Question Regarding Erikson

[Defender of the Vale]

I just finnished reading Erikson's Gardens of the Moon (which, despite some of the negative reviews, I rather enjoyed). I was wondering if it would be possible for me to skip Deadhouse Gates for the time being and move straight into Memories of Ice. I know this seems odd, but I would like to continue with that part of the story before switching over to Kalam and Quick Ben's. Would this ruin anything for me in the future?

[Arakasi]

You could definitely read MoI before DG. I don't see anything in MoI that spoils much in DG, well I guess just don't read the epilogue.

[Rhaegar's Son]

I'd agree with Arak...especially about not reading the epilogue.

I can't recall if any of the brief sections w/ the TTG would be spoilerish. I know more comments are made in MoI about events in DG than vice versa, but in my memory they are fairly safe and insignificant.

[dits]

I think reading Memories of Ice before Deadhouse Gates could work. Erikson did intend Memories of Ice as the second book before he wrote Deadhouse Gates. And the spoiler at the end of Memories of Ice could actually give Deadhouse Gates a bigger impact.

[perspicacious]

I cannot for the life of me get through Gardens of the Moon. I get confused and bored and then confused as to why I'm supposed to care. I know this is a pretty highly regarded series--and that the books afterwards are supposed to be better--but if I'm having so much trouble with the first book, does it stand to reason I just won't like any of the series? Or is there just that much of a dramatic increase in quality?

[Trencher]

[quote name='perspicacious' post='1467359' date='Aug 4 2008, 01.23']I cannot for the life of me get through Gardens of the Moon. I get confused and bored and then confused as to why I'm supposed to care. I know this is a pretty highly regarded series--and that the books afterwards are supposed to be better--but if I'm having so much trouble with the first book, does it stand to reason I just won't like any of the series? Or is there just that much of a dramatic increase in quality?[/quote]


I feel the same way about GOTM and DG. I may stop halfway through DG and never look back at this rate.

[quote]think reading Memories of Ice before Deadhouse Gates could work. Erikson did intend Memories of Ice as the second book before he wrote Deadhouse Gates. And the spoiler at the end of Memories of Ice could actually give Deadhouse Gates a bigger impact.[/quote]

I wish I had read MOI before DG then. Often times I think a "spoiler" fopr Erikson is normal information any other author would have given you anyway and not made you wait 800 pages for. For me a spoiler might give me hope it will get better.

[potsherds]

[quote name='Trencher' post='1467389' date='Aug 4 2008, 08.20']I feel the same way about GOTM and DG. I may stop halfway through DG and never look back at this rate.



I wish I had read MOI before DG then. Often times I think a "spoiler" fopr Erikson is normal information any other author would have given you anyway and not made you wait 800 pages for. For me a spoiler might give me hope it will get better.[/quote]
If you feel the same way for DG as you did for GoTM, then the series likely isn't for you. It's 'highly regarded' by certain people, and completely disliked by nearly as many. It's a love/hate thing. But if you're still disliking it well into the second book, move on to something else.

[Myshkin]

[quote name='perspicacious' post='1467359' date='Aug 3 2008, 23.23']I cannot for the life of me get through Gardens of the Moon. I get confused and bored and then confused as to why I'm supposed to care. I know this is a pretty highly regarded series--and that the books afterwards are supposed to be better--but if I'm having so much trouble with the first book, does it stand to reason I just won't like any of the series? Or is there just that much of a dramatic increase in quality?[/quote]
You're not alone in this. As Pots said, there are as many who don't like this series as do. I'm not a fan of the series but I did read the first 5, and I'll just say that Gardens of the Moon was by far the worst written and most confusing. So if it's just the poor structure of the book that's bothering you I'd say give it a little longer; but if it's the poor characterization, lack of depth, meandering plot, or general D&D feel of the book that's bothering you, you might as well stop now because it really doesn't get much better.

