I'm all in for epic books, just no longer a fan of epic series because they too often just repeat the same beats over and over again. I've recently started re-reading The Wheel of Time books, and the first one is still one of the most amazing fantasy novels ever, but mid-way through the second novel I couldn't help but feel like Rand Al Thor isn't moving forward and just being naive even worse than someone well into the heroes journey should be. Same for The Sword of Truth. And don't get me started on Dune, even acknowledging that it went more into philosophy. No offense to anyone that likes the later books in any of those series, but as far as I'm concerned, I've just kept the first ones.
Stuff like A Song of Ice and Fire avoids that because it isn't afraid to move the plot to other characters, though of course, we'll probably see the heat death of the universe and the gold master release of Star Citizen before the Winds of Winter releases.
Ken Follett is probably one of the best in the genre because he does different things. Pillars of the Earth is an amazing book, and he didn't turn it into a 6-book series or something that just drags on and on and on. So kudos to him for resisting the temptation there! (EDIT: Ah, turns out that I completely missed that he did. That's what I get for not checking.)
> no longer a fan of epic series because they too often just repeat the same beats over and over again
I can't remember the specific phrasing, but I remember an interview or something with Ken Follett where he basically said "Your readers come to you for a specific reason, the key to success is the find a way to write the same story over and over again without it feeling stale."
The one comment I'd make is that it's not just the order the books were written in, but also the order they're read in. I just happened to read Gibson's Count Zero (when it came out) before Neuromancer and found that I preferred it... because as you say themes repeat. I enjoyed both, though MLOverdrive not so much.
Have you read the Expanse series? That seemed to have noticeably distinct themes through the second and third books, but I think based on style the authors split exposition and conclusion up.
Rand is moving forward you can see it in his inner monologue as it shifts from the first two books
In TEotW: Rand goes from claiming to be a farmer to doubting his place in the world, he struggles and overcomes obstacles. He goes from “Tam is my father!” to “Tam is my father?”
In TGH: Rand knows what he is but is unwilling to accept it. Over the course of the book he adapts to being treated more like nobility and a leader and becoming accustomed to it this is particularly clear in his interactions with Huiron. He even forgets and tries to command the Shienarins when their commander, Ingtar is right there.
I thought the parallel between Rands journey and the heron marked blade was also well done! Rand desperately tries to hold on to the heron blade as it’s his tie to Tam. As Rand goes through his journey he learns to use the blade and as he accepts who he is at the end of TGH, the blade, his last vestige of Tam as his father, is metaphorically and literally broken.
I am about to finish my first time through the series (listening to the excellent audiobooks). And I agree with OP that somewhere in the second or third book, Rand annoyed with his slow character growth and refusal to accept that he was the Dragon. I think the second book is even my least favorite of the series. The early books are also somewhat repetitive in their structure: Rand goes on a quest and defeats a Forsaken at the end.
However, the series starts to shift in a few ways not long after where the bulk of the books is about his allies on their quests scattered throughout the continent and they are far more interesting than Rand’s brooding. It also occurred to me in the last book or two that Rand’s slow growth may not be the most enjoyable to read but it is realistic — the story only spans two years or so and Rand has little time to actually process what is happening to him. He kind of acknowledges this in the last book, when Moraine remarks that the three boys she took out of the Two Rivers have grown up, and Rand says something to the effect: “no, only Perrin has, and when it comes to Matt and myself, I just hide it better.”
There is also all the growth that you mention as well as his somewhat immature attempt to harden himself in preparation for The Last Battle and his final realization that strength does not come from suppressing all his emotions.
To add: the heron-marked blade is used pretty well in other ways as well.
For context for the unfamiliar readers perusing this thread: heron marks indicate a blade master — a titled earned by defeating one in single combat or by undergoing a rigorous training process over years. Rand is a farm boy given such a blade by his dad when he sets out on his journey, and he is surprised when he learns his father was a blade master because he was just a simple farmer that served in a war 20 years beforehand to satisfy his own desire for adventure.
Rand feels he does not deserve to carry the sword but does it to honor his father. Even though he trains quite a bit, it is more a crash course than a proper pedagogy. He kills a blade master at one point but there are no witnesses so by tradition he feels he can’t claim the title. He carries this imposter syndrome across many of the books and obsesses over training with the sword. This continues until he is maimed in a way that hinders his ability to fight with the blade and, at roughly the same time a character points out that it doesn’t matter if anyone saw him defeat the blade master, he earned the title and should feel confident about it.
In a lot of ways, this arc is a microcosm for his internal conflict about being the Dragon Reborn (the chosen hero of prophecy). He goes from not believing he could possibly be the Dragon, to obsessively trying to prepare himself mentally for his final confrontation with evil (he repeatedly says he must make himself as hard as steel), to eventually realizing that his own perception of what makes a Dragon / blade master is immature — both are just a men, with their own strengths and weaknesses even though they have dedicated their life to a purpose.
