| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What are they?
I know that, this being a D&D community, I will get flamed to death for this, but I cannot stand The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I got partway through the first book, and I couldn't keep reading. I cannot abide by the writing style at all, and the characters didn't interest me. I found myself rather bored with it.
What about you guys? What highly acclaimed fantasy do you dislike?
I remember not liking Icewind Dale trilogy by R.A Salvatore. One of the most boring books I ever tried reading. I got through about 82% of the book and I just couldn't read anymore. That book almost ruined fantasy novels for me but luckily I found some other worthy gems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is very quickly going to turn into stoplikingwhatidontlike.jpg, I fear.
Maybe, but I hope not. I just want to have an intelligent critique of acclaimed novels that some of us do not particularly enjoy.
Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter. I cannot abide by the main character. At all.
Twilight: This one needs no explanation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember not liking Icewind Dale trilogy by R.A Salvatore. One of the most boring books I ever tried reading. I got through about 82% of the book and I just couldn't read anymore. That book almost ruined fantasy novels for me but luckily I found some other worthy gems.
Anything Salvatore writes is awful, but then I don't think he is actually critically acclaimed.
From what I've read, he's usually received rather lukewarmly-to-poorly by critics. But one does have to wonder how he sells so damn much cranking out such hackworthy tripe.
I actually had a near decade-long Salvabattle with a friend, where he would buy the latest Salvatore masterpiece, then he'd hand it off to me to read after he was done so that we could debate its merits. I eventually won. He eventually got to the point where the badness could just no longer be denied.
Not sure if I have a personal fave for this list. Other than when I am comparing notes with a friend, I tend to read mainly good stuff. I guess I've been lucky. Most of my disappointments were already known disappointments.
Although... I did quickly get sick of George R. R. Martin's gimmick of killing any and all interesting characters, or just defaulting to the worst outcome in every situation. And the more the critics and readers alike loved him for it, the more I wanted to slap him - and them - repeatedly over it.
I haven't even bothered to read his latest. I will be most disappointed in it. I know without looking.
Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter. I cannot abide by the main character. At all.
You're not alone on this as the Hamilton herself has spoken on how much she now hates the main character. Apparently, at some point the market took over the character and her publisher started telling her how to write. I'm sure she'd just kill the series if it wasn't for the fact that it is her cash cow.
@Brunn] I have seen his books on top 10 worst books list's. They let him shoot out hordes of books tho. The R.A. Salvatore section takes up a whole shelf at Barnes and Nobles and I'm not really interested in reading anything else by him after the torcher I had to bear with the last book of his I tried to read.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did any critics praise The Sword of Truth?
Because if so, put that one down for me. Moral dissonance out the ass and pushing your politics as manna from heaven does not make for a pleasant read. Neither does just plain bad writing, for that matter.
Really dodged a bullet by finding out how repugnant that series was after SFBC landed the first one on my doorstep.
....speaking of the SFBC and quotes from critics you've never heard of gushing over a book...
Fifth Sorceress
admittedly it's hard to say with a straight face that either of these were genuinely critically-acclaimed by actual critics
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe any book you dislike should also come with a compliment, as in I can see the value of X the critics/fans like...
Maybe not critically acclaimed, but RR Martin's Game of Thrones.
I did not find the political manuevering exciting in a fantasy world. Politics are boring enough without having the consequences being irrelevant. Maybe more time on the characters would make the politics have consequence for me?
For the same reason I did not like Dune.
In both cases I beleive the world scope is well done, technically and vividly. I can see both with all the concrete descriptions given. :)
Not so much critically acclaimed, but the Sword of Truth series. Ugh. I was fine with it for several books. And then it was like falling down a mountain after that. I'm super anal about finishing a series once I start it, so I had to read through to the end. I now wish I hadn't though.
I have the same problem with the Song of Ice and Fire series. Loved the characters. Liked how the setting was such an integral part of the storytelling. Got over the whole tragedy-porn replacing a plot thing pretty quickly. I got to the point where I was actually hoping my favorite characters would get killed off as it was beyond obvious that being permanently released from this chagrin of a story was the best thing that could possibly happen for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just can't get myself to liking the Song of Ice and Fire series either, partly due to a pal of mine never shutting up about how much he liked it for being more cynical than most fantasy books he's read. Yeah, good idea to tell me that when I quite clearly tell him I prefer my stories with at least some hope in them (to avoid Darkness Induced Audience Apathy). Also, I have never liked the Harry Potter series either, but mostly due to how the mythical elements were treated differently from what I was comfortable with. Then again, that flailing tree was one of the few things I did like in it.
