I love Malazen so much I even enjoy listening to why people don't like Malazan. This is a great review, hopefully it can help someone, there is nothing worse than reading something you don't like.
I think it's important to hear different perspectives. I enjoy reading all the explanations from people who do love the series too. But yeah, not every book is for everybody.
kThis was interesting to watch. As someone who has read the whole series three times now I obviously disagree with your assessment in a lot of points but some stuck out. You say that these are your personal opinions and that's fair enough but throughout the video you use "we" a lot which makes it a claim for a larger public. Probably not a deliberate decision but I thought I'd mention that that left a bit of a sour taste with me. The term "chosen one" is a bit of an issue that you probably didn't pick up upon because it is very clear throughout these books that there is no single "chosen one" and being chosen by whatever power is not exactly desirable. In fact, you cold call it a subversion of a trope, something that guy from New Mexico supposedly does so well. Another point: What you call objective or writing craft points is still very much subjective. You say that Erikson can't handle that many povs and that seeing a character go through a thought process, working out things the reader has already been shown is bad. But that is still your subjective taste, possibly a lack of patience with the book. As for the claim about characters, well, if you expect character development within the first 60% of a novel of a 10 book series, a part that does not in fact cover that much in-world time, then maybe that once again is down to a lack of patience or a preferance for very fast-paced narratives. And if you can read through the confrontation between Tattersail and Lorn or the conversations between Lorn and Tool and see no character work done, then maybe that is down to very subjective expectations of how characters should be written. You saying that Whiskeyjack was the only time you felt a character well done does support that as he's probably the closest to a stereotypical character of modern fantasy you can get in this book, the gruff, strong, silent type who's always suffering from his own regrets. As a side-note: The movie script did exist but was much shorter than the novel and I agree you can see this legacy in the novel, in particular the Daruhjistan parts. All good for not liking the book, taste is of course subjective but when talking about writing craft and dropping the o-word, a little care would convince me subjectively more.
Thanks for the comment! I'll try to respond to your points, and yes, clearly these are my subjective opinions. I know that is redundant ;) 1. "you use 'we' a lot..." You are correct in assuming I'm not trying to speak for everyone's tastes. I don't script these, so it was not my intention to speak for "everyone" if that's how you took it. 2. "there is no single 'chosen one..." Paran is who I'm referring to mostly. I know Tattersail serves a purpose, which is the one I called since I surmised "death" doesn't really have stakes in this book from what I've read, at least to the major players. Whether there are multiple doesn't really matter, it's the fact that a "power" chose an individual or individual for a purpose. 3. "What you call...writing craft is subjective." And I said in the video "you may still think writing craft is subjective." 4. "Erikson can't handle that many POVs...." Yes, I'll stand by my "opinion" that redundancy in writing is poor craft. 5. "If you expect character development in the first 60% of a 10 book series.." That's just patently false. Compelling character development, the key word being "compelling" can be done in a single line. There are moments of it here, but it is sparse for the sheer amount of words written. 6. "conversation between Lorn and Tool." Far too much exposition in these sections for my tastes. Character work happens through action and not information. 7. "Whiskeyjack was the only time you felt for a character..." I don't think it's that he's a stereotype, it's that his struggles are relatable and understandable. That is how you create empathy. Show things that we can grasp onto. It is why 99% of interesting characters in fiction share what some might call "cliche" flaws or tragedies. It's because it works.
It's a shame to see people quit on the first book. This series is an absolute masterpiece. I quit the first book 3 times and kept coming back. On a reread, this book is so much better in seeing how much goes on and how much sets up for later. You dont know the plot until third book. If you can figure it out.
I was hooked when I read the foreword. (In the store. Yeah, I'm one of those.) It gave me the feeling I had commisioned this book and it was written to fit my taste perfectly. It didn't disappoint and I don't remember ever thinking the ball was dropped, throughout the ten books. That said, the series is LOOOONNNNG!