He does move characters on, because time moves on. Things get bigger, but themes remain very similar in at least the first 3 books. Similar to your description of The Wheel of Times books, I found the Pillars of the Earth very good, but the sequels were less exciting (I still read books 2 and 3 and bought the 4th one).
> Pillars of the Earth is an amazing book, and he didn't turn it into a 6-book series or something
Just in case you or anyone else is unaware, he did write two others in the same 'universe' and their construction is very similar. That is not a complaint however, I thoroughly enjoyed all of them!
I love Pillars of Earth too, and he has turned it into a series (the Kingbridge series) with the fifth book expected this year. I've read each book and overall enjoyed each, particular his detailed research attempting to accurately depict everyday life for each historical era, however it does feel like the same plot with new characters 200 years later with each release.
I would like to get you started on Dune, I personally felt it was an impressive series in its ability to expand scope continuously until a resolution fell out of the events that drove the expansion.
Never read Follett but certainly keen for Brandon Sanderson's 5th Stormlight book sometime next year, they are huge books, he's definitely become my favourite writer despite being a bit meandering in prose sometimes.
The guy raised $40m in a kickstarter and pumped out 4 novellas this year, it's impressive how much of a literary machine he is.
Perhaps I went into this series with unrealistic expectations but I found it pretty disappointing. Same for Rothfuss. There is a huge volume of older fantasy novels that are a much better investment of time, IMO.
What kills Sanderson for me is the dialog. Real people don't talk like a Mormon sunday school teacher. No warrior on a field of battle is going to yell "oh butterfingers!" in the middle of a battle.
I don't think he is super great at dialog, either, but I like how his cursing is world-specific rather than just reusing what we think of as cursing in our world. He has quite a bit of it in Stormlight Archives (see: https://www.17thshard.com/forum/topic/7204-swearing-in-rosha...) but it doesn't "offend" us here in our world because it is specific to their world.
That's kind of a high fantasy trope. "Blood and ashes!" from Wheel of Time comes to mind. It's like how they like to use different measures of time and distance. "It took him a fortnight to travel all those leagues." Helps take you out of the real world.
It's the ultimate giveaway in the cosmere when someone curses with a different word than used locally, is the sure sign they are far more powerful than they seem.
Characters in general for Sanderson books tend to feel like Sanderson picked one trait, and something 'surprising', and made that their whole personality. Then he builds from there. They eventually become complex characters but for awhile after their introductions they feel like a cardboard cutout. And of course the characters still feel much more puritan and sterile than I would prefer.
Agreed. I read Sanderson for his superb world building skills. He does an excellent job of exploring how magic systems impact the world and societies within it. But the characters and dialog are all pretty weak. His books are all easy reads, and he’s prolific so it’s nice to have something reliable to fall back on when I’m searching for more substantial novels.
I bounced off of one of the early Stormlight books, maybe Way of Kings. Doesn’t mean it’s bad or others won’t find it rewarding. Sanderson rewards readers who are looking for world building and the reveal of the way things work.
I liked the first Mistborn trilogy, but couldn’t get into the later ones.
For recent large scale fiction that’s also not going to work for everyone, I really liked the Terra Ignota series. (But, if the warnings and the first chapter put you off, you’re not going to like it)
I think pillars of the earth and name of the wind were both entertaining but I was somewhat annoyed by both of their villains who just try too hard to make the reader hate them. We get it. The bad guy is evil.
Sanderson's villains do have their own shades of grey, even if it isn't quite as emphasized as in GRRM's books. The villain of the first Mistborn book was genuinely trying to keep the world safe; he was just terrible at it, and he had an evil god whispering in his ear for a thousand years. The Parshendi are first shown as just villains, but later books show their side of the story and they become far more sympathetic.
Yep, there's also a major character who has been pulling strings behind the scenes in about ten different books across various series. How good or bad they are depends on how closely their aims happen to align with the goals of the main protagonists of the story. Although it's really easy to miss; presently this is mostly easter eggs for sharp-eyed readers.
IIRC Sanderson has stated that he's trying to set up a Star Trek type setting. He's developing all these different cultures with different values, and eventually they're going to become space-faring and come into conflict with each other over their different priorities.
It took me three times over a few years to even finish The Way of Kings despite liking his other books, it's definitely a rough beginning but am basically hooked at this point.
That's a really interesting perspective to read because I feel almost exactly the opposite: liked TWoK and have been progressively disenchanted with each subsequent book.
TWoK reminds me of the (Mirror-Moon TL of the) original F/SN VN in that the author/TL being bad at realistic characterization actually enhances the experience. F/SN Shirou and TWoK Kaladin are both weird broken robots with warped perspectives, and exposing the reader to an exhaustive amount of the (creative and surprisingly involved) setting, both mundane and horrific, through those perspectives is actually pretty interesting in a literary way and ascends above what could otherwise have been just plain bad writing.
Other posts in this thread have referenced the development of Kaladin's character through the arc of the plot, and I think that's what lost me. "Fixed" Kaladin is an uncanny-valley imitation of a fleshed-out character; "broken" Kaladin is, intentionally or unintentionally, a lot more fun. I found myself actively disliking many of Sanderson's attempts at expanding his characterization, especially in RoW.
