Are some books just “challenging to read,” or simply poorly written? For example Malazan, or something.
Are some books just “challenging to read,” or simply poorly written?
For example Malazan, or something.
49 Answers
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Loading Please wait
I’ve heard great things about Malazan and also words of loathing, so I would say “challenging” for that series. But haven’t read it myself. Anyone read Tim Severin’s Viking series? I thought they were very good but not what you call page-turners.
I will always stand by this: all Tolkien books.
Man was a fantastic storyteller, not a great writer.
My gut reaction to this is “Heresy!” but my rational mind can’t deny there are inconsistencies in LOTR. But I wouldn’t class it as either of the above two.
If LOTR was released today, I’m pretty sure an editor would have said “John, do we really need that hippy guy in it? Tom whats-his-name.”
I’m prepared to admit it may be due to a stylistic difference I have with them; but The Hobbit was even a slog in places.
Tbh I legit don’t understand why anyone finds it challenging. Take your time to enjoy it and it’s magical.
That’s what I’m saying though. I do enjoy them, immensely. I just get lost in the writing and word/term choice a lot.
@Peter Tom Bombadil is the best part of LOTR.
I enjoy it as it was the first fantasy books I read, but I wont reread it. It’s too slow to take off and I cant stand every chapter has at least three pages of songs and poems. As I said I love them but wont likely revisit any time soon
@Sarah Ha ha, fear not, I love old Tom! But I’m not sure he would make the cut if Tolkien had written LOTR today. Which is part of a whole other debate: are editing standards today too tight? I’ve read many times that if it doesn’t bear on the plot, then chuck it. Some say there should be action from the first page. I personally like steady world-building and don’t mind info dumps if they are interesting. I just Wiki-ed Tom and there is some insight from JRRT himself, down the page under the sub-title Concept and Creation. Very interesting!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Bombadil
The first book of Malazan is hard. Beyond that it’s all fantastic.
Is the first book The Gardens of the Moon or am I on the wrong series?!
@Peter it is.
I found that book nearly unbearable until about 3/4s the way through.
Ah, might give it another go. I tried that one and gave up after about a hundred pages. Thanks!
I’m on my fourth attempt now and most of the way through the third. Found books 1+3 better than book 2. It does meander a lot and need to be pretty focused but worth the effort so far
I quite enjoyed Malazan and didn’t find it a slog. However, other series (Kate Elliott Prince of Dogs and Janny Wurts mistwraith to name 2) made me wonder if I’d ever get the hours back. Less is often more.
Steven erikson writes ln a higher level then most. Certainly not poorly written. The most complex writers with stylistic prose, usually are the ones people have gripes with. Ie bakker Wolfe erikson
I would say sanderson is a poor writer but great story teller
I loved his writing in WOT. Dunno how much he contributed in the last three books but you can see his touch in those. It wasn’t perfect Jordan. I haven’t read any other books written by him but hope to do so soon
Personal preference. Poorly written would be a matter of a book being filled with Mary Sues and character arcs that make no sense; or outright words that make sense when used in junction. There is a famous example of this. The name eludes me at the moment.
Malazan is hard. The first book is confusing. It is somewhat structurally a mess. I can’t speak for the later books, but Erikson does tend to slam too many characters with strange names at you at once. I struggled for awhile. Honestly, I barely remember most of what happened or who was in the Gardens of The Moon because if I can’t keep the characters straight the rest of the narrative falls flat and becomes confusing. His prose is slightly above average but by no means unapproachable.
So what’s the verdict? A little bit of both?
@Thomas poorly written ? i need to take a deep breath ?
@Michael Just stop, man ? We get it, you have trouble with people not loving your favorites books.
@Thomas poorly written ? i need to take a deep breath ?
@Thomas i’m trying to let it go?
@Michael You can do it! I believe in you.
Michael https://www.tor.com/2017/11/21/malazan-suggested-reading-order-ian-cameron-esslemont-steven-erikson/ Primeau
I wouldn’t say difficult to read. As I told in many posts before, some books takes time to get used too. Malazan series is one such example but once you get into it, it will remain one of the best you have ever read
I haven’t read Malazan but its sitting on my shelf. I think some books are definitely challenging as opposed to badly written.
Yes
The answer is both. Some are challenging to read and some are just poorly written.
Don’t know about Malazan. Haven’t read it.
I’m meaning a single work, does it tend to be challenging or is it in reality hard to read? Obviously some books are poorly written and some are not.
Modern fiction-writing theory is that if you want people to read your book, you have to make it easy for them. You have to make it interesting an understandable (to a certain extent) from the very first page. People are lazy and they will give up on your book if they aren’t immediately grabbed and entertained.
In theory, people used to be more patient and used to give books more of a chance before TV and social media came along and gave us all ADD. But nowadays, it’s a tougher market with lots of competition for people’s attention.
Having said that.. there ARE some really great books out there which break the rule, either intentional or not, and are still worth the read.
I can agree. I usually stick with books that aren’t so great, but some I ditch pretty early on if it’s a sequel and I’m back for round 2 of “meh.” For me that’d be Exile by Salvatore.
“The Innocent Mage,” by Miller is a book I’m feeling meh about, but sticking with it.
The big example for me is The Reality Dysfunction by Peter Hamilton. It’s sci-fi, not fantasy. And the first 100 pages were so boring, I almost gave up. Then, almost exactly on page 100, the whole things flips around and it becomes one of the best series I have ever read. 😛
Another example (also sci-fi) is Neuromancer by William Gibson. This is a book that’s hard to read. The language is deliberately dense, poetic, and obscure. But that’s one of the things that makes it great. 😛
These days I prefer a deeper, more dense read, with occasional forays into fluff. I used to prefer the easy, fluffy books. They tend to be more formulaic and once you read a few by this type of writer, every book thereafter is predictable. I still enjoy that kind of book, especially when travelling or in waiting rooms. You don’t really have to pay attention or think very hard. It’s entertaining and fun. These days I love a story that surprises me, one with history and mystery and irreverence. Ones that get better with each re-read. Love Malazon.
i think you better check yourself before you start criticizing Malazan. it’s a masterpiece
I couldn’t make it through malazan either. It’s the only series I actually put down
@Colt i try not to be offended when people don’t like a book I consider a classic. but it’s hard ? I guess that’s human nature. I have been on the other end many times
@Michael I’m gonna try it again. It came highly recommended. I’ve read the silmarillion so surely to God I can make it through anything. I think I may have started it in a hard and stressful time. I think it deserves another chance. But I came across sapkowski’s latest in the middle of it too so it’s a little unfair to malazan
@Colt i will tell you that when i first started the first one it was a little hard. there is a lot of Mythos to adsorb
And I read the silmarillion
It is Scifi (for the most part, although I have read reviews that state that it is really fantasy), but I found Nine Fox Gambit by Yoon Ha Lee to be a very challenging read. It was an excellent book and deserved all the awards it won, but the author just kind of throws you in and doesn’t explain the whole hive mind math magic system that the story is based on.
Something to consider perhaps – https://www.tor.com/2017/11/21/malazan-suggested-reading-order-ian-cameron-esslemont-steven-erikson/
@Sami Cheers for the link! Yet to read Esslemont’s books ?
Discworld is well written but hard to read. Too much back and forth abrupt dialog
I find some discworlds a bit chaotic and challenging to follow.
Malazan is 21 books??