[Cruella_Da_Oz]

At Erikson's forum it was discussed why the series has some popularity problems (comparatively), and many forum members agreed that about first 100 pages of first book put a lot of people off and if they would just stick around...
I guess they would know. I consider starting with Memory Of Ice that seems regarded as the best one more or less. Of course I won't understand anything, but I have big experience reading books I don't understand.

[Muttering Bill]

MoI and DG are set at the same time, so you can read either one first. I would agree to skip the epilogue though - come back to it after DG.

I wouldn't read them out of order myself, but then Deadhouse Gates was my favorite of the series.

And there is a huge increase in quality between GotM and DG. (I didn't think Gardens was bad, just a little confusing.) So if you don't like DG, the rest of the series is pretty much just more of that, so you might want to bail out now.

[Gormenghast]

Hm. I haven't read MoI yet, but there's a certain flow with revelations that may require a proper reading order for best effect.

My choice instead was to read GotM, DG, and now the Bauchelain and Korbal Broach novellas before MoI.

It seems that those novellas precede MoI? That seems the first encounter between Bauchelain and Emancipor Reese.

On the matter of sticking to the series even if you don't like it, I'd say just try hard till you hit half of the first book (with the chunk in Darujhistan), if it doesn't work, just stop. The second book is much, much better, but I consider it denser and even more demanding to be fully appreciated. Better written, better structured, better paced, some incredible characters and a strong drive. But still a very demanding read and despite it's better written, it's still the same style.

So, if you expect some huge change you'll likely be disappointed. On the other hand it's much improved and explores different themes. For some this makes the book richer (as they have little retreading), for some it's disappointing as you leave characters and plots behind to look in a completely different direction.

[duchess of malfi]

Can someone direct me to an actual timeline of Erikson & Esslemont?

What happens first - one of the prologues? Night of Knives? The novellas? Midnight Tides?

The series is all jumbled up chronologically...has anyone ever sat down and actually figured out an actual time sequence for the books and parts of the books?

edited for spelling

[MinDonner]

Best not to try. I doubt even Erikson knows. :(

[Werthead]

[quote name='duchess of malfi' post='1467677' date='Aug 4 2008, 16.32']Can someone direct me to an actual timeline of Erikson & Esslemont?

What happens first - one of the prologues? Night of Knives? The novellas? Midnight Tides?

The series is all jumbled up chronologically...has anyone ever sat down and actually figured out an actual time sequence for the books and parts of the books?

edited for spelling[/quote]

It goes something like this:

[quote][b][u]CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER OF THE MALAZAN BOOK OF THE FALLEN[/u][/b]
BBS: Before Burn's Sleep
BS: Burn's Sleep

??? BBS: Prologue I of [i]Midnight Tides[/i]/Prologue I of [i]Reaper's Gale[/i]*
298,665 BBS: Prologue I of [i]Memories of Ice[/i]
119,736 BBS: Prologue II of [i]Memories of Ice[/i]
1154 BS: Prologue of [i]Gardens of the Moon[/i]
1154 BS: [i]Night of Knives[/i]

1154 BS?: [i]Blood Follows[/i]**
1154 BS?: [i]The Lees of Laughters End[/i]
1158 BS: [i]The Healthy Dead[/i]

1159 BS: Prologue II of [i]Midnight Tides[/i]
1161 BS: Chapter 1 of [i]Gardens of the Moon[/i]
1161-62 BS: [i]Midnight Tides[/i]
1162-63 BS?: Prologue and Book I of [i]House of Chains[/i]***

1163 BS: [i]Gardens of the Moon[/i]
1163-64 BS: [i]Deadhouse Gates[/i]/[i]Memories of Ice[/i] (occur simultaneously)

1164 BS: Books II-IV of [i]House of Chains[/i]

1164 BS?: Prologue II of [i]Reaper's Gale[/i]

1164-65 BS?: [i]The Bonehunters[/i]
1164-66 BS?: [i]Return of the Crimson Guard[/i]
1165-66 BS?: [i]Reaper's Gale[/i]
c. 1166-67 BS?: [i]Toll the Hounds[/i]

Still to come:
[i]Dust of Dreams[/i]
[i]The Crippled God[/i][/quote]

[Foreverlad]

At about 200 pages into GotM, I came to a halt.

