• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

What are you Reading Now?

Scribble

Archmage
What, you don't like Dostoevsky OR Guy Gavriel Kay?

Well...I never!

Those are two of my favorite authors :D

I have nothing against them personally, rather I respect them both. My issue with them may have more to do with these two facts: I have little free time and they wrote very thick books.

Can you like the author yet still have trouble with reading them? :)
 

SM-Dreamer

Troubadour
I'm reading, on and off depending on mood and schedule, Through Wolf's Eyes by Jane Lindskold and Foundation by Mercedes Lackey (both of which I found at the thrift store and decided, why not?), rereading GoT and underlining bits of it, reading Sin and Syntax by Constance Hale, and considering Julia Cameron's The Artist's Way.

This of course does not count school textbooks or required reading (ie, The Giver by Lois Lowry in my english class) :p
 

Mythopoet

Auror
Can you like the author yet still have trouble with reading them? :)

Yes. I have great trouble reading Gene Wolfe. I've only managed one of his books so far and tried three others without being able to get into them. I keep trying because he is quite possibly my husband's all time favorite writer and we even named our youngest child after him and one of his characters (Severian Wolfe). I have enormous respect for the man and his abilities, but he is really hard for me to read.
 

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
I was reading some Gene Wolfe not long ago and he's one I really love in short bursts. I don't think I could read one of his books straight through, but when I do read him I'm like, "Damn, he's really good." It's just weird I can't get into some of his stories for whatever reason. Maybe his style just takes longer to get used to for me. I had the same issues with Steven Erikson and China Mieville and I count them amongst my favorite writers nowadays.
 

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
I just finished a re-read of Goedel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid. Not fantasy, but fairly fantastic.

Am starting on An Instance of the Fingerpost. A few chapters in. Slow going, so far.

I find myself deliberately avoiding fantasy. I do subscribe to the Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, but most of the fantasy stories I read there just irritate me.

Still working on O'Brian and on that biography of Robert Mitchum. But not much lately has caught my fancy. Maybe it's time to go back to favorites, like Chandler or Conrad. Or something fun like a Nero Wolfe novel.
 

Philip Overby

Staff
Article Team
I find myself deliberately avoiding fantasy. I do subscribe to the Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, but most of the fantasy stories I read there just irritate me.

Just curious, why do they irritate you? I read one not long ago I thought was really well done. It was about mermaids, but was really dark and weird. I'd love to read more from that author. I'll have to look and find out her name.
 

monyo

Scribe
I read "I Am a Strange Loop" by Hofstadter and I've been meaning to read Goedel, Escher, Bach... it's a dense read.

I just finished a re-read of Goedel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid. Not fantasy, but fairly fantastic.

I've been reading Gödel's Proof recently (about halfway finished), of which Hofstadter edited the most recent edition, and cites in the foreword as being one of the major influences to get into his line of work and write GEB.

Also just started American Gods and The Wise Man's Fear. Recently finished On Intelligence, Relic, and Reliquary, all of which were great. The latter two I ended up reading mostly based on this post, plus positive memories of the movie.
 

Caged Maiden

Staff
Article Team
I'm reading T.W. Ervin's Flank Hawk and I'm really enjoying it. I've read later in the series and seeing where it all began is wonderfully surprising. Zombies, panzers, dragons...it isn't my normal fare but the writing is clean, the POV interesting and the situation both amusing and serious. Sure, the combined elements may initially indicate a rather silly tale, but I'd recommend it to those readers who enjoy a different type of fantasy. Common, comfortable elements arranged with new ideas and a serious quest.

Terry's details paint a vivid picture and I think that's what most inspired me upon opening the book. The pacing and judicious presentation of details create a nice balance even for a harsh critic. If you like something a little different, this is a very enjoyable story and its presentation makes it worth the read even if you presume you'll dislike WWII technology in a fantasy setting.

Well done, now I'll have to get Blood Sword...
 

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
Just finished Pied Piper by Neville Shute. A curious tale of an old man who winds up shepherding several children across France during the Nazi invasion in 1940. Despite the setting, there are only a couple of scenes of violence, but many scenes of courage.
 

Lovi

Scribe
I'm currently reading The Way of Kings by Brandon Sanderson and, just like the Mistborn trilogy, it is awesome. I tried to read The Name of the Wind, started it twice, but couldn't get over half way, because it's simply so damn boring. Nothing interesting has happened, so I just gave up. I can't see what the hype is about, really. The character isn't likable at all and absolutely nothing interesting happens...

That said, I'm currently also trying to read the 4th book of A Song of Ice and Fire to know what will happen and not have to wait for the tv-series, but even that is so incredibly boring, third chapter in. I've been thinking of reading the Discworld novels, but I don't know if they're too traditional and boring because they're older. I haven't read the Wheel of Time novels either for the same reason.
 

Ireth

Myth Weaver
Pratchett is one of those writers who seems to be rather polarized as far as reactions to his work goes. You either love him or hate him. IMO, they manage to strike a perfect balance between laugh-out-loud funny and gripping drama, with neither taking away from the other.
 

Mythopoet

Auror
I've been thinking of reading the Discworld novels, but I don't know if they're too traditional and boring because they're older.

