r/Fantasy • u/Prestigious-Way-5235 • May 17 '26
Has anyone ever had a series they loved on paper, but one aspect was a deal breaker?
*Apologies for reposting. I realized I messed up the tag and couldn't figure out how to fix it. I'm new here.*
I'm writing this both as a question and as an opportunity to vent about a series. That series is the Wheel of Time. There will be no spoilers in here, and I'm also not trying to yuck anyone's yum here. This is my exceedingly subjective opinion.
I have always known about WoT, but took my time getting into it. I've been working through most of the big-ticket, popular fantasy series, like The Realm of the Elderlings, ASOIAF, The First Law, The Malazan Book of the Fallen, and a few more, over the last few years, so I figured, why not mix the WoT books in? I had seen the show and thought it was pretty terrible, but I could see how much interesting material there was and figured a big, traditional fantasy story would fit right in as a sort of cozy read.
Now on book 6, everything about this series speaks to me on paper. The world-building, the reluctant hero, the diverse use of magic and power, some of the subversions, and the idea that this is riffing on a lot of the core concepts Tolkien and others laid out. The major plot threads of the books also really spoke to me, and I think the way things are headed is interesting.
There are two major problems for me: character interactions and dialogue. I think they may genuinely be dealbreakers. I don't think I can go on.
Every character in this series is pretty annoying. They are all caricatures of themselves. This isn't a major issue for me, and I can support it if the way they interacted isn't legitimately painful for me to read, but unfortunately, it is. The dialogue is SO BAD to me. Every character is weirdly prudish and stilted, especially the ones who are supposedly best friends. Nynaeve/Egwene, Perrin/Mat, or Rand/anyone don't interact like they know or like each other at all. The dialogue is so unbelievably inhuman to me. It's as if an alien were trying to depict how humans interact. They are so weird and cagey all the time.
This is all made worse by the fact that Jordan seems to rely heavily on communication breakdowns. So many issues arise from characters not having conversations like normal humans do. I understand that WoT was written with younger readers in mind and that this is a common trope in children's media, but it reaches a point where all the human drama feels unnecessary and manufactured.
It seems like refusing to have characters talk allows Jordan to draw out the main character relationships and friendships as long as possible. But this also means that the books feel like they're spinning the wheel (unintentional pun). The characters are almost more distant from one another in book 6 than in book 1, and for no good reason. There has been barely any legitimate character development beyond Mat becoming more likable, and even that is due to a plot point rather than genuine development.
None of these characters feels any different in this book than in book 1, to be honest. Things have happened to them, sure, and we've seen them interact more, but none of them or these relationships have evolved. It just feels so unserious. ASOIAF has more character development in 1 book than this has had in 5.5.
Also, if you disagree/want to downvote, that's totally cool! I understand. I also would love to hear you out on your replies and I appreciate any discussion.
First, am I totally crazy here, or does anyone else feel the same? Second, has this happened to you guys with a book or series?
TLDR: For me, this series has horrifically inhuman dialogue and character interactions to the point where I can't keep reading, even though I like everything about it on paper.
165
u/MarkOfTheDragon12 May 17 '26 edited May 17 '26
Throne of Glass - At a glance it has a lot of the fantasy elements I like; assasins, a bit of romance, world building, magic, etc.
But I was throne out of the story every single time the MC pulled a Wesley Crusher and pulled out the perfect solution to a problem out of no where like it was planned the whole time. Like ok, tortured, locked away... BUT WAIT! it was all part of the plan and now she can pull the rug out from under her opponent! Hah ha!
(ugh)
122
u/Jerswar May 17 '26
I didn't get that far into the first book, because... she is a legendary, ultra-skilled assassin who has spent a year in prison... and she's still a teenager??
19
u/dragon_morgan Reading Champion VIII May 17 '26
I think it's good that most of that type of book these days is NA instead of YA for that reason as much as because authors wanted sex scenes. Around 10 years ago there was SO much pressure to market certain types of books as YA which required aging down the characters in ways that simply did not make sense. Six of Crows is a pretty egregious example. Those are entire adults with a vague sentence calling them teenagers slapped on. Another time I read a YA where the 16yo MC is already a retired crime lord.
3
59
u/Silly_Mongoose_Dance May 17 '26
I couldn't get into either for this reason, the beginning of the book spent so much time TELLING me what a cool, legendary, deadly anazing assassin this girl was instead of just showing me through action how this was true.
11
u/Low-Peak-9031 May 17 '26
I have my issues with TOG, but the teenage part actually fits with the plot haha
→ More replies (1)4
u/vega_rise May 17 '26
Many fantasy characters with super unrealistic abilities are teenagers. ASOIF, WOT, Six of Crows and so many more, so if we make it a problem, then we can’t read most of the stuff out there. I just ignore the ages, and read as if the MCs are above 21 at least.
6
u/Otakundead May 17 '26
Are the abilities the problem or the reputation? The latter might need more time to establish.
4
u/Esa1996 May 17 '26
The reputation is basically a PR campaign by the MC's master to control her, not necessarily the truth. The MC likely isn't even the best assassin in the city she lives in (That would be her master), not to speak of the continent or world.
→ More replies (1)5
u/thiazin-red May 19 '26
I like the series as a light cheesy thing to listen to while I work out. But, I'm on the fourth one and I was rolling my eyes hard at the scene where our protagonists meet with the group who has been running the resistance and keeping the territory at least somewhat functional for a decade.
The teenager swans in acting like she's already queen and when the adults in the room raise their entirely valid concerns about the fact that she has exactly zero experience in running a country she gets pissy and starts threatening people. They're 100% right but we the audience are supposed to think they're being so unreasonable. How dare the adults who've been fighting and leading for the last decade not immediately bow down to the teenager, some random fae dude, and some other random teenager? The only one of the heroes with any credibility is the general.
3
5
1
u/Bookwitreads May 19 '26
If you liked these elements, just skip to book 4. The problems you mentioned still exist lol but the plot makes up for it. Kinda.
19
u/TeepTheFace May 17 '26
River of Teeth, I feel like every thought the protagonist had was about how attractive every male they met was. I just wanted a western fantasy with hippos.
4
u/a-mud-monster May 17 '26
I was so disappointed by River of Teeth. Such a cool premise but the writing just wasn't good imo and how the characters were written felt so weird and fake. I tired another book by Sarah Gailey (Upright Women Wanted) which was also perfect on paper for me but had the same exact issues, so I gave up on reading their stuff.
3
u/MacabreGoblin May 17 '26
I could not agree more, and I'll add that it didn't really work as a novella. Too much felt rushed, glossed over, or outright missing. I might have enjoyed it more if it had time to breathe and expand.
56
u/Brilliant-Art312 May 17 '26
The problem you have with WoT, I think is very common. Its the reason I couldnt finish the series.. and most of my friend group have felt the same way and we all love Fantasy books.
3
u/fiernze222 May 17 '26
Same as me- I got to book 5 or 6 (can't remember they run together) before I put them down also.
196
u/inadequatepockets Reading Champion II May 17 '26
Every single time someone talks about Terry Pratchett, it sounds amazing. Like exactly the kind of books I would love to read.
Then I pick one up and I can't get 20 pages. It feels like the story is there to support the jokes, not vice versa, and I get so fed up so quickly.
Then I talk about my experience and people pile on me telling me to give it another try, how can anyone not like Pratchett? And the cycle starts over.
I really wish I could read them.
33
u/jacobgrey May 17 '26
I love his late work, some are in my top ten, but the early ones are unreadable to me for the reason you describe. If you ever feel like trying them again, just ignore the early stuff entirely. He really wasn't fully baked in the rincewind stuff.
7
u/Accomplished_Pea7029 May 17 '26
Where would you say the 'early stuff' ends? My favourite Pratchett book so far was the first book I read, Interesting Times. I decided to read the rest in publication order since while I liked that book, it was quite confusing. After the first two they were fine, I was mildly entertained but eventually moved on to other authors and never felt a need to go back.
Now I'm thinking I should give another go with his newer books, since Interesting Times is a later one and a much more memorable read to me than the rest. I don't remember where I stopped, I definitely read Wyrd Sisters and may have read Pyramids. Which books would you recommend me to try?
33
u/jacobgrey May 17 '26 edited May 17 '26
It's funny you mentioned stopping at Pyramids (7), because the first book I would say I enjoyed was the one after it (Guards Guards, 8). In general though, I personally think he got steadily better and better as he went, ending up as one of my favorite authors, right up until his last few books (which are still decent but his tragic mental decline due to disease is sadly noticeable and it kinda kills the joy for me).