Wheel of Time series... started off interesting enough (for me, at least), then steadily descends into what I can only describe as drudgery.
|
|
Wheel of Time series... started off interesting enough (for me, at least), then steadily descends into what I can only describe as drudgery.
I agree. Book 10 was probably the hardest to get through for me. It was probably just weariness trying to get anywhere near the end of series. I think Book 6 was the last one that really interested me.
A Song of Ice and Fire was a refreshing break from the norm for me, but I struggled through Book 4. I hope Book 5 is better!
(deleted... dual post)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am a massive fan of trilogies! If you cannot write the damn story out in three books, well...
Oh, I actually did like the Belgariad (which is a five-volume stroy). That 'Trilogy' limit is not exactly an iron wall...
Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter. I cannot abide by the main character. At all.
Twilight: This one needs no explanation.
Anita Blake: I really liked Anita Blake when I first started reading. There was this whole edgy female detective angle going with magic thrown in but as it gets further and further into the series it starts devolving into nothing more than a Pornographic Screenplay, seriously, I was on like book 15 or something like that and of the 300+ pages 230 of them were either leading up to or describing sexual acts, the first few times is kind of interesting but 5 straight books of it is just LAME.
I tried reading the other series the author does, Merry Gentry, but it's just a distillation of the sex stuff in Anita Blake. Honestly I think the writer is kind of washed up.
I will say that Anita Blake/Merry Gentry are the ONLY series that I've never finished. It just got that bad for me.
Twilight: I actually do enjoy the twilight series, the books are very well written and if you read it without the context of the movies it's quite enjoyable.
Okay, some things sound absolutely stupid when you watch them (perhaps simply because they can't put on screen the way we visualize it in our minds.
Like the sparkling thing, sure, I've joked around about this before but honestly I didn't think it that dramatic when I first read it, I figured it was more something like velvet where it just kind of has this sheen when you look at it in the right light I totally didn't think he was a disco-ball.
Before you bash twilight keep in mind what it is meant to be. It's meant to be a gushy teen romance novel and for who it's written for, it's done quite well.
I am a massive fan of trilogies! If you cannot write the damn story out in three books, well...
The Harry Potter books were a chore to read. I got through Book 3 and gave up!
It might just be how old you were when you first picked it up. I grew up on harry potter, I started reading when I was about 12 years old and I'll admit that it was a chore to get through the first chapters of the first book. Once you get into the magic stuff though it got really interesting. The final book came out just before I graduated High-School and it really felt like the characters grew up with me, the writing style really matured over the course of the seven books.
I am a massive fan of trilogies! If you cannot write the damn story out in three books, well...Oh, I actually did like the Belgariad (which is a five-volume stroy). That 'Trilogy' limit is not exactly an iron wall...
I hated The Malloreon it ruined the Belgariad for me and the Sparhawk stuff I dropped after the first few chapters.
I think R E Howard wrote better Lovecraft than Lovecraft.....
Conversely I think LotR was one of the best tragedies I have ever read... there is no happy ending.... Frodo fails, and must live with the pain of it for eternity... It was Sam that succeed and he has to live with the knowledge that it broke his friend.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hated The Malloreon it ruined the Belgariad for me and the Sparhawk stuff I dropped after the first few chapters.
While I didn't exactly hate the Malloreon, I don't consider it great, either.
Hmm.. the Sparhawk stuff... Kinda liked the first trilogy (Elenium IIRC), couldn't bring myself to finish the Tamuli.
Conversely I think LotR was one of the best tragedies I have ever read... there is no happy ending.... Frodo fails, and must live with the pain of it for eternity... It was Sam that succeed and he has to live with the knowledge that it broke his friend.
Ah, but the group succeeded, even at the expense of breaking the protagonist. Not exactly a tragedy in my oponion, but a nice ending, not some complete 'everyone happy ever after' cliché finish.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd call the ending of LotR bittersweet. And I like it that way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hated The Malloreon it ruined the Belgariad for me and the Sparhawk stuff I dropped after the first few chapters.While I didn't exactly hate the Malloreon, I don't consider it great, either.