Reddit is rarely good for recommendations but honestly when I was looking for a book that had amazing world building they suggested Malazan and they were right on. Nearly finished with book 7 and ready to for 8
For me a fantasy series succeeds if it makes me feel immersed in the world. So far only 5 fantasy book series have done that: A Song of Ice and Fire, The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Wheel of Time, and The Stormlight Archive. Malazan fails because it feels like like an RPG and the characters are just not compelling. As a result, I don’t feel immersed in the world. Similar to the way Sanderson’s Mistborn trilogy didn’t work for me because it felt like I was in a video game. I would have attempted to at least finish the series if it were not for the author himself, Mr Erickson. I don’t think Mr Erickson takes criticism well. Other reviewers have criticised the series for weak characterisation. Mr Erickson read these negative reviews and responded with a rant on Facebook where he essentially questioned the intelligence of readers. When I read his rant on Facebook I decided it was time to give up on the series. If you are an author who writes for public consumption, your work is fair game- you’re going to get negative and positive reviews. Some people will dislike it and some people (maybe most) will love it. You need thick skin. But Mr Erickson doesn’t view his series as simple fantasy to entertain people. He sees it as a masterpiece, which is why during an interview he expressed his desire for academics to study his work and lamented that more people are not reading/ studying his books. He specifically wanted a literary scholar to write an academic paper comparing Gardens of the Moon and Dune. I think the author has an inflated ego or is highly sensitive. Either way his comments really irked me.
I didn't realize Erikson has such a high regard for his work. I agree with you. If you put yourself out there you need to be open to criticism. Getting angry at negative reviews just shows your self consciousness. He probably wants to be regard as Tolkien, but he's not in that class.
I recently finished Gardens of the Moon and overall I enjoyed it and I'm very much interested to read the next books. I understand your criticisms and they definitely are fair, but I do enjoy the spectacle magic and gods among men. Also the redundancy didn't bother me because, like you said, i did read it from the characters pov, and I liked to see everyone figure things out differently. For the most part I just went along with what the book was doing, and mostly enjoy the moment to moment storyline.
Glad you enjoyed it and want to continue. I totally understand the magic and spectacle preference. That's part of the equation for me. It could be why I veer away from most mainstream fantasy. I do understand I'm in the minority so there aren't many options for me in the genre.
One of the things I enjoyed which I think you may not have was the dissemination of the information through the characters. An event would happen and you would see some pov's discuss and theorise with each other. An perhaps what I enjoyed more than that was when a specific character was so focused on their own goals they missed out on this information, and so you could see them acting on "outdated" info. characters didn't just "know" things and actually acted on what they thought they knew even if they where mistaken. And then when I was re-reading with your videos you can really see how all the characters have their own motivations and hidden agendas that are working in the background. Obviously you won't pick up on them as you are just meeting them and you don't have the ten thousand pages of context, but it is crazy how you can read Gardens after the series and it feels like an entirely new book, bear in mind I didn't read it as closely as you were analysing it the first time. Overall its a damb shame that you bounced off the series however I respect that it is a big commitment and that if its not for you its not for you. But even with that being said you have got to at least read Deadhouse Gates come on my dude like it is the best series ever and if you read to DG you will see it I know it to be true hahah. I feel like it is also so hard to accept as there is everything in this series so their will definitely be parts that will blow your mind but evaluating if it is worth getting there is also a consideration to take.
I may eventually go back to it, just out of curiosity to see if the second book is as good as everyone says it is. The thing with the repetition only bothered me because I didn't feel like it was adding anything personally. It did help in case I missed info the first time, but I don't need to see every character process every event. Maybe the big ones. But the way he structured the book was part of the problem. Way too many POV shifts, which just made the reiteration of the information worse. For me.
@@JasonFuhrman it’s hard at first but you get used to it. And the beauty of the re reads only kicks in once you read a few of the books. I started off with memories of ice for some reason and I much preferred that way of entering the story. Maybe start with that.
@@JasonFuhrmangardens of the moon was also written way before the other books, he really perfects his style as the books go by. Even so, after you’ve read the entire series, going back to gardens of the moon is just amazing. Every death of a major character just hits even harder at that point.
The series is brilliant. Gardens of the Moon drops you in the middle of an unexplained world and is somewhat difficult to follow at times. As the years have gone by I’ve gotten so I sometimes recommend for new readers to read a comprehensive summary of the first book, then read the next 2-4 books and go back and read Gardens of the Moon. The characters and world make so much more sense then. I know it’s a killswitch for some people, but you really get sucked into the series by about book 4. Lot of reading to get there.
I plan to read book 2 because of many of the comments here. If it doesn't redeem itself, I won't go further. I don't believe it should take a number of books to get into a story.
I was so frustrated by this book when I first read it for the same points you brought up, but by the end I was loving it and I'm so glad I carried on for the rest of the series!
Well I'm glad your efforts were worth it. I didn't think this video would be this big, but I've appreciated the discussion to help my get a broader view in case I decide to revisit the series.
I finished the first book, though on a second try and I just couldn’t make myself continue. I can tell from the writing style that Stephen Erickson is a fantastic author. Just something about this book makes me not care about anything or anyone in it. 😩 and I wanted to love it….