Stormlight started out so well but it is having the same sprawl problems that all Epic Fantasy faces. The more characters you introduce, the more plot you have to manage and the slower any character moves forward. Too many writers are reluctant to kill their darlings. Even GRRM, who was willing to kill Ned and surprise with the Red Wedding, lost control of all his threads years ago and that is why he'll never finish ASOFAI. It will require too much work to find "satisfying" ways to kill everyone off and lead the plot to an ending.
I could be misjudging because I read his Stormlight books with large gaps of time between readings but the first book, as I recall, was excellent while the later books quickly fell into YA territory for me. It seems to me that he either has found that his audience is much younger than I am and they crave a different writing style which he is happy to cater to or he is simply trying to write too much and doesn't spend enough time fleshing out descriptions. His sentences structures are bland as well.
The Wheel of Time for all of its warts sets a precedent in terms of how a world can be described all the way down to differences in clothing styles. Granted it did get a bit wearing reading about what people were wearing. So it was a bit extreme, but I find myself missing that in other books I read.
I need to look more into Sanderson's stuff, because the first of his books I cracked open seemed like it was written for an 8 year old. His narrative style is not something I enjoyed. I'm sure he meant it to be whimsical, but to me it just felt jarring and a detraction from the story.
FWIW, I also had the perception of his writing being more on the YA side, but I was pleasantly surprised by the Stormlight books (although I haven't read all of them yet). It's definitely not full-on Grimdark (for me that's a good thing), but still felt very mature. I don't think Sandersons sensibilities will ever let him write a sex scene or dialog with English profanity, but that doesn't bother me.
Yeah, I can easily recommend Sanderon books to people, and there is enough variety that people might like some and not others. Tress and the Emerald Sea and Yumi and the Nightmare Painter were both interesting, and Tress was especially a refreshing tale outside his norm.
You know he's an amazing author because whenever he is mentioned, people will come out of the woodworks to proclaim how they don't like his work, and the problems they have with it, as if that means anything.
This isn't to say that you have to like his work. Rather, he's so good, that instead of people promoting the epics they do like, they instead can't help but still talk about Sanderson. And that's incredibly powerful.
I really enjoyed Tress and Yumi/Nightmare Painter (couldn't get into the wizard one), not going to lie, his style is a bit cringy and he doesn't do humour well, along with what seems like a bit of moral preaching seeping in, but they are definitely fun books that are easily accessible. Same with The Emperor's Soul which his new novellas seem to hark back to. Yumi is him capturing that essence from a decade ago, though I wasn't really a fan of the ending.
Most fantasy genre fans have tried a bit of Sanderson simply due to how prolific and popular he is. Hence we all have opinions.
In the same vein, most fantasy fans will also have some opinion on Harry Potter. Or pop music fans will have something to say about Taylor Swift these days.
Patrick O'Brian's Master and Commander is 20 books, and I've read them all twice. There's an art there, and you can't reduce it to a formula. Total immersion in a period is definitely a part of it; you can actually find an interview with him on YouTube. He spent his entire life learning about it.
Amazingly, I've read that he actually wasn't that good a sailor, in real life.
I very much enjoyed the fun that O'Brian had in The Far Side Of The World with the unavoidable problem of plot armor with which authors of book series with continuing characters must deal.
I think he says in his interview that he came to wish he'd spent more time on the early years of the wars. Because he was running out of war by the end.
This is silly. There are so many readers, that you can pick most any topic and format and this is a true statement.
Nor is it a refutation that we have shorter attention spans. It /could/ be, but there could be a lot of things there. It is a hard question that will take some nuanced investigation to really get a good answer.
To this particular claim, though, it is always been the case that a large number of people buying literature are doing so for the signalling use case. Authors shouldn't confuse purchases with reads.
I'm wrapping up a read of Lonesome Dove, by Larry McMurtry. What an amazing "epic" book. It will certainly go down as one of the great pieces of American literature. I strongly recommend it.
Someone gave me a copy of Pillars of the Earth in 1996, and I read it in two days flat. It's a brilliant book, and miles better than the TV series (which is not bad).
With the move to electronic media, there is scope for more experimentation in length. There is no intrinsic reason why books should be a particular length.
Books were the length that they were, in the 20th century in particular, because of the needs of the physical printing industry. Cost went up more than linearly with length, beyond a certain point.
(In the 19th century books were often serialized in magazines first.)
Stuff like A Song of Ice and Fire avoids that because it isn't afraid to move the plot to other characters, though of course, we'll probably see the heat death of the universe and the gold master release of Star Citizen before the Winds of Winter releases.
Ken Follett is probably one of the best in the genre because he does different things. Pillars of the Earth is an amazing book, and he didn't turn it into a 6-book series or something that just drags on and on and on. So kudos to him for resisting the temptation there! (EDIT: Ah, turns out that I completely missed that he did. That's what I get for not checking.)