Can We Discuss Fantasy Literature?

[merlin]

I strongly recommend you try The Dresden Files (9 books in total so far) by Jim Butcher. Ive devoured the 9 and can't wait for the next one in April 07.

[Jove]

Aah - I read far too much pulp fantasy!

Currently reading "Impossible Odds" - another of Dave Duncan's stories about the Blades. Great stuff - and ripe for movies.

My favourite stuff is still David Gemmell's heroic fantasy.
I try and avoid the vast epics - as I find the first story is usually great, but that's 'cos they're not sure if it will sell and have to please the publisher. Then, when they get the deal for the trilogy, the second book is pretty lame and the third is lame up to the ending - which was what the author always wanted to do, so is usually ok. Or it's sometimes the case that they're not sure how to end it and do so far too abruptly, almost with ST:TNG's "anti-Klingon" button!

Take Feist's "Magician" as an example - astounding 1st book in the trilogy / never-ending series.
But after that it's the same old fare - retreading the same worn ground with very little new to say for itself.

I think it may be that I like novelty value - and in a trilogy or series the novelty wears off after the 1st book. So I generally try and avoid them. Especially when particular authors *cough* FEIST!!! *cough* can only seem to write in trilogies!!

Who else do I like....
Never really got into the Dragonlance series or anything like that.
I like Elizabeth Moon's trilogy about Paksenarrion (female Paladin). That was entertaining. And I liked the first couple of Card's series about Alvin the Prentice etc.

I'm actually trying to read more of the "classic" fantasy stuff - so Mallory's "Le Morte D'Arthur" and "The Mabinogian".
Plus Poul Anderson's "Broken Sword", and some Fritz Leiber stuff (Fafhr and the Grey Mouser).

[HighWiredSith]

I heard David Gemmell died recently.

I had to read "Le Morte D'Arthur" for Medievel lit when I was in college - oh the agony! Trudge through around 1.5 million pages of very tiny print, about halfway through the tome actually before tossing it for good and flubbing my way through the exam. When it comes to Medievel Lit, there's Chaucer and, well, that's pretty much it, everything else is agonizing.

[Jove]

OMG!!

I've just checked and you're right - 28th July this year!!

What a downer!

When I start I am going to take Le Morte D'Arthur very slowly. Maybe a page a day.

Maybe if I ever move house and have a swanky living room with a glass coffee table I shall keep it under there (next to my copy of The Mabinogian) - just to show everyone how pretentious I am before offering them a glass of chilled Chardonnay and some canapes.

[HighWiredSith]

Originally Posted by Jove

Maybe if I ever move house and have a swanky living room with a glass coffee table I shall keep it under there (next to my copy of The Mabinogian) - just to show everyone how pretentious I am before offering them a glass of chilled Chardonnay and some canapes.

Of course! Always keep a copy of Chaucer's Catnebury Tales in the original Middle English open (nothing turns on literature chicks like Middle English), Mallory's work, and of course, James Joyce's Ulysses.

[toomuchcoffee]

I just did some exploring at amazon, and it looks like you can get The Cantebury Tales in audio book form. Oh, wait. It's probably not in middle English. That sucks. They really aught to make that available.

[Jove]

Originally Posted by HighWiredSith

...and of course, James Joyce's Ulysses.

Hey! Not so much of the foul language, please! There are children about.
I wouldn't wish my worst enemy read that book - unless I'm in the middle of a conflict - in which case it would either (a) keep him distracted as he tries to understand wtf the book is about and saying, while I plan and execute my assault; or (b) p1ss him off really badly and so backfire on me as he exacts his revenge.

[toomuchcoffee]

I just picked up The Golden Compass. It's supposed to be better written than the Harry Potter books, so here goes. (Haven't read Harry Potter and don't think I will. I'll watch the movies, though).



Actually, I don't want to read this. I want to read something else. Should I read this or not?

[Splendiferous]

My sister swears by those books, and I read the first one aaages ago. it's pretty good. If you're going to read it, read it before the film comes out - the film which removes all traces of Christianity and the Church from it, for some reason - despite the fact that, as far as I recall, that was the backbone of the series

[toomuchcoffee]

Actually, I decided to read one chapter and ended up reading the first three and I'm hooked. IMHO, I think this guy's a darn good writer. I'm seriously thinking about rereading the book, just to absorb it properly. If I had the time. I wouldn't mind rereading it at some later point.

With regard to taking the references to church out, that is highly disappointing, though I can see where it would cause controversy and diminish the audience, which, really is too bad. Should they really do that? Well, maybe it'll introduce the books to more people, anyway.

[Jove]

I wish they had done that to "The DaVinci Code" - 'cos the film would have been so much better.

I read the book - and it was okay - some great conspiracy theories (even if based on a hoax from the 1960s - but "that is what they want you to believe" etc) but the film was pretty dire.
I thought Ron Howard was a good director... sort of.

But he's not really.

The dialogue was US-t.v.-series-esque - with questions handed to people on a plate so that they could answer and explain things.
But then I think the book was much like that.

But the book is better - probably such is the case with most films based on books.

[HighWiredSith]

Originally Posted by Jove

The dialogue was US-t.v.-series-esque - with questions handed to people on a plate so that they could answer and explain things.
But then I think the book was much like that.

But the book is better - probably such is the case with most films based on books.

Didn't read the book but saw the movie. It really was as bad as they say. Yeah, Ron Howard is bad about assuming his audience is too stupid to figure out even the simplest of things themselves. This kind of spoon feeding is what dimishes even his good stuff, like Apollo 13 and A Beautiful Mind. That, and the over top emotional stuff.

[Kieraganion]

Man I am so out of the loop, need to catch up.

Lets see here

Read and loved almost of the Dragonlance saga. Loved the Sinnara serries. Drizzt is the MAN (or rather Drow)! Could care less for Harry Potter. Clive Barker is the best modern fantasy auther in the world (Imajica, anyone?), Stephen takes a close second. Tolkien... pwns all. I think that covers it.

Ciao!

[Splendiferous]

Neil Gaiman, Neil Gaiman, Neil Gaiman.

That's all I have to say.

Neil Gaiman.

And James Barclay. Though his fantasy is in the more traditional 'heroic fantasy' mould (judging by the Raven books, not read his newer series).

[Kieraganion]

I'm still just a little bothered over the striking resemblance "American Gods" has to "The Damnation Game". A little to close to home for comfort.