A Malazan RANT!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- I finished two more Malazan books and have a lot to say. Reapers Gale and Toll the Hounds were both solid, but Malazans weaknesses are becoming more apparent.
Merch: teespring.com/...
Patreon: / danielbgreene
Amazon: www.amazon.com...
Discord Server: / discord
Twitter: Da...
Twitch: / fantasynews
Instagram: / dgreene101
GoodReads: / daniel-greene
Subreddit: / danielgreene
I like Malazan. Malazan doesn't like me! 😂
Its been a while since I have read the series. As I remember, I felt much the same way for books 5-9. It felt like the overall plot was moving slowly. With the last book though, it felt like it came together. I really enjoyed the ending. Not at WOT levels, but still very satisfactory and cathartic.
Toll the Hounds arguably has the greatest, most jaw-dropping "event" in all of fantasy. I'm surprised that doesn't factor in.
Everything you said is the kind of thing that would drive me nuts. Thanks for making it clear this series is not for me. If it was a standalone or even a trilogy, I might have given it a shot. But I'm not investing that much time/brain power in a series where the author seems more concerned with being clever & showing how complicated he can write something, rather than giving me a plot and characters to care about.
@@Yesica1993 It's good to know your own tastes and be able to select reading most likely to provide what you are looking for. Selection is a skill in and of itself.
One thing I would say if you fancy trying a taste of it is maybe reading Memories of Ice but reading it as a stand alone book. It absolutely functions as one and demonstrates a lot of Erikson's strengths. If you end up loving it then you can know if the rest might be of interest as well. Just a thought.
Wait till you get into the next book i had to tap out about half way through it by far my least favorite book in the series
Daniel: Don’t get me wrong; I like Malazan.
Me: I can’t believe Daniel hates Malazan.
Still laughing...
@Aaron Sanders He cakks him a brilliant dude. He doesn't think he is bad he just has not liked his very counter meta style of writing. I doubt there will be an apology. I think we are likely to hear, it's differnet level, I like it but... Its what we heard here and I think it is what he will be saying after Crippled God. Daniel just likes more cohesive storytelling that isn't a condemnation of SE or MBOTF. So I think it's unlikely his opinnion will suddenly flip... he hasn't even read DOD yet... and that certainly won't change his opinion lets just agree on that.
Hahahaha, accurate.
Hahahaha, the truth!!
@John Sorry was not meaning to imply it is a bad book. What I was trying to hint at (But if I'm honest I was going for humour and may have missed) was that a lot of his problems with the series that he mentions here are absolutely present in DoD. I would agree though that the hate for it is more on the level of meme than carefully thought through critisicm and many an angry fan will just jump on the band wagon.
I get the same reaction when people talk about 'the slog' in WOT. Then I ask them which books are the slog for you? They are usually not sure... some of the ones in the middle is typically the reply. Then I mention a few of the great scenes and sequences from those books for example 'the cleansing' and they are like oh yeah I loved the build up to that and we chat for 10 mins about it and then I remind them that that was in one of the books they IDed as 'the slog'.
DOD definitely has all the MBOTF traits and his unorthodox style is as strong here as anywhere. That is why I made my comment. But does it get undeserved levels of hate I would also agree.
Here is my take on Malazan. I mildly disagree with the point on characters, but this is how I have approached the series.
First, Erikson openly acknowledged that he resists the idea that all authors have or should spring from the tolkien mindset of storytelling. He has stated his desire was to tell a story that actively rebelled against the tropes of the farm boy chosen one. From the Majority Arab Cast to the Chain Link structure of the storytelling (more on that below)
Second, Erikson is an active-reader writer. Part of the issue for a lot of readers will be that you have to do work to get through them. You have to think about how the points connect and make your own conclusions regularly. You are required to engage with the text actively in order to make sense of the larger narrative. This is closer to writers like James Joyce or Thomas Pynchon, who ask the reader to engage with the text as an artifact, not a story. It is a huge ask of readers, and is definitely frustrating. But by that same token, if you put in the work to read it and actively connect the dots, it becomes intensely rewarding.
Third, Erikson does have problems with superstructure and adding characters each book. I have nothing to say on this point. Although I will say that the broad plot does (largely) get resolved by the end. There are also a set of main characters who are the dramatic thru-line, but it doesn't become super clear until the very end.
Fourth, Erikson writes more for theme than plot. There is one theme that has been beaten to death the entire story, that has been shared by all the characters and conflicts. If the story has point, it is that theme. Because that theme constitutes spoilers, however, I will not share it until you have concluded the story.
Fifth, Erikson is writing in a way I would classify as a Chain-Link, a propos of the main villain. Each story dovetails into the next and creates a longform narrative chain. He also engages in some fractal storytelling, and Gardens of the Moon in many ways tells the whole story of Malazan if you are paying close attention to its overall structure. I mean this literally. The plot beats of that story track to all five clusters of the chain in ways that can seem uncanny. This is my own personal interpretation, however. Don't quote me on it in discussion.
Finally, Erikson's writing is meant to reflect events as they happen in history. As a history buff I'm sure you can appreciate how major historical events were not one causal event, but a series of events scattered across many regions that in the end, ended up having profound effects on history and the world. World War I was not a straight-line; it was somethings happening in Serbia and Germany and France that all converged with the Assassination of Franz Ferdinand. So in that regard, Erikson as both an anthropologist and historian is reconstructing the narrative chaos of real-life events. It's debatable on whether that's valuable in a fantasy story, but I loved it.
None of this is to disagree with, or counter your opinions. I definitely respect those. I just wanted to offer my perspective, because these things helped clarify the story and made me enjoy it so much more to the point where it's one of my favorite texts.
Cheers
Really good comments and really good points. You have clearly thought this through and understood the texts better than I.
I'm not done with the series, but being almost done (both his and Esslemont's series) and listening to some of Erikson's interviews, I'm seeing what you saw. The way things link up too remind of the way the MCU's individual franchises tell their own tale yet link up into the grand meta-narrative that concluded in End-Game (but not as well done or deliberate as Malazan is). Still, I found it to be a helpful comparison in explaining its structure to people.
Good post, I get kind of irritated with people that insist that Malazan “doesn’t work” in whatever sense because it’s not reading in the way they expect. Like, you can have whatever taste you want, but up to a certain point you need to try and have an open mind for different styles and different forms of story telling if you want to grow as a reader instead of just like, looking for the same genre story over and over again.
Great post. Erikson himself says he is a "short story" writer. He just expanded that to 3 million words.... but that type of story telling places weight on every word, sentence, and paragraph. If you aren't actively engaging with it then this isn't the series for you. Those plots, themes, characters are there. I think he especially gets a bum wrap on the characters and characterization. People complain about the "being dropped in" or as Daniel puts it "restart, restart, restart" but Erikson really does put these things in front of you (in some cases over and over and over) in small ways before he brings them into primary focus (as you noted about Gardens). That wasn't apparent to me on a first read but on the re-read it was like "Oh man, he really did spell this out for us" it was just on ME as a reader to have been able to see it. There were literally HUGE plot points he gave away very early on. His essay on the opening scene at Pale is fantastic as well. It really opened my eyes for my first re-read on how much thought and detail he DOES put into almost every aspect hanging on every word. But it takes work to read in that fashion. Which obviously isn't for everyone.
Exactly this. I have nothing against Daniel but I never understood the logic behind criticizing a series for what it doesn't even intend to do. Rather critize it for the things it tries to do but does them poorly.
Daniel: favorite series is wheel of time
Also daniel: malazan needs to be edited and trimmed
Hahahhaha actually died
100% Agree. People tend to have intense biases toward their favorite works. That applies to people who watched the Star Wars prequels when they were growing up as much as it does to Wheel of Time fanatics or Malazan fans. Daniel is no exception. I wish Daniel was as critical of WoT as he is of Malazan because I am as critical of both series as he is of Malazan in this video.
To be fair, Daniel has said WoT needed editing and trimming many times.
@@diabloman Well.....not like this. He said that the Slog (books 8-10) are... not that bad...not that bad?!?! So many people stopped reading WoT because of those. I.....honestly think he is a a lot harsher on Malazan because of his love for WoT - so much people have been comparing them and in most cases Malazan comes on top as far as overall quality goes (i know, it's subjective), that Daniel has to be a bit more..nasty with Malazan
@@Snitch55 Count me as someone who stopped on Book 9 of WOT because of the Slog. I guess I'll never know the ending of WOT because that was too dreadful trying to get through the slog. I still remember exact moment sitting the book down and walking away from the WOT series. Really, the only character I wish I knew the ending to was Mat.... but not enough to hear about Pulling on Braids and Crossing arms under breasts for x10^7 times again.
The "Hero's Journey" of Malazan Book of the Fallen is that of the reader. This sentiment seems to be shining through in Daniel's videos.
Exactly. So exactly. I think my heart broke reading that very excellent summation. If you don't become a better Human by the end, you need re-read the story!
That is an incredible perspective. Thanks for sharing it :p
Did erikson said this or was it essamont?
@@THX-bz8bi Erikson said it in an interview somewhere. I can't recall which one. My apologies.
I want a Malazan Moments tier list when you finish the series, been itching for a while for some spoiler filled Malazan content.
Good luck: he said he needs to catch up to publication, and there are something like 30 books in total
Sauron Gorthaur I own them all! I’ve yet to even read the first page, but I know I’ll enjoy it. But MAN do they take up a lot of space on my shelf lol.
@@theandrewcummins I do the same thing. I have 13/15 Wheel of Time books and I haven’t even read a page of them yet. I know I’ll like it, but so much other stuff is out there and I already dedicated a year to Malazan so I want to read some other stuff! Hoping you tried it out in the three years since this comment, though. I know Malazan will never be topped for me
@@xgamerx360x I’ve since read all that Malazan has to offer essentially lol. Amazing stuff.
Does he tie it together at the end of the series?
As Karsa would say:
"Witness."
Yes, few plot points are left untouched.
Hey, in the main series you wont find 'a tie end' for the 10 books, a lot of plots are still left in the mid air... You will have to read some other books like ¨Kharkanas Trilogy' , Assail, Esslemonts books, Bauchelain & Korbal Broach series, i think Malazan is way more difficult to read than something like Wheel of Time. Altho Wheel of Time is one of my favourites boks.
Love them all :)
Moridin Honestly I had a much easier time reading Malazan than WoT. That’s in part because, as Daniel puts it, I do enjoy the “moments” style of writing. I really enjoy seeing disparate moments that seem unconnected tie in to the story in unexpected ways, as opposed to a very clear building narrative. To me WoT is like a highway with plenty of rest stops and towns along the way, whereas MBotF is more like the road system of a whole city, intertwining in interesting ways and eminently exploitable. With WoT, you’re along for the ride. With MBotF, you have to drive through, and I like that.
Yes
I mean everyone is focusing on one tie in but it's not a story of x people but a flow of how the entire Malazan "world" copes with a great crime undone and the many paths to get there.
