The Books/Reading Thread

erikson's still better ;)

We'll see... :cool:

I've been reading Deadhouse Gates for a while now, and I have to admit that it's been really hard to get through. Gardens of the Moon was epic fantasy gold, but Deadhouse Gates just seems too long and forced (I have to say). This is just my opinion, but somehow I feel that Erikson's series doesn't possess the realism that Bakker's does. I know you'll probably disagree, no country. :cool:
 
erikson's still better ;)

Erikson's kinda annoying me right now... I've read through all the books released so far once, and I greatly enjoyed most of them, but so far I feel like I've only exploited the entertainment part of the series, and there's so much more depth there, just waiting to amaze me. But.... it's like over 5000 pages and I just can't be bothered.
 
Wow, just wow. You're not reading one of the most intelligent Sci-Fi books ever written because the author insulted a band you like. Grow up.

I don't think it's possible that an intelligent book could be written by an author who doesn't like Maiden.

...Yeah you can stop talking to me, it will not ever lead anywhere :/
 
I like both, although the originals are definitely better.

Yeah, much better. I just never understand why so many die hard fans of the originals hate the new books/the film so much, I find both pretty enjoyable.

Have you read any of Frank Herberts other books? None of it really gets to the same quality as Dune but The Eyes of Heisenberg/WorShip books/ConSentient books are all pretty good.
 
The new ones to me were just solid and enjoyable sci-fi. No reason to dislike them, but of course not as good as the originals.

I haven't read any other Frank Herbert books but I probably should. I should also reread some of the Dune books considering I haven't read them in 5+ years.
 
...Yeah you can stop talking to me, it will not ever lead anywhere :/
I can still slam you for being so retarded as to think anyone who doesn't like Maiden isn't intelligent. Where the fuck do you get that from?

Edit: The newer ones, including the prequels were enjoyable to me. They wrapped up alot of the loose ends and didn't fuck things up like such books sometimes do, and for that I respect them. It doesn't live up to the originals, but I'd never expect that.
 
We'll see... :cool:

I've been reading Deadhouse Gates for a while now, and I have to admit that it's been really hard to get through. Gardens of the Moon was epic fantasy gold, but Deadhouse Gates just seems too long and forced (I have to say). This is just my opinion, but somehow I feel that Erikson's series doesn't possess the realism that Bakker's does. I know you'll probably disagree, no country. :cool:

if i was interested in realism i probably would never have read either of them. but if you just mean real world connotations, erikson's hasn't really got off the ground yet, it does later.

deadhouse gates is the hardest one of them all to get through, and on my first reading the series only started getting really good at the end of DHG (as in, much better than gardens). memories of ice (book 3) goes like a breeze in comparison. with hindsight re-reading the first couple is like reading totally new books though, i really loved DHG second time round, there isn't a weak sub-story among them. plus it's only upon the re-read you realise it's subtly introduced you to the guy who becomes possibly my favourite character later on :D
 
How is it? I've been contemplating reading that.

I think it's great, but I tend to agree with some of Rand's philosophical beliefs. It's written in a very dry, formal style; but there's a reason for that, so you just have to get by it. I'd say go for it though man, enjoy! :cool:

if i was interested in realism i probably would never have read either of them. but if you just mean real world connotations, erikson's hasn't really got off the ground yet, it does later.

deadhouse gates is the hardest one of them all to get through, and on my first reading the series only started getting really good at the end of DHG (as in, much better than gardens). memories of ice (book 3) goes like a breeze in comparison. with hindsight re-reading the first couple is like reading totally new books though, i really loved DHG second time round, there isn't a weak sub-story among them. plus it's only upon the re-read you realise it's subtly introduced you to the guy who becomes possibly my favourite character later on :D

By realism I meant the realism of the characters, their development... that kind of thing. I think Erikson sacrifices characterization for story. Bakker, on the other hand, blends character development with the development of the story. Maybe I just haven't gotten far enough into the series, like you said. I bought Memories of Ice, so it's waiting for me. I'll try and finish Deadhouse Gates soon.


Lastly, are there any Neal Stephenson fans here, and is Anathem any good? I've been reading about it, and I'm really interested in giving it a try.
 
By realism I meant the realism of the characters, their development... that kind of thing. I think Erikson sacrifices characterization for story. Bakker, on the other hand, blends character development with the development of the story. Maybe I just haven't gotten far enough into the series, like you said. I bought Memories of Ice, so it's waiting for me. I'll try and finish Deadhouse Gates soon.
Yeah, that's the real thing that's kept me from really getting into his books. The characters just aren't interesting enough for me to slog through to the good parts.
 
Lastly, are there any Neal Stephenson fans here, and is Anathem any good? I've been reading about it, and I'm really interested in giving it a try.

Huge Neal Stephenson fan...I can't read Anathem until next summer when I can devote time to it. It sounds pretty interesting. He's been getting a lot of crap for it though for inventing new words and shit. I don't know. The reviews haven't been overly impressive, but I'll still read it
 
Yeah, that's the real thing that's kept me from really getting into his books. The characters just aren't interesting enough for me to slog through to the good parts.

like i've said before i like erikson's characters so much more than just about any other character in any other book, that's the main reason i love him so much - i wish that these people existed in real life seriously. if these characters aren't realistic then people should aspire to be like them and so make them realistic, as far as i'm concerned. i'm pretty sad haha.

the other thing with erikson is he introduces them as mysteries, potentialities, and then gradually lets them paint their own little layer onto this vast epic history which dwarfs them all, as opposed to just laying everything out from the outset. for me there's more realism and truth in that method alone than in the entirety of most books. i could go on about this for hours but i've gtg, might add more later.
 
Huge Neal Stephenson fan...I can't read Anathem until next summer when I can devote time to it. It sounds pretty interesting. He's been getting a lot of crap for it though for inventing new words and shit. I don't know. The reviews haven't been overly impressive, but I'll still read it

Cool, thanks. I might pick it up soon. I'm very intrigued by his invention of new words for the story. Anathem (as some might have already been able to tell) is a combination of "anthem" and "anathema." I think that's so cool; and it brings me to my next point...

I finished Anthem. Very simple read, but still interesting. Eventually I'll get to The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged.
 
Just finished reading "Prey" by Michael Crichton. It was okay, but nothing special. I just started reading Ted Bell's "Assassins". Anyone know any good US History books to read?
 
Gardens Of The Moon has finally clicked with me, but unfortunately it's going to be due in a couple days! :lol: