|
Solitair posted:I'd say The Terror is actually pretty good, but that's because Islam isn't in it. (This is not exaggeration. Don't read those books. They're really bad. The protagonist uses technology to disguise himself as Paris and have sex with Helen of Troy. And she can tell it's not her husband because it's bad sex.)
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 15:01 |
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:Isn't Islam technically also not in Olympos, aside from the indestructible murder robots somehow based on the Voynich Manuscript that Muslims built to kill all the Jews that now think the entire human race is descended from Jewish stock? This strikes me as splitting hairs, and not really disproving my point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
They're not Muslim robots 
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
So I wrapped up Ubik this week and while I like PKD's writing, I hated the ending and his abandoning of a well maintained internal logic. I'm thinking about picking up Flow My Tears, but was wondering if there was a better next one for me, taking into account my frustration with Ubik. Thoughts or recommendations appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
Harry Potter...
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Well, if you go for bestsellers, there's always the Kingkiller books. Spoiler: they're horrible. I honestly don't think the fantasy fanbase can even agree on the two you posted as good. (GRRM sucks at writing anything that's longer than fifty pages) If you want to try fairly modern series with dedicated fanbases, Brandon Sanderson, Steven Erikson and Joe Abecrombie could fit the bill. They're pretty different from one another and I don't think I've met anyone who liked them all, it's very much an either/or thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer. Earthsea, probably. It's gorgeously written.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer. Bridge of Birds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:Earthsea, probably. It's gorgeously written. navyjack posted:Bridge of Birds. I would have gone with either of those, or Guy Kavriel Kay's loose trilogy of The Lions of Al-Rassan, The Last Light of the Sun and The Sarantine Mosaic. And if you're okay with standalone novels as well as series, Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell received equal amounts of acclaim from both fantasy and non-fantasy fans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
If you're specifically looking for stuff the non-genre world likes and reviews well, Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:The thing that most got me was how Mo avoided the most massive media feeding frenzy since Diana died by simply checking into a hotel for a few days. After which the British media and especially the tabloid press apparently gave up all interest. This only shows up kind of in passing, but Mo now has the minor superpower, and eventual Krantzberg-inducer, of being forgettable and ignorable. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer. John Crowley's Aegypt quartet, and Little, Big. Also Earthsea. Rikki Ducornet's elements series. Jack Vance's Dying Earth stories. E: I'm a fool for forgetting Gormenghast! vv I first read The Book of the New Sun when I was a kid. Even if you don't put too much effort into trying to work it out, and are a child, it's still a pleasure to read, if occassionally baffling. Trying to work out what's happening and why (and why Wolfe's writing it) can go much deeper and more difficult. Safety Biscuits fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
How, uh, "difficult" is Book of the New Sun? I'm bad at challenging literature, and I've heard Wolfe can be, well, difficult.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
A Proper Uppercut posted:How, uh, "difficult" is Book of the New Sun? I'm bad at challenging literature, and I've heard Wolfe can be, well, difficult. it depends what you want out of it honestly, you can read it straight through as a baroque dying earth future fantasy and have a blast without really engaging with it at all. It really rewards deeper reading and multiple reads though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer. I have it on good authority that GRRM's Wildcards series is pretty amazing and popular.    I don't know about relative popularity, but Glen Cook's Black Company has always seemed widely recognized. It's pretty solid, I guess. Peake's Ghormenghast was pretty unique and enjoyable. It was a big jolt reading it, as I was used to D&D fantasy for the most part until then. Steven Erikson's Malazan Books of the Fallen are in my opinion one of the best fantasy epic series that exists, in terms of everything an epic series is defined by - juggling characters, writing, world-building whatever the gently caress else...good story. It's fantastic. It's not as challenging a read as Zelazny's Urth stuff, but was challenging enough that people complained regularly and called it too confusing. David Eddings' Belgariad series was hugely popular when it was out, and when I was a teenager I loved them. For some reason I prefer his Sparhawk series these days, but I haven't read either one in maybe twelve years. I suppose you have to mention Terry Brooks' Shannara books, but you grow out of them. At the time they were insanely popular. Raymond Feist had his Magician/Riftwar series - which was blown out of the water by the series' sequel series, the Empire Trilogy. All quite fun, though. Bridge of Birds and its successors SHOULD have been much more widely popular than they were, but god drat they are amazingly written and fantastic. Phillip Pullman's Dark Materials trilogy is REALLY good, starting with the Golden Compass. - it was popular enough to have a big screen movie (that was absolute poo poo) made from it, too. Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe I'd list up as being insanely popular - back in the day - the same with L'engle's Wrinkle in Time series. I'd say their popularity ebbs and flows such that they're still somewhat relevant. Pratchett's Discworld series is right up there among my favorites alongside Malazan. Completely different, though. Hugely popular fantasy series. Robin Hobb's Farseer trilogy Trilogy has always been known to people I meet, and I'm not that big of a nerd. Really good books. Stephen King's Gunslinger series is probably among the most popular ever I would imagine. Comedy Terry Goodkind mention. lovely terrible terrible trash once you're past your 'teens. I'd say the Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan is the same. Maybe even Game of Thrones. I read all three at around the same time in early highschool. Wouldn't recommend any of them. Drifter fucked around with this message at 03:58 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer. While not exactly widely read among the general public, The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant is up there among the best literary-fantasy, and Stephen Donaldson's The Gap Cycle is likewise for literary-SF.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
Corvinus posted:The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant My uncle gave these to me when I was a tween, but I couldn't get past the attempted rape by the main character near the beginning of the first one. Does it get better from there?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
Klungar posted:My uncle gave these to me when I was a tween, but I couldn't get past the attempted rape by the main character near the beginning of the first one. Does it get better from there? It depends on your definition of better honestly. Donaldson does not write happy books. However, the event in your spoiler tag is treated exactly as what it is for the rest of the series.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 04:55
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer. If you want Literary fantasy here are a few suggestions (beyond this anything published by the Fantasy Masterworks imprint is a good starting point): Anything by John Crowley, but especially Little, Big (one of Harold Bloom's faves) and Aegypt. Most things by Lucius Shepard, but especially The Dragon Griaule (reflections on the creative process with a GIANT DRAGON). The Vergil Magus, Pellegrine and Limekiller Series by Avram Davidson, dense and allusive fantasy. People LOVE The Last Unicorn by Peter S. Beagle. Virconium by M. John Harris is widely respected. The Neveryon series by Samuel Delany, post-modernist/structuralist philosophy/the aids crisis filtered through a sword and sorcery setting. Also read Bridge of Birds. Drifter posted:Oh man, I loved Zelazny's New Sun books. fez_machine fucked around with this message at 05:01 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Peake's Ghormenghast was pretty unique and enjoyable. It was a big jolt reading it, as I was used to D&D fantasy for the most part until then. The first two books are some of my favorites. The third is not fantasy and also not good. Read it at your own risk.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
fez_machine posted:If you want Literary fantasy here are a few suggestions (beyond this anything published by the Fantasy Masterworks imprint is a good starting point):
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
^^^ I don't believe I've ever read the third of Ghormenghast, but I know I read the first in a high school class. Good to know I can skip it. There are so many other books to read. fez_machine posted:People LOVE The Last Unicorn by Peter S. Beagle. It's pretty funny and I don't know what's wrong with me, but I really don't like The Last Unicorn. However, Peter Beagle is one of my favorite short story authors in the whole world.   Oh...oh fez_machine, you poor thing.Also, if we're just throwing out recc's, Guy Kay's Tigana and Sarantine were super good. Drifter fucked around with this message at 05:22 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
Mars4523 posted:Writing off Pratchett's Discworld as being "for children" puts into doubt your taste in good books. They are both good and for children. I love the Night Watch and read it every year, it's easily Terry Pratchett's best book. But good is not great, and the original question was for Fantasy's best.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
Terry Pratchett, while certainly not Literary Fantasy, is not Literally For Children. (well okay, with some pretty obvious exceptions) Efb
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:18
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Oh man, I loved Zelazny's New Sun books. Unless I'm missing something due to not being familiar with Zelazny, I'm pretty sure this is a misattrubution. The Book of the New Sun was written by Gene Wolfe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Terry Pratchett, while certainly not Literary Fantasy, is not Literally For Children. They play very heavily to the adolescent crowd, and anyone under the age of 18 is literally a child. They're good entertainment but up against the best of non-genre fiction (certainly the series beats many thriller, sci-fi, and crime/mystery novels),the Discworld series doesn't rank. fez_machine fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer. If you're looking for something that a large majority of hardcore fantasy fans love and is actually a very good read than the top one is probably Joe Abercrombie's First Law series and the following stand alone novels that serve as sequels to it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