Malazan is only for the most masochistic fantasy fans, and that’s why we love it.
WoT fans who suffered the slog - *are you challenging me?*
Hussain T I must be alone, in that I enjoy the WOT slog lol. I’m on “The Path of Daggers” currently.
@@theandrewcummins The Slog is fine when you read it through. Imagine reading Path of the Daggers or Crossroads of Twilight and having to wait two or three years for the story to continue.
Reed James I hadn’t considered it from that angle, but I can certainly see that now. I enjoy the political intrigue in this slog however.
I thought piecing everything together based on tiny hints was one of the most fun parts of the series
I feel the same - one actually has to THINK to follow the story.
That's what makes it interesting in contrast to other works. It is demanding, it is exhausting, you have to remember and rethink what you have read. It is as much a struggle for the reader as it is for the characters.
I love it because it is like reality: things are complex, nothing is obvious, it's like life: You have to fight for answers, accepting that they might not be as satisfying as you hoped for when you finally get them - IF you get them at all.
I agree, finding the connections was a huge part of the experience. Malazan has the best "Aha!" moments in fantasy, in my opinion.
I think its much harder for him because hes a booktuber whos juggling malazan with so many other series while most readers would focus on it.
Indeed. Erickson doesn't take his readers for children, he supposes they're intelligent human beings.
No talk down, no unecessary explanations.
That's refreshing and welcome.
The sheer impact when realization hits of these hints that piece together is so rewarding.
Steven Erikson has a Dark Souls mentality to his books. ‘Git Gud at reading scrub!’
Correct. That's why I stopped with Dark Souls at part 2 🤣 it's a damn good game but I don't have the patience anymore to die over and over again.
@@whosaidthat84 Yeah I'd be tired of dying too after your football career.
I love Dark Souls but I hate Malazan.
Excellent way to describe this series
Does this mean Karsa is GiantDad?
Malazan may seem like it doesn't have a coherent overarching plot, but I feel this is more due to how many characters and storylines there are to follow. I definitely had the same feeling of Malazan being more about a series of really cool events rather than a continuous narrative the first time I read it. But after going back through the series and reading what other people have picked up on through the books it's clear that there is a plot and events even from the very first book have been important to building up to it. The problem is the story is way too large to pick up on much of this first time through. It doesn't help that there definitely ARE some stories that are dead ends that don't do too much for the plot and are more about world building.
One guy in these comments described it as a chain link style of story telling. The problem is I read a lot of fantasy and I wanted to love this but I just ran out of steam. I think if you do have the stamina for deep note taking, re-reads, reading write ups/essays on it or watching utube vids on it, then it can all come together amazingly. it is a scholarly work as much as a story and while this is a breathtaking acheievement and accomplished amazingly well it can disapooint those who just came for a great story. I think that is where I got lost and ran out of steam. Just to be clear I got half way through the Crippled God before stopping, I didn't just get to Deadhouse gates find it was not really a sequel in the classic sense and stop.
The series is more a historical artefact than a single fantasy story and though I agree that the character arcs of the central people Anomander, Karsa etc clearly form multiple links in the chain it is for a speicifc kind of reader to enjoy that enough to justify the time and effort it takes to enjoy it to anywhere near its potential. So glad it exists though as it is an exemplar of a new way of delivering the genre.
Yeah, I definitely understand that sentiment. I can't remember which book it was but I came very close to giving up on the series. I figured I had already dumped so much energy into it that I had to finish it though. And when I did finish it I definitely didn't feel like I came out of it understanding everything Erikson had been building up to. But for whatever reason the world that he made is interesting enough that I have continued to torture myself with trying to grasp its history and events.
Definitely a one of a kind fantasy series.
@@Awesomesauce35 Agreed and one doesn't need all the answers after all that's what the imagination is for. Thank you for your insight it was appreciated.
All of this is exactly right.
Malazan is the ultimate "not a bug, feature" book series. It's amazing, but confusing, but the confusion is by design, but goddamn just look at my bro Anomander Rake but Jesus what is going on here and shit?
That was midnight tides for me lmao what the fuck is this? Who are these people? Where did they come from? Is this a new series? Lol but then it came together and I was all oooooohhhhhhh lmao
Something as massive as Malazan is bound to have flaws. It takes nothing away from the series for me. I look forward to your spoiler reviews, if I live long enough.
Well it does take away. When the previous books of 1-6, themes and philosophy where there to aid and improve upon the plot,
Whereas now he just dropped the ball on the plot thing and started introducing sub plots (redmask, bhargast in dod, snake) to get his themes and philosophy across
Then it is a problem. If he had written these books this way from book 1 then yeah I would agree but it's not the case. You can't switch the direction of a series in the middle
Flaws do take away from something. That's why they're called flaws genius
@@shayaanali3824
That's oversimplifying it lol
@@arnoldarun7655 To each their own, while I felt book 9 was a slog, I really enjoyed each sub plot you mentioned and felt like they were more or less necessary for their implications(Even when a lot of those implications only made sense on my re-read). My overall opinion on Daniel's take is that I understand am but gonna have to hard disagree. I'm very much looking forward to the spoiler talk so I can see what specifically bothered him.
@@arnoldarun7655 that's not a switch in direction it's a result of what has come before. He is giving the less significant roles more significant ones thats part of the philosophy that malazan explores. How is that dropping the ball?
Erikson called Toll the Hounds a cipher for the rest of the series, in other words a book that makes the others make more sense in the readers mind so that might be worth thinking about.
But they’re so long and so complicated that I lost those story strings all together so even if he does make everything make sense there are still pieces that are impossible to hang on to because there’s too much almost. Malazan is epic and brilliant but it’s like me trying to understand Einstein view of the world it’s too big. Too much analysis required
@@taylorhauser3347 Yeah sometimes I'm conflicted about the idea of a work being overly intellectual. On the one an author shouldn't dumb down their story or writing but on the other hand they need to make sure there's an emotional core that makes it accessible to more than just an elite few readers to enjoy.
@@taylorhauser3347 some people are willing to commit to that, some arent. Neither are in the wrong, but I think it's good to consider that you're not expected to have a complete, accurate understanding of absolutely everything in Malazan, just as how we obviously don't understand absolutely everything in our world. Even I, who love these books and have read most of the novels set in the Malazan world, can barely, vaguely explain what an Azath is, for example, I just have a general idea of what they do and how they work.
Thirty-seven Bridgeburners disliked this video.
After reading Malazan, almost all other fantasy series feels bland compared to Malazan's epicness. Malazan kind of spoiled it for me.
@John Dresden should be seen as Popcorn Books. I use them as palate cleansers in between other epic fantasies. They are just fun books.
Malazan is fantastic for sure. Agree with a lot of Daniel's criticisms, but agree with the larger hype of this series because it Malazan truly is amazing.... That being said, I have had no issues getting into other series. I read Joe Abercrombie's First Law trilogy after Malazan and think it that it's MUCH better told story, though lesser in scope.
GIve The Stormlight Archive a try, it not as immersive as Malazan but will capture your attention
@@antoniomangoni9719 Ya.. I read Stormlight Archive, it comes second in terms of epicness compared to Malazan for me. Waiting for next book this fall/winter!!
Antonio Mangoni I cant read Sanderson anymore... his prose is just too... basic? Not sure that is the right word, it also feels anachronistic, which I know is a weird thing to complain in a fantasy setting, but the way dialogue is written often brakes immersion for me. Like I’m hearing 21 century American teens larping. The worldvuilding and magic systems are top notch though
Whew! I'm very excited about getting into Malazan in the future, probably next year as I am middle through my first read of WoT. Therefore, I can't really say anything about Erickson's writing right now...
BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT CUTTING UNNECESSARY STUFF!!! 😤
I'm loving my time with WoT, but OH MY GOD does it feel like a chore some times. And I haven't even gotten to the slump yet ☹️
She said, folding her arms beneath her breasts.
I have to say, I think Erikson's characters are among the best I've read in fantasy. But he shows this differently than most writers, the personalities and humanity comes through more in the relationship between characters than in the characters on their own. I've started thinking about the characters in pairs, and they are so fantastic.
I love that "inability" to convey information. Every time you, as a reader, get to tie some knots, it is an adrenaline rush and epiphany like moment.
Agreed. If you've ever tried to write anything, that "inability" is basically another level in communication or teaching; past the wooden timeline style relating skills learned in grade-school school diagramming and outlining. It's a function of synthesis and reflected evaluation.
I actually love that Erikson never holds your hand on his series the fact that it is a confusing maze almost made me like the series more. I read these all in a row except the last two books as they had not been finished and just picked up where I left off on them. When you see the end result of his characters plots is when you pick back up on the bread crumb trail that seemed to make no sense at the time which makes me want to read the story again so much more than any other novel.
Listen, the sub-plot about the oxen is incredibly important and cannot be edited out in case everything goes wrong
Lmao, that ox does play an important role to be fair
@@Fen02879 Not only in the plot, but in characterization or allegory of the whole. If just the ox was taken as a short story, it would be brilliant on its own, which is hard to miss unless you're reading for a self-validating echo in fiction.
"So much of this could be resolved if Erikson simply improved how he delivers information to the reader." This is something I have been saying for years...it's a series that is so epic in scale that it feels like it should be the greatest fantasy series ever written. But, the way it is delivered is so convoluted and confusing that I simultaneously have to say it's the most frustrating series I've ever read.
I have a love/hate relationship with the Malazan series as I've been reading it at some level for the last decade. I have attempted to binge through the series a couple times and have read the first seven books at least three times apiece...some a few more. But, every time I try to make it through the series I consistently get stuck about midway through Toll of the Hounds. I feel like I am always confused as to what I'm reading, who most of these characters are, and why I'm even supposed to care about what is happening. I was literally trying to read some of it last night and was just so frustrated because I couldn't remember who most of these characters are and why every paragraph feels like a random short story.
And yet...I keep trying.
Part of me isn't sure why because he's one of the most frustrating writers I've ever read. I suppose that a lot of it is the worldbuilding...and the plots that he has set up that I actually understand haha. And honestly, I really am extremely curious how he will wrap everything up. But, if I am honest with myself, why would I expect him to wrap everything up in a satisfactory way like a Sanderson novel when I am constantly so confused and disappointed by his writing?
It must be the subtle hope that he's just been messing with me this whole time and the series will culminate in such an epic and satisfying ending that the pages of The Crippled God will literally burst into flames as I close the book. Unlikely...
We are the same lol. You articulated well my experience with malazan
I cant remember how far I got ( waiting for the next book to come out ) I read them again and enjoyed them more since I was able to follow the story better, but after toll of the hounds I really had no idea what was going on and stoped reading.
Grow up, come back to the series after you are 35... if you're already there, then that sucks for you.
@John I didn't realize enjoying a person's writing style was connected to their level of masculinity. I actually thought it was a matter of personal taste like all art. I stand corrected, thank you for bringing my shortcomings to my attention.