Now that this video has more or less blown up (by my channel's standards), I'd like to say thanks to everyone who had contributed to the conversation. Whether you agree with me or not, I appreciate all the perspectives. Keep 'em coming!
I gave up on this book like five times. Luckily I’m a stubborn bastard and picked it up a sixth time. Ate the rest of the books up after that. My favourite series.
@@JasonFuhrman I started on memories of ice, the 3rd book. There was something about the fight scenes that really drew me in. By the time I’d got through the siege of captustan I was converted and devoured the rest of the books obsessively.
Gardens of the Moon was tough. I used to play AD&D a lot in highschool and remember a lot of odd characters, settings, and half baked plots that, if you roll with the punches and tolerate some lameness, you end up having a great time. This book is like a D&D game with a super smart and creative DM who's just cutting his teeth. If you stick with the campaign and keep showing up, you end up having some very memorable evenings.
Lol at least 60% of the reason I'm still powering through is because the author is a fellow Canadian haha. I find I'm not reading the book as much as experiencing it but once I've finished and looked back at the chapter summaries, I feel like it was a positive experience, but it is the most challenging read I've ever done. Somehow, not in a bad way. It's like reading Shakespeare I suppose. I feel like I'm getting something good out of it, but it's hard to understand what's happening moment to moment. Every once in a while I get flashes of understanding, and in those moments the book is super good and according to readers, that happens more and more until it all makes sense, but this story definitely doesn't hold your hand at all. I do particularly like the T'lan Imass though. The best thing I can think to say about this series is that EVERY criticism is fair and/or true, but it's still super good.
haha well glad to hear you're powering through. Maybe it's because I read it so closely and made videos about each chapter, but I never found it extremely tough to follow. Sure there were things that happened that didn't inherently make sense on the spot, but that's fairly common with stories at some point. The sheer amount of characters, events, and places I can see being a lot to keep up with, and I think that's ok. Internalizing that takes time. I may do like another commenter suggested and just read chapter summaries and try book 2. Everyone is telling me that's when it comes together, so if it doesn't work for me then, it's just not for me.
This book is not for me either. I found that I didn’t care about any of the characters. Before people bash me, I tried my best to like it. I was able to finally finish it by listening to the audio, but I will not continue with the series.
Read what you enjoy. If this is not the series for you then find something else and have fun. I will not try to entice you to carry on because the second book is just as difficult to get into and even more brutal. Book 3 , Memories of Ice is my favourite book ever but I understand not everyone will buy into the series. I have read so many Hugo award winning novels and thought they were garbage so do not feel bad if something is not your cup of tea
For whatever it's worth, the balance skews way more towards character in all of the subsequent books (by the start of the next book you can immediately sense the progression). So much so that by Fall of Light you'll be wishing for more plot and shorter scenes :D. GotM is full of great ideas with some less than stellar plot progression. Whenever I've recommended the series to people I describe GotM as the hurdle you just have to get through. In retrospect it plays a lot better, which doesn't make getting into the series any easier. I can understand bailing out now, but you really are missing out on some truly special moments as the series continues. Everyone has their own tastes though and at least you gave it a shot! Edit: I should add that I'm one that tends to prefer "low" to "high" fantasy. Here, the high fantasy is soft enough that the fuzziness of its rules adds to the mystery. A series like ASOIAF relies on its groundedness to establish its sense of place and consequences. Malazan regularly breaks free of what audiences feel is or should be possible, but somehow each of the times it seems to break its own rules, the results feel inevitable. That's a tough balancing act to achieve and I really give Erickson credit for consistently pulling it off.
Thanks for the insight! Maybe down the line I'll give book 2 a shot and see if it solves problems I have. I have never been a fan of slogging through content to get to "the good stuff" but you never know.
@@JasonFuhrman Malazan is a series that succeeds for me because of its problems. Its a weird comment to say, I know, but for me its a series that started at a 6/10 , but has continued to give back to me in unexpected ways as I've read through the main series and into the prequels and side stories. The more you dive, the more questions you have, and the deeper you want to go. But as that happens you also start to realize that you've grown to care about Whiskeyjack and Fiddler, and all the others. For every scene that falls flat, there are others that are spellbinding. Book Five for me may be the high water mark of fantasy. The thing is, if someone wrote that to me after I'd read just 60% of GotM, I'd think its just someone that has their fan-blinders on. That first book has problems. The tenth book also has problems (that is to say, nothing can ever be perfect). But the series as a whole succeeds for me because it slowly and surely plumbs an emotional depth to match its scope. You may never get there - hard to say, but I think that's the reason that the series resonates so much with people.