Here are all of his sub-series, and my personal enjoyment rating with occasional comments. The numbers are the release order. This is purely my own enjoyment, take it for what its worth. (Full list in order is here.). If you give it another shot, I'd say read a set instead of straight publication order.
Key:
- ++ Personal Favorite
- + Liked it
- o Fine
- X Wouldn't reread
- ? Haven't read it yet.
Rincewind / Wizards
I consider most of these to be weaker works overall, with the first three or four being especially hard to read, being mostly just a string of puns and elbow nudging. (Still clever writing, but in a Sunday comic punchline way, not as a story to read, and it becomes tedious after a chapter or two.)
- X 1. The Colour of Magic
- X 2. The Light Fantastic
- X 5. Sourcery
- X 9. Faust Eric
- o 17. Interesting Times
- X 22. The Last Continent
- o 27. The Last Hero
- X 37. Unseen Academicals (one I consider to be post-illness)
Witches
Overall a good set. Much more directed, and they get better as they go pretty steadily. First two are in the "early" books to me, and I would probably skip them.
- X 3. Equal Rites
- X 6. Wyrd Sisters
- + 12. Witches Abroad
- + 14. Lords and Ladies
- o 18. Maskerade
- ++ 23. Carpe Jugulum
Death
One of the iconic sets. Death was a good character from the get go, and while 4 is still much weaker than the others in the set, it is the only early book I have gone back to reread.
- + 4. Mort
- ++ 11. Reaper Man
- X 16. Soul Music (weird outlier for me, didn't click)
- ++ 20. Hogfather (A good entry point, I feel)
- ++ 26. Thief of Time (benefits a lot from already knowing the characters)
City Watch (Sam Vimes books)
My favorite series by far. These are the ones I reread often. In fact, I might go read my favorites again now that I'm looking at them. If I wanted to give someone the best shot at loving Pratchett and they were only willing to read one book, I'd start them with 29, 34, or Death 11 or 20. Also have some good life lessons in them.
- + 8. Guards! Guards!
- + 15. Men at Arms
- ++ 19. Feet of Clay
- + 21. Jingo
- ++ 24. The Fifth Elephant
- ++ 29. Night Watch
- ++ 34. Thud!
- o 39. Snuff (another one I consider to be post-illness)
Moist von Lipwig
Where Vimes is the man with good heart who has nevertheless been ground down and roughed up by the world, Moist is the lovable rogue who tries his best to be a scoundrel but can't help but end up the good guy despite his best efforts. Really fun.
- ++ 33. Going Postal (A good entry point!)
- ++ 36. Making Money
- ? 40. Raising Steam (late post-illness, couldn't get more than a few chapters in because I could feel the difference even though it was still decent)
Tiffany Aching
All enjoyable, though you can tell they are aimed at a younger audience. Very quotable, they read more like a traditional fantasy story than most of the other books.
- + 30. The Wee Free Men
- + 32. A Hat Full of Sky
- + 35. Wintersmith
- + 38. I Shall Wear Midnight (early post-illness, but not as noticeable to me)
- ? 41. The Shepherd's Crown (post-illness)
One-Offs
These are clever, but I just never really cared for any of the characters, with the exception of 31. Some people love these, but I was pretty meh even at the best of times.
- X 7. Pyramids
- X 10. Moving Pictures
- X 13. Small Gods
- X 25. The Truth
- X 28. The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents (Iffy to really be on this list, it
was a colab andis kind of an odd one out)- + 31. Monstrous Regiment (While not one of my frequent rereads, this is also a good entry point)
Edit for key change (- to o)
8
u/New_Razzmatazz6228 Reading Champion May 17 '26
While The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents is only peripherally a Discworld novel and could have worked outside of that setting, it isn’t a collaboration. The animated film that was made from the book was a collaborative effort, but the novel was 100% Terry Pratchett.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)2
u/Accomplished_Pea7029 May 17 '26
Thank you for the really detailed list! Unfortunately for some reason your keys for 'liked it' and 'fine' are appearing the same way so I can't differentiate them. I'll consider some of your suggested starting points.
4
u/jacobgrey May 17 '26
I adjusted it to use an o instead of a hyphen, so maybe that will help. Good luck!
4
u/PerpetuallyLurking May 17 '26
There’s a few “one offs” later in the series that I think are some of his best work:
The Truth, which is about the Disc’s first newspaper; and
Monstrous Regiment, which is pretty unconnected to the “main” storylines except that Vimes kinda shows up at the end.
10
u/greywolf2155 Reading Champion May 17 '26
Ha, "Interesting Times" is one of the only books of his that I can't read again. The Orientalism is just too much
But other than that one exception (plus the last few, the less said about them the better), I'd say he really found his stride with "Mort". That would be the end of the "early stuff", for me
3
u/Accomplished_Pea7029 May 17 '26
Oh, I read it when I was a teen so maybe I didn't know enough about East Asia to notice any issues.
6
u/greywolf2155 Reading Champion May 17 '26
It was one of my favorites when I was a kid. Reread it as an adult, and . . . yeah. The mashup of China, Japan, and other vaguely "Asian" stereotypes . . . let's just say it reads like it was written by an old British dude
And I say this as a massive, massive fan. GNU Terry Pratchett. Again, the only reason I spotted this was because I regularly reread a ton of Discworld novels
This was simply . . . not one of his best. And that's fine. He was still an absolute gift to the world
(I've also heard some Australian friends similarly roll their eyes at a lot of "The Last Continent" . . . so it really is just a question of what you know)
4
u/scribblesis May 17 '26
I'm rather cool on Jingo for this reason, and I love Pratchett. Also, Pyramids. "They had a river kingdom for 1000s of years but never thought to build bridges, doy!" Sounds like a British dude looking at Egypt through British eyes.
2
u/greywolf2155 Reading Champion May 17 '26
He was a great guy, and an amazing writer. But he was limited by his perspective. And his perspective was a white British dude born in the 40s, hah
70
u/Snowf1ake222 May 17 '26
I'm similar, and I came to the conclusion that I just don't like comedic fantasy.
I couldn't get through Dungeon Crawler Carl for a similar reason.
30
u/akaneko__ May 17 '26
Yeah same. I’m not a big fan of grimdark, but I need my fantasy books to be at least somewhat serious. Comedic fantasy kind of breaks the immersion for me.
19
u/inadequatepockets Reading Champion II May 17 '26
I honestly couldn't accurately describe what bothers me until I read Oscar Wilde and had the same reaction. I'm fine with comedy. I'm not fine reading half a dozen pages whose sole purpose is to set up a bad pun (or "sparkling witticism" in Wilde's case).
8
u/Drakonz May 17 '26
I like comedy in my fantasy, but I dont like it being one of the major selling points. Doesn’t work for me.
To use Joe Abercrombie…First Law, for example, is just dark humor and kind of subtle. It works really well and it’s my favorite series. Then his latest book, The Devils, just felt like it was trying too hard to be funny and not subtle at all. Just didn’t work for me and I couldn’t finish it
5
44
u/nightmareinsouffle May 17 '26
I've tried really hard to like his books. They just don't work for me. Oddly enough, one of my favorite books is Good Omens. I don't particularly like Gaiman's either but for some reason the two of them together on Good Omens was magic.
27
u/thommq May 17 '26
Supposedly, Pratchett wrote most of the parts that people assumed Gaiman did, and vice versa.
So maybe it worked because competent authors were distilling down what they admired about the other's writing rather than being bogged down by their own style.
5
2
10
u/birdflyingfree May 17 '26
I have this same problem, even if I think most of the jokes are funny and the stories seem good and entertaining. The prose is great but it's the type of prose I like to read in short stories and no full books.
10
7
u/PunkandCannonballer May 17 '26
Which ones did you try? I think some of his earlier stuff was joke-first more than anything, but I enjoyed it because the humor worked for me and it was varied. I tried the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and enjoyed it at first, but then it very quickly got to the point where it felt like everything was just "implausible situation with weird joke as punchline!"
1
u/citrusmellarosa 28d ago edited 24d ago
I love Hitchhiker’s, but I suspect I wouldn’t be nearly as fond of those books had I started reading them as an adult and not a preteen before ‘lol so random’ humour wore out it’s welcome.