@@anubistv1154 Thank you, I thought this was a matter of personal taste like all art. I didn't realize it was due to my obvious immaturity and a lack of intelligence. I hope the enlightenment you posses will descend upon me soon; then I too can enjoy the loftier things and scoff at the unwashed masses who clearly aren't as educated as yourself. Thank you for setting my eyes on a future hope.
I somewhat disagree regarding the plot of Malazan. I would say there are at least three big plots and several smaller plots that gradually converge throughout the ten books. It’s not a casual read because of this and because Erikson defies the expectation that stories must follow a protagonist or key set of characters. If you can adjust to these key factors, Malazan will simply blow you away with its genius. You’re absolutely right about the meta-writing- that’s Erikson’s greatest strength, I think.
Also, though I haven’t personally read them yet, some of those plot holes you mention might be filled in the six companion novels by Ian Esslemont, Erikson’s co-creator of the Malazan world. My understanding is that they take place simultaneously with Erikson’s ten books.
But in the later books especially books 7, 8, 9, he introduced so many sub plots just so his theme gets across. He just dropped the ball regarding plotting here.
Spoilers for book 7-9 below
Did we really need the imperial police plot in such detail in book 7. Tehol was a shell of his previous self in the book and had very little to do. The karsa - Icarium plot was dragged out for so long. And the biggest offender redmask. The reason for his existence, just to explain the motives of kchain in dod. That could have been reduced a lot.
In dod, I understand the significance of the snake but did they really need sooooo muchhhh screen time. Introducing the assail as a big bad without devoting them enough time. I thought dod was the setup book but instead of flushing the assail characters we get pointless desert walks from gruntle and friends, pointless expansion on the bhargast ppl just so they can be killed by draconus entry, the imass and the kids walk. I could go on naming few more.
The matter of fact is Erikson totally botched up the plot side of things. It's decision he consciously made. I can't fault him for it. But when the previous books of 1-6 where philosophy and themes were accompanying the plot instead of overpowering, changing the course in the middle of a series is a bad idea.
arnold arun The Snake... oh my god the Snake. There are several bits in that where the narrator talks directly to the reader and basically says: ‘I dare you to skip ahead, coward, I know you want to! Well you can’t! WITNESS US!’ And I just... good lord. It’s a bold move Erikson to deliberately write a subplot so monotonous you FEEL like you’re with them trooping through the desert, and I get the idea, but c’mon. I don’t read to be bored
Your last sentence in particular I think sums it us. He writes in a way almost no one else is writing. I wouldn't say his books have plot holes but I have read through to Crippled God and I must say it does not feel cohesive to me. There are core plot lines but they are constantly diluted because as a reader I am not sure who to care about because threads and chaarcters I thought were interesting just got left as they were not the core ones and there were no sure way to know which ones he was going to go with.
He is extremely different which sets him apart. he is very good at the 'meta-writing' I think was your phrase. He is a giant in his own style of storytelling and he might be the only person in that particular field. It is genius I can see it well enough for that but like Daniel (at least in part) and many others I did not particularly enjoy a lot of it and so my desire to re-read it or finish the last book (Which is where I got up to before running out of will power) is hjust really low. I don't think that is necessarily a critisicm of the work. He is a very partuicular author for a very specific kind of reader and they will love his work and there is nothing else loke it out there for them so thank goodness it exists.
arnold arun You make some valid points, and I wouldn’t say that Erikson ties up every minor plot in a way that satisfied me, though I’m going to read the series again because I’m pretty sure I missed some things the first time. But overall, I found myself in a state of awe at the end of Malazan. Even things like the Snake added to the pathos of the story for me, so I didn’t experience it the way you seem to have. I think you’re right, though, that often Erikson writes with theme in mind rather than plot. Personally, I grew to like this, though it took me a while to adjust to it.
Malazan Book of the Fallen is my favorite fantasy of all time. But yes, it helps a lot to binge the series, and even more to read it multiple times.
It’s hugely rewarding to those who reread. And no, Erikson does not make it easy to follow. On the contrary, he expertly uses misdirection and mystery to create confusion for the first time reader. He’s not lazy; he works hard to hide the ball.
But it makes the series all the more rewarding for those who like riddles that have deeply hidden answers. You seem to suggest there are no answers, there is no design, there is no plot. That’s not true, it just seems that way if you can’t hold it all in your head because it’s your first time through and you take a month off between books.
The series is not for everyone, that’s for sure. But I do hope one day you will try to reread it. Because it’s like turning on a light in a dark room; suddenly you won’t be stumbling over the furniture and you will see the path ahead and it’s beautiful.
Also, you know how fans of The Wheel of a Time love to complain about it? That’s not common among Malazan fans because those who don’t love it just tend to give up, which is fine. There are lots of complaints about book one, Gardens of the Moon, but only a few about book ten, The Crippled God, just because if you aren’t into it chances are you won’t make it that far. (Although there are exceptions. Why anyone would read the entire series while not enjoying it is beyond me, but a few do.)
its definitely not for the fantasy wanka...
It really was amazing to me on re-read how much was there I just didn't grasp it the first time. It wasn't even so much him hiding the ball all the time. It was how subtle he was about there even being a ball. His essay where he deconstructs the scene at Pale just opened my eyes to how much he puts into every word on every page. Which is HEAVY and if you aren't ready to pick it up then you end up lost. It's not because he's not giving you the map it's just that you have to learn to read the map as you go. While I understand why Daniel feels like it's "restart, restart, restart" on re-read it really does hit you how much he set all that up. He didn't throw it at you from left field. It took reading it a second time to see that though. I think if Daniel read it a second time (especially if he did it uninterupted) he'd drop many of these complaints.
@KT Well, the complaints are valid if you aren’t ready to commit to bingeging a massive ten-book series not just once, but at least twice, preferably three or four times. Readers have to know what they are in for. Everyone who has read the series at least twice will say it’s worth it, but some people just aren’t ready to commit to that much reading, and that’s okay.
Oh no, DoD will break this man
Feels bad man, DoD is probably the weakest one. Albeit if that would encourage Daniel, the finale is probably the best book in the series. Let's hope he doesn't give up on Malazan by that point.
@@hopeprevails3213 I gotta agree
Been thinking the same thing.
Dust of Dreams breaks everyone... "even in defeat, they WON."
Cyrus the Great I actually found DoD to be quite good, though definitely lower on the ratings. I’d put it above GotM and DhG. It had some fantastic stuff but was bogged down for sure
Am I the only one here that thinks that all those "negatives" are some of the best parts, like doing the mental gymnastics, trying to play catch up with Erikson, trying to guess whats the next move and remembering hundreds of characters that you'll probably never hear from again?
If anyone manages to read Malazan in nine months, I'd be more amazed than I was at the ending of Toll the Hounds.
When I finally got past Gardens for the first time I read the rest in 7 months
I got through the audiobooks in 5 or 6 months I think, but i can't recommend going into the series like that to anyone. I missed a ton just by being inattentive for a few seconds, which had me scrambling through the wiki after every listening session. I'm rereading them now and taking my time, and I'm getting so much more for it.
I punched through most the books in about two weeks.
I took around 3.5 months.
Pace dropped every time a new cast of characters got introduced, or a new world. And, of course, you end up re-reading the convergence finales. So that you can picture it again in all its glory.
I plowed through all 10 in 10 months orso, but gawddamn it was an endurance trial lol and I had already read them. But also gawddamn I love that series
I was under the impression from a malazan booktuber that Malazan wasn't over yet. There are still more books according to a video from only six months ago.
Maybe he was talking a about another arch of malazan Stories though
The Main Series is done. There are other books in the Malazan world. But the series ended with Crippled God.
There are a few series by 2 different authors set in the Malazan world.
By Steven Erikson:
- The Malazan Book of the Fallen (complete, 10 books)
- The Kharkanas Trilogy (2 published, 1 forthcoming)
By Ian C. Esslemont:
- Novels of the Malazan Empire (complete, 6 books)
- Path to Ascendency (complete, 3 books)
He's going to publish the first book in a new series now instead of the third kharkanos book as the first two didn't perform as well.
Malazan is a world that goes forward and backward almost infinitely created by Eriksen and his friend Esslemont. The Malazan Book of the Fallen covers a specific period of time in that continuity. That main series is done. However it was clear right from book one that these two made a world and the book series came afterwards. They have split which bits they will each cover but they have a lot of lore plotted out for years, centuries into the past and future of Malazan.
I would imagine they will both be still writing series set there till they die regardless of what age that happens. They are historians, archeoligists, writers and world builders to the core.
As a fan of this series so far...yes. Malazan is like if Tolkien had decided to write about the whole Similrillion in a series of novels. The World IS the protagonist and antagonist of Malazan--not its characters. There has not been, not will there ever be, books like this. I wonder if he had written these as standalones if they would have worked out better. He tries to include and think about way too much, so as you said, you live for the epic drama of each book. I wonder how how his later series has turned out and how Esselmont differs in his writing style than Erickson.
Pros: Esslemont's books accomplish having the same tone and atmosphere as Erikson's. They also have a similar humor, but the authors are best friends and usually having a shared sense of humor goes with that. He also focuses on individual description for characters and places (but not to a Jordon level), and that goes with how he's better at painting a clearer picture of the different cultures that make up the Malazan Empire's home continent that aren't as obvious as say the Wickans. And his novels give a sense of mystery to how the average person views sorcery, the deeper history, and the more fantastical elements of their world. In Erikson's books, it seems like the elder races' history, the warrens, etc is just common knowledge. That said, we also don't live in a world where there's not just records, but individuals that were around a hundred thousand years ago or more.
*
Cons: Esslemont's prose is not up to par to Erikson's. He's also far more blunt and even sloppy in conveying his books' themes and philosophy. This goes with making his writing less emotionally charged, which has left me less caught up in his contributions than I did with Erikson's. However, he gets better with every book I've read so far. Though keep in mind there's a weird disconnect in terms of style between "Night of Knives" and "Return of the Crimson Guard". When Esselmont wrote RotCG I think he was trying to match the scope and structure of Books of the Fallen while NoK was more his own way of writing (but the latter was also originally written even before "Gardens of the Moon").
"nor will there ever be"... idk about that, fantasy is a weird genre, maybe there won't be for a long time but I wouldn't be surprised if something even more astonishing popped up in 30 years or something.
I actually greatly disliked Esslemont's books, for various reasons. I find his plotting to be sloppy, his characters generally uninteresting, and the only appeal for me was the idea of someone writing the story plots that the main Malazan series had to drop.
In general, I consider them serviceable, but not books that got me reading past the first couple.
Essamont books are good not bad. His plots are tight and he fleshes out the characters. His books also enhances both the world and story. His Path to Ascendancy prequel series is really good. Also Orb Spectre Throne, Stoneweilder and Blood and Bone are amonge his best works. His prose is better in PtA and the later novels of malazan empire series.
Reading through the comments section of this video I don't think I'm the only one that is intimated by Malazan.
