The Books/Reading Thread

The Ozzman said:
Just the first book? I still need to continue past the first book in the series.
Click to expand...

Nope, im on book 13 now. As much as I have enjoyed the series thus far, I can understand a lot of the criticism it gets. Entire books could be filled with political infighting of little consequence and ridiculous levels of haughty Aes Sedai posturing. Characters could also spend significant amounts of time in annoying moods that can be frustrating. Most book snobs would probably call it a shit series, but I enjoy it so I dont care. I admit that I may have dropped the series midway (where the plot slows to a crawl) if it werent for hearing that the series gets redemption in the end via Brandon Sanderson. Honestly the series is hard to recommend, but ill have to hold judgment about the series as a whole until I finish it.
 
EternalMetal said:
Nope, im on book 13 now. As much as I have enjoyed the series thus far, I can understand a lot of the criticism it gets. Entire books could be filled with political infighting of little consequence and ridiculous levels of haughty Aes Sedai posturing. Characters could also spend significant amounts of time in annoying moods that can be frustrating. Most book snobs would probably call it a shit series, but I enjoy it so I dont care. I admit that I may have dropped the series midway (where the plot slows to a crawl) if it werent for hearing that the series gets redemption in the end via Brandon Sanderson. Honestly the series is hard to recommend, but ill have to hold judgment about the series as a whole until I finish it.
Click to expand...

Others here stopped caring after about book 6 or so. I'll get to at least the 3rd one before deciding to continue further. 10+ books in a series is a lot. Are they as captivating as TEOTW was?
 
EternalMetal said:
I just got gifted the First Law Trilogy by Joe Abercrombie for Christmas and was wondering if anyone here has read it? Im relatively easy to please when it comes to fantasy, especially since ive been soaking up the Wheel of Time for the past 6 months and am kind of glad that it dragged on as long as it did (at least now than im into the Sanderson books and shit is finally getting to the point).
Click to expand...

i have yeah. it's not exactly a high priority read in my book, but it's readable and easy to enjoy. it's a good gateway into the fantasy of the last 20 years if you aren't too acquainted; a quintessential 'grimdark', cynical, gritty and gleefully bloody, influenced as much by comic books and action/western movies as by classic fantasy literature. the worldbuilding is its biggest weakness, i never got into that side of it and zoned out whenever it got too heavy on the lore, plus i didn't like jezal's whole arc much. everything involving logan and glokta is a lot of fun though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EternalMetal
The Ozzman said:
Others here stopped caring after about book 6 or so. I'll get to at least the 3rd one before deciding to continue further. 10+ books in a series is a lot. Are they as captivating as TEOTW was?
Click to expand...

Id say the next two are, but after a while the plot just slows down. I just feel like a lot of the books could have been edited down to about half the size and still said the same thing. Things pick back up a bit by the 10th book and so far im really liking how Sanderson is handling the rest of the series. To be completely honest, I dont see you sticking with the series until the end.

no country for old wainds said:
i have yeah. it's not exactly a high priority read in my book, but it's readable and easy to enjoy. it's a good gateway into the fantasy of the last 20 years if you aren't too acquainted; a quintessential 'grimdark', cynical, gritty and gleefully bloody, influenced as much by comic books and action/western movies as by classic fantasy literature. the worldbuilding is its biggest weakness, i never got into that side of it and zoned out whenever it got too heavy on the lore, plus i didn't like jezal's whole arc much. everything involving logan and glokta is a lot of fun though.
Click to expand...

By comparison, what would you consider a high priority read? And yea, im relatively new to the genre. My reading preferences have always leaned more towards sci-fi, but im gravitating towards fantasy as of late.
 
Thanks, but im not sure im ready for the Gene Wolfe of fantasy yet. Malazan is on my to-read list though, so maybe some day.
 
i mean, one man's gene wolfe is another man's terry goodkind, but fair enough. i think erikson would be appropriate as a next step into deeper waters if you do enjoy abercrombie though. i'd also recommend glen cook's black company if you're looking for something that's not a huge commitment, fantasy in the style of a deadpan war veteran's journal and, directly or otherwise, an influence on everything else i've mentioned including abercrombie.
 
I’m all caught up on Bakker’s series, and I think it’s conceptually fabulous. Really an impressive blend of genres, and bleak as hell (which I love in fantasy). I imagine his narrative voice can be a bit grating on some readers. I’d describe it as one of high philosophy, if that makes sense; and it’s fitting given that philosophy is central to the series. But it can wear you down a bit, I find.

Bakker’s prose also isn’t always transparent, by which I mean it can be difficult to follow what’s happening sometimes. But it lends a wonderful atmosphere of mysticism to the story. And the entire narrative premise is, again, stunning.

Haven’t read Abercrombie, but I’ve heard good things. Some critics have compared him to Bakker, as I recall.

I realize no one was asking about Bakker, but thought I’d pitch in my two cents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: no country for old wainds and EternalMetal
Started reading this. Should get through it fairly quickly like any other Vonnegut novel

220px-CatsCradle%281963%29.jpg
 
Einherjar86 said:
I’m all caught up on Bakker’s series, and I think it’s conceptually fabulous. Really an impressive blend of genres, and bleak as hell (which I love in fantasy). I imagine his narrative voice can be a bit grating on some readers. I’d describe it as one of high philosophy, if that makes sense; and it’s fitting given that philosophy is central to the series. But it can wear you down a bit, I find.

Bakker’s prose also isn’t always transparent, by which I mean it can be difficult to follow what’s happening sometimes. But it lends a wonderful atmosphere of mysticism to the story. And the entire narrative premise is, again, stunning.

Haven’t read Abercrombie, but I’ve heard good things. Some critics have compared him to Bakker, as I recall.

I realize no one was asking about Bakker, but thought I’d pitch in my two cents.
Click to expand...

something you didn’t mention that’s unique to bakker, in my own experience at least, is the feeling of otherworldly menace and sheer perversity at times. i don’t think he’s as ‘bleak’ as somebody like erikson, whose stuff is weighed upon by a kind of grand apocalyptic melancholy, but he’s even more fucked up. it’s probably been over a decade since i read those books and some of the images and characters have really stayed with me.

i do agree his philosophical digressions can be a little overblown in places (erikson’s are more organic i think), but it’s such a strange and ambitious work that i don’t mind a bit of self-indulgence now and again.

i think you’d be disappointed with abercrombie if you go into his stuff with bakker-level expectations tbh, there’s nothing like the same originality or ambition there. i’d recommend it if you felt like something less heavy, more of a ‘badass’ page-turner.
 
no country for old wainds said:
something you didn’t mention that’s unique to bakker, in my own experience at least, is the feeling of otherworldly menace and sheer perversity at times. i don’t think he’s as ‘bleak’ as somebody like erikson, whose stuff is weighed upon by a kind of grand apocalyptic melancholy, but he’s even more fucked up. it’s probably been over a decade since i read those books and some of the images and characters have really stayed with me.

i do agree his philosophical digressions can be a little overblown in places (erikson’s are more organic i think), but it’s such a strange and ambitious work that i don’t mind a bit of self-indulgence now and again.

i think you’d be disappointed with abercrombie if you go into his stuff with bakker-level expectations tbh, there’s nothing like the same originality or ambition there. i’d recommend it if you felt like something less heavy, more of a ‘badass’ page-turner.
Click to expand...

Definitely agree on the menace and perversity element. There's one scene in particular that has always stuck with me--the epilogue scene in, I think, The Warrior Prophet. If I recall correctly,
the Consult is terrorizing northern settlements, and Aurax or Aurang, one of them, rapes an anonymous farmer's wife and children. The scene is disgusting and utterly heartbreaking, and left a bad taste in my mouth after finishing that book.

Just a quick comment on the "grand apocalyptic melancholy" aspect. I haven't read all of Erikson's series, so I can't speak for it. But I personally think the atmosphere of Bakker's series is heavily apocalyptic and bleak. It is known informally as The Second Apocalypse series, after all. It may not feel quite as classically grand as the Malazan series (which feels more like histories written by Tacitus, or something), but I do think there's a powerful apocalyptic gravity running throughout it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: no country for old wainds
Einherjar86 said:
Just a quick comment on the "grand apocalyptic melancholy" aspect. I haven't read all of Erikson's series, so I can't speak for it. But I personally think the atmosphere of Bakker's series is heavily apocalyptic and bleak. It is known informally as The Second Apocalypse series, after all. It may not feel quite as classically grand as the Malazan series (which feels more like histories written by Tacitus, or something), but I do think there's a powerful apocalyptic gravity running throughout it.
Click to expand...

yeah, i suppose both are very bleak in their own ways, it's a big part of why i'm drawn to them. probably more accurate to say erikson has more of a tragic, melancholic quality, whereas bakker is more alienating (not a criticism) and, like i said, menacing. they both have all of these qualities in places though.
 
I read most of this last month:

9780735206663.jpg

I bought it after hearing Rickards interviewed about it in a podcast. I'm not as much of a conspiracy theorist as he is, and unsurprisingly much of this is over the top with conspiracy theories, but it's also a good lesson in economic and political history, and whenever I fact-checked it online I didn't see any reason to question the non-opinion parts of the book.

Highlights include examination of the Greek debt crisis in 2015, the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1944, the repeal of the British Corn Laws in 1846, and the ideas of Joseph Schumpeter.

The main part I skipped over is this really academic section on complexity theory, complete with tons of formulas. I think the main point of it is to debunk equilibrium models in economics (i.e. the idea that the economy follows a stable pattern of boom-bust cycles), which I'm willing to accept without examining my assumptions with academic rigor. I'd rather lazily conclude that economics is impossible to fully explain by either mainstream or complex models, and wallow in an ideological middle ground.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Einherjar86
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Julma Jurmu
books?
Replies
28
Views
2K
Children Of Bodom
Crimson Babe
C
bRaTpRiNcEsS
O/T: What are you reading? part 2
Replies
136
Views
4K
Anthrax
Arg_Hamster
A
C
You should avoid reading...
Replies
21
Views
2K
ProgPower USA Lounge
Kenneth R.
K
xfer
not-so-rolling books thread
Replies
35
Views
1K
Kayo Dot
AndICried
A
Master_Yoda77
Fuck You We're Drunk Thread
Replies
14
Views
769
GMD Social Forum
mutantllama
M
Top Bottom