Good fantasy page-turners

[Darth Richard II]

...

...

Dude.

I know people don't read the threads the comment in, because humanity is getting dumber, but cmon.

[Deedles]

Let go of desire Grasshopper. Expectations lead to suffering. Ypu bring the pain upon yourself by hoping for basic courtesy.

[Errant Bard]

Apart from that there is no UF I can recommend without some caveats***.

Kraken, still by Neil Gaiman, was pretty awesome, I thought... And also, like was said about rivers of london, notably uninterested in sex (a great point, in my mind)

[Darian Frey]

I'm a feminist and so is my slave girl. No need for "magic swords" for it to be satisfying***.

I must have missed her the last time I cleaned the bedroom.

[john]

I would argue that wot isn't so much misogynistic as it is... We'll, stupid. Jordan tried I think, but as someone said earlier, he just read men are from mars, and then added braids.

This. It's mostly just clumsily written. I mean, Jordan's clearly trying to be quite progressive, if anything, but the world's so heightened it doesn't really compare to ours at all in most cases. Then there's those bits that Lyanna mentioned which yeah, do seem to give an indication of some of his thinking being a bit off.

I must have missed her the last time I cleaned the bedroom.

You're so emasculated.

Kraken, still by Neil Gaiman, was pretty awesome, I thought... And also, like was said about rivers of london, notably uninterested in sex (a great point, in my mind)

China Mieville. Good choice though, great book.

[Errant Bard]

China Mieville. Good choice though, great book.

Uh, you are right, I don't even know why I thought it was Gaiman, I had the book in front of my eye. :blush:

[Darian Frey]

You're so emasculated.

No, I'm a house husband. That was a reference to not finding the slave girl my WIFE says she has. But don't let me take away your ammunition for a good piece of snark.

[john]

No, I'm a house husband. That was a reference to not finding the slave girl my WIFE says she has. But don't let me take away your ammunition for a good piece of snark.

eh ... I know who you are and what you were referring to. Banter's clearly off the table then.

[Darian Frey]

eh ... I know who you are and what you were referring to. Banter's clearly off the table then.

Ignore me, bad day.

[aceluby]

Sanderson writes much better than Weeks, or at least the Weeks on display in Night Angel. I have not read Lightbringer yet.

I disagree, they both have their pros and cons. Sanderson is much, much worse at dialog and humor; and their prose IMO is pretty much equivalent. This isn't deep reading here, just fun, action packed, quick paced novels. I'd say they are pretty much on par, but give a slight nod to weeks because I like his themes more and his dialog is bearable.

[Toblakai]

I disagree, they both have their pros and cons. Sanderson is much, much worse at dialog and humor; and their prose IMO is pretty much equivalent. This isn't deep reading here, just fun, action packed, quick paced novels. I'd say they are pretty much on par, but give a slight nod to weeks because I like his themes more and his dialog is bearable.

I disagree, they both have their pros and cons. Sanderson is much, much worse at dialog and humor; and their prose IMO is pretty much equivalent. This isn't deep reading here, just fun, action packed, quick paced novels. I'd say they are pretty much on par, but give a slight nod to weeks because I like his themes more and his dialog is bearable.

I only read Night Angel and currently remember Sanderson's writing in Stormlight more. So I am perhaps unfairly comparing Week's early work to Sanderson's later work.

However, I don't recall Sanderson ever being as bad as the writing in Night Angel, which is famously awful. I heard he improved with Lightbringer.

But yes, Sanderson is weak with dialogue, but improving.

[Suttree]

But yes, Sanderson is weak with dialogue, but improving.

Hope you're not using his most recent Stormlight book as evidence. Or are we talking sliding scale?

[Toblakai]

Hope you're not using his most recent Stormlight book as evidence. Or are we talking sliding scale?

The dialogue in Stormlight is generally stronger than Mistborn and (dear lord) Elantris. That's all I am saying.

But claiming that Brent Weeks had stronger dialogue in Night Angel is ridiculous. The multiple conversation between Kylar and Elene regarding "wanting to fuck" are the most juvenile conversations I have ever seen in a book. And it isn't the swearing, it is how forced and fake and pseudo-gritty it is.

[aceluby]

The dialogue in Stormlight is generally stronger than Mistborn and (dear lord) Elantris. That's all I am saying.

But claiming that Brent Weeks had stronger dialogue in Night Angel is ridiculous. The multiple conversation between Kylar and Elene regarding "wanting to fuck" are the most juvenile conversations I have ever seen in a book. And it isn't the swearing, it is how forced and fake and pseudo-gritty it is.

I thought the so called 'wittiness' of the dialog in Stormlight to be far and away more cringeworthy, which is basically what filled the entire second book in Stormlight. I'm enjoying the Night Angel trilogy far more and feel his dialog is much better, though obviously I never claimed that it was without flaws, just better than Sanderson. I'd much rather have a short weird conversation about fucking than one about, gasp!, gloves on safehands, courting, and the juvenile discussions about who likes who.

Different strokes for different folks, it's all subjective anyway.

[Toblakai]

I thought the so called 'wittiness' of the dialog in Stormlight to be far and away more cringeworthy, which is basically what filled the entire second book in Stormlight. I'm enjoying the Night Angel trilogy far more and feel his dialog is much better, though obviously I never claimed that it was without flaws, just better than Sanderson. I'd much rather have a short weird conversation about fucking than one about, gasp!, gloves on safehands, courting, and the juvenile discussions about who likes who.

Different strokes for different folks, it's all subjective anyway.

I guess I will have to agree with different strokes. I don't love Sanderson's dialogue but it never pulls me out of the story and make me want to throw up.

Beyond dialogue, Weeks also slips from Third Person Limited to Third Person Omniscient at times. It also felt like a first draft to me, without any edits. I thought he was a great storyteller but awful writer. Once again, based on Night Angel only. Also, apparently if you're a woman, your choices are virgin or whore.

[aceluby]

I guess I will have to agree with different strokes. I don't love Sanderson's dialogue but it never pulls me out of the story and make me want to throw up.

Beyond dialogue, Weeks also slips from Third Person Limited to Third Person Omniscient at times. It also felt like a first draft to me, without any edits. I thought he was a great storyteller but awful writer. Once again, based on Night Angel only. Also, apparently if you're a woman, your choices are virgin or whore.

He does do that. It happened once in the first novel, hasn't happened yet in the 2nd one that I've seen.

Know who is also guilty of switching POVs like that? Erickson. He does it all the damn time in the Malazan series and it drives me nuts. When I saw it early in the first book of NA I was like 'oh no, not this again', but didn't catch it more than that so far. So while it happens, it doesn't happen so much that it takes me out of the story like Malazan did.

Regarding virgin or whore... what about all of the nobles? They don't fall into that. The same thing could be said of ASOIAF, because in these worlds (and in our history) the most common occupation for women is prostitution. It doesn't bother me.

Doesn't really matter though, it's a page turner for me. I can't put the damn thing down, much like how I couldn't put the first Stormlight book down. It's just really light, easy reading that I'll read once and never pick up again, which serves its purpose perfectly for me. Everyone needs a book like that every once in a while IMO and while Sanderson has typically filled that void for me in the past, Weeks is right there with him now.

[Toblakai]

He does do that. It happened once in the first novel, hasn't happened yet in the 2nd one that I've seen.

Know who is also guilty of switching POVs like that? Erickson. He does it all the damn time in the Malazan series and it drives me nuts. When I saw it early in the first book of NA I was like 'oh no, not this again', but didn't catch it more than that so far. So while it happens, it doesn't happen so much that it takes me out of the story like Malazan did.

Regarding virgin or whore... what about all of the nobles? They don't fall into that. The same thing could be said of ASOIAF, because in these worlds (and in our history) the most common occupation for women is prostitution. It doesn't bother me.

Doesn't really matter though, it's a page turner for me. I can't put the damn thing down, much like how I couldn't put the first Stormlight book down. It's just really light, easy reading that I'll read once and never pick up again, which serves its purpose perfectly for me. Everyone needs a book like that every once in a while IMO and while Sanderson has typically filled that void for me in the past, Weeks is right there with him now.

Last post about this! Maybe. :)

Yes, it happened in Malazan too, especially in the first book, but not as much as Erikson developed in later books (and probably had more editing). But with Erikson, it wasn't heaped on top of a bunch of other writing issues I had.

That said, I also tore through Night Angel at a record pace and gave it 4/5 stars. Here is my Goodreads review of the first book, which does get my feelings across (sorry for the long post):

This is a tough one to review. The prose is pretty bad at times – the characters are one dimensional, the scenes are too short to adequately set-up the constant political intrigue, the dialogue is forced and is often used simply to explain things to the reader, the third-person-limited voice is sometimes ignored, and the word choices and phrases are occasionally embarrassing. It all reminds me of a D&D book, but NOT one written by Weis/Hickman or Salvatore. And it is a hell of a lot more confusing than any D&D book.

Yet, I LIKED this book. Why? The characters are unique and varied even if not well-rounded, and the main character actually is well-rounded. The pacing is fast and fun. Some scenes, especially near the end, were surprisingly emotional. And most importantly, the story held my attention, and I kept turning the pages. In fact, at about the halfway point, the book is borderline impossible to put down.

This is the book equivalent of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest (the second one) – it’s fast, it’s fun, but the constant scheming and backstabbing makes little sense. And by the time it is over, I have little clue of what exactly happened, but I have a stupid grin on my face.

I will keep reading this author, but will likely not sing his praises to others, as I do with Martin, Sanderson and Abercrombie. This is the truest definition of a guilty pleasure. Plus, Brent Weeks has the exact same birthday as me, including the year, so that counts for something, right?

[Pilusmagnus]

I've created a monster.

[Zorral]

Ah right, I forgot about the first person pov restriction. I guess tloll stays the best bet then.

I love what Abraham writes to bits, I didn't mention it because in my mind the long price feels quite slow, but now that you mention it, I did not sleep the day I got A Shadow In Summer.

Well, I've not read Twilight, but from what I gathered, it's disturbing in slightly different ways. Outlander's heroine starts the story already married, has outdoor sex (initiated and premeditated by her) in the first chapters whereas Twilight's heroine is a highschooler whose virginity is the linchpin of the series.

So, without spoiling, Outlander is often touted as a feminist work but to me it was a softporn book for adult women, where the heroine ends up accepting some guy's dominance over her, but it's ok since he's a young scottish demi god (especizlly in bed) with a

rape

trauma, and she shows women can do stuff like gather herbs, heal their men, be spunky, and get rescued by menfolks.

In truth, at least in Outlander (1991), it's the man who is rescued by Our Heroine - Protagonist - First Person Narrator.

Jamie Fraser is the perfect examplar of the torture-comfort meme that had so many female fantasy writers squirming with delight back in the 90's, pre-9/11 era. If anything, by the end of the novel, he's a saint who earns his sainthood by a life-time of pain, torture and self-sacrifice, concluding being the obessive object of a homosexual sadist's lust -- who manages to get Jamie into prison under his complete control. Claire rescues him in the nick of time before he succumbs to death.

It was all Jamie Fraser and the guy on the X-Files that the then forty and under female fantasy writers were writing.

[Darth Richard II]

The idea that anyone would consider Weeks in even the same league as Erikson makes my brain bleed.