You are ofcourse entitled to have your wrong oppinion
Other than: shallow, callow, uneducated, unread; overly impressed with self identified intellect.. the kid´s alright as a reviewer...but WOT? best ever?...seriously...?
@@kaialoha Dang, that review really hurt your feeling huh?
@@kaialoha how did daniel hurt you
Why are Malazan fans obnoxious losers lmao
@@kaialoha WOT is YA.
Malazan is mos def an acquired taste. I've read each book once and am thinking at a re-read of the series. But going in to each book i realize the challenge I am in for, and enjoy it for what it is. And there is no way you can binge this series without total burnout. One book a month at the most. But as a fellow writer and someone who knows Erikson personally, my God is his world building OFF THE CHARTS. It is quite literally astonishing cuz i know the hard work and talent it takes. His prose is next level too
Agreed. He is almost unique in what he has done with MBOTF. Not everyone can engage with it a point you address but that does not detract from what he is as a writer and worldbuilder. I personally struggled with this series but I can see that he has done a masterwork even so.
in my dreams you would help facilitate an interview between Daniel and Erikson. I would pay real actual dollars for this.
I've read 2 a month and the only reason I stopped after book 8 was because the final 2 books aren't translated to German yet. So, I disagree. I loved throwing myself completely in this world. I somehow knew that Daniel wouldn't like 7 and 8 though. Personally, I love them and even though TtH gets a lot of criticism, I loved it from start to finish.
I read them all in one month
I find it impossible (as a person who does not take notes when reading, ever) to have pauses between books. To me it feels like an absolute must to go all out, while everything is still as fresh in your head as it can be, otherwise I, personally, would feel lost if i take a break from it. Given the fact I do enjoy many parts of it, this is the best method, for me personally to enjoy it to the fullest, although fighting the burnout has never been more real :)
How I describe it to my friends is that going slow with this series is like taking a test-run and then the 1st or even more likely the 2nd re-read will be the point where you can actually understand and enjoy what's going on.
If you are expecting that by the end of main series all your questions will be answered and all plot threads will be tied, You will be sorely disappointed. Erickson said long time ago that there will be many unanswered questions because he simply feels that is kinda realistic thing . One thing that might help new readers of Malazan is to realize that main character of this series is world itself. Other characters are just side characters.Hope this helps at least a bit xD
it's so strange hearing from the readers that feel as you do, for me the plotlines are crystal clear. but then again i know how it ends and how stuff connects. however how you find his characters weak is simply a mystery to me, i could tell you the motivations of every single character - to me they are among the most brilliant in all of litterature.
but your right, the books where never written for the mass market but because that is the story he wanted to tell.
Indeed. Its a history of a vast period of a world brilliantly told from the POV of army grunts; gods; Heroes; grunt mages ( love this one..); High Mages; Undead; Ghosts; Emperors; Super Ninjas; Immortals; Demons; lovers; Redeemers; et al...all in deep very insightful details with observations I frequently have to pause to reread. Makes Tolkein characters look cardboard. Fookn genius that Erikson...
I absolutely agree, I think these characters are just so well done.
If the characters are aliens you mean.
So far for me, the characters are what humans would look like if they were not bound to the strictures of human bodies, or minds. Like what would happen if you threw a human consciousness into a machine facsimile, and began to change the parameters of the body, and indeed capacity of the mind over time, and then added in fucking random ass thought loops, and annoying traits. (And also inexplicable genius or insight.)
Fuck me listening to every unbound creature in this world spiral into stupid logic restrictions that just don’t exist in that world, or shouldn’t exist, has got to be one of the most tiring experiences have had to suffer through to get to the fantastic lore. And there is at least one boring annoying thought spiral character in each book. As bad as Perrin Aybara, in his self pity chapters. God. Felisin. Crokus. Paran. They all have these just terribly tedious spans were we have to listen to them moan and bitch on, and on, and on.
Plus random unearned nobility. Characters just suddenly displaying altruistic concepts that really don’t seem to have any founding in the world at all.
I love the series so far. But it is hard to digest through its density, and diffuse plot, and it’s reliance on the reader to trust every boring restart. Every span of chapters where you have no fucking clue what they are talking about. That Erickson will eventually kill or change the crap character, and explain the world.
/rant
@@chickenmonger123 "And then added in fucking random ass thought loops, and annoying traits. (And also inexplicable genius or insight.)" You just legitimately characterized most waking moments of every human being that ever lived. That's literally all that we are, plus the struggle to match up with hand-me-down insights which have either served our own purposes or that we've been pressured/guilt-tripped into subscribing to. Take away those things, and there just isn't much left if we're honest with ourselves. I see similar criticisms of the outward behavior loops portrayed in Jordan's series. I want to ask those people: "Have you ever been around a teenager when one of them wasn't putting on a show for you? Because they don't do much else." In the words of Robert Heinlein: Humans aren't rational beings, they're *rationalizing* beings. We are born into one archetype of a limited set. Deviating from it is stressful in the moment, and reprogramming from it is a monumental act of will and logistics.
I totally agree about the random unearned nobility, outside of the possibility that it could and sometimes was characterized in the books as a foundation for hubris. I decided just to take it as the optimism for humanity Erikson may have allowed to bleed through his fingers. There was one plotline that irritated the living hell out of me and still does to this day: The Snake and the Santa Claus soldiers. A bunch of worn down to death slogging grunts facing a life or death day to day survival march leading up to a massive confrontation they probably knew would out-do every apocalypse conflict they've ever heard of is at best an awkward place to plug that in. I'd say that stranger things have happened, but they haven't in recorded history that I'm aware of.
What I noticed on a re-read is that all that "he drops you in" stuff is overblown. He almost always has introduced things before he then brings them to the page to focus on them. Many times he does so multiple times. There is a burden on the reader to actually remember it.
Man Erikson is like an alien being writing a fantasy series. Listening to people try to talk about it is like the conspiracy meme from always sunny
Still the best series ever written and I'm right and you're wrong 😂. Nah, those are very fair criticisms. Erikson was writing against everything conventional in storytelling, including the idea of an overall story arc, much as our lives are not clear cut paths. That said he did drop the ball in some places and that's why this series isn't for everyone. Thanks for giving the book series I love most some love!
I absolutely agree that "Erikson was writing against everything conventional in storytelling, " I also agree he did a masterful job. Just because I didn't enjoy it as much as I feel it deserves does not take away from the fact is a major player in a writing style that few have even touched never mind mastered. I am glad MBOTF exists even though I prefer many other series to it. I learned something about writing and about myself (Specifically my tastes and capactities) reading it.
I think your comment is a very good one. It is clear useful and balanced even on something you clearly loved.
Are you reading the Novels of the Malazan Empire simultaneously with Malazan Book of the Fallen?
The books are meant in many cases to be read together. Many plot threads that start in one author's works end in the other's.
For example: I would read Night of Knives prior to The Bonehunters. I would read Return of the Crimson Guard after The Bonehunters. Return of the Crimson Guard is almost a sequel to The Bonehunters in terms of its storyline, and it wraps up a few things nicely that don't really get addressed in Reaper's Gale.
I would read Stonewielder either before Reaper's Gale and after ROTCG, or after Reaper's Gale but before Toll the Hounds. I would read Orb Sceptre Throne after Toll the Hounds. You COULD read Orb Sceptre Throne after Dust of Dreams, but Dust of Dreams and The Crippled God are basically one giant book, so I don't like breaking those two up. I would finish the series with Blood and Bone, and Assail.
In either case, before you start Dust of Dreams, I would read Night of Knives, Return of the Crimson Guard, Stonewielder, and Orb Sceptre Throne.
This is the order I read the series in:
1) Gardens of the Moon (SE)
2) Deadhouse Gates (SE)
3) Memories of Ice (SE)
4) House of Chains (SE)
5) Midnight Tides (SE)
6) Night of Knives (ICE)
7) The Bonehunters (SE)
8) Return of the Crimson Guard (ICE)
9) Reaper's Gale (SE)
10) Stonewielder (ICE)
11) Toll the Hounds (SE)
12) Orb Sceptre Throne (ICE)
13) Dust of Dreams (SE)
14) The Crippled God (SE)
15) Blood and Bone (ICE)
16) Assail (ICE)
Adding 6 more books makes reading the series even more challenging, but the two authors designed the world together. Their works are meant to go back and forth. Erikson himself states in the introduction to Night of Knives that "To this day, we continue to work on the Malazan world's history, poring over its details, confirming the sequence of events, discussing the themes, subtext, and ensuring the consistency of crossover characters."
Try reading some of the ICE novels, and some of your issues with the series may be assuaged.
Thats the first time i saw anyone mention that.Thanks for this info i will combine the two when im gonna start malazan
Do the way you read malazan is the optimal order?
@@derickkaz6096 The list he posted is definitely the best reading order.
@@derickkaz6096 Just jumping in here to confirm that yes, it is widely agreed upon that the order suggested above is the optimal "Full read" order. There are a few variations, but the broad strokes are almost exactly the same.
That being said, reading the Esslemont books in between can be a bit jarring for reasons that are entirely unrelated to the actual story and have a lot to do with prose quality. Jumping back and forth from Erikson to Esslemont can be a bit of a struggle, especially if a big part of why you read Malazan ends up being Erikson's prose, like it does for some of us. Don't let this discourage you though, in my opinion the ULTIMATE READ is in fact the one with the books interspersed. And it is worth it, just a large time investment.
Nice,thank you for your input everyone
Of the novels of the malazan empire I've only read Night of Knives - I do remember that its a much faster paced book and to me, was a nice Palette cleanser. I've only read upto Reaper's Gale - because Toll the hounds hadn't been published - and I got distracted waiting. When I get back to rereading I will take note of this list :)
After watching the whole video: You will have the same complaints about books 9 and 10, and You will struggle reading large parts of them. (they are both better to read than book 8 tho)
I understand where You come from, but personally i love the things that You said You don't like about the series.
I'm still gonna give a thumbs up to this video :)
My main complaint about WoT was all the repetitive explaining throughout the books. Malazan remedied that complaint for me, but it cranked the dial to 1000 where almost nothing is explained, and you have to put it all together yourself. I don't mind flipping through the wiki every 50 or so pages though.
@@jakebibb7109 I have a 96 pages A3 format notebook in which i keep my own notes :)
Already filled over 60% of it :)
My favorite book in the sequence is toll of the hounds. And its not even close
Disagree. Book 8 is easily my favorite of the series
I have been reading Malazan for years now and I love World History and Archeology this is the angle I approach the books from, you're not going to get all the answers or full conclusions, and you're not going to know the full thoughts of the characters. You will get conflicting points of views within the series, just like history is written. If you approach it as a well written history book of a world and it's cultures and not a typical, linear novel with all the character thought, motivations laid out I think you will get more out of it. There are of course problems, in the series, anything of this scope and size will have them, but I have took them in stride and as whole I am obsessed with the world and I am now reading them in chronological order, which I only recommend if you have read it in publishing order first. You will have a lot spoiled otherwise. Love your channel too, just subscribed.