Hmm.. the Sparhawk stuff... Kinda liked the first trilogy (Elenium IIRC), couldn't bring myself to finish the Tamuli.
Conversely I think LotR was one of the best tragedies I have ever read... there is no happy ending.... Frodo fails, and must live with the pain of it for eternity... It was Sam that succeed and he has to live with the knowledge that it broke his friend.Ah, but the group succeeded, even at the expense of breaking the protagonist. Not exactly a tragedy in my opinion, but a nice ending, not some complete 'everyone happy ever after' cliché finish.
They also succeeded in taking the magic from the world. The Elves fade and go into the West the Dwarves eventually shut themselves away and the Hobbits hide from us and become fearful it becomes the Age of Man.
Aragorn is the Paragon of mankind - when he dies there is no other that will equal him.
In defeating the shadow - the world becomes a shadow of what was, that is the tragedy.... or maybe the bright light of mankind extinguishes the starlight of elvenkind...
Feist's Magician I disliked intensely.
I got bored after Silverthorn
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Tolkien's writing is even more dry than Jordan's >.<
Wheel of Time series... started off interesting enough (for me, at least), then steadily descends into what I can only describe as drudgery.I agree. Book 10 was probably the hardest to get through for me. It was probably just weariness trying to get anywhere near the end of series. I think Book 6 was the last one that really interested me.
It seems to me that to rant against Jordan in a way to qualify for this thread, you need to dislike the BEGINNING of the Wheel of Time series, because everyone trashes the later books of that series. And I can honestly say that I didn't like the beginning of WoT (and have said so in other threads on this site).
Maybe any book you dislike should also come with a compliment, as in I can see the value of X the critics/fans like...
That's fair enough. I don't recall finishing a single book without finding at least ONE good thing I could say about it.
Certainly, Jordan had quite a story to tell, but he took his time about telling it. In _The_Eye_Of_The_World_, from what I recall, there were three scenes where the main character has a dream-that's-not-really-a-dream where the BBEG says "Ha ha, you're mine!" There are three scenes where an agent of the BBEG tries to recruit the main character. And so on. Every scene occurs in triplicate.
This alone might not be so bad. One could argue that there is a certain charm in repetition. It gives the reader a feeling of familiarity and understanding of the story. But another factor is the long descriptions that stretch the story out to three times its ideal length. Those two factors result in a book NINE times the length it should be.
And even then, I might have finished the series, if not for one other obvious problem...
I am a massive fan of trilogies! If you cannot write the damn story out in three books, well...
Exactly. I got about 1000 pages into Wheel of Time, which I would regard as a good length for a series. If Jordan could have gotten it all in 1000 pages, I could at least have finished it.
I also found the series unconvincing. One character is turning into some kind of wolf-thing, which might have been scary, but somehow, Jordan's description of it made it sound silly. When the main characters are afraid of crows, that COULD have been scary, but somehow, I found Jordan's description unconvincing. One of the characters was magically addicted to a cursed dagger, but somehow, I just feel that Jordan just didn't make it convincing, as Tolkien had done with the One Ring.
On a topical note: I never really did like the Pern books.
I am one of those who were disappointed with Lord Of The Rings - there is certain reason why there is parody named Bored Of The Rings. I liked the work prof. Tolkien done while building the world, I liked Hobbit, I liked early, mythic part of Silmarillion but trilogy itself was quite dull. I returned to it after playing Lord Of The Rings Online and it was less duller than initially but still it was far from being great book.
The black company.
I hated that I had to read it to finish the story.
Chalk it up under cool story, awful writing style.
It read like a fantasy book written by Dennis Miller.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Lankhmar stuff. Just don't like the writing style at all.
Same for the Elric stuff.
Boy, am I gonna make a lot of enemies here!
|
I had couldn't get into the Sword of Shannara series. I got about 50 pages into the first book and couldn't read any more.
I didn't like the Darksword books by Weis and Hickman. I loved their Dragonlance stuff but for some reason didn't like this series.
I felt the same as many people about LotR. Saying that, the Hobbit is my favourite fantasy novel.
Thankfully, I have found plenty of good reads, many of them on people lists here.
Harry Potter: Always through they were silly. Never gave 'em a chance.
