# Raymond Feist or famine?



## Aiden Sawyer (Jun 12, 2011)

I was in 8th grade in the early '80s when I was introduced to fantasy (Tolkien of course), and I was pretty muched hooked right then. But my love of fantasy was cemented by the next book I read, Magician by Feist. From that point on, my reading (scholarly commitments not withstanding ) consisted almost entirely of fantasy. Feist remained atop my check list whenever I went to the bookstore (the internet was not a household search tool back then), and I consumed every new book that Feist put out, filling in he voids with whatever fantasy I could put my hands on. However, some point after Feist's collaborative effort on Daughter of the Empire with Janny Wurtz, my appetite for Feist diminished considerably. I still pick up his latest books if I stumble across them, but I don't actively seek them out or consume them as soon I buy them. So, did I outgrow his writing, or did the quality of his writing fall off?


----------



## Artless (Jun 13, 2011)

Aside from being in the 8th grade in the Early 80's (I was being born...) I am in much the same boat.  
I was introduced through the Hobbit, and the first few books of the Wheel of Time Series.
I LOVED the First trilogy of Feists, but the second series was even better.
Then I picked up the books in between the two (Prince of the blood etc) They where great
Then the legends of the riftwar books... not too bad
Then the Shadow of the Conclaves series started.
I read the first three books
I enjoyed them, but I haven't actively sought them out.

I don't think his writing has dropped off at all.
I think its become like a tv series you loved for the first few seasons, that gradually got less and less interesting.
We are to familiar with the place and the people for it to be interesting anymore I think...


----------



## Map the Dragon (Jun 13, 2011)

Comparatively and honestly, I find Feist a bit dry. I can't even pinpoint a reason, but I have a hard time getting interested in his worlds; however, I have given him much of my time. I think I like his characters more than his plots or writing. That must have been enough for me when I was reading some of his pieces.


----------



## Dr.Dorkness (Jun 14, 2011)

Yes feist was a great writer, still is actualy. But what I believe that he had only 4 great characters in his whole writing. and them not apearing or at least not as much is the reason his newer books do not apeal to us much. who are those 4 characters? First of Puc, Thomas, Jimmy (James), and Amoss Trask. puc and thomas are just great. Jimmy and Amoss make Arutha, lets say, enjoyable. I mean he generaly is boring as hell. (as a character that is). Jimmy does this also for the sons of arutha in king of the blood. while Amoss does this for arutha's youngest son in the kings bucaneer.


----------



## Aiden Sawyer (Jun 14, 2011)

Dr.D, I do believe you are on to something there. All of those characters are enjoyable, and although pug appears in many of the later books, his character is less appealing as an adult of awesome power. No I just need to put a finger on what I liked so much about Daughter of the Empire... I may have to re-read it.

cheers


----------



## Chase Simba (Jun 14, 2011)

Daughter of the empire and the following series focused on the political power-plays of a stagnating culture.  Mara was a brilliant, likeable, caring and human character.  She didn't have magic at her disposal, and she created her own political and military power.  You felt that even though this was a fantasy book, she could still be real.  And that's why you loved it.
Or at least, that's why I loved it, anyway.


----------



## Chase Simba (Jun 14, 2011)

Also, Dr. D has a good point.
At least where the other books are concerned.


----------



## Artless (Jun 15, 2011)

Chase Simba said:


> Daughter of the empire and the following series focused on the political power-plays of a stagnating culture.  Mara was a brilliant, likeable, caring and human character.  She didn't have magic at her disposal, and she created her own political and military power.  You felt that even though this was a fantasy book, she could still be real.  And that's why you loved it.
> Or at least, that's why I loved it, anyway.



Agreed. This is why I couldn't read the trilogy when I was reading the Magician trilogy at such a young age, the political interplay overwhelmed me. A couple of years later though, and it blew me away.
Much like GRRM has done with his work. The politics is so indepth and convoluted it is a story in and of itself


----------