For anyone interested in the series, but also intimitading nature, I strongly encourage you to try the Tor reread alongside. There is a chapter summary for every scene (if needed), but more importantly commentary of a first time reader and a rereader, that greatly increased my enjoyment of the series!
From what he's said here, it doesn't seem for me. But I never say never. If I did, I would try this route, so thanks.
Thank you.
10 very big books podcast is also doing a read along where they discuss a few chapters per episode! I believe they just started House of Chains (book 4). They’ve also featured Mr. Erikson on at least two episodes so far, where he discusses his process of writing, and the events of the book they just finished. It’s really interesting stuff!!
When I read the first book, I had no idea what was going on or how the scenes I read were connected, but the scenes themselves were so enthralling.. or as you said... indulgent. The danger and menace was so real and substantial. He does the slowburn really well. It's almost like every chapter is its own book, with some chapters being standalone or barely relating to other chapters.
For example, Kruppe's first scene was extremely confusing, so to enjoy it, I had to try not to make sense of it and just let the words on the page make a picture/movie in my mind. Going through every scene that involved Kruppe really was rewarding because Kruppe's character slowly gets built up and my opinion of him slowly changes.
The Malazan series takes effort to read, that's for sure, and I think it's why I also put it down for a month or more at a time to take a break. It's heavy both mentally and sometimes emotionally. Lots of dark, heavy stuff.. and having to focus on ignoring the plot can be tiring.
I've read the whole series, and will probably do a re-read with Mikes Book Reviews next year, but I can't disagree with anything you said. It is both an extremely fun series and frustrating series at the same time. I'm hoping with the re-read I pick up on a lot of the things I missed the first time around. Maybe I should even take notes this time.
On one hand, I completely agree. On the other hand, I'm a close-minded fanboy of the series. I'm torn! Nyahaha!
You can agree he has a point but disagree that those points outweigh the excellence of the series or how much you enjoyed it. Tolkien (Despite the incredible love heaped upon him) were he to write today would be torn apart by you tuber book critics... well he wouldn't get published. Can you imagine justifying Tom Bombadil and the Old Forest adventure or the poem on the ent wives to a modern editor?
The point is something that defies writing convention are just spectactular for their audience and burn a new path in how we read and what we read. SE has done a master work, does it work for everyone ... no. Yet it is the very things that make it a slog and hard to finish for some, that make it all the more unique and worth reading for those who are looking for something 'counter-meta'.
You my friend sound like someone who loved that extremely different style but you can see why others struggled with it. You are not torn you are just cut from a different cloth and can see all the more clearly for it.
@@Trisjack20 but the thing is I not only agree that he has a point. I agree with his points exactly. It's just that I'm in denial. Haha!
@@ssejllenrad561 :) At least you've been able to enjoy it... flaws and all. To be honest there is not any other series like it. I got to part way through Crippled God before I ran out os steam and I have to say there are some sequences that are just mind blowingly well written.
Yet in the end these points Daniel makes are a lot of what in the end left me in a DNF state.
So maybe being in a bit of denial is not so bad especially if you can accept the facts as other's see them at the same time :)
Let's not get started on Karkanas...
I've really liked the novels Esslemont has put out the past 5-6 years, he improves every time
Most malazan fans are closed minded lol
I don't understand how you can call the Malazan characters, even the super powerful anything but magnificently fleshed out and human. Yeah, he doesn't give them internal monologues to nearly the same extent as many of his peers but that's 100% a deliberate stylistic choice. He gives us their actions and their words and lets us infer from that the same way we might if we were actually interacting with another human being because the entire series is built on Erikson's philosophies about empathy and compassion. It's just another way of showing over telling. He doesn't build characters by telling the reader exactly what they think so much as he lets the reader infer from the subtext of what the characters do and say. Spoilers for Memories of Ice below**
To look specifically at some of the super-powerful characters go back to MoI and look at the dialogue between Rake and Envy after Black Coral. It's been a while but Rake either implies or outright says if he'd known Envy had been nearby he would have dropped Moonspawn completely on the city. The comedy of a millennia-old godlike figure being petulant towards his ex aside, it's one among many pieces of humanizing dialogue for Rake throughout the series. It's not that his characters aren't as fleshed out as other authors, it's just that (like his worldbuilding) he's not going to hold our hand.
That said, I agree with most of your criticisms even though I grew to like his indulgence later it was still hard to get as invested, though it's generally more important than you think it will be.
I still love your stuff even if we disagree on my favorite series. I plan on reading yours soon.
"It doesn't feel like there is a major plot, more like a sort of events".
Boy, I wonder how's the review of book 10 gonna be like.
I get your criticism, and I do feel some of it is justified. I just don't agree with calling Erikson a "flawed writer", because he has stated multiple times in interviews that he intentionally wrote the series against the main tropes and elements of "standard fantasy", so trying to judge the man based on these standards is the equivalent of judging a fish for its biking skills. Malazan is something you take based on the rules it sets for itself, and, on that sense, I wouldn't go as far as to say that Erikson is unable to write in accord to "regular fantasy".
On another hand, if you haven't really grasped what Toll the Hounds is about, you'll suffer through books 9 and 10, because it's where everything (and I do mean EVERYTHING) comes together, Toll the Hounds being what SE called the "cypher" to the series.
Prep those notes and pray to the Queen of Dreams 'cause stuff is about to get brutal.
THIS. Well-stated.
I don't know, I think having a satisfying plot arc isn't a fantasy element as much as it is part of good storytelling. The fact that so. many. readers. quit this series is a testament to there being something fundamentally wrong with how its written. I get why it has such a cult following, but I don't think consciously having a disjointed plot is a good decision for an author. I suspect it's like a chef plopping food in front of you, you tasting it, disliking it, and then the chef tells you that the food is good and he chose to make it bland or whatever. You don't need to be a chef to know bad food, and you don't need to be an author to recognize flawed storytelling. Feels like an emperor's new clothes moment.
@@Paininabox1325 Have you read it? I have. And what I'm saying is that the "disjointed plot" comes together and pays off. I believe Daniel himself has stated before that, although the books are difficult, there is payoff. With the series as a whole it is like that too.
I'm not overlooking or saying that it doesn't seem like the plot is disjointed by this point. It does. What I'm saying is that you've gotta go through the end to realize that everything was building up to something waaaay bigger than anything you might have expected.
On that sense, it boils down to a matter of taste, and a matter of more and more of current fantasy being almost following a formulae (especially after Robert Jordan, Martin, Sanderson etc.).
One example of a rule that is broken by Erikson is that some of the character arcs are incomplete. He has stated before that this was intentional, because life is not like that.
On that sense, saying it's bad because it doesn't follow standard writing, or even because of an impression that's real now, but that proves itself wrong later, doesn't seem like the way to go. I'd call it a rushed judgement, but alas.
@@JoaoSalvatico You're allowed to like it, I'm not saying you shouldn't. However, in other stories where revelations at the end recontextualize and change the interpretation of everything before it, there's still good plotting to follow to get to that conclusion. Fight Club, for example, was intriguing before the end and after the end, it's like two movies in one. Or, The Sixth Sense, engrossing all throughout. Job #1 of the author is to get people to turn page, and Erikson chooses to let a large chunk of people fall off the wagon to tell the story he chose to tell, and I don't think it's a good choice, especially considering that it could be plotted better and still had his revelations; it's not a zero sum game.
I respect him for being conscious of the choices he made, which is why I don't think he's a bad writer; he told a novel story and made choices that hurt the storytelling.
As someone crazy enough to have read through the 3.5 million words of Malazan twice over, I guess we just have different tastes. Reaper's Gale in particular is often named one of the best of the series. Not that your criticisms are wrong, I definitely felt them second time through. I guess I don't feel they detract as much from the grand, operatic moments that the series offers. I've read both Book Of The Ancestor and Lightbringer this year based on your recommendations, and whilst they were mostly enjoyable, I'm not sure how they even remotely compare to the richness of theme and prose of something like Malazan or Kingkiller.
Good point. I've read several of Sanderson's series and the first of Stormlight, and they're not much more than kiddie comics without pictures. And that may be an insult to some kids' comics that I remember; the ones that had hidden adult themes and worldly situations buried as subtext that only come through when revisited much later. There's nothing complicated enough to be buried as subtext in Stormlight. It's explicit value-signaling, as healthy as some of those values may be.
At the risk of coming out as all high and mighty, I think people shouldn't approach the storytelling as you do with a normal genre-fiction series, it just doesn't follow the current typical story structure that is in vogue in Western storytelling at the moment. Being someone who was practically bred with latin-american literary classics that were packed with inner monologue, complex prose, and lacķing when it came to plot and story structure; Erikson's style really resonated with me. And as you said, he is aware of it and doesn't giva a f* for not following the same trend, and I respect him all the more because of it. One of my favorite authors alongside R. Scott Bakker.
Also...potsherds, potsherds everywhere
Fraser “potsherds, potsherds everywhere” is unironically the best way to read Erikson’s books. Quite a lot of the story is putting together disparate fragments that Erikson leaves lying around, which is why so many people are disappointed when they read it as a traditional fantasy epic.
GOCRAZY3 I had not thought of it that way. Very good point.
“Malazan is a series built on events,” Daniel Greene grunted.
I'm starting to think homie is a surface level reader. Might be a fantasy nerd but he is missing a lot of the deeper writing fundamentals. Seems like to him, everything must be in YA "hold your hand" "show don't tell" otherwise it just wooshes over him.
Daniel Greene. Keep in mind how you feel about reading WoT a second, third, or fourth time. I essentially started out with WoT, probably before you were born or could read. WoT was, and is a fantastic series with all of the faults that people describe today. Books 6-8 (if memory serves) are rough reads IF you don't know how to read Jordan. Malazan is a different type of slog. It's extremely difficult to grasp at first, and even difficult to fully grasp the first time through the series. Much like how Wot reveals so much more on a second read, Malazan reveals exponentially more than Wot ever did on repeated reads. Trust the fans. WoT will always hold a place in my heart, a place in my top 2 list. Malazan once finished and read again is by far the most satisfying fantasy series I ever read. That's the trick though, reading it again. It's impossible to appreciate Malazan without a second read. This could be a fault by some standards, but it is not by mine. I struggled with it the first time around. Still, I read it again. After reading it a second time, I HAD to read it a third time. It is probably the most difficult fantasy series to get into, but it is the most rewarding.
I love these books and I can't wait to hear your thoughts on the end of the series.
Also have you ever looked into Ian C Esslemont's books? I'm not gonna lie I started his series thinking I was going to hate it. Mostly because it took me so long to get through Erikson's books and I had become so familiar with his writing, but now that I have finished the last book of his series I can say I have two authors that I absolutely love.
I'm francophone (from Montreal, Quebec, Canada) and learnt English as an adult. My friend had this great library and for years I wanted to read Malazan, and he kept saying "You're not ready." He was so right! XD Eventually I picked it up, and finishing that series (in my second language!) is the biggest reading accomplishment I've ever had.