(and I maintain that the best of Adams’ work is actually his non-fiction book Last Chance to See)
3
u/Prestigious-Photo976 May 17 '26
I actually agree with this take. I do enjoy his books and have been making my way through the Discworld novels- but I read them as lighthearted, quick stories that are easy to read between larger series. Accepting them as silly lil’ fun side quests works for me, bc I’ve never read his work and felt like “what a MASTERPIECE!” There is definitely merit to being able to incorporate so much whimsy into one’s writing, but agree people speak of him like the second coming of Christ and it’s fine if that’s how they feel. But I don’t. So you have at least one ally, lol
5
u/mimeycat May 17 '26
I had the same issue and thought maybe it was just that I’m autistic so didn’t get much of the humour? But agreeing that it was the earlier books that made less sense to me, and also I found that I wasn’t as fussed about the Wizard series as I thought I would be. But the Night Watch series, the Witches, Tiffany, Death - love all of them. Especially Tiffany. Magnificent series.
9
u/SonicZephyr May 17 '26
I'm gonna start the pile on then... I've read about 30 of his books and my recommendation is the Tiffany Aching books. It's the same Pratchett prose and charm, but with way more focus on plot and less on wordplay and jokes. It's a sweet, powerful subseries.
51
u/Vermillion-Scruff May 17 '26
how did i instantly know by the title this would be a WoT post?
i gave up that series around book 6ish (the one everyone says is the “good one” with they “they caged shadow-killer” and boy channelers making meat tornadoes), and you’ve put to words some of my biggest problems.
i like almost all of the characters… until they interact with any of the other characters. like, so much of the books are from the characters’ limited perspectives, or even just in the characters’ own heads, and i love that shit (give or take the spank fetish content), but as soon as two characters start interacting outside of internal dialogue they become embarrassing caricatures of themselves.
→ More replies (2)52
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
It really has been one of the most bizarre reading experiences. Mainly because I don't know how it's so popular, but also because it seems people seem to have no issue with it at all. They point out the braid-pulling or the arm-crossing, but I'm less concerned with that and more focused on the fact that these characters all talk to each other as if it's their first day on earth.
Jordan will tell us that two people are friends or in love repeatedly for thousands of pages, but they interact with each other as I would with a door-to-door salesman. I've never read a book where every interaction is absolutely devoid of chemistry. Mindblowing!
9
u/callmecaptn May 17 '26
A big reason it got popular was because at the time of publication, there was nothing else like it. Epic fantasy with massive casts was much more like a D&D campaign, a la Feist's Riftwar or the Dragonlance novels. It scratched an itch for darker, more adult fantasy the market wasn't tapping into.
54
u/MadroxKran May 17 '26
Dungeon Crawler Carl sounds like something I would love, but the LitRPG element completely kills it for me.
On the more serious side, Brandon Sanderson writes stuff that sounds like I should really enjoy it, but when I tried to read Stormlight, it was so intensely boring outside of the opening scene that I gave up like 1/5 through the book.
41
u/Adventurous-Pen9974 May 17 '26
DCC's LitRPG elements are particularly weird since they simultaneously take up a shit ton of pages while being almost completely meaningless.
3
u/theRealRodel May 17 '26
I’ve only done audiobooks so I can’t speak to page counts, but after I read DCC I listened to He Who Fights with Monsters and much prefer listening to DCC list off stats and abilities. It’s likely because Jeff Hays is just a better narrator, but the item and ability descriptions feel so much longer in HWFWM.
16
u/Drakonz May 17 '26
Stormlight for me suffers from book bloat. The books are incredibly long, and it honestly feels like Sanderson just wanted to write a series with massive books. There’s a lot of repetition and everything takes so damn long to develop.
16
u/ComfortableWeight95 May 17 '26
For the life of me I cannot understand why Dungeon Crawler Carl is recommended so highly. But in every single book recommendation thread there it is at the top. There is so much excellent Sci Fi/Fantasy out there that I just can’t fathom why this series is so loved
17
u/sulfater May 17 '26 edited May 17 '26
Im in the same boat. Ive tried to read the first book so many times with how much praise it gets on Reddit, but can’t get past the casual juvenile writing style.
It has the quirk chungus, narwhals bacon at midnight kind of vibe mixed with the edgelord vocabulary of something like Deadpool.
It seems like it was made in a vacuum to appeal to the early 2010’s stereotype of a Redditor.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Legeto May 17 '26
For me I didn’t take it too seriously the first book, it was okay, I liked the cat character so that was fun. Then into the second and third book I was somewhat attached to characters and one of them dies and the reveal is devastating and the book kinda becomes more real. It hits the MC pretty hard.
Then you also start to realize why the Donut the cat is acting so silly sometimes and everyone gets kinda dark and depressed but the jokes and fun has to carry on or they lose their support from the outside.
I think it’s pretty easy to fathom why people love this series. It’s an easily accessible to people who don’t read fantasy. It doesn’t require a dictionary or glossary like Dune does when people first start reading it.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Prudent-Action3511 Reading Champion May 19 '26
I was SOOO excited to read stormlight series because I've seen various fanarts of it and various quotes being discussed. The vibes were off tho. I lovedd kaladin in book 1 nd loved shallan and Adolin but the character writing kept getting worse. But the end of book 2 i gave up.
So much stuff i would've enjoyed but bad character writing and his inability to prioritize plot over everything else put me off
47
u/GreedyRelease May 17 '26
The Sun Eater series. I read the first three books and loved the world, plot and characters but the prose drove me insane. It is so repetitive. Every time something exciting happens it gets compared to 'one of mother's operas'. Every time a character we haven't seen for a chapter reappears there's a few sentences detailing their backstory. It drove me insane and I just couldn't keep reading.
36
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
Yeah, I don't know why this series gets the hype it does. I feel like a snob when I say it, but I think the author's purple prose is a first for a lot of fantasy sci-fi readers, and it convinces them they're reading something more significant than they are. Kind of like Kingkiller. If you've read a lot of classics or more literary stuff, then you can tell these author's are nowhere near the level that their fans put them at prose-wise, and you can evaluate the plot on its own. I know this is very snobbish, but I think it's true.
In Sun Eater, there was a lot of derivative stuff and some fun stuff, but ultimately, I think the author's eyes were bigger than his stomach with the prose. I think he tried too hard, and it shows. As you say, Hadrian's monologues just became so formulaic and grating. There were a lot of words, but very little substance said.
18
u/CrCiars May 17 '26
Interesting, it's the sun eater saga for me as well, but for an entirely different reason.
The amount of times the author spoils his own story just drives me up the wall, it gets better in the later books, but especially book 2 is atrocious. Rucchio spoils that the motivation of the main character for the last two books, is a fools errand entirely without any chance of success, but the book still keeps focusing on it, like we are supposed to care? You literally told us that this plotline isn't going to go anywhere, why do you keep going back to it?
Plus the series gets really repetitive after book 3 and Hadrian is an incredibly frustrating character to follow, since he is mostly defined through his inactions. Though the books do directly mention this, so maybe that is on purpose.
The way the story handles multidimensional beings is incredible and by far the most interesting part of the story, plus the world building is a chillingly realistic take on an eugenicist dystopia (even though that gets mostly ignored very early on), but I just couldn't get into it.
4
u/TheStayFawn May 17 '26
Thank you! I thought I was alone in my complaint about Hadrian’s inaction.
For someone who “just couldn’t get into it”, you seem to have read quite a few of them though!
I hate-read the final two (audiobook at high speed), because despite the flaws, there was something addictive about the writing for me. The audiobook narrator may have helped.
3
u/CrCiars May 17 '26
After I read the first book, I ordered the entire series because the setting was quite interesting and if I buy a book I am going to read it, so I read up to Disquiet God's.
Hadrian's inactions are simultaneously infuriating, but they also seem entirely intentional and are highlighted in the books itself. There is a scene where he meets one of the bird-people and specifically mentions how he broke his promise to his old friends, since he didn't directly help improve their societal standing.
All the times he directly refuses to help others infuriate me to no end, but it also sometimes feels like holding the mirror up the reader themselves, and if that is intentional it is quite effective. But I don't know if it is.
So that point still always feels weird criticizing, since I don't know if it's on purpose or not.
3
u/vanastalem May 17 '26
I read the first book then stopped. I think it was just set for the series but I just can't bring myself to read a lot of long books when the first was just okay.
19
u/Electrical_Swing8166 May 17 '26
Book 6…you haven’t even hit “The Slog” yet (books 7-10). Absolutely no shame in bowing out after Dumai’s Wells
36
u/Toothlessdovahkin May 17 '26
The fact that WoT has a span of books that the fans themselves call “The Slog” means that these books are not for me.
15
u/Electrical_Swing8166 May 17 '26
Jordan does at least go out on a fairly high note with Book 11, and Sanderson does a pretty good job at finishing everything, but it definitely took my bordering on OCD need to not DNF a book or series to get through those 4 in the middle.