Sword of Truth: I received Wizard's First Rule as a gift, read through the entire book, bought the second book, only to then realize how much I hated them both. I mean really, it was the blandest, most boring read... fell into just about every trap (or trope, perhaps?) in fantasy literature.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tolkien - I tried multiple times to read it growing up. I made it through the Hobbit (barely) and just couldn't handle the holy trilogy. In my twenties I got a hold of the audiobook and thought it was fantastic. The movies, which did away with all the exposition, brought that magic to me that I was always told about. I've since gone back and read them and enjoyed them immensely. So I can definitely see both sides on this one.
Salvatore - I have to admit to growing up on his works and thinking they were the greatest things since sliced bread. The exposition read smoothly, and the fight scenes were phenomenal. As I grew older, the emo-ness of Drizzt began to wear on me, and I realized that the smooth writing and the fight scenes were hiding some glaring writing flaws. Then again, I have the same thoughts on Stephen King, who I simply cannot get through a single chapter. Smooth writing, draws in the reader, *terrible* mechanical writing skills.
Anne Rice - Another writer I grew up on thinking was pure awesomesauce. Then I realized it was a world of vampires layered on top of a thinly veiled androgynous work of porn. Eventually the writing developed in such graphic sex that I just threw it down on the ground and never picked it back up again. It pretty much turned me off to anything vampire save Stoker himself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ooh, I'll play!
First answering the thread title without reading the responses:
--all TSR novels are crap except for the two Galen books by Michael Williams (I haven't really read all the TSR novels)
--David Eddings is crap
--Terry Brooks is crap
--Stephen King has a lot of crap; The Eyes of the Dragon is total crap
And, just so no one can accuse the ol' Burgomeister of only being negative I'll say:
--the L. Sprague de Camp and Lin Carter stories are just as good as Robert E. Howard's (ooh! I'm such a troll!)
And, finally, Mervyn Peake's Gormenghast novels are overlooked fantasy masterpieces. How can I say this? you ask. Michael Moorcock sings his praises, Ursula Le Guin mentions him and they even made an awesome BBC miniseries about the first two books! My answer: I haven't seen it mentioned once on these boards the entire time I've been hanging out here.
Okay, so the fan video's a little chintzy and NONE of that music is the show, but definitely check it out!
|
Sword of Truth: I am in total agreement. I read the first one and got about 100 pages into the second one when he started describing yet another torture worse than what was in the first book. I dropped the book like a hot potato.
Wheel of Time: I really liked the premise of the books. Started reading the first book, got about 1/4 way through, put it down for a year or two. Tried twice more, didn't make it that far. Even tried the audio book, never got past the first disc. Jordan can not write.
Any book by Salvatore: I have tried to read his books, but could never get past the first few chapter.
George RR Martin's A Game of Thrones: One of the most boring books I have ever read. I read 4 other books while trying to read the first one. Never finished.
Dragonlance: Read the first one, tried to read the second. I just couldn't get interested.
Raymond E Feist's Magician: Read the first book. Never bought the second one.
Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser: I also wanted to read this. Drivvel. Difficult to read. Never Finished.
Anita Blake Books: They were good detective vs bad monster until just after the Meredith Gentry books came out. The next Anita book, she was turned into a succubus. The one after that devoted over 100 pages to a single sex act. While I still read the books, I can do without all the gratuitus sex scenes.
Rowling's Harry Potter
wow, we differ completely on our views of the harry potter series and the runestaff series.
but yeah, to each his/her own.
Sword of Truth: I received Wizard's First Rule as a gift, read through the entire book, bought the second book, only to then realize how much I hated them both. I mean really, it was the blandest, most boring read... fell into just about every trap (or trope, perhaps?) in fantasy literature.
A rose by any other name... how do I love thee? let me count the ways...
Sure they sound like cliche's NOW, but that is because they were so good THEN everyone has copied them since. I am not defending the book (I havenae yet read it) but the earlier writers get more leeway from me as they 'created' the cliche. :)
Brooks' Shanarra -- Tolkien was bad enough that I shouldn't even bother with a Tolkien ripoff.
I did not like the tolkein rewrite, and for some reason I never got past the 'big-bad-black-rocks-of-unforgivable-doom" description of the mountains that one could cross overnight. I do remember the mountains thinking "Brooks gets it..." then the characters cross them in a day. did I miss the 747 boarding?