What you explain here makes so much sense! It's really all about the worldbuilding, the spectacular events (convergence, in every freaking book lol) and certain characters, but the plots keep losing their momentum and it does feel like we're trudging through some parts.
It's one of my favorite series but I absolutely agree with everything you're voicing about it so far. Hearing you say it's not an easy read makes me feel like it was even more of an accomplishment for me to read them all
I always wonder how it is for a native english reader... english is my third language (1st german, 2nd russian, 4th french) and how that influences my perception of the books.
You've summed up nicely how I feel about the Malazan series.
Without spoiling, there are a few plot lines that remain unresolved after TCG (although TCG does do an incredible job of tying up so much in a satisfying way). When Steven Erikson was asked about it, he implied he would be exploring them more in his upcoming "Witness" trilogy.
I will also say that your experience has probably been made much worse because youre a booktuber whos juggling Malazan with so many other books and series. I didnt necessarily "binge" the series but I did keep focus and momentum while reading it and I didnt struggle much with understanding everything. In fact I kind of enjoy slowly piecing things together like its a great jigsaw puzzle.
10 very big books is a malazan read through podcast. Deffo worth a listen for new Malazan readers
holy crap I didn't know this was a thing and I'm listening to it now and it's amazing, thanks for the heads up!
@@AstromarineCorpseThey're also doing interviews with Erikson after every book
Another thing to consider is that Erikson is an anthropologist. As such, you mentioned his his worldbuilding which is on a unprecedented scale, which is true. Just as true is that unlike a regular fantasy series where every event, character and storyline factors into the epic conclusion, Erikson is more willing to allow his world to be a world. Not everything in England affects America, not everything in Colorado affects Texas. There are certainly events that send ripples out because of how huge they are, but not every storyline gets resolved at the end of book 10 because not every story gets resolved in real life. Essselmont resolves some of this, his series of six side novels touch on and clean up some of the orphaned storylines. Erikson and Essselmont have both written prequel series, one about dancer and one about rake. Needless to say, the world of malazan is much bigger than the story it tries to tell in the ten massive books it offers. It is more similar to Tolkien in that regard than it would care to admit.
From what I saw, it's quite difficult to engage in critical conversation about Malazan, because on hand you have people who tried reading it, but gave up and have nothing to say about it or just flat-out dismiss it. On the other hand, you have people who actually read it and who are, logically, always die-hard Erikson's fans (there doesn't seem to be any other variety of his fan). And his fans hold Malazan in such high esteem that it's impossible to have a dialogue with them - they will insists that every bug is actually a feature, that any objection you raise is actually just result of you not being accustomed to Erikson's style. It's tremendously frustrating.
100% agreed. The sheer scope of the world and the moments Steven delivers without fail are unmatched and are what keep me coming back to eventually finish the series. Lol I've been reading Mbotf since 2014. I'm only about to get into Toll the Hounds at some point, but reading this series is a mammoth task each time.
Now imagine how good they are rereading them.
It all comes together. You’ll see. But your criticisms are valid as hell, especially when compared with fantasy norms and traditions
He wrote against the norms which is amazing. I read right up into Crippled God and I still don't think it really comes together, but then again neither has history in the real world. What Eriksen seems to do brilliantly is make his books feel real and gritty and messed up... like real life. unfortunately it isn't why I read fantasy... I get enough of that in real life :) So I prefer other writers. Does not mean I do not respect to the highest degree how imaginative, inventive, clever and well crafted the series is. Unfortunately for me it seems the norms are the norms for a reason. They pay off in a way MBOTF just never did, which sapped my resolve and interest. I gave it a propper go only to get half way through Crippled God and run out of will power to push on.
Trisjack20 I could see it not maintaining your interest, but how did it take you 9 books to figure that out? If I had made it to the final book, especially half-way through, I would have finished it.
Trisjack20 I highly suggest completing it. It really does come together.
@@dark_ones_taint5993 I am sure it does. I apologise if I came across at it was not good enough to finish it was. I just need to summon up the energy to engage with it again when sadly (and I mean that genuinely) I do not care very much about his characters and story any more. I know that is a sad condemnation of me as a reader and when I read his preface to GOTM I thought this is the kind of book for me. deep, loads of world building history complex etc. Yet in the end it turns out I am more of a typical reader than I thought. His far reaching unique style just ended up losing my interest and I couldn't maintain any real interest in the final destination and outcomes for the characters. I want to emphasise again though that I don't think this is a condemnation of SE. He wrote what he wrote and in the style he did on purpose and did it really well. I just enjoy so much other work so much more. For me reading is imaginative, inspiring, uplifting, escapist. MBOTF just was not providing me with that.
So I have to persuade myself to read it for the literally lesson it is and to enjoy his sheer skill and scope not for enjoyment. Sadly I am a little lazy and a little busy and when I think I have two hours reading time finally and I see Crippled God sitting there and next to it something more standardly cohesive and fulfilling like Eddings, Jordan, Sanderson, Prachett, Weeks or Lawrence its hard to justify not reading them just to get the lessons of reading Crippled God.
I will try though mate. I got through 9 and half books in the end I might just muscle through it out of grit and I am sure I will learn a lot about the trade in doing so and his scenes are masterfully put together. Some of his battle sequences and philosophy belong in text books they are so effective.
Sorry I have rambled as is my wont. Thank you for your encouragement and when I do read it I will raise a silent salute to you for the invite to try again. Probably not soon though.
Trisjack20 you’re good! And there’s nothing wrong with having preferences, I just firmly believe the ending was much more “typical” fantasy than the previous books and events would have one think. I think and hope you’ll be satisfied with it.
I appreciate you Daniel, but I feel as though this video sort of shows many of what I personally believe are your critical blindspots. At 3:50 kinda shows it in particular. This hyper focus on plot can miss the point of literature that doesn't follow that reasoning. I think one of the points of the stories and also the book's form is to ask the question(among others) "what is the point of satisfaction and fulfillment in a narrative?"
I know this is mostly just a preference thing, b I just wish you had a wider grasp on this type of literary styling and I think you'd have a much nicer appreciation for what Erickson is trying to do. Especially considering what he's doing as an author could be argued is not particularly unique and has been done even better by other writers.
dalton fordyce I’m curious, what do you think he’s trying to do and which authors do you think have done it better?
@@GOCRAZY3 threecrowsmagazine.com/interview-with-steven-erikson/
Although this interview is about his Sci-Fi book Rejoice I think the first answer gives clues as to how he thinks about the themes of Malazan. Another commenter mentioned Erickson's postmodernist and deconstructionist motivations, which I believe comes through in the way Erickson uses world building conventions and the fogginess of anthropology as a way of subverting standard epic fantasy expectations when it comes to the purpose of world building in the first place. The world building in malazan is almost more expressionistic than purely communicative, if that makes any sense?
In terms of fantasy authors who have done this type of literary genre flip, I'm not super sure because I'm not yet well read in the genre. I think Jemisen and Pratchett come close. But in other genres, I think the way Thomas Pynchon manipulates the detective genre in Inherent Vice and the Sci-Fi genre in Gravity's Rainbow is particularly interesting. Also the way Cormac McCarthy has been able to write Western novels and Post-Apocalyptic novels in ways that read more as expressions of both love and hell rather than just adventure. I don't think Erickson goes so far with being expressionistic and deconstructionist as those two writers, Erickson has a much lower focus on prose for example, but I do put them in my same mental space personally.
I mean, plot and characters are kind of the fundamental building blocks of story telling, and if someone doesn't think an author has done a good job portraying those aspects of a story, then that is a legitimate complaint, not a "critical blindspot".
@@johncanuck2744 Yeah, I understand it fills a niche for people, but it seems like a chef plopping food in front of you, you tasting it, disliking it, and then the chef tells you that the food is good and he chose to make it bland or whatever. You don't need to be a chef to know bad food, and you don't need to be an author to recognize flawed storytelling. Feels like an emperor's new clothes moment.
@@johncanuck2744 Plot, character, theme and setting, my friend, are the most important parts of the story. Erikson focuses heavily on the latter two and less on the former and there's nothing wrong with that, I don't see it as criticism. Especially when an author such as Sanderson is so popular, but he focuses way too heavily on setting and plot and not nearly as much on characters or themes. It's baffling, honestly. But each to their own, I guess.
Here's the things I've seen turn people off from Malazan:
1. There is no protagonist. No ''main guy'' to root for, no ''Bilbo'' to bring the ring to Mordor, etc.
2. It is non-sequential, no linear story, goes back and forth constantly
3. Gigantic cast of characters
4. Lots of those characters are pieces of shit and near villains
5. Size, not is only each book a door-stopper, but they are also exceptionally dense. Malazan wastes no time, every sentence serves a purpose
6. The violence, some people just don't enjoy reading about civilian massacres, corpse monuments, mass rapes, gore, etc
7. The lore is enormous and cleverly hidden. You don't get exposition dumps, you have to find about it by yourself from unreliable narrators
8. And of course, the fact that Deadhouse Gates feels like a completely different story with new characters, tends to turn off readers that just came from Gardens
It should be noted that all these things are on purpose. Erikson writes it like this because he likes it like this, and he's the best at doing it.
Everything gets better when you re-read the books.
My serious suggestion; don’t wait, reread each book as you go along. It makes such a difference.
@@timswabb I'd advise against this personally, because I feel seeing the events unfold in future books, then seeing the foreshadowing and set up once you reread is more satisfying.
@ Shawn Boudreau You can still do that on the third and fourth reread!
@@timswabb I would finish the main series up before starting a re-read.
Perhaps the Esslemont books, or at least The Crimson Guard.
@Silas Clayton Well, rereading each book worked for me. I loved it.
I absolutely agree with the desert/oasis analogy. There are such vast amounts of nothing that when something does happen it's an event. The characters all seem to blend together (except for, say, Kruppe) and I don't really notice when one of them is missing (or dead). The pacing is terrible, with story threads being ignored for hundreds of pages then showing up just as you've forgotten when they left off. These books feel like background noise.
I started reading Malazan before book 4, then did a reread for 5, 7 and 9 :) Love the series and really do feel it only gets better the second time.
Based on this description, which is exactly how I've felt about book 1, I will not continue this series. Thank you!
I've tried to read Malazan twice: once 12ish years ago, and then again last year. I had the same result both times: I read book 1 and don't enjoy much of it (Tattersail and Kruppe are about all), but I'm intrigued by the worldbuilding and as a long time fantasy reader am willing to get through a full book of set up to get into a story, no problem. Then I start book 2 . . . and it's just more of the same. As book 2 goes on, there's a voice in my head that pops up every now and then. "Why the fuck am I reading this?" it says. About halfway through book 2, that voice gets louder than the voice reading the story, and I put it all down and walk away to non-masochistic fantasy.
