Find content
Male
I have had that book for a few years! Awesome book!Joshi's The Rise and Fall of the Cthulhu Mythos.
Hyborian Frog
Member Since 01 Jun 2005Offline Last Active Mar 11 2013 03:54 PM
Posts I've Made
In Topic: Steven Erikson - Malazan Book Of The Fallen Series
21 August 2012 - 09:21 PM
Deuce, I was clearly trying to rile you up and that is why I put this in my last post.
Especially the intellectual elitism bit (knowing that you write for the Cimmerian)! lol! And the "too deep, complex part" is the cheesy response that diehard Malazan fans tend to throw at people who disagree with them (just read the Amazon reviews).
Malazan certainly has its faults, but for the most part it is one of the better series out there.
Glad to know you don't view Eddings as superior fantasy!
*puts a carrot on a string from the end of a stick and dangles it in front of duece...
Just face it, Malazan is too deep, too complex, and too literary for you. You just don't "get it"!
Especially the intellectual elitism bit (knowing that you write for the Cimmerian)! lol! And the "too deep, complex part" is the cheesy response that diehard Malazan fans tend to throw at people who disagree with them (just read the Amazon reviews).
Malazan certainly has its faults, but for the most part it is one of the better series out there.
Glad to know you don't view Eddings as superior fantasy!
In Topic: Steven Erikson - Malazan Book Of The Fallen Series
10 August 2012 - 04:23 PM
deuce, do you really need to bash Erickson nonstop? Honestly by your posts I don't think you have read much if any of his books. If you did, did you not enjoy Deadhouse Gates or Memories of Ice?
I cannot believe in your effort to portray intellectual elitism...you actually used Swordbearer(widely considered Cook's worst novel), Eddings(considered one of the worst fantasy authors ever. Literally his first two series are the exact same story), Terry Brooks(Sword is a complete Tolkien rip), etc. to show why Erickson sucks. It is honestly quite hilarious!
Erickson has freely admited to all his influences many many times. But trust me, Malazan is not a ripoff series in the least. It's a great mixture of Tolkien(mythic), Homer(tragedy), Moorcock(anti-heroes, metaphysical), Howard(barbarism, darkness etc., Karasa), and obviously Glen Cook(nick names, Bridgeburners, soldier POVs). It is really EPIC! Actually there is nothing this EPIC out there. It deals with more continents, armies, races, wars than probably anything out there.
But hey this is common. Cook fans sometimes love Erickson. Almost all Erickson fans end up loving Cook. That is probably because Glen's books are much faster/easier reads and the POVs and naming style of soliders is similar because that is where Steven/Esselmont got the idea for that from.
*puts a carrot on a string from the end of a stick and dangles it in front of duece...
Just face it, Malazan is too deep, too complex, and too literary for you. You just don't "get it"!
For the rest of you, a good starting point is this new trilogy. It is set before all the other books and is a self-contained story-arc.
I cannot believe in your effort to portray intellectual elitism...you actually used Swordbearer(widely considered Cook's worst novel), Eddings(considered one of the worst fantasy authors ever. Literally his first two series are the exact same story), Terry Brooks(Sword is a complete Tolkien rip), etc. to show why Erickson sucks. It is honestly quite hilarious!
Erickson has freely admited to all his influences many many times. But trust me, Malazan is not a ripoff series in the least. It's a great mixture of Tolkien(mythic), Homer(tragedy), Moorcock(anti-heroes, metaphysical), Howard(barbarism, darkness etc., Karasa), and obviously Glen Cook(nick names, Bridgeburners, soldier POVs). It is really EPIC! Actually there is nothing this EPIC out there. It deals with more continents, armies, races, wars than probably anything out there.
But hey this is common. Cook fans sometimes love Erickson. Almost all Erickson fans end up loving Cook. That is probably because Glen's books are much faster/easier reads and the POVs and naming style of soliders is similar because that is where Steven/Esselmont got the idea for that from.
*puts a carrot on a string from the end of a stick and dangles it in front of duece...
Just face it, Malazan is too deep, too complex, and too literary for you. You just don't "get it"!
For the rest of you, a good starting point is this new trilogy. It is set before all the other books and is a self-contained story-arc.