I think what people mean when they say the series is "confusing" is that the full context and significance of much of what you read in these books is rarely revealed when you first read it. It's not so much that the writing is difficult to understand as it is the author's intent that the reader be in the dark in order to set up a later reveal. It's one of the things that makes the series stand out in comparison to most fantasy series I've read which tend to be fairly linear. But what else should I have expected with source material derived from a tabletop roleplaying campaign? As I recall from my D&D days, every good DM knows how to keep their players in the dark!
Yes, knowing that this came from a D&D campaign makes sense. I didn't find it confusing, like you said, which was a surprise based on what I heard before reading it. I hear the writing craft improves in later novels. It's too bad he didn't go back and revise this one to be a tighter read.
Couple of things: gods talking with men is easily explained through the concept of ascendance in which formerly mortal characters change in cosmic importance in the history of this world. The superhero comment is really strange to me because there are no clear heroes or good vs evil in this series. Another thing, your characterisation of this novel as plot over character is a misapprehension on your part. This series is theme over plot, not plot over character. All plot developments here are in service of thematic exploration. And Erikson’s approach to character building is different because he doesn’t spell things out but only observes behavior. He lets the reader make their own interpretations of their behavior but Erikson is very consistent in slowly building up great characters over the course of the series, but you have to engage with it as an historical text. This book was playing very different games which you didn’t pick up on.
hey thanks for the comment! Let me try to clarify. 1. "Gods talking with men is easily explained through...ascendance." I don't think defining a process is my issue. It's that I just don't care for that in fantasy. 2. "The super hero comment is really strange...because there are no clear heroes or good vs evil." That is a semantic problem on my part. I don't necessarily mean "super hero" as someone who fights for good. I mean it as a term of someone who has powers, physical, magical, or whatever, that elevate them to do great things over the general population. There are many characters in this book that fit that description. 3. "This series is theme over plot, not plot over character." I'm not sure this solves any problems I had with the book. It's still intent to deliver a "message" over creating a story with characters you empathize with. Theme should exist in a story, only when told through characters we feel for. Theme generally develops once you see the arc of the character(s), not before. Of course, everyone creates stories differently, but I'd argue character should begin the process, and theme will naturally emerge. If you start with theme you're in danger of putting puzzle pieces together to serve your theme rather than focusing on an emotional journey through character.
@@JasonFuhrman Well yes, thematic explorations need stories with characters and it would help if those characters are compelling. Many people who like the series seem to have no problems with Erikson's way of character writing, so it might just be a personal thing that it works for some and not for you. The characters do get layered but Erikson stimulates the readers to observe closely their actions instead of clearly explaining their thoughts and feelings as other authors might do. It's a stylistic choice. I'm saying this and also my comment about theme over plot because these are tools that could allow you to take much more enjoyment out of these novels once you accept them. But it seems that Erikson's version of fantasy is simply not to your taste, so I won't try to convince you.
I quit recommending what I view as the high point in modern literature because nobody can finish it who’s not looking specifically this type of book. With that said, you cannot provide an analysis of this series until the first 3 books are finished(which is really one book).
I can agree with that. But I feel like with any book, regardless of when it comes together needs to hold the interest of the reader. It had far too many things that rubbed me the wrong way: cheesy dialogue and situations in parts, the POV redundancy, character reactions and actions. I'm all for a book to be about bigger things and not fully explain itself. But this one was just not to my tastes in too many ways.
@@JasonFuhrman i read these books the first time in the early 2000s, didn’t know a soul who read them. I like going into books blind; with that in mind, I loved the first book but the second was a struggle for me but I preserved. When I read the 3rd book(the best modern book I’ve ever read) the payoff was huge, and I regretted my attitude towards the second book. Upon reread, I felt #2 is a masterpiece. With that said, I think Malazan fans grieve when strong book readers (like you) abandon the series because it is so dear to us. I appreciate your response, and wish you well. Cheers
I wish I would have read these when they came out originally. I feel like it was doing some interesting stuff from the time, but it's difficult sometimes to see it through that lens. Especially when a lot of fantasy series have learned from this and even creating their own innovations.
I just finished the book. The early parts of the book felt tedious. Then it got interesting and I was hooked in. Then at the end, everything wraps up rather quickly and some what oddly. And the book managed to introduce new confusing elements. I still liked the book even with the issues I had with it.