This described my experience although I didn't even get through book 1. I don't know why, sometimes I can get through a lot of slog when I'm promised that it will pay off finally, but sometimes I just can't put up with it.
Well the second book really gets it together after the half point. When Duiker meets up with Coltaine, it's spectacular.
I read the 10 main books by Erikson, and I seriously can't understand why some people insist on forcing it on themselves if they aren't enjoying it, sometimes reading several thousand pages before giving up. I always tell people the same: they shouldn't expect Erikson flaws to magically vanish, or his style to change. If you suffered reading the first books chances are the rest of the series will be painful to read.
And Erikson will basically keep introducing new things all along the series, so don't expect the setup to end any time soon.
What I'm saying is read what you enjoy, time is too precious to waste. This is definitely not for everyone.
Borja Yup! I’m a huge Wheel of Time fanatic, but I’d say the same to people who are still struggling to get into that series after the first book or two. To each their own: read what you enjoy.
THIS!!!!!!
Kinda liked book 1 and wrestled through book 2.
Started book 3 and was like what the F is happening here...
One of these days....
I don’t know where you saw that the ending is unsatisfying, but the point of it is to wrap up the main plot (i.e. the crippled god) and a handful of other side plots tangentially related to the CG. Of course ALL of the ends won’t be tied but there are other books for that and how the main plot is resolved is, imo, very good and satisfying.
Malazan becomes immensely more enjoyable on rereads, because that's when you start to notice the tiny hints he left over all the books, foreshadowing or hinting at events that will come way, way down the line. It is a huge connected plot in my humble opinion, not just events.
I think a lot of people switch off during reads because they either move too quickly in not playing out the narrative cadence of the characters, or they just don't like/can't fathom/deny the importance of the topics at hand. Whenever I used to hear somebody characterize Sanderson's magic system as "developed", "advanced", or "imaginative", that would send up some flags, except that I've learned by now after watching a bunch of fantasy critic videos to see earlier signs.
I just finished Reaper's Gale and this is a wonderfully worded criticism, which really hits where I struggle with things at this point. The good moments are wonderful and have kept me going, but it has begun to wear on me trying to keep track of everything previously and then making myself care even one iota about new information/side story lines.
You do realize that there’s another author, and his books also tie in with Erikson’s right? I get some of your complaints, (except for how you feel about the characters) but I feel like you’re approaching this series with the wrong mindset. Instead of trying to “understand” everything that’s happening, just ride it out and let the realizations kick in when Erikson is ready for them. I believe this series is meant to be more of a historical record of an era.
“I believe this series is meant to be more of a historical record of an era”
YES.
it is, exactly why Erikson stated himself not all plots will just be resolved at one point in time, history goes on - always.
Toll the Hounds eschews major plot movement in favor of exploring the themes in greater depth and on that level it works quite well. I understand why it's not for everybody but imo it's the best written Malazan book (plenty of critics have said the same thing).
Toll the Hounds is so much "a plea for compassion." Just wait for the 4th wall break of Dust of Dreams "if you look away, I name you a coward."
Malazan is Malazan. Its the grown up in the fantasy room that's not trying to impress you. He's not trying to come and sit next to you, you got to go and sit next to him.
I went and sat next to him. He said nothing I didn't already know and I soon found him the most boring person at the party so went looking for more interesting companionship.
Its funny how personal taste matters, I have always found the slong in wheel of time to be worse, and would have been my "fail a bet series".
Erickson is an archeologist so he approaches the series like how human history was. Poeple pop in and out of being key figures in how human history was shaped, and there are no core few responsible for changes, it's the accumulation of small things done by many poeple.
Just like how ww2 would have still happened without hitler, malazan really shows how history rarely follows someones character arc traditional fiction has trained us to think. Malazan pokes holes in traditional fantasy molds with characters like crokus and Felson.
That said some parts are hard to get through, espically in the prequels, but they are very realistic in a historical context
I'd buy Malazan: Brotherhood in a heartbeat 😅
I understand your critiques and I also tell people before they begin reading it that it can be the best and most entertaining series they've ever read, one that will make almost everything else pale in comparison... if they're willing to WORK at reading.
SE is very traditional in that he writes in a style that 1) leaves something for the re-read; 2) is about the story he is trying to tell, not about making it as entertaining as possible. He is very non-traditional in that his whole point is to play with tropes, bend and break tropes, and not worry about tying up every thread in one book. He has spoken about all three of these concepts... they are purposeful (maybe even THE purpose). That makes it a tough series to read and enjoy.
Tightening up the story or eliminating parts of it to make it more commercial is just not something he's willing to do.
The scope and scale of the storytelling is incredibly unique. Upon completion of the series, in the last few pages of The Crippled God, there are some epiphanies that happen (though the biggest one I experienced didn't happen until I was on my second re-read, IIRC).
I've been through it front-to-back 3 times now. Gets better each time.
Yeah, I can't imagine having to criticize these books. I started off absolutely hating GoTM, 2 years later and 2 restarts later I somehow made it through the whole series and love I to death, if someone doesn't have the kind of time to commit to the series or has to keep up with other series along side it, there's no way it can be as enjoyable and rewarding a read. As a die hard fan, I def respect the critism
One of the things I like about the Malazan fandom is they are so respectful of those of us who struggled. I wish other fandoms could be as thoughtful. I think it says something about the kind of reader and thinker you have to be to enjoy the series.
@@Trisjack20 There are more of us who quit the series at some point than not I imagine. I gave up on GOTM 3 times before I finally just made myself read the first 3 books without regard for if I understood everything or not. At that point I realized everything I was frustrated about was just because it wasn't a typical series and that he really had given me everything I needed it was just up to me to put it together. I knew I was going to read it at least a second time. It was sort of like I had to learn how to read his books and the only way to do that was to read his books. Which is a lot to ask I guess but I found it rewarding. Once I realized he was taking me on a journey AND giving me the map at the same time it really changed for me. It was especially clear the second time through just how much he put things in front of me before he had me confront those things in detail etc. His essays on his writing he has on his website really helped me to wrap my head around what he was trying to do as well. www.steven-erikson.com/index.php/deconstructing-the-siege-of-pale-aftermath-scene/
@@Kruppes_Mule Thanks for the insight. I can completely understand your point and you explain it well. I will have a look at the essays because I like to try and write myself and enjoy lessons from those who are well practised in the craft. Hopefully I will get something out for myself and also better understand MBOTF as well.
I have read the main series three times and enter some kind of 'Malazan trance-state' each time. I think most Malazan fans watching your video intellectually agree with you 99%, but at the same time for many (me included), reading Malazan was an incredible indescribable experience no other fantasy series have accomplished.
I know this this unrelated, but I just finished reading A Song of Ice and Fire, and oh my goodness I just want the next book!!!!!!! It was so freaking fantastic!!
You liked dance of dragons? That book was so ass
Omg! I can so relate! I finished it last year and I'm in serious withdrawal! I literally want to re-read it just go live in that world!
How so?
The depth and complexity increases, and Martins prose improves, with each additional entry.
The second arc of asoiaf (affc in particular, imo) has been incredible so far.
His newer books are constructed a little differently; they're no longer so straightforward. AFFC was a big-bang of mythos expansionm and then ADWD was full of symbolic allusions and mysteries for the reader to worry at.
Is this why you didn't like them? Or, why are they .. *ahem*. ass?
@@lsdeann_3293 well said!
@@lsdeann_3293 Agreed. The books are excellent and they are all quality content. I will be waiting the next two with great excitement. I have re-read the first 5 three times through.
Having only read Gardens of the Moon, I cant speak too too much on this... but I love how "confusing" it can be at times. I put mistborn and the licanius trilogy (shadow of what was lost, etc.) down because the exposition dumps are just ridiculous. To me this series is fresh and invigorating and I love the challenge it presents. I understand everyone is different, but as someone who can't stand "here is the entire plot we need to figure out now!" in a matter of pages, only to have that explained over... and over... and over again... this series is where it's at. My mind could change as I go deeper in, but we'll see. (Also just wanted to say though I DNF'd mistborn, I do enjoy stormlight, though it has it's glaring flaws as well).
"Weakest at conveying information, double triple checking..." I felt this SO strongly when I last tried Malazan. Im a fast reader and very used to tearing through books, but I was constantly flipping back three pages and rereading like I was trying to understand calculus homework.
"What's going on, are they underwater now??? How long has that been happening?" was one that stood out for me in Deadhouse Gates.
I felt what was going on was incredibly cool, the world was intense and I intend to give it a third shot, but that was a major sticking point for me. Having to slow my pace down either a ridiculous amount, or just realize I had no idea what was going on several times per action sequence is very fatiguing.
Like Daniel, my all time favourite series is the WoT, which also suffers from bloat/could have used editing at various parts in the series, but I've never had to completely break immersion like with Malazan. There is so much information, I occasionally didn't remember who a person was or missed a reference, but that's different from completely being derailed on a basic action sequence and feeling like I missed the first 20 minutes of Memento.
Couldn't agree with you more here. Except I'm an audio "reader" and have been for many years. My mind has totally become accustomed to it but literally I find myself in your shoes as well, which makes me feel better because some people say you have to "read" these books. Wrong. It appears the confusion is generalized across the mediums. I'll literally be like "Wait what? Are they under water now? Since when?" It's difficult.
@@GrayGeist that underwater bit in Dead house Gates threw me for such a loop, like "holding his breath, swimming, wait what the fuck?" then find out some like "and then they went in the river" was tacked onto the end of a sentence 3 pages earlier, and took me a while to find it even looking specifically.
@@diabloman Honestly - you have an advantage over me. I'm like a sledgehammer going through this book - no turning back - and if so I rewind like 4-5 minutes at a time just to remember wtf is going on or what I missed.
With that said, I HIGHLY recommend going to the Wiki and reading the summaries of EACH chapter as you finish or if you're confused. They're concise and well done.
Unfortunately this makes me this, could I just read the whole series via wiki? I think I should have. I don't know, I want to like it so bad but everytime I pick it up, its a chore. I'd rather read the entire trilogy and all the side books by Joe Abercrombie for a third time.
just a little note - the "endgame phase" starts somewhere around Bonehunters, since it is there that the Crippled God thing is starting to pick up pace :)
I have only gotten through 3 books in more than a year. Some of his characters are great and He makes everything so vivid and real. Yet, in every book there seems to be ling stretches of nothing important happening filler. I just think if each of these books were a couple of hundred pages shorter they would be so much better
Without spoiling anything, there isn't really any filler. Nearly everything ends up being important later on, even if it's only in key conversations between characters or cause-effect scenarios as plot.
@8:20 - Is exactly why I love the malazan series. I LOVE making those connections on my own, it feels like i've discovered something secret, i suppose it's what some people may feel in mystery novels but i do not read those at all. I do find that if something IS super important for the reader to understand he will usually be pretty explicit about it.
Some of your points are how I feel about WoT. The “b is cool, I don’t care about z” part, especially.
Proving again the point that it is horses for courses.