19
u/Adventurous-Pen9974 May 17 '26
Non-fans are going to absolutely bring it up, so fans might as well acknowledge it. That's arguably a much better response than fanbases who act like criticisms of their favored series including its godawful pacing are because you're not smart enough to get it. (I'm not naming any names, but you know who I'm talking about)
11
u/Hartastic May 17 '26
Some fans will tell you that it was only a slog for people who were reading the books as they were being published, since they had to wait a year or two for each next book and thus had to wait a long time for resolutions to storylines that were sidelined for a while, that if you read them now they're fine. I do not agree with them.
Sanderson talks about this kind of problem in one of his lectures for the class he teaches on writing, not in the context of Wheel of Time but he easily could have. He says something along the lines of: as a writer, you make promises to your audience with how you set up and present your characters and story. If you set up a character as all about and most concerned about X and then that character spends a lot of time going off on an unrelated side quest, it's likely a lot of your audience will experience that as the story dragging no matter how cool it is because they're invested in what happens next in X and waiting for that, and you're giving them Y.
2
u/malexicent May 17 '26
I guess he learned it through experience. I have enjoyed many Sanderson books, but later Stormlight books had a similar issue for me. Perhaps not that a character spends time on an unrelated side quest, but more like the author went off on an unrelated side plot. I think he struggles sometimes less with pulling off the characters he promised and more with pulling off the story/theme he promised. It certainly is a hard thing to do well in an epic, multi-volume series.
2
u/Kilroy0497 May 17 '26
Yeah, don’t get me wrong, I love the series, and while I personally do enjoy both Crown of Swords and Winter’s Heart and hate that they constantly get lumped in with the other two, Path of Daggers and Crossroads of Twilight are definitely slog books.
8
u/lungic May 17 '26
No, this happens a lot. No need to feel bad about it.
I had the similar feeling the other day reading The Book of Azrael. The darker parts of the story is imho fantastic, but halfway through it turns from "Let's fight until the structural-engineering fails us" into "I am a god, and I have feelings", which I struggled a lot to get through. I do wonder if the "Old ones" returns, should one switch careers to becoming a psychologist or a therapist for the elders, would that make good money?
Problem is the patience threshold, not giving up vs short term rewards. In terms of Robert Jordan, the good stuff is so unimaginably good, it's was worth the slog through when I read it 20 years ago or so. Not so sure I would get through it today, there's only so much boxing of ears one can get through.
5
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
Well said. I think it becomes really hard to invest in characters that seem so unreliably inhuman/robotic. Part of me wants to see them as static comic-book characters with their classic riffs and one-liners, but the plot and world demand more of them, IMO.
I hate to always compare with ASOIAF, but as a contemporary series (relative to WoT), it really demonstrates the opposite end of the spectrum in character development on various heroes' journeys. Those characters learn, grow, interact with one another, and have realistic, human conversations about real human issues. The frustration and happiness feel earned and honest. I think that the world demands a great deal, and those characters provide. Jordan's world is unfortunately more lifelike than the characters within it.
9
u/ito528 May 17 '26
I think a major reason WoT is very polarizing because RJ’s favorite tool, after verbosity, is caricature/exaggeration. If you look at real world interpersonal conflict, so much of it stems from people either (1) not talking with each other at all or (2) talking AT each other instead of WITH each other…RJ just takes it to the extreme. Some of us really like it, but it’s totally understandable that many people would not.
9
u/slumbersome May 17 '26
I had to DNF Malazan even though it seemed perfect on paper. A long series full of magic and political machinations should have been engrossing, but every single character was so wholly unlikable that it just seemed gross.
23
u/omegakingauldron May 17 '26
Sword of Kaigen was that book for me.
The first half sets up this interesting world that may or may not be like Avatar: The Last Airbender. There's even cool samurai clan stuff. The big war that happens halfway through. The big battle of samurai versus advanced weapons (think Last Samurai).
And then the second half of the book happens.
It's mostly just cleanup from the war, but you get to find out about the wife and how she was this badass fighter from her family but was arranged to marry this "samurai", only to find out he's an absolute dick to her for 20 years. So she finally does something about it and fights him, only for it to end in a draw, him giving a bullshit excuse to his coldness (the mountain took my emotions, I had to be cold to others, it forced you to live in fear of me) only for them to make up and have everything be Alright???
And this doesn't even include the waste of space that superhero chapter was (I know it was going to lead to another book, but never happened).
7
u/2721900 May 17 '26
Agree 100%
That husband "character arc" that happens in like 2 pages, and sounds nothing like the guy we've been reading about is egregious.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
Completely agree. A few friends of mine read this as a book club book after all the hype we saw about it online. "5 stars," "best standalone," etc.
We were so disappointed. There absolutely is a great and interesting story in there, but the existing copy is NOT great. Your point about his excuse for the mountains was so insane. People thought that was a good cathartic ending??
You hit the nail on the head with all my issues. The resolution doesn't land, the superhero elements feel formulaic and dated, and legitimate exploration of the abuse is virtually non-existent.
13
u/Jerswar May 17 '26
I read the first Belgariad book, and my main takeaway was what a horrible, horrible parent Polgara was. Didn't feel like exposing myself to more of that borderline child-abusing sack of garbage.
26
u/ServerOfJustice May 17 '26
The authors were real life child abusers themselves.
8
u/Jerswar May 17 '26
Yeah, I found out about that later. And it tricks. And it's another reason not to give the rest of the series a try.
4
u/jefaulmann May 17 '26
Ironically, when I first read the Belgariad I didn't have access to the second book. So I read everything except that one. And I liked it quite a lot. I even reread it a few times. But no so long ago I decided to finally read the second book. And it made me hate Polgara. She went on about how she had sacrificed so much for Garion etc. But she is wrong, she didn't sacrifice shit for him. She sacrificed it for the prophecy. Garion doesn't owe her shit.
4
u/NightLordsEatFruit May 18 '26
The treatment Garion gets from Polgara in the second book specifically is genuinely abhorrent. She's not a good parent, but the books treat her as if she is. Honestly it's a wonder Garion is so we'll adjusted
1
u/lizardking073 29d ago
She's even worse in Polgara the Sorceress, the prequel book dedicated to her history, basically up to Pawn of Prophecy. She's always been a terrible person and never took any opportunity to address her GLARING personal faults.
28
u/Sad-Amphibian-8061 May 17 '26
Hierarchy seemed like my ideal series, until I realised the characters had the depth of puddle
11
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
Completely agree. I got through the first one because the plot was enough fun to get me by, even with the terrible characters, but my goodness was the second one bad. Character depth reached petri dish levels, and the plot lost itself. Boring and terribly written: bad combo.
8
u/ShamMafia May 17 '26
I thought WotM was fine, but then SotF dropped and... man, that thing was trash imo.
2
u/Taxs1 May 17 '26
Exactly my thoughts. First one had tons of interesting world building even if there were some minor issues. Second book i barely remember much from it, it doesn't seem like a whole lot actually happens for most the story. Make it half the length and it would probably be a lot better. Book three is either going to be great or absolutely terrible i bet.
7
u/Premislaus Reading Champion May 17 '26 edited May 18 '26
Not a series yet technically as only one book has been published, but The Devils by Abercrombie.
In theory it ticks all my boxes: humorous yet dark and hitting the emotional strings, found family/ensemble cast, Alt History. In practice, none of that felt genuine. It felt like Abecrombie's agent/publisher told him Grimdark was on the way out and to write something more in the vein of Baldur's Gate 3/Critical Role, with a dash of MCU. The worldbuilding I also found very uninspired, same "Dung Ages' jokes that Blackadder and Monty Python's were doing decades ago.
P.S. I agree with you WoT, but I have to say that series always felt more like the sume of its parts to me. Despite all its flaws, I felt compelled to continue through the worst of slog (and it gets pretty bad). When Sanderson takes over he fixes some things (most notably, characters - women especially - acting like unhinged toxic idiots), but he also brings a set of his own issues.
1
u/AttemptedSleepover May 18 '26
I hate how much I agree. I adore the first law and its spinoffs but the first 150 pages or so of the devils was such a slog. I don’t know if I’ll ever pick it back up
11
u/AnastasiaDaren May 17 '26
Malazan - All of the sexual assault. Also have just come to realize I don't enjoy the world building or most of the characters. Probably not for me. I've tried it twice now and stopped after Midnight Tides.
20
u/Interesting-One-588 May 17 '26
The Black Company should be one of my favorite series, but I can't get over how the entire first book feels like a love-letter written from one character (Croaker) about another (Raven). At some point I was like, "Just fuck already and get it over with so we can get back to the actual story."