Favorite Fantasy series but also one I completely understand folks not getting into or even just not enjoying once they've gotten into it. It has so many quirks that you'll either love or have to endure and for that reason it's gonna be divisive as hell.
Definitely a huge fan base, and I can see why people enjoy it. We all read for different reasons. Some like the sprawling epics with many characters and world-changing plots, and others prefer quieter, more introspective stories. And there is no universal book that everyone likes. That's just how it is. I'm glad I gave it a go after all these years though.
im reading the book right now, im also at around 60% of the books and i agree that the book is not so hard to read actually. The events that take place are shared among many PoVs, but you know that side A has 3 characters, side B has 3 characters and the chapters are unfolding around them, so it's easier to follow. As regards to the redundancy of the PoVs, i didnt really feel that. You get to understand better the character's personality as you see how they process each event. In fact i loved how the book was written it made me feel way more immersed to the actual story and to how mysterious everything is.
Yeah I'm always surprised people think this book is difficult. I'd heard that for years before I tried it. While it has a lot going on, I wouldn't call it difficult.
Maybe "super hero" is the wrong term. What I mean is a large number of people with great power, physical, magical, or something in between doing "super" acts. Chapter 2 comes to mind.
@@AvanToor Yeah honestly on my first read it was pretty clear to me this was not a single protagonist narrative. A typical saying that comes to mind is that Erikson's writing style in terms of plot structure and character dynamics is not unique to litterature, but it is unique to Fantasy. And that's okay! Not everything has to be for everyone :) I typically think I grasped onto his writing and story elements in Gardens in part because I've read far more classic science fiction than I have fantasy. And Erikson writes much more like Clarke or Hebert than he does Brando Sando (Who I also love) And still, it's perfectly fine for anyone to feel anyway they feel about any works of art :) And to the rest of you who have witnessed a certain walk in The Glass Desert (you know who you are) while some of this man's takeaways are funny to us in the grand picture we can look back upon, most people have seen but one or two brush strokes of that painting. It's okay for new readers to fall off fast, but remember what a certain someone once said, "The fallen know but one challenge, and that is to rise once more."
@@Yoda0VGs I think you're confusing me with someone else. I just reacted to the fact that this man seems to expect certain things. I'm sorry if I gave you the impression of being a Sanderson reader.
Really enjoyed the way you laid out your points. Like you, I am not a fan of magic widely available, not a fan of Gods walking among men, and not a fan of resurrections....so I contended with those things while reading Gardens of the Moon. However, after finishing it and let it sink in my head I felt compelled to read Deadhouse Gates and thought the characters were much better developed on that one. Gardens of the Moon took me like 5 weeks to read, the next 2 books took me 8 days each. Long story short, I am on book 4 and loving the ride. I think there's noticeable improvement in his writing starting on book 2, except for whenever there's any sort of romance happening (subjective ofc) but those are always 0 to 100 in a split second. Anyways, great review, wish it would have worked for you cuz now that I discovered your channel, I think your reviews of the series would have been super interesting!
Thanks for the comment! I've heard good things about book 2 and have decided to give it a try after many comments suggesting I do so. Here's hoping it works out for me.
“Kruppe is generous enough this morning to disregard dubious observation regarding his eating habits and the habits of his orifices.” ― Steven Erikson, The Complete Malazan Book of the Fallen
@@JasonFuhrman “Join us, friend,” said Kruppe. “Sit here by this fire: this scene paints the history of our kind, as you well know. A night, a hearth, and a tale to spin…” ― Steven Erikson, The Complete Malazan Book of the Fallen
Malazan is an acquired taste, but I absolutely love it. I love it when pieces start to fall into place and when rereading entire books, after having progressed in the series, you pick up on so many details. The way everything is connected is just beautiful. However I will also say I could not read Malazan the way I read something like Mistborn or Cradle: front to back in one or two days. Malazan takes time. I read it in small pieces over the course of weeks or months per book. If one is a very dedicated reader, who cant put a book away after reading for an hour, I feel like Malazan will burn you out.
I've just finished the book and I enjoyed the review as I felt some of these frustrations. I don't agree with the 'chosen one' trope applying to the book at all though.
I should have probably clarified the "chosen one" trope in the book. When I say "chosen one" I mean someone who is literally chosen. In the book there are arguably two people who are chosen. Paran and Tattersail. I don't mean "to save the world" just chosen and not someone who overcame challenges of their own free will. And I'm not talking about fighting against being "chosen" either. The mere act of being chosen is what I'm referring to.