fez_machine posted:But good is not great, and the original question was for Fantasy's best. Actually the original question is muddled because it lists qualities that are, generally speaking, mutually exclusive. You're not going to have a book that is widely-read by the non-sci-fi/fantasy crowd that is also critically acclaimed. By way of a (sci-fi) example, The Martian is probably the most widely-read sci-fi book of the last five or ten years, but no one considers it a masterpiece of the genre. The answer to the widely-read question is Harry Potter; nothing else even comes remotely close. The answer to the critically-acclaimed question is more nuanced, but your list is an excellent starting point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
nightchild12 posted:Unless I'm missing something due to not being familiar with Zelazny, I'm pretty sure this is a misattrubution. The Book of the New Sun was written by Gene Wolfe. Haha, good catch. You're right, a misattribution on my end. However, on the topic of Zelazny, while I did not enjoy the first Amber Prince book, Lords of Light and This Immortal were quite good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
savinhill posted:If you're looking for something that a large majority of hardcore fantasy fans love and is actually a very good read than the top one is probably Joe Abercrombie's First Law series and the following stand alone novels that serve as sequels to it. I got in with Best Served Cold, aka Quite Low Fantasy Count Of Monte Cristo Knockoff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
freebooter posted:Without sounding like a snob, what's the most widely acclaimed and well-received (by the general non-fantasy reading public and/or literary critics) fantasy series after A Song of Ice and Fire and Book of the New Sun? Is there one? Back when I was trying to get back into reading fantasy those were the two that seemed to have general consensus as the best the genre had to offer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
Zelazny pro read list: Lord of Light, Creatures of Light and Darkness, Isle of the Dead, This Immortal, The Doors of His Face The Lamps of His Mouth, then maybe Amber 1-5 if you want to keep going.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Mars4523 posted:This would be Terry Pratchett's Discworld. It's not high brow, but is an excellent satrical body of work with a large number of highly memorable characters. Other series might get lots of press in the fantasy press circuit, but only Sir Terry  I started discworld with Small Gods. It was great. Started from the beginning and enjoyed every single one of them. Drifter fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
So, edging away from "literary" fantasy, can anyone say whether The Dinosaur Knights by Victor Milan is any less embarrassing than his first book?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
fez_machine posted:They play very heavily to the adolescent crowd, and anyone under the age of 18 is literally a child. I think the comparisons between Pratchett and Wodehouse are really apt. Nobody ever claimed Wodehouse was James Joyce, but it takes a lot of skill to consistently turn out stuff that sharp and funny.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 07:38
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I think the comparisons between Pratchett and Wodehouse are really apt. Nobody ever claimed Wodehouse was James Joyce, but it takes a lot of skill to consistently turn out stuff that sharp and funny. There are a lot of highfalutin' cultural critics that have a blind spot in terms of comedy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
Solitair posted:There are a lot of highfalutin' cultural critics that have a blind spot in terms of comedy. The problem is comedy in general isn't retained in cultural memory. Name five comedy focused authors off the top of your head between 1900 1970 or even 1990. I would guess few people in this thread have read Robert Sheckley, John Sladek or William Tenn. Critics tend to respect a drier, finer crafted humor, for example Jane Austen is very funny, one of her virtues that most critics agree on. I like Pratchett, a lot, but his work tends to be very rooted in various adolescent concerns, there's a reason why many of his protagonists are teenagers or in their early twenties. There are protagonists who are much older, like Weatherwax or Vimes, but the prime emotional movers tend to be young. It's only rarely that we get novels like Reaper Man and Night Watch where the concerns of adults come to foreground. Plus Pratchett was prolific enough that there's a good amount of sloppiness in his craft. Overall, Discworld is one greatest fantasy series ever, it's enormously satisfying to read but it doesn't quite reach that other level. P.G Wodehouse, in comparison, does one thing and does it to perfection, there's considerable literary pleasure in watching the clockwork of his characters and plots spin up and then release. His consistency is the quality that puts him over Pratchett.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 09:04
|
|
|
Hmm 'best' is kind of subjective, so subjectively Terry Pratchett is actually the best ever fantasy author that's my take.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 09:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 15:01 |
|
|
Chairchucker posted:Hmm 'best' is kind of subjective, so subjectively Terry Pratchett is actually the best ever fantasy author that's my take. I guess because all taste is subjective there's no point listening to other people at all nor voicing our opinions. There's absolutely nothing shared or in common between anybody or any piece of fiction, it's all subjective. Nothing can be compared because we are physically incapable of experiencing another person's subjectivity. theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you loving moron fez_machine fucked around with this message at 09:29 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2016 09:23
|
|