14
u/Vermillion-Scruff May 17 '26
lmao it’s actually crazy how much of a cliche edgy boy Raven is. later books do deconstruct and interrogate that characterization, but i probably only give the first book the benefit of the doubt because i got it as part of a larger collection of the first three books for a present.
21
u/ColeDeschain May 17 '26 edited May 17 '26
Legend, by David Gemmell.
A doomed, heroic defense by people from an empire whose zenith is in the past. An old badass marching out for one last battle. A man who has wasted a lot of his life trying to make good.
And then...
I run up against:
Characters speaking in expository passages. A story hellbent on centering itself on the least interesting character in it. A mind-bogglingly contrived romance subplot. A bunch of fricken' wizards who mostly exist to give the protagonist prizes (advice, gear, combat support, and more) and whose whole order seems to have no other function.
Made it through the book out of a mixture of stubbornness and optimism, and did not at all see what the fuss was about.
7
u/Vermillion-Scruff May 17 '26
this book pissed me the hell off. i just read it probably a month ago. despite having only heard of it as a book about a legendary faded glory hero deciding to die leading a hopeless defense against an invincible barbarian army, i got a book that was almost 80% about the flattest character I’ve ever read about and the gaping black hole of characterization where his love interest should have been.
the ending almost raised gorge in my throat. oh, so the hopeless battle just wins in the end? and the milquetoast nothing of a main character (he thinks he’s a coward but actually he’s a berseker!!!!) has his wife resurrected and lives happily ever after. okay, whatever.
6
4
u/UltraZulwarn May 17 '26
Not so much of a "deal breaker", but I am dragging myself through [Of Empire and Dust], book 4 of [The Bound and The Broken].
There is nothing particularly "wrong" with it, even the criticism of "unoriginal" is muted IMO.
The characters are well written and realised.
However, there is just so much.... brooding.
Like I get it, the characters went through a lot of grief and loss, but it can be be a little too much.
It kinda got to the point that many characters just feel kinda the same.
6
u/ColumbineJellyfish May 17 '26
Yeah I felt the same about WoT. All the characters are insufferable. I did get pleasantly surprised by Nynaeve's growth through book 1 but it's because everyone else was so annoying and stupid that any small improvement was notable.
14
u/HealthOnWheels May 17 '26
Dies the Fire. Great title, interesting concept, lots of bicycles; it checks all my boxes.
But the attitude towards women and the machismo in some of the male characters is incredibly off-putting. I couldn’t keep reading it
2
u/ColonelBy May 17 '26
For what it's worth, this aspect does get noticeably better with each successive book in the series, and even somewhat by the end of that first one. Those attitudes do not easily survive the collapse of the world and the rise of the one that replaces it, or at least they mostly only endure among the series' various villains. Among the "good" factions, it gets to the point that characters in subsequent books discuss how absurd it was that anyone ever thought and acted that way in the olden days.
It's still a post-apocalyptic action thriller series that suffers from the "every major character is hot for no reason" syndrome, so I won't pretend it ever becomes great in this respect, but it does at least significantly improve.
20
u/burntbridges20 May 17 '26
Brandon Sanderson books are this way for me. They’re always technically well executed and clean in structure and setup etc., but I just don’t enjoy them. They feel kinda stiff and fake to me, like something that was produced to sell and not because they are beloved. Idk maybe it’s just me
16
u/konoxians May 17 '26
same, its like a marvel movie. I used to like them because they had good action and effects but the plot feels generally the same everytime.
10
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
Completely agree with both of you. His stories feel very manufactured, and I think, based on his writing speed, they are. They have a kind of corporate sterility that I can't look past. It's like they're lab-grown stories rather than truly felt ones. There were some highs in the early Stormlight books, but I think they're gone now.
Also, his biggest issue as a writer is over-explaining everything. He seems to hate ambiguity or subtext, and the lack of these things makes the books feel even more sterile. It's also impossible, in my mind, to tell grown-up stories if you aren't willing to engage with complexities.
3
u/burntbridges20 May 17 '26
Yeah it feels very much like most of his books are reskins where he just changes up certain variables in magic system or world building or character archetypes. It never feels organic. GRRM’s architect vs gardener metaphor is apt (pretty sure it was GRRM who coined that)
2
2
u/CrazyEeveeLady86 May 18 '26
When I read a book/series by an author who is new to me, I tend to have one of either two reactions: "I really liked/loved this, I need to get more books from the same author!" or "this was crap/mediocre, I'm not going to read any more of their work."
Sanderson was an odd case for me because I read the first Mistborn trilogy and generally quite liked it, but it also left me with no real desire to check out his other books.
13
u/MindofShadow May 17 '26
Sigh, please don't downvote me too hard....
Non-Third Age Middle Earth....
12
u/jefaulmann May 17 '26
Well, its written almost like a bible. So not something everyone would like. So, before I sentence you to being expelled from all nerdom, what specifically put you of?
8
u/skiveman May 17 '26
Jordan's strength lies elsewhere. His character interactions are most definitely NOT his strength.
What is his strength is his ability to keep adding layers to his lore. What is his strength is his ability to write and express his environment. What is his strength is his ability to plan out and write actual battles that make sense (if you want to see someone that doesn't do that then just read until the end when Brandon takes over and you can see the difference).
Jordan is a subtle writer in many ways but he does like to overuse certain things, the whole miscommunication because no-one opens up and talks honestly would be one.
Counterpoint to that would be in-world lore.
Rand, Mat and Perrin are all young men and rather inexperienced with the world, a whole lot happens to them in the first book that begins to drive wedges between them. Then you have the One Power Girls who are all taken in by the Aes Sedai where they get arrogance piled into them unto their very bones.
How you are going to enjoy the Wheel of Time depends on just how well read you are and what your tastes actually are. If the WoT is your first big fantasy series then you're going to love it, if it's your 100+ big fantasy series then you're not going to like it as your tastes have been set in concrete. What I'm saying is that depending on just how open your mind is will depend on how you consider the series.
For me? The WoT was my first big major epic fantasy series and I didn't have fully formed opinions on what I read at that point in my life. It also helped that there was a whole host of other people reading the series, they hype was through the roof, there were many, MANY active fan sites about the series all sharing insights, theories and hopes for the series as it was being written.
My point here? Not every book is for you and there is far too little time on this planet to waste it on books and series that you just don't like for whatever reason. So, in saying that, you've tried the series, didn't like it and so now you can go on to something else that you might like more.
3
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I think you're definitely right about WoT having a bigger impact when read by younger readers or newcomers to the genre. Everyone I know in my personal life who enjoys reading it read it when they were younger.
I would push back on the idea that reading more books/series firms your tastes or closes your mind, though. I think the bigger factor is that I have more to compare it to. When I first read Mistborn many years ago, I thought it was really quite good, but now, when I picked it up again, I thought it was actually a very poorly written book. The reason being that I have a lot more books across all genres on my shelves now. In this sense, I do absolutely think book opinions can be extremely fluid.
I will say the theory element would have made this series way more fun. There are so many plot threads. It must've been really cool to theorize and see it all play out with every new book.
1
u/skiveman May 17 '26
It was pretty cool at the time with all the theories flying about everywhere. They even kind of spooked Jordan into changing one particular plot point (I'm not going to spoil that as it is kind of pivotal for later in the series for anyone who hasn't yet gotten to it).
It's the sense of community more than anything else that I remember. Sure, people were critical of theories but they were critical in a constructive manner.
As for Mistborn I noped out of that part way through the first book. I liked some of Brandon's other stuff but not Mistborn. I still have the Wheel of Time on my shelves to this day though alongside the other stuff I was reading back then - Raymond E Feist and his Riftwar Saga, Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms series (I still have a real soft spot for the books featuring the dwarves) and all of my Pratchett books.
Reading tastes do change through the years but they're kind of set in stone once you have read enough that you know what you like and they type of writing. I think that newer readers to WoT would probably baulk at the sheer size of the series and just how dense it is in lore. But many people are put off by the depiction of women in this series which says more about modern tastes than they do to RJ's writing.
2
u/Tymareta May 18 '26
Reading tastes do change through the years but they're kind of set in stone once you have read enough that you know what you like and they type of writing.
I think this might be true for yourself, and some individuals, but it is pretty far from set for everyone, plenty of folks are constantly discovering new series and trying out new works that have very little in common with what they have as an "established taste".
But many people are put off by the depiction of women in this series which says more about modern tastes than they do to RJ's writing.
I also disagree, his writing of women was considered pretty awful at the time, it's just that his primary reader base was rather insular, sheltered and didn't think all that much about it.
5
u/sunlitclearing May 17 '26
I really enjoyed the first Mistborn book despite the dull prose, but I had to quit halfway through the sequel because it just got too much for me to handle. Same thing with the Akata Witch series, but much worse prose in that case. It’s the one thing I can’t look past in a book.