This is why Eriksen did right to write for himself and let the chips fall where they may. He suits a specific kind of reader and it doesn't need to bother him that he doesn't reach the mystical (Larger audience) because he got to do something extraordinary. I think Jordan is the same. Wrote what he really wanted to write the way he really wanted to write it. Thank goodness there is so much variety and so many damn good authors out there these days that we as readers are spoiled for choice and do not have to read or finish things we'd prefer not to.
@@Trisjack20 Haven't read Malazan, so no comment there, but some of Jordan's problems as a writer are just that. The repetitive prose, selective stupidity, and repetitive side characters aren't simply his vision, they're weaknesses he has as an author.
I’ve enjoyed your journey through these books. Couple things though, Erikson went to the Iowa Writers Workshop and graduated with a Masters in Fine Arts. The workshop is considered one of the most prestigious in the country. I would say pretty confidently that most of the way he writes, no doubt all the difficulties included for the reader, is 100% intentional, and shouldn’t be considered a flaw. It’s definitely not for everyone, and I struggled with it a lot. I even made a reddit post in the middle of Reapers Gale about how I didn’t want to finish because of the disjointed narrative and constant neck breaking switches in perspective. BUT, I pushed on and the narrative (and overall plot) converges in an extremely satisfying manner at the end of TCG. Read and find out.
You know, I felt like Erickson wasted so much time the first time I read them, but on the reread I was shocked by how necessary every scene was to the plot. I think it’s hard to see sometimes because of how much philosophical naval gazing Erickson fills his chapters with (mileage may vary) but every scene has a *point* that furthers the narrative.
Feather Witch is one of the most wasted character potentials ever though. Her and the Tiste Edur Queen.
Yeah, her character totally went off the deep end.
@@calebmauer1751 Wasn't she a major device in character contrast, and in shaping Udinaas and Mael's arcs? I actually thought it was great that her delusionality and narcissism got tossed in the trash, at the end. When all those "reviewer space" all-stars would get worked up about how Erikson used Felisin or Hetan, I thought that surely they would empathize most with Feather Witch and feel THAT pain.
I disagree on lack of satisfying plot line wrap up. I read Malazan after GoT and immediately realised that was a major weakness of GoT and strength of Malazan. It made me think Martin was a poor planner and Erikson a master at exactly that. Nobody does better foreshadowing and spanning of threads across volumes. There are definitely areas where it could do with trimming, but that's a separate issue.
MOAR Malazan content!
I like lots of different fantasy books and for teh record I really enjoyed The Wheel of Time; I still own all the books in that series and they havent been ditched like some other books over the years that I wont ever read again. Despite owning a few hundred different fantasy books I still want to read so many other authors out there. However of all the fantasy I have read over the past 25-35 years, Malazan Book of the Fallen is the one that stands out the most.
As a constructive counter to your video I wanted to pick up on a line you said.
"His flaws are becomeing more apparent.."
I would suggest it is a matter of perspective that his style is a flaw or not. I would say that its not a flaw but a preference for how an individual should write a fantasy novel. For me my perspective on Erikson's style is heavily influenced by his background and interests in history, archeology and anthropology.
He wanted to avoid or minimise using techniques that often dominate fantasy (themes which I dont mind in any other book) and has created a style that makes the reader always want to know more, leaves them with a sense they havent quite got the full picture, wondering if they have misunderstood the way something went down. A feeling maybe akin to that of a passionate historian trying to piece toegther an ancient culture, or a series of events that wiped out a settlement, you just KNOW there is more but you just cant quite find that missing piece of the jigsaw that makes everything fall in to place, and deep down you fear that you may never actually find that piece and that you will have to settle for what we know now.
Whats even more true is that this is real life too. We dont ever know the full story and how everybody else around us is doing each day and sometimes those people drift out of our lives without us even making a concious decision to let that happen. Life isn't wrapped up in neat parcels for us to digest and tick off as complete. Even on film some of the greatest films or series on TV are ones leaving you with a sense of "why?" or "what happened next?" e.g. The Sopranos or No Country for Old Men or Citizen Kane as a couple of examples. What makes great writing and delivery even better is the lack of a neat parceled end that means there is no thought or debate about it afterwards. Indeed these shows have geberated hole You Tube channels looking for the hidden meanings and possibilities of the shows / films.
So the human thirst for knowledge and to understand everything is what drives us in life to achieve many things and this thirst is used in entertainment media to both leave us wanting more but also as a way of keeping it real, and its that sense of mystery abuot events that happened over a millenia within the Malazan world that frustrate me and tease and tittilate me better than any lover could.
I completely get why many people do not like Malazan or are frustrated by Malazan and I dont make some sort of judgement on them. Its not an intelligence test but but just how our brains are wired and where we are in our life at that moment in time that colours our perspective of what makes a book enjoyable or engaging.
Being in my mid-forties there are authors I once loved that I will never buy another book from again. Not because I hate them but because I no longer find their style for me, though I can honestly say I wouldnt be here now if I hadnt read those books whne I was younger. As I get older I increasingly want to find something different that engages me in a different way, though I still enjoy reading some more traditional A-to-B-to-C style book.
If I take a book that leans more towards Sci Fi than fantasy (Gene Wolfe's The Book of the New Sun) it's almost impossible to understand in some parts and yet a few reviewers have put it in their top 10-15 books of the genre (I agree!) and still they state they cant quite get their head round it. For me that book does the same thing that Malazan Book of the Fallen does and that is present the story in a very different way that always leaves something behind in the back of your head.
When I read the author saying he was just going to write it and just go stright into it and not explain it. His point felt like be smart enough or not. I think his opinion was definitely positive as in not talking down to readers but instead it was I believe my readers are clever enough to deal without me using author's techniques to break it up.
I was determined (as I see myself as someone who loves world building, history and deep worlds) to read it and love it. I bought them all. I had to admit (And I feel embarrassed to so do) that I struggled to deal with all of it. The fact that it is more history than story is amazing but hard. The fact he tries/succeeds to follow the wholel world in one go is hard to follow.
His scenes and characters in microcosm are very good. The background of the Houses etc is legendary. Yet I kept wanting certain characters to continually develop and move forward and too many of them go in widely different directions and many never meet each other. He is totally writing for himself and I feel he is totally happy with those who love it picking it up and it doesn't worry him if it is not for everyone. It is deep, it is quite confusing, some things do not pay off and I understand why. Many things in history did not have a proper conclusion. Some of it happened before and some of it will happen later.
Good - his world is HUGE, DEEP and internally consistent. His power levels are staggering and his individual events and scenes are powerful. Some extremely emotional, some really novel/unique and I feel I could use indidual scenes, chapters and books as masterclasses.
Bad for me- The books did not seem to really build on each other anywhere near as much as I wanted. They came across as disjointed. The characters are gritty but I fail to care about a lot of them, not because they are badly written but becasue the story just drops them without warning. I get this is gritty and 'realistic' but it is not why I read. It led to there being so many characters and I was not sure who to invest in to a high level so I didn't invest in anyone too much. Also while it is great to make characters not just good and evil and more complex there are almost no charcters in this entire series who are just positive good poeple I can firmly just want to get behind. Most of them do horrific things and have horrific things happen to them. Yet those emotional hits started to be numbed by my previous experiences.
So after all my reading I got half way through Crippled God and I just ran out of steam. It has been in my bed side drawer now for 3-5 years I forget how long. I should finish it but every time I think I will, I think wouldn't I rather read Sanderson, Butcher, Abercrombie or Jordan and usally I do. That may be entirely my own laziness but that's the experience I had.
It's ana amzing piece of work and I think it deserves all the plaudids and priase it receives. it is a deep and masterful work and stands apart from the crowd. Yet I would not recommend it to most of my frineds.
I would recommend people read Memories of Ice on its own and just enjoy it as a stand alone novel. There are others that do the same thing.
Deadhouse Gates has a proper beginning, middle and end as well. I would have enjoyed it much more if I had not thought it was a sequel to Gardens of the Moon.
Anyway that's my rant and my sad ending to my epic tale of trying to read Malazan
Trisjack20 good god I can’t believe you got over 3 million words in and then didn’t finish the series, I’m getting some serious second hand anxiety
"I got half way through Crippled God and I just ran out of steam. It has been in my bed side drawer now for 3-5 years"
this is more tragic than the chain of dogs
@@GOCRAZY3
And what's tragic is that the last book is arguably the best in the series.
Some food for thought: Not every plotline has a bow tied around it at the end of TCG. But similar to the reason for ICE's Malazan books, Kharkanas Trilogy, the upcoming The God Is Not Willing is that plotlines are picked up elsewhere down the line.
Will you do the review of Attack on Titan season 2?
I hope so
I just bought the whole 10 book set of off Ebay based on your previous feedback yesterday and wake up to find this video today
I see some of your points but the scale the characters and there relationships in the army make me really like, and I feel like some characters dont get endings I believe are good as they should be
there were just too many of them to satisfactorily deliver closure on all, but I don't think SE was worried about that. As history does the same thing, leave some to guess work and some to uninteresting or disappointing ends and some in utter glory and catharsis. He writes against the normal way of writing. While this is extraordinary (In the literal meaning) it is also not satisfying for many readers myself included. The norm is the norm for a reason. Yet it is still brilliant that someone like SE has come along and delivered such a different piece of writing into the fantasy genre.
I started a bit later than you did (mid February), but it seems we're at the exact same point now. Hearing you say you are able to read other books as well, makes me think your pace DWARFS mine, as i've been sticking to the series exclusively (binging it, as you described it), so you have my admirations, Sir! Here I was thinking I was able to speed-read it, lol.
My point was, that I consider myself a huge fantasy nerd and read it exclusively - your description of the Malazan series is 1000% how I feel so far as well - to the last word! This is not something you can recomend to anyone, die-hard fan or not (no one is that die-hard)!
Anyway, huge fan, found your chanel after I finally finished WoT a year ago and could bask in the spoilers and have pretty much watched all your videos since the very beginning of your channel.
Keep up the good work and race you to the Malazan finish!
I can totally see your point Daniel but I would suggest that you stop using language in a way that assumes that what you're saying is a fact in order to convey your appreciation or lack of, regarding certain elements in these books.
All your points are valid but the choice of words your using pretends that what you're saying is also a fact outside your own perception. Its an important part of being a critic, instead of a commentator.
I've to disagree with many of your points as it seems that the core of the matter is that you want for Malazan to be something that it isn't. The entire series would lose so much if it was presented the way you wanted, yes it would be clearer and shorter but it would lose its personality and just be another fantasy series of the bunch, instead of a piece of work that dared to challenge basically everyone that chose to read it, and we need more things like that, in my opinion.
Keep the good work :)
He does. He always says these are his opinions and not facts what are you talkin about?
Sure there are mind blowing 'moments' but the build up and detective work is what sets him apart. This series is 'DEEP'. And it is not uncommon for people to have read the entire corpus 4 or 5 times and still gleaning...