Jump to content

What should I read first?


Guest Raidne

Recommended Posts

Found Bakker's names to be atrocious
Well no one ever asks you to pronounce the names. I didn't have a problem with the names, but perhaps that was just a result of loving the Silmarillion, Beowulf, and other mythologies and stories with those sorts of names.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd read Bakker first on the grounds that he actually employs an editor and his books aren't 1100 pages each. Even if you don't like him, at least you'll know it a lot earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Bakker, I almost stopped reading after the prolouge, which, IMNSHO, sucked. I made myself reading the first chapter, so I could justify spending fifteen bucks on the book, and fell in love with it. But yeah, a lot of the names suck.

I have a copy of Gardens of the Moon, but have not gotten around to reading it yet. I'd say that if you don't want to get depressed, you should stay away from Bakker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Raidne

What is it about Bakker that is so depressing? I mean GRRM can be depressing, but I enjoy his willingness to make things happen.

Now I guess I think I'll start with Bakker, since it sounds like his books are easier to hold onto while sitting on the beach. Honestly, I've gotta say I'm starting to not be so thrilled about either option...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, both are a bit heavy-going. For a lighter summer read I'd much more readily recommend Scott Lynch's hugely enjoyable The Lies of Locke Lamora. For a much easier read than Bakker & Erikson, but with some weighty ideas and issues, I'd also recommend The Prestige by Christopher Priest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it about Bakker that is so depressing? I mean GRRM can be depressing, but I enjoy his willingness to make things happen.

Now I guess I think I'll start with Bakker, since it sounds like his books are easier to hold onto while sitting on the beach. Honestly, I've gotta say I'm starting to not be so thrilled about either option...

It's just what the writers do to their characters that are quite tragic and harsh. I just finished Warrior Prophet and... it's not very pleasant. But it's definately a great read :lol:

As for Erikson; I found the series didn't get "depressing" until the final chapters of Deadhouse Gates (the 2nd book). Gardens of the Moon isn't really sad at all; it's just really confusing at first :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason to mention Bakker and Erikson in the same sentence is that both are excellent at what they do. They do *not* appeal to the same kind of reader. In fact, I think they appeal to polar opposites within the realm of "avid fantasy readers".

Put me in the Erikson camp. Erikson has become my favourite author, surpassing even GRRM. Bakker, while impressive, didn't turn me on at all. I've read two of the three books, and I don't know that I'll ever read the third. That said, it's not hard to see how Erikson's writing might drive some people apeshit. It's confusing, the characterisation is impersonal, magic and superpowers are pervasive (from the POV of the main characters), and four books in the underlying main plot is still nebulous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason to mention Bakker and Erikson in the same sentence is that both are excellent at what they do. They do *not* appeal to the same kind of reader. In fact, I think they appeal to polar opposites within the realm of "avid fantasy readers".

I disagree, I love both :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, I love both :lol:

Yeah, and I love Bakker while I like Erikson a lot.

The difference though between hoe GRRM is depressing and Bakker is is that GRRM gives you moments of reprieve while Bakker just keeps piling it on and on until you don't think you can take anymore and then he piles still more on. It may sound like I'm a bit masochistic for loving his work so, but the thing is, for me while reading Bakker, no matter what he heaps on I never lose the feeling that I'm reading something really great. It's like looking at a painting and being repulsed by it but at the same time recognizing it is an unbelieveble work of art.

I definitely wouldn't read Bakker for beach fare though. However, Greg Keye's "Kingdom of Thorn and Bone" series seems made for that. It's great fun reading, a little bit heavy in places but not too deep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Raidne

Okay, I bought TDtCB and Gardens of the Moon and Deadhouse Gates. I read the prologue of TDtCB today, and right after I finished it a fell asleep for two hours in the middle of the day. I woke up a couple of times, but could not will myself to get up. Therefore, I deem it hypnotically boring. :)

Nevertheless, I'll keep reading it. I do already dislike the I-have-total-control-over-my-emotions-and-therefore-am-the-shit aspect of Khellas (sp?), but whatever. I just finished the Dark Tower, so it's sort of like he's Roland with less personality. ;)

Lastly, I like all kinds of fantasy and science fiction, so I doubt I'll love one and hate the other. After all, I wouldn't love both Neal Stephenson and Ursula le Guin, otherwise, right? To put it in perspective, I even made it past Faith of the Fallen (but I can't remember what the name of that book was...).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Four books in the underlying main plot is still nebulous.

Really? Memories of Ice pretty much spells it out loud and clear what the main plot is. Midnight Tides gives us the first inkling of how the antagonist's plans will work out and The Bonehunters brings the threads together for the first time, but I think the main storyline (sadly not as original as might be wished) is quite discernable from Book 3 onwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd read Bakker first on the grounds that he actually employs an editor and his books aren't 1100 pages each. Even if you don't like him, at least you'll know it a lot earlier.

Probably the best neutral(ish) comment here.

Hopefully not too off topic, but a question for Bakker readers: I read the first one, and neither loved nor hated but was definitely underwhelmed. What is different about 2 & 3 that would make me go further ?

(Which, to be honest, I probably will.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully not too off topic, but a question for Bakker readers: I read the first one, and neither loved nor hated but was definitely underwhelmed. What is different about 2 & 3 that would make me go further ?
Hmm. Well, things really happen in the second and third books. A lot of big things. If you like epic battle scenes, you get a lot of them. If you like huge ordeals you get a lot more. You get to see a lot more of the antagonist's plans, more about Kellhus' background, more about the history of the world and the place of the Gnosis in it.

And you get a lot of resolution. Pretty much everything is largely wrapped up; a fair deal of it pretty satisfactorily. It is a setup series in the sense that the apocalypse doesn't happen yet, but most of the pieces of the first book - Conphas, Cnauir, Kellhus & dad, Akki and Esmi, Serwe, the Mandate, the Scarlet Spires, the Cishaurim, Maithanet, the Holy War and the Fanim - and the Consult - are all dealt with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully not too off topic, but a question for Bakker readers: I read the first one, and neither loved nor hated but was definitely underwhelmed. What is different about 2 & 3 that would make me go further ?
As said before, book 1 acts as almost a prequel within the prequel series. It let's you know how Kellhus does what he does as well as his overall motivation throughout the second two books. While the series centers around Kellhus, what the series is more importantly about is how the characters around Kellhus act in response to him. The action picks up in book 2 and culminates in book 3.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna read Erikson when I get a chance, so cannot comment on his work.

I just finished The Darkness that Comes Before, and I must say..."that was one of the worst books that I've ever actually finished." It's all a matter of opinion, of course, but I honestly asked myself why anyone would recommend it, and there are so many that do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few months ago, I ordered the first two from Erikson and Bakker. I read Erikson first and it was so so. Then I read Bakker and I was completely hooked. Great book, great characters very good plot. I just had to read the third of the series, whereas I haven't bothered with Erikson anymore. Just no interesting/challenging enough IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to say to everyone who says. "hey read Bakker because his series is finished!!", you know what? There are a lot of series that are finished. That doesn't mean that they are good or worth reading, it just means they are done.

Yeah, but if you read the topic title carefully you'll notice the little question "Erikson or Bakker?" in the Subtitle. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to say to everyone who says. "hey read Bakker because his series is finished!!", you know what? There are a lot of series that are finished. That doesn't mean that they are good or worth reading, it just means they are done.

But people are asking who to read between Erikson and Bakker. Erikson isn't finished while Bakker, technically, is with one series. So that's a valid reason when it's just between those two other authors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...