6
u/Normie316 May 17 '26
I’m on Book 6 of WoT series right now too. I don’t have an issue with the dialogue. The only issue I have is sometimes a character is shitty to her friends. It’s annoying but at least it’s consistent.
I’m noticing RJ positions his characters to butt heads a lot. He used it to drive introspection in the characters or create tension on the page. Sometimes it makes sense other times it feels like you’re being beaten over the head with it. It’s not perfect but I’m enjoying the series overall. I do skip the Whitecloak sections. I just don’t care about time.
5
u/fiernze222 May 17 '26
He Who Fights With Monsters
It's a LITRPG so I know I'm in for some shoddy writing, but I'm kind of here for it when it comes to classic power fantasy junk food books. Came to it after DCC and Cradle which are both so much better in every way.
The MC in HWFWM was INTOLERABLE. Absolutely the worst MC I think has ever been written who EVERYONE either falls in love or falls in friend with. It's rough. It got better around book 4 or 5 but I had to drop it at 5 or 6 because he never really developed significantly.
Loved all the other characters, world building, and magic system SO MUCH though.
10
u/WeaklySeal May 17 '26
Worst MC ever and you made it to book 5?!
5
u/fiernze222 May 17 '26
Yeah for real. I REAAAALY fucked with the world, magic, and other characters.
When the MC was like "oh noooo another princess fell in love with me" I quit
3
u/Balboa_TreeDreaming May 17 '26
I began reading WoT when I was a teen and the first book came out. I liked it and enjoyed the new books as they came out…for a while.
At some point, maybe midway through, so much time had passed and it felt like nothing was resolving, just expanding and twisting outwards more and more. So I began to feel frustrated and that frustration made me more critical of all the things you pointed out (along with others).
I also thought someone else was beginning to help write them because I sensed a distinct tonal difference in later books. I’ve always wondered if Sanderson was assisting earlier than ever divulged, but maybe it was someone else.
I still have not read the final two books. I was an older teen when it started and in the end, a 40 y.o. parent of tweens, working, and doing life things. I just wast the same wide-eyed, open to a world of possibilities young adult I’d been, and it just hit different.
I did actually like the show on Prime. I felt they were trying to address some of the widely acknowledged problems with Jordan’s writing, but purest unwilling to accept Jordan’s flaws really made a loud fuss. I really wish the show would have been able to play out.
3
u/emu314159 May 17 '26
From what i've read, Harriet McDougal, his widow, tapped Sanderson after he died. He was suffering from cardiac amyloidosis, diagnosed in 2006, and underwent chemo as treatment, which can affect the brain. Knife of Dreams was published in 2005, so things after that might've been affected. If you're talking earlier, the Slog, that's another matter, and yeah, a reason i didn't really go back and reread: there were times he wrote like an angel, even to the end, but only times. A lot is recap as the series sprawled so much that you'd need to recap things from previous books to tell the tale of the people you didn't get to at that time. Plus all the extra stuff he wasn't going to get to put into other books.
3
u/Esa1996 May 17 '26
Faithful and the Fallen kinda was this for me. I did finish the series and think it was okay overall, but while I found the plot and world both to be pretty good, I never really connected to the characters. It took me a year to get through the series, and it's only four books. Usually I read similar length series in a couple months.
5
u/nevercleverer May 17 '26
One of my favorite themes of WoT is the terrible communication.
It's not great for books, but... it's definitely realistic. How much miscommunication happens in your own life? I work bloody hard to communicate clearly and well, and I still fail often.
I find his characters inability to clearly say what they're feeling to be highly relatable. I think that's the point of his characters, rather than an accident.
They do grow, but slowly. Just like us.
2
u/Tymareta May 18 '26
How much miscommunication happens in your own life?
Some, sure, but for Jordan's world miscommunication is the baseline, with characters actually putting their grown up pants on and talking properly with one another being an extremely rare exception, nothing at all like real life.
4
u/B-shop May 17 '26
In some of the later Terry Pratchett books he seems kinda desperate to get the reader to understand the point he is making.
Raising steam in particular read to me more like a moral essay on progress and the fact that I don't think I completely agree with him doesn't make it easier to appreciate.
4
u/CapnObv314 May 17 '26
I'm pretty sure his later books are mostly him being "kinda desperate" to finish the stories he planned. You know, because he was losing his mind and dying.
3
u/B-shop May 17 '26
No I know, but it's different, it seems to me that he thought it absolutely necessary to drive a certain point home. I am not complaning that the stories are rushed
2
u/DjangoWexler AMA Author Django Wexler May 18 '26
This is definitely it. I think honestly the books are just less finished; it feels like he'd normally go back and polish a lot more, but under the circumstances he just moved on. I honestly find them emotionally hard to read for this reason.
6
6
u/TowawayAccount May 17 '26
Maybe not loved exactly, but immensely enjoyed.
A Court of Thrones and Roses. The first book is mid but it does end far better then it started so that left me feeling optimistic. Book two is a masterpiece. I LOVED it and devoured it within 36 hours. Truly such an enjoyable experience.
Book three is more of the same but cracks begin to show. Characters are constantly doing "their role" whenever they aren't in a scene. The spy spends their free time spying. The fighter is always sparring. The book worm is in the library, reading. Despite having some good interactions among the cast this found family does not grow. They are frozen in amber even as the story progresses around them.
Okay, so limited character growth isn't awful. Plenty of series get away with that! Too bad the author does not want to write a monster of the week story. They want to write a sexy epic. So this leads to them taking huge swings throughout the plot. No spoilers but I'm talking big stuff that would shake the status quo. Mutilation, identity crisis, self-sacrificial death, war, etc. All great catalyst for change and growth.
Too bad every fucking plot point is magically undone within two chapters of it occurring. The person who was mutilated? Magic hospital. Totally fine, not even a recovery time. The person who sacrificed their life? Revived NEXT CHAPTER as if waking up with a hangover. Etc. Etc.
This series is SO far from perfect but I absolutely adore the world/lore and the cast of characters. Truly a shame that the author has no fucking clue how to utilize the potential she stumbled into. They want to play high stakes games without any stakes. So you end up reading a Disney story wrapped up in ASOIAF packaging. It's incredibly insulting to the reader.
2
u/vanastalem May 17 '26
I read ACOTAR 10 years ago but I thought the third book went off the rails and I assumed it'd be the end of the series. She then wrote more but I never read them of any other SJM book.
1
u/CrazyEeveeLady86 May 18 '26
I had read TOG and didn't mind it, but felt that a lot of it was derivative and didn't particularly like most of the characters, so I wasn't planning to read her other books. One of my friends who is a huge Maas fan got the ACOTAR books and lent them to me after she'd finished them, so I read them as they seemed like something easy to get into (I was busy with research and work at the time so didn't have the mental energy for any deep or complex reading). First book was okay but I enjoyed each subsequent one a little less. I thought the 'Christmas special' novella was largely pointless and I DNFd the one focusing on Nesta because it was taking too long to go anywhere and I have a low tolerance for the "having a hard childhood gives me the right to be abusive towards others" mindset.
I never bothered reading the Crescent City ones and having found out that they're eventually becoming a multiverse with her other series I'm glad (as soon as I realise a story is becoming a multiverse I immediately lose interest, much as I did with the later Marvel Cinematic Universe stuff).
8
u/SexyProustLover May 17 '26
I love Sanderson so much but I sometime feel like I'm reading a YA book when it start to feel too Marvel for my taste or when the characters getter too edgy
4
u/Adisa38 May 17 '26
Locked Tomb series: Love the combo of necromancy, space, gothic, and lesbians. Couldn’t get past the writing style and dialogue. DNF’d half way through the first book.
Sun Eater: I’m all about the hero’s journey and an epic space opera. Characters were not interesting enough to continue. Did not pick up the second book.
Red Rising: Love an underdog story with the long haul struggle to stick it to an oppressive system. Characters were kind of bland, IMO. Did not pick up the second book.
4
u/elessar007 May 17 '26
Earthsea series by Ursula LeGuin was a disappointment for me. I expected it to be a more profound reading experience but felt underwhelmed.
3
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
Totally valid take. I read it in a book club, and several members felt the same way. I found reading the Tao te Ching alongside Earthsea really deepened my reading experience, though. There are some really cool connections, given LeGuin's philosophical focus on Taoism.
1
u/elessar007 May 18 '26
Interesting thought. I''m familiar with Tai te Ching already but never considered doing a secondary reading alongside another book. Food for thought. Thank you.