Why on earth would you think something older is "traditional and boring"? Why on earth would you think "traditional" and "boring" go together? Some of the absolute best fantasy is decades old. Some of the earliest fantasy has still never been matched for sheer imagination.

Bless me, what do they teach them at these schools? (<Narnia reference, just in case that doesn't come across.)
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
True, Mythopoet. As for Sanderson, I tried to read Mistborn twice and didn't think it was very good. Not sure what's all the fuss is. Elantris was decent, and I like what he did with WoT, but his other stuff doesn't interest me.
 

Lovi

Scribe
Why on earth would you think something older is "traditional and boring"? Why on earth would you think "traditional" and "boring" go together? Some of the absolute best fantasy is decades old. Some of the earliest fantasy has still never been matched for sheer imagination.

Bless me, what do they teach them at these schools? (<Narnia reference, just in case that doesn't come across.)

What I mean is are they the traditional heroe's journey over and over again? Where you automatically can tell which characters live to the end, which ones die along the way and what will happen? With no surprising plot twists? And the non-optional Chosen One protagonist that defeats the villain in the end? These are the things I associate with the traditional generic fantasy around 80s and so. I haven't read them so I don't know what the case is with those books, perhaps you could tell me if you've read them? And also, I think that because they're older they're traditional because the trope-twisting fantasy became popular later on after those books.

I'd gladly read them but don't want to go through the trouble if they are infact very generic, because I don't like to read that kind of fantasy. I like surprise plot twists and unexpected character deaths and so on, generic fantasy doesn't offer that because the generic fantasy readers don't like that.
 

Scribble

Archmage
True, Mythopoet. As for Sanderson, I tried to read Mistborn twice and didn't think it was very good. Not sure what's all the fuss is. Elantris was decent, and I like what he did with WoT, but his other stuff doesn't interest me.

Ditto. I tried Mistborn but lost interest after a while.

To the point about classics... just because something is old doesn't make it good, but the old ones that persist generally have something to offer that is special. Mary Stewart's Merlin series (The Crystal Cave, The Hollow Hills, The Last Enchantment) are one of my favorites, richly written. Even though the story is ultimately predictable, Stewart made it unique. Her Merlin is the only one that I've read that felt "real" to me, and I've read a few, including Lawhead's series.
 

Mythopoet

Auror
What I mean is are they the traditional heroe's journey over and over again? Where you automatically can tell which characters live to the end, which ones die along the way and what will happen? With no surprising plot twists? And the non-optional Chosen One protagonist that defeats the villain in the end? These are the things I associate with the traditional generic fantasy around 80s and so.

You know, I don't think I could name one fantasy book from any decade that matches this criteria. Not even books that I didn't like. My husband tells me that The Sword of Shannara may fit the bill. I haven't read that one yet. But between the two of us, and we're pretty well read in the genre, especially if you combine our knowledge, we can only come up with one possibility.

I think you're making a lot of hefty assumptions here and you seem to be applying them to all older books. I mean, sure, there are some books from ALL decades that are generic and boring. But to assume that because something is from a particular decade it would be generic and boring... is just too illogical. And when did 80s fantasy become traditional? (And when did traditional become bad?)

In the 80s Gene Wolfe wrote the Book of the New Sun. Roger Zelazny finished the Dilvish the Damned stories. Stephen King began The Dark Tower. David Gemmell and Glen Cook started publishing their acclaimed series. James Blaylock and Tim Powers published their books that would be the spark that started the Steampunk craze. And Terry Pratchett started the Discworld series which were probably the first books written specifically to turn fantasy tropes on their heads.

I haven't read them so I don't know what the case is with those books, perhaps you could tell me if you've read them? And also, I think that because they're older they're traditional because the trope-twisting fantasy became popular later on after those books.

Yes, I can tell you about them. I've read them all, except the newest one, most multiple times. The first Discworld books were like parodies of the fantasy genre. Pratchett took many fantasy tropes and played them for unexpected laughs. He made his heroes an incompetent and cowardly wizard and a naive tourist. You never knew what was going to happen to them next. But Pratchett built on the Discworld foundation and it grew with the telling. The humor never left, but it became less central. He introduced many unconventional characters, some didn't take off. Others became the basis for many books. His characterization got better with every book. The stories improved too. He can write thrilling mystery and intrigue with Sam Vimes and the Guards characters. He can write folklore-esque fantasy drama with the Witches of Lancre characters. He can write urban fantasy action and adventure with Susan Sto Helit and Death, yes DEATH. And he can sprinkle a liberal helping of the Wizards of Unseen University into any book for laughs.

He is a brilliant writer and most of the Discworld books are fantastic.

I'd gladly read them but don't want to go through the trouble if they are infact very generic, because I don't like to read that kind of fantasy. I like surprise plot twists and unexpected character deaths and so on, generic fantasy doesn't offer that because the generic fantasy readers don't like that.

The fantasy genre is so wide and varied. There isn't really any such thing as "generic" fantasy or "generic" fantasy readers. Whenever I see people talk about fantasy as if this is so, I know they haven't read enough.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
Yeah. Everyone has been there at one time, though, where their experience of the genre just isn't that broad. The 80s had all kinds of interesting, non-traditional fantasy. But unless you're really up on the genre you won't know about most of it. And bless you for mentioning Blaylock.
 
Top