really know where he wanted to go with the story. There's hundreds of other little problems with the series which will quickly become evident and have been well-worn in online discussions (e.g. the endless stream of philosopher soldiers) but some of these would spoil the plot. If I could get my time back, and I wasn't obsessive about finishing things that I start, then I'd choose to read only select books from the series starting with Gardens of the Moon which is a pretty tight standalone story.

If you're looking for further sci-fi/fantasy reading give the Acts of Caine series a go. They won't win any prizes for literature but they're incredibly entertaining. The Gentleman Bastard Sequence is pretty good too.

[Gormenghast]

Bakker usually is careful not to let any philosophical engagement go on for more than a page or two before breaking off for something more plot-driven or character-related. Erikson, OTOH, is happy to have much longer digressions on philosophical matters which do bog down the narrative and pace.

Well, I agree on the matter of focus in respect to Bakker. It's very driven to a point, almost obsessive, but that's a quality.

But in general you have better success at enjoying Erikson if you don't particularly like introspection, than enjoy Bakker if you dislike what he's doing.

So, if you don't engage with Erikson you can still squeeze enjoyment out of the books, there's more diversity, but if you don't engage with Bakker you go nowhere. Bakker themes are more sustained, you cannot set them aside.

And in general if Erikson is humanist, Bakker is inhumanist. So they are opposite but moving toward the same center ;)

Who's better at what? Erikson is broader, uses different levels and moods, plays with a richer palette of colors and notes. Bakker is focused, straight to the point and if there are ten different things they all point to the same center. So Bakker can make an impact and pierce through more effectively than Erikson. It's like focus versus range.

So, in general, the things that Bakker does, he does better than Erikson because he's more ruthless and focused. But Erikson can play on a wider range, can write well different emotions and styles and so on. While I put both in the same category, one does not replace or substitute the other. And both write stuff that no one else does (or would).

Bakker, though, has no competitors when it comes to emulate (and surpass) Tolkien voice (the scriptural voice, I think he calls it).

[Hermione's Cat]

I too have bought the Malazan series I think almost a year ago just for the reason I wanted to read other fantasy until TWoW comes out.

The first half of Gardens of the Moons was very hard to get through.

I was just like: Who are you? What do you do? Oh, so there is magic? How does it work? ......??? ......??? ......??? ......???

Sooooooooooooo many questions and very few answers.

But at the second half it gets better. If you get used to the writing style it's not so bad.

Granted, it's a very big world, and it's not really fleshed out, meaning, nothing gets explained that I could totally understand it. The books didn't pull me in as much as ASoIaF did.

The second book, Deadhouse Gates is actually my favourite so far. Memories of Ice was near as good.

But now I have been stuck three thirds through the fourth book, House of Chains for, I don't know, I think I haven't touched it in half a year?

There are many great characters, which I like very much, but I think I would have to start from the beginning and I'm not ready to struggle through it all again just yet.

I think one of the disadvantages is that you don't see some characters for a whole book.

After the first book, I wanted to know more about Whiskeyjack, but he isn't in the second book at all.

Then, after reading the second book, I was really interested in some characters I've met in there, but they weren't in the third, and so on.... I mostly had forgotten some important info from the individual plotlines when they cropped up again.

The language is at times very complicated.

I have to add, English is not my first language, I'm German, but seeing that I read ASoIaF and many books in English and watch all my movies and shows in English, I like to think I'm doing pretty well in English.

I think you need to be very concentrated reading these books.

Edit: Oh, and I should add, that I bought the first 8 books at one go, so they're just sitting on my shelf now.

I feel pretty bad about it.

[Hermione's Cat]

Sorry, double post. Stupid internet.

[Pilusmagnus]

If you're looking for further sci-fi/fantasy reading give the Acts of Caine series a go. They won't win any prizes for literature but they're incredibly entertaining. The Gentleman Bastard Sequence is pretty good too.

Scott Lynch is next on my list.