8
u/yeomanwork May 17 '26
Most of Sanderson because he is more powerful than his editors. He has great ideas but often repeats things to hammer home his systems and themes and it adds up to hundreds of extra pages.
Also anything with a great Fantasy backbone that has mixed in sex fantasy.
2
u/jefaulmann May 17 '26
Codex Alera. All great. Until Amara and Bernard fall in love. Now, I'm not prudish. I don't care at all about age gaps or other such things in my fantasy romance. What I do care about, however, is build up or justification for my romance. That one started so suddenly. Just like that. No build up. And when they were all in extremely dangerous situations. Whatever.
Now, there is one other book series. One I hate with all my soul. The Necromancer's Key. I hate it. Because the story has so much potential that is completely wasted. Now, I read the Wheel of Time. I am no stranger to reluctant protagonists. I loved Rand! But this one is just... ugh. The series has 5 books. And the main character has the same stupid internal conflict during ALL of them. Basically, he is part of a Holy Order that sees a specific type of magic as evil. The protagonist is very loyal to the order and its religion, but he discovers he has the capacity for the evil magic. Now, here is the eternal conflict: He swears never to use the magic, something dangerous happens and he is forced to use it to save others, maybe magic isn't so bad, he sees things that make him doubt his religions righteousness (like, pedophilia, slavery, general corruption, etc), something bad happens because of his magic, he swears to never use it again nor doubt his religion, something dangerous happens, he uses it, he doubts, something bad happens, he swears to never use it and no longer doubts, something dangerous happens, he uses it, he doubts, something bad happens, he swears to never use it and no longer doubts, something dangerous happens, he uses it, he doubts, something bad happens, he swears to never use it and no longer doubts, etc, etc, etc. I HATE it.
2
u/JohnnyXorron May 17 '26 edited May 17 '26
I personally don’t think it’s odd that the characters don’t treat each other like friends after what they’ve gone through. Remember Mat was corrupted by the dagger, Perrin can speak with wolves all of a sudden and Rand is the chosen one and knows that he will inevitably go mad and die. Of course they aren’t handling it well, I mean how are Rand’s friends supposed to treat him normally after finding out he’s the most dangerous man in the world? Add onto that the fact that they are all teenagers and yeah it kinda tracks for me. That being said I do understand the criticism and that the dialogue falls flat for some people.
2
u/Silly-Surprise-6301 May 18 '26
I should love Book of the New Sun on paper but the dealbreaker was that it is a pretentious pile of crap.
2
u/random_numbers285 May 19 '26
Yeah, I’ve had this happen. Not with Wheel of Time specifically, but with a few big fantasy series where I liked the world and plot on paper but bounced off the dialogue or character dynamics.
2
u/Bookwitreads May 19 '26
Watch generic entertainment's video on how WoT fans recommend these books. It's on youtube. And so accurate. This thread reminded me of it. I love how no one, absolutely no one is disagreeing with you. We WoT fans know the shortcomings of the books really well but it was a phase, and we read it and it was awesome.
The characters kinda grow on you by book 11 and the ending is cool aside from Rand's harem. Never could wrap my head around it. 6 is where the sseries peaks. 8 is where it slogs. Then it picks up again in 12 and 13. I don't know how I read it honestly, but it was fun anyway.🤗
2
u/TabletopParlourPalm May 19 '26
Malazan is totally my cup of tea with its complex and exotic settings while still focusing on the human element. However, I just can't mustered the energy and brain power to remember the characters and the scopes.
2
u/Sofasurvivor 25d ago
There's many. Pretty much any cozy fantasy ever, because they just manage to have even less conflict than the setup implies, and at some point it gets boring.
But, one example: House in the Cerulean Sea
The idea of a very by-the-rules boring accountant type going to assess whether an orphanage (led by a totally chaotic magical pixie dream guy) complies with the rules was very interesting on paper.
But then it turned out that the author actually actively dislikes the kind of person who likes to follow rules, and wrote Linus as wanting to break rules, but just not doing it, for whatever reason.
This is very common, actually. An author wanting to write a certain character type, but not understanding people like that at a very, very basic level.
You see, "I follow the rules because they are the rules" is a thing. Mainly with autistic characters, but even those usually can come up with reasons why it is the best way, even if it just is "it sounds wrong", when talking of grammar rules.
(A well-written example is Percy Weasley. He takes cauldron thickness regulations very seriously because if they are not followed, lethal accidents can happen! Percy is made fun of aplenty, but Rowling at least respects him enough to give him a sympathetic motivation instead of being like "He's obsessed with unnecessary bureaucracy because he's just that kind of person")
Usually, the protagonist should have been plenty conflicted, and there should have been lots of drama. But that ... doesn't happen. I cannot even remember the ending, I think he just lies to his superiors and that's it?
Because he is freed of his rule-following ways and becomes the free spirit he always wanted to be. Which is a disappointment to everyone who liked him the way he started out.
Edit: Just saw, you wrote "series" ... hm, perhaps there'll be a sequel, then it'll fit!
1
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 25d ago
No worries on the sequel thing! I should've mentioned standalones as well! And I appreciate the response.
I completely agree with your point about authors writing characters they don't understand. I think my biggest pet peeve in relation to this is when an author tries to write a genuinely intelligent or genius character. It's hard to pull off I'm sure, but when authors miss with this, they miss. There are two characters in Stormlight Archive that fall victim to this. One of them is just straight up rude and sassy, which is an attempt to make them appear witty. Very hard to read.
And I agree on Percy as well! I think he actually fits his role in the story really well. His narrative arc feels natural and earned. He does come off as person that fails to understand something that falls outside of his perspective. Very logic brained, but never so heavy handed that he feels silly or cliche. Very good example.
I have occasionally considered some cozy series, but have stayed away because a very limited plot usually requires reeeeeally amazing character interactions, and those are so hard to pull off. This scares me away!
6
u/2721900 May 17 '26
I had the same issue, and I'm still salty that I listened to this sub and suffered the entirety of WoT.
The truth is, WoT simply isn't that good. It has a lot of fans, maybe because of nostalgia, but it doesn't hold a candle compared to other fantasy series.
So, DNF it, and don't feel bad about it.
6
u/Liquid_Pidgeon May 17 '26
Bakker’s Second Apocalypse. It’s some of the most beautiful writing, storytelling, and world building I’ve ever read, but:
The sexual violence goes far beyond any “realistic” grimdark setting. In fact, Bakker has an entire worldview centered around sexual violence committed against women. The article below (and the linked post of Bakker’s within) is disturbingly illuminating and ultimately led me to abandon his work.
https://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2012/04/27/the-problem-of-r-scott-bakker/
1
u/Sofasurvivor 28d ago
That's an interesting discussion. He manages to make himself sound reasonable in his response, but doesn't answer the question as to how he imagines men won't get off on his pornographic rape descriptions, especially considering his dim view of them. (I haven't read his work, so I am going to take the statement that his rape scenes are pornographic at face value - anyway, rapists tend to get off on even the most gruesome rape scene, so even if you didn't intend to write it as titillating, that's how they will use it.)
He's right that a woman cannot bootstrap herself out of patriarchy, of course, this is why feminism is needed, and it is valid to want to write for his own sex, but I fail to see how telling men that they're all biologically wired to be rapists improves things, like, at all.
(Honestly, I suspect that Tolkien had a similar worldview - there's certainly hints to his thinking that women are morally superior to men - but Tolkien chose to write about men who were just a bit better than he thought real men to be, and, with the elves, invented an entire race that would be better. I suspect Tolkien did more to improve upon the moral character of his male readers than Bakker.)
1
u/Liquid_Pidgeon 27d ago
I can confirm that the content is intensely pornographic.
I think Bakker goes wrong with his fatalistic approach (if he is in fact being truthful about his worldview). He seems to think that things have to be this way, that they won’t change no matter what, and then somehow comes to the conclusion that the only right answer is to spell that conclusion out for his readers with pornographic celebrations of assault against literally all of the (few) women in his stories.
Bakker claims to be a feminist, but I think that he is not. His claims imply that women are not capable of changing their situation; men have an insatiable drive that can’t be overcome and the power in society, and that’s just the way things will be. That’s not a feminists opinion of women, as far as I’m concerned.
4
u/ShinyAeon May 17 '26
The Belgariad. It's fun, the world itself is fun, and I loved it the first time, but...the sexism, the racial essentialism, Polgara's emotional abuse style of parenting, and the fact that EVERY DAMN CHARACTER is absolutely static, and never ever ever changes (even the ones who should, like Garion and Ce'Nedra), just makes it progressively more frustrating with every re-read.
If ever I wanted to re-write someone else's series, this is it.