I didn't find the story confusing. It was easier for me to initially follow than Bakker's work. My complaint (thus far) was that there was very little information given as to why anything at all mattered. Okay, Empress takes over, there's a witch of some sort in a kid's head, gods are intervening, a marionette is taking risks, someone's trying to wipe out military group(s) and an asskicker in the sky doesn't like being messed with.

If I had any reason at all for being concerned, I'd be sucking the story up chapters at a time, but it feels like there won't be any immediate resolution or purpose behind these things. Without some sympathetic motivations for me to follow, I just can't care.

As I mentioned in another thread, I may go back to continue the story, but I'd rather not wait a couple of books for a minor plot point to be resolved in passing.

edit: ...Hood's breath Wert...

[duchess of malfi]

[quote name='Werthead' post='1467719' date='Aug 4 2008, 12.05']It goes something like this:

...[/quote]

Bless you. I have read through [i]Bonehunters[/i] thus far, and have often thought that being able to reread this series in actual order of events might be a good thing at some future point of time.

[henderson]

Steven Erikson's MALAZAN BOOK OF THE FALLEN sequence is a very solid read.

[Gormenghast]

[quote name='Foreverlad' post='1467723' date='Aug 4 2008, 18.08']As I mentioned in another thread, I may go back to continue the story, but I'd rather not wait a couple of books for a minor plot point to be resolved in passing.[/quote]
The idea is to look at it like a big tapestry.

In general every book has one or two main plots that get (almost) completely resolved. The problem with GotM is that the first chapters aren't really the core of the novel (Darujhistan is) and go nowhere. Erikson wanted to give the feeling of ongoing history without a starting point just for the ease of readers.

So that whole beginning isn't directly plot or character driven, it's just there to set-up the world and things going on. You learn about the empire, the inner factions fighting, the overall confusion that both characters and readers feel as nothing is really clear and even the characters themselves have to "infer" a lot of what's going on.

Things like the dialogue between Paran and Topper at the beginning of chapter three are there to offer the context, but they become meaningful only with the time.

The side effect of all this is that things that feel confused don't register in the memory of the reader, so they either go lost or make sense only on re-reads.

With the characters is a bit like that. You aren't meant to "care" for that first part. Erikson doesn't even try and actually skips parts that could work to introduce and familiarize with them. Later on, in Darujhistan, things get more focused, the plot more directed and the traits of characters should stand out more.

On the other hand even the characterization is mostly "inferred" by the reader. Erikson doesn't care to lead by hand even when it comes to make a character more familiar. There isn't any straightforward characterization nor easily recognizable types. Either you like this style, or not.

[Myshkin]

I hate it when poor writing is excused by saying that the author intended it to be confusing, and it only seems poor to those of us who just don't understand its brilliance. GotM is poorly structured because Erikson tried to take his personal D&D campaign and turn it into a novel, without any idea of how to structure a story. It is confusing because while Erikson intimately understood his world and its workings he forgot that we the readers did not.

[Foreverlad]

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1468361' date='Aug 4 2008, 20.44']I hate it when poor writing is excused by saying that the author intended it to be confusing, and it only seems poor to those of us who just don't understand its brilliance. GotM is poorly structured because Erikson tried to take his personal D&D campaign and turn it into a novel, without any idea of how to structure a story. It is confusing because while Erikson intimately understood his world and its workings he forgot that we the readers did not.[/quote]

While I admit it's all subjective, I like to believe the idea of a novel is to convey a message, tale or idea. For those of you who've read most/all of the novels, do you think the scattering of chapters across multiple books (chronologically listed by Werthead) help add more to the story than if they'd been produced in order to begin with? If the style helps more than it hurts, cool.

I know arranging story elements out of sequence can have dramatic effects on a tale, curious how Erikson's work out.