@@JasonFuhrman I think I get you, maybe, at least with Paran. Not sure about Tattersall as hers was more of a resurrection and she sort of earned by an impressive display of power and she made an effort to remain alive in some form. It was more a giving of aid than a choosing. Whereas with Paran and Crokus it is difficult to know if the characters choices are their own so it's hard to fully get behind their character. Especially when you don't know why they were chosen in the first place. Perhaps I still misunderstand you, but either way I think what you describe is not the 'chosen one trope' for most people, or at least for me, but a trope nonetheless. I think in the latter stages of the book, the mystery of the gods is lessened and they effectively become characters, which other books rarely do, at least as far as I've read. And I think that understanding of character makes these things less frustrating in retrospect. But as you say in the video, it's not necessarily good writing to frustrate your readers and hope they struggle through to the pay off. Thanks for the response.
i am reading this book right now. this book so far has a lot of information for me to digest. a lot of terms and a lot of types of weird people and a lot of strange events are happening. it's very intriguing, so much so that i want to finish this first book. i want to find out more about the strange customs, the strange magic systems....like what the f is happening?
Apparently this series is going to get REALLY good later. Just watched a video by Matt's fantasy book Reviews where he asked about 30 booktubers to name their favorite fantasy book and the last book of this Fallen series got the most votes! Personally, I have not heard of Steven Erikson, so I was quite surprised.
I have also heard the same thing, and maybe it does get wildly better. It's hard for me to justify pushing through something to get to "the good stuff." I firmly believe things should be good from the beginning, not in subsequent volumes. That said, I may return to it at a later date to see what I think of the next volume at least. Full disclosure: I do not have mainstream tastes, so I am quite positive I'm in the minority here. I encourage you to check out the book to see if it's right for you.
I read enough of those books, and honestly if Dune was considered "fantasy". Dune would be better than practically all of them apart from LOTR. just my two cents.
Malazan is very different from any fantasy novel I read.. I’m almost done and have a 50-50 love hate relationship with it. It has incredible moments and creativity, but mind numbingly frustrating parts
You say it in a nicer way than I can. This book isn't for people interested in human relations and how to find out what can make life better for all. All characters are objects with main purpose to kill or be killed in pointless and boring descriptions of violence. It's like reading about a never ending chess game. It has interesting language and some creative ideas. Otherwise it's on a really low level.
haha, well thanks! Yeah, it's painfully obvious the characters are there to serve the plot. Erikson doesn't seem interested in exploring a character-driven plot, but one that is orchestrated from a 30,000 foot view, with gods, or Erikson himself, gazing down at a massive, as you put it, chessboard.
I wish I agreed. I wanted nothing more than to like this book and series. It's been some time since I've gone through an epic fantasy series. Was hoping this might be the next one.
@@JasonFuhrman to be fair, Gardens of the Moon is the least character driven book of the series. There's only one or two characters in the book that have any real "arc", most stay the same. But most of his characters end up developing over the course of many books or years, especially since there are so many POV's and very few main characters. Also if you are interested, Erikson did write an interesting piece on characterization on a facebook post he did, I think its worth a read. A lot of people have criticized his character work, but I think its because there are two schools of thought on what the "best" way to do characterization is, and as usual Erikson picks the less accessible option lol
@@dentonholmgren4886 cool, thanks for the info on the article. I'll look for it. I understand that characters probably develop over the series but I still think it's worthwhile doing something in the first book. It's the first chance to win readers over. You can expect them to "get it"after a series of books. If anything, the first volume should hook you the most.
@@JasonFuhrman I understand that for sure. I had read Gardens of the Moon years ago and didn't return til last year, but this time armed with a guide that made things easier to follow since I had a tough time the first time. What hooked me the second time was actually the thing you didn't like, meaning the extremely powerful characters and gods among men. Its something I wouldn't have liked 5 or 10 years ago, but this time I really enjoyed having those elements. Although I'm still not a big fan of the Sanderson types of magic.
I ran across this video while about three-fourths of the way through Gardens of the Moon, and I'm going to force myself to finish it, but I'm not enjoying it that much, for reasons that may not be quite the same as yours but at least have some overlap. One of the reasons I read fantasy is to immerse myself in another world and vicariously experience that world through the eyes of the viewpoint character(s). That works a lot better when there's only one or, at most, a very few points of view, and when the reader is allowed to know about as much about the world and about what's going on as the viewpoint character does. This book definitely does not give me that.