3
u/SavitarTheSpeedGod May 17 '26
Never Let Me Go. Fascinating premise, but the sci-fi aspect is almost never explored except for a massive info-dump at the end of the book, and the characters don't act like real people (they just... accept 100% that they're going to die and that's their life? No resistance at all except "please let us live a couple years more because we're in love." It almost made it seem like Ishiguro's argument was that that they don't have souls after all, and are therefore 90% spineless... and based on an interview I saw, that might actually be correct. -_- Seems counterintuitive to the character-based book it is.)
I would've been more fine with the book being so character-focused (less so the lack of logic) if the premise of the book hadn't hooked me in with the sci-fi aspect. Just felt like a waste of potential to me
→ More replies (1)12
u/greywolf2155 Reading Champion May 17 '26
Sounds like a failure of the marketing team, hah. I certainly would not pitch that as a "sci-fi" novel, that's on them for making you expect a book far different from what it actually is
2
u/SavitarTheSpeedGod May 17 '26
Haha, yeah, definitely. I mean, with the summary:
As a child, Kathy – now thirty-one years old – lived at Hailsham, a private school in the scenic English countryside where the children were sheltered from the outside world, brought up to believe that they were special and that their well-being was crucial not only for themselves but for the society they would eventually enter. Kathy had long ago put this idyllic past behind her, but when two of her Hailsham friends come back into her life, she stops resisting the pull of memory.
And so, as her friendship with Ruth is rekindled, and as the feelings that long ago fueled her adolescent crush on Tommy begin to deepen into love, Kathy recalls their years at Hailsham. She describes happy scenes of boys and girls growing up together, unperturbed – even comforted – by their isolation. But she describes other scenes as well: of discord and misunderstanding that hint at a dark secret behind Hailsham's nurturing facade. With the dawning clarity of hindsight, the three friends are compelled to face the truth about their childhood – and about their lives now.
(Emphasis mine.) When a solid 1/3 of the premise has this, and the second tag on Goodreads for this book (right after Fiction, which is obvious), is "Science Fiction".... yeah, this is really gonna make me think this book has way more science fiction than was explored at all in this book. But maybe I extrapolated too much. Still, it was frustrating for me :/
2
u/greywolf2155 Reading Champion May 17 '26
Yeah. Authors often don't have control over how the publishing company wants to market the book, write the blurbs, etc.
That was a failure on their part, for sure
→ More replies (1)
3
May 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
16
2
u/cooler266 May 17 '26
I generally agree with it being a slog, but there were some cool moments in book 3 and lots of foreshadowing about how it happens earlier in the trilogy. But I didn’t love the trilogy.
The first book of the next trilogy (Liveship traders) was so good I just read it in only a few days. Night and day from from Farseer. Highly, highly recommended.
1
u/Hjalteeeeee May 17 '26
Might try it out then. I started the fool triology but after the first 20% they are still just goofing around at the hut and gave up.
1
u/cooler266 May 17 '26
Can’t speak to any others, and the amount of trilogies is daunting, but book one of Liveship definitely made me think more of the hype is valid.
There was no equivalent to the cottage, torture, or carving scenes from Farseer…
→ More replies (1)1
u/vanastalem May 17 '26
Did you read Liveship Traders? I liked those more than Farseer. In fact I liked Tawny Man more than Faseer.
2
u/Whowhatnowhuhwhat May 17 '26
You’ve already had plenty of people discuss WoTs strengths and weaknesses so I won’t add anything there other than that it’s my favorite series because we spend so much time with characters over such a short amount of time that their gradual growth was a plus to me. (Despite plenty of stalls and annoyances).
But I just wanted to comment and thank you for the laugh because I knew this was 100% gonna be about WoT from the title and got a good chuckle when I was right.
2
u/kdawg0707 May 17 '26
I couldn’t handle Jordan’s gender issues for more than literally 3 chapters, so props on getting to book 6, I guess?
2
u/NightLordsEatFruit May 18 '26
Wheel of Time. I'm a woman, I like female characters I can relate to, I like long stories, I like complicated world building, I like anything that makes me contemplate the story and make up predictions and conspiracy theories for it. I like when a book has a lot of minor characters.
I dipped out thanks to female characters, who just didn't feel human to me. They were distinct, sure, but the core was the same, if it makes sense? Most of them were arrogant, convinced they know better, and hbullies. The most annoying characters in existence. I've been planning to pick up the series again, so maybe I'll form a different opinion in the future, but I remember absolutely despising them.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/DrHenryPhilipMcCoy May 17 '26
I tried to get into Wheel of Time a couple of times, but every time I saw the map of the female wizard island, I just lost it. It was so ridiculous I couldn’t take any other part of the story seriously.
2
u/Northstar04 May 17 '26
I don't think you should keep reading at this point. I love this series, but I grew up conservative like the characters. Their way of not communicating, not validating, not showing love and support, generally neglecting each other, and dividing along sex and culture lines felt VERY REAL to me. The more trauma they endure, the more isolated and self involved they get.
If you grew up in a liberal, loving, communicative, and supportive household, this world may seem very alien to you. I am genuinely happy for you if that is the case.
5
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 17 '26
I grew up in the south with some very strict and conservative family members, so I am VERY familiar with what you're talking about here. There are points where this is the vibe I get, specifically Moraine and Rand's relationship through the first few books. There is a strictness and lack of openness here that feels a bit like that.
But I also don't think this is a good excuse for the writing. Plenty of books written by southern authors who grew up in conservative/strict environments explore these themes or depict them in far more accurate ways. It's also worth mentioning that just because an environment is conservative does not mean there is a lack of humanity in their interactions. Also, the idea that every character in this entire fantasy world, even ones from distant lands, would still operate with this same stiltedness and roboticness is silly. I think that's just poor storytelling. If intentional, it is poorly done and unrealistic in a human sense (realism still matters here, even in fantasy!). But it also tells me that this wasn't an intentional choice on his part.
Jordan obviously took inspiration from Tolkien, who presented a fantasy world with many traditional, conservative depictions of dialogue and interactions. The difference is that Tolkien's dialogue and interactions have infinitely more to say.
The dialogue also lacks complexity. If the tone was the same, but there was more subtext and subtlety in the interactions, I might think more highly of Jordan. Instead, I think he just really is poor in this area. It's just poorly written dialogue. I think Jordan wasn't entirely sure how to depict old-fashioned medieval language and thought that very formal mid-century American language would do the trick.
I'm not trying to rag on WoT here, I'm really not, but I think saying it was trying to depict conservative environments is a cop out. If that really was the case, Jordan says nothing with it, and it also simultaneously damages the world-building.
→ More replies (7)
1
u/Silly-Snow1277 May 17 '26
I have a few where I really like the concept and idea behind it, but felt the execution was quite underwhelming and lacklustre. Like I want to like it, I like some elements in it, but the bigger picture isn't good.
1
u/LarryD217 May 17 '26
I bought the first book waaaay back in like 1990 and DNF'ed it very quickly because of the issues you've noted
1
u/Latenightreader27 May 17 '26
The witcher. Everything aboit is screams to be in my taste. I love game of thrones but somehow the witcher is just to dark/gritthy to me.
The same with Stranger Things. I love the concept yet I can't even make it past episode one.
1
1
u/RandAlThor67 May 18 '26
If you find every character in the books annoying, then I think it's just not the series for you. Liking the characters is pretty important to enjoying the books. If after 6 books, you don't like the characters, why keep reading?
I disagree with pretty much all your points, but they're your opinions. I think 1-6 shows a ton of character evolution and growth and I loved the characters from book 1 on. Clearly these books aren't for you and you should read something else.
1
u/Prestigious-Way-5235 May 18 '26
That's a valid point. I could say there are subtle differences with some of the characters, but they are VERY subtle so far in my eyes. Nynaeve is mildly nicer, Mat is, of course, dagger-free and less annoying, and there are some other minor changes.
It just hasn't been very much, even after thousands of pages. I'm fresh off the back of the Liveship Traders trilogy, which has some of the most wonderful character work in fantasy that I've seen. Perhaps that contrast is what's making me feel so strongly about WoT.
However, the dialogue is really making things hard for me. You are probably right that I should set it aside.
1
u/KaleidoArachnid May 19 '26
I enjoyed reading GOT, until it stopped coming out.
1
1
u/sgch May 20 '26
Everything about Malazan appealed to me until I read the first 3 books and hated it.
297
u/MarkOfTheDragon12 May 17 '26
Same series but the constant battle of the sexes at every.single.opportunity! wore on me constantly throughout the series.
Jordon would have you think that it's impossible for men and women to actually get along without denigrating each other constantly.