I did not like Paolini's Aragon book for the same reason. I could not read the mentor's voice without hearing Alec Guinness saying, 'let the force flow through you' or saphire's flying not be accompanied by whining Tie fighter sounds, or Luke screaming 'NO!' when the guy died or... or... Lucas stole enough other's elements that there was no need to steal them. OK as a teenager-written book it is done well, but please does that mean the Art gallery next door should replace their walls with refrigerator doors? ACK
... I returned to it after playing Lord Of The Rings Online and it was less duller than initially but still it was far from being great book.
I did not like Hamlet until the sixth or seventh read (plus how ever many viewings :) There is just so much missed on the first time through. LotR is like this, it gets better every time I go through it. I have them on CD (& my nano :) so I 're-read' by listening every year. It does get better with multiple readings.
I do think if you 'liked the first' ones you cannae rule out the whole series :) there is a reason they got to make a series.
[I feel that the Burgomeister of Troll Town allows me to say impolitic things freely. Doodlebug Anklebiter takes no responsibility for what the Burgomeister says, but it is still up to a court of law to determine whether that is actually binding.]
If you don't like J.R.R. Tolkien, Fritz Leiber or Michael Moorcock's Elric or Hawkmoon books you are an illiterate yokel. You probably don't like Shakespeare, and I bet you think Mark Twain is a better writer than William Faulkner. Why do you even bother reading?
1. If you don't like J.R.R. Tolkien, Fritz Leiber or Michael Moorcock's Elric or Hawkmoon books you are an illiterate yokel.
2. You probably don't like Shakespeare,
3. and I bet you think Mark Twain is a better writer than William Faulkner. Why do you even bother reading?
1. I like Leiber and Moorcock... 2 out of 3 isn't bad?
2. Yes, I do! Well, except the comedies, which I find annoying.3. Yes, I do. Or at least I consider him to be a more important writer, which I guess isn't quite the same thing.
And I think Robert Parker's All Our Yesterdays is a fine work of literature, in contrast to his other stuff that I read for the pulp fun of it. (Steven Brust likes Parker, too, and I dig Steve, for that matter.)
Liked Anita Blake, until it got ridiculous, plot synopsis of the books below:
ANITA: "Oh look a vampire, I must [have sex with/kill] it"
ANITA: " Oh look a were[creature], I must [have sex with/kill] it"
Most frustrating books for me were The Arcana series by Morgan Llywelyn.
Great books however it was supposed to be at least a trilogy. Ended up contacting the publisher and Morgan Llywelyn herself wrote me back and expressed her frustration that she couldn't write them because they didn't sell well enough for her publisher to order the sequels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's something else: Mr. Game of Thrones guy could have just called himself "George Martin" and it would have been fine. But he went with "George R.R. Martin," kind of like "J.R.R. Tolkien." And I like him less for that. If I write an epic fantasy series as "K.R.R. Gersen," please shoot me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[Banishes the Burgomeister back to Troll Town]
A 66.6 repeating% on the Tolkien-Leiber-Moorcock meter lets you (or anyone else) off the hook.
I don't know what you find annoying about the comedies so I may (or may not) be sympathetic to you there, but I think some of them are better than others. I also make a point of reading them while [bubble bubble bubble], so that might make them funnier! But some of them are definitely better than others. The Taming of the Shrew and A Midsummer Night's Dream to name two off the top of my head.
Here's something else: Mr. Game of Thrones guy could have just called himself "George Martin" and it would have been fine. But he went with "George R.R. Martin," kind of like "J.R.R. Tolkien." And I like him less for that. If I write an epic fantasy series as "K.R.R. Gersen," please shoot me.
I didn't know that, but if he'd gone by George Martin he might've been confused with the Beatles' producer.
"He played on Sgt. Pepper's AND wrote Game of Thrones? Woah."
|
Here's something else: Mr. Game of Thrones guy could have just called himself "George Martin" and it would have been fine. But he went with "George R.R. Martin," kind of like "J.R.R. Tolkien." And I like him less for that. If I write an epic fantasy series as "K.R.R. Gersen," please shoot me.
I'll give him a pass on that, since he's been George RR Martin since he was writing elegiac SF short stories for Analog in the 1970s, and the parallel with Tolkien would have been lost on a significant fraction of Analog's readership :-).
"He played on Sgt. Pepper's AND wrote Game of Thrones? Woah."
You mean, kind of like Moorcock's involvement with Blue Oyster Cult and Hawkwind? (er, not that Hawkwind is exactly comparable to the Beatles...).