I'm just reading it. I am pretty the much same as you but i just haven't read too much of high fantasy so I'm going to finish it and I'm going to read second one and then decide if I'm continuing or not. Funny thing is I'm pretty much clear on what i know and what i don't know as far as plot goes, which is what these books are notorious for right? Not knowing what the hell is going on. I understand what's going on or at least i have connected the dots that are currently given but the multiple character povs that just constantly change are just obnoxious, i swear i read one chapter where he changed three of them in 5-10 pages. I heard he went to the writing "school" in between the first and second book and that the second one is much better written.
I had no trouble following the story either, which isn't what I expected. I heard this was a complex and difficult to follow novel. I she with the POV shifts. He should have stuck to one per chapter. I'll probably read book 2 at some point to give him a fair shot since so many people say it's way better. If you read it before me come back and let me know how you feel
I can appreciate the opinion. I am actually someone currently reading book 5 and would say we don't get much more explanation about book one even at this point. That said, I enjoyed some of the things you weren't enjoying in this book that made me interested enough to finish the series. For me, the interplay of gods and mortals despite the power difference was compelling, and the sense of spectacle and amount of things happening, even if they may at times seem superfluous or overwhelming, created its own sense of mystery and awe that made me intrigued to continue. Even then, every book has had sluggish parts, or parts I could understand would turn people away. For me, it wasn't until book four when I finished a book and was very excited about the direction of the series. From what I've read most fans felt that after book three, which was certainly good but I found it waned at the end. The series hasn't revealed anything to me that would make it worth the reputation of its diehard fans, but I'm less than halfway and what I've read so far is certainly quite good. Malazan has a certain appeal, but its more detached and historical in perspective which makes it harder to emotionally invest in. Regardless, its entertaining enough for me to keep reading but I understand others losing steam.
Thanks for the comment! I appreciate the perspective. It sounds like you really enjoy it but aren't gushing about how dramatically it changes in book 2, which is a much more even-keeled opinion to me. I find franchises have their die-hard fans that will defend it to the grave, so it's nice to see someone a little more unbiased.
One of my issues when it comes to reading is I rarely DNF a book. Even if I'm not engrossed/enjoying it, I push through to the end. An compulsion for closure? An unrelenting opitimism? I may never know.
Quick points: Not everyone in the Malazan world can use magic. Very few people in Gardens can use magic. There is no chosen one plot in malazan, especially not in gardens, its activley avoided at all costs. Im confused why this was mentioned? Gods don't really just walk around. Shadowthrone and Dancer maybe, but obviously there's an in story reason for that with their wanting to get revenge on the empress for their murder
"Not everyone in the Malazan world can use magic. Very few people in Gardens can use magic." But it's very prevalent in the books. We have a mage battle in the prologue, an epic super-hero level war in chapter 2. We have a character turn into a puppet. We have people possessed. There's even more than that, and that's just the 60% of the novel I read. "There is no chosen one plot in malazan, especially not in gardens, its activley avoided at all costs. Im confused why this was mentioned? " Paran is literally "chosen" by the gods of chance, no less. You don't get much more cringey than that. Tattersail is also pretty much chosen after destroying herself to be reborn. Crokus is also chosen. Now when I say "chosen one" I don't mean sent off to save the world. I mean someone who is chosen by a higher power or force for whatever means. "Gods don't really just walk around. Shadowthrone and Dancer maybe, but obviously there's an in story reason for that with their wanting to get revenge on the empress for their murder" The mere fact that gods actually speak to anyone was a huge turnoff for me. It's a waste in my opinion to have that kind of transparency so early in a novel. It kills all mystery.
@@JasonFuhrman There's definitely a lot of magic in the books. Due to the fantasy setting. But I think that's a very different point to saying that everyone can do magic. Even in the examples you just gave (assuming none of those people died), that leaves maybe 6 people who can do magic. And thats me including people like Kruppe who will largely just conjure sweet roles, and Tayschren and Topper who are in the book for like a scene. Assumig they did die, or were only present at the start for a scene, there's maybe 3 people who can do magic? I mean I guess, but surely the fact that whole trope is flipped on its head should be a posstive in your eyes? I.e, Paran legit rejects the Gods of chance, he basically tells them to fuck off, though I can see the issue you could have with that. But I think the way SE tackles the chosen one trope is exactly the antithesis of what you dislike. Also, Tattersall certainly wasn't chosen. Your last point Im struggling with. I personally found the mystery surrounding those two Ascendants (shadowthrone and Dancer) really intriguing. So im curious what mystery was lost by them interacting with select mortals? Or other gods?
@@kristienwhitney-johns5863 Yes, this is fantasy, and yes there can be magic, but it has more magic than I prefer, which literally kills the "magic" for me. Take something as classic as Lord of the Rings. Magic is ancient and mysteries and only a few can wield its power. This, to me, is what makes magic special. Not when it's a literal profession. Or take something like Joe Abercrombie's work. How many people are performing magic? I hope that helps to explain where I'm coming from. Maybe I could appreciate the "chosen one" commentary if I'd read the book when it came out in the '90s. But fantasy has taken big shifts in recent times, so while I can appreciate what he's doing from a chronological standpoint, it's not as innovative reading it now, if that makes sense. That reminds me of another thing I forgot to bring up in the video: Paran talking to the gods as if they are ordinary people has a similar effect was many people performing magic. It ruins the mystery and the grand scale of things. Talking to gods and magical super battles in the first half of a novel does little to pique my interest. It makes what should be extraordinary feel ordinary, to me. I hope my last few sentences help articulate why it ruins the mystery of powerful beings by talking to them as if they are ordinary people. If not, let me know and I can try to explain further. Thanks for the discussion!
I slogged through the first book. It wasn't "difficult". It's that there was no protagonist. No stakes. No story, character arc, companionship, journey. It was just a bunch of badash clips of flight, teleportation, invisibility, gods, shapechange, resurrection ... with all the magic, how could there be any stakes? I then read reviews that say you have to go in with a spreadsheet and/or reread the series for the first 2 books to make sense. It does read like the first draft of a movie script.
I have heard it gets way better, but it's really hard to justify my time to push through when there are so many other books to read. Plus, I doubt all of my other issues will be resolved, since it seems that his style of fantasy won't drastically change.
The last 100 pages was like a stupid Michael bay film where he smooshed a bunch of action setpieces and set up a sequel. He couldn't stick the landing, even though i thought he started the story strong.
Interesting video. I’ve owned gardens of the moon and deadhouse gates for about 6 years. Got them together in the ladder half of 2017. Tried to pick up gardens but never really had the motivation or time to finish. I read the prologue with young Ganoes probably like 5 times. Furthest I got in those years was tattersail finding out hairlock is in the marionette. I think that’s only like chapter 2. But this year I finally sat down and finished it and man am I glad I did. I’m currently about half way through memories of ice and this series has blown me away so far. I totally understand people not getting into it though. Malazan reminds me of Elden ring in the sense that it’s tough to get through and it’s not for everyone, but if you can push through it you’ll end up experiencing one of the largest and coolest fantasy worlds ever.
For anyone who struggles with GOTM I would recommend Ian esstlemonts Paths to Ascendency series first; introduces the world, characters and magic system a lot more easily for people who haven’t read epic fantasy series. Personally I cannot agree with anything you’ve said in this review and I believe that if you even just got to the 2nd book ‘Deadhouse Gates’ by the end your entire view will change. ‘The chosen one’ the whole point of the series is that there is no one chosen person who can ‘save the day’ everyone in the series plays a part no matter how small a character they are. Erikson MPOV cannot be touched even by GRRM to have a series with 100s of named characters who are all distinguishable from each other is genius. Honestly if you ever finished this series nothing you will ever read again will come close to it. I think you do yourself a disservice by not atleast trying to finish the first 3 books. If you can get to that point and still have the views you currently have on the series then the greatest fantasy series every written just isn’t for you.
I do keep hearing about book 2. I wonder, though, it doesn't seem like magic everywhere and a good number of all powerful characters, interactions with the gods, and so on are going anywhere though, right? That's one thing I just don't care for in my fantasy. Of course I like magic, wonder, etc, but here it's cranked up a little high for my tastes. I appreciate you sharing your opinion and am not trying to detract from anyone's enjoyment. I just like to share when a book doesn't work for me, and I've seen many others come to my same conclusion. That said, maybe down the road I'll revisit it and see if book 2 solves the issues I have. I'm sure it will with some, but it seems the high fantasy tropes it uses are here to stay.
I was skeptical about the series after the first book but as soon as I finished the 2nd I was sold on everything. In the 2nd there is very little magic used at all and only a handful of POVs so I think will work better for you. As for the rest of the series yes the magic system is high end but it’s actually very rarely used like the scene of pale where it’s all out. You see the consequences of having this power and the toll it takes on the mages. There are no ‘all powerful characters’ you will quickly learn that as you go through the books. The gods are very rarely seen at all after the first book it’s more subtlety implied when a god is influencing events and you never really are shown the plans each has in place you have to work that out for yourself. ‘Tropes’ cannot be associated with this series at all, you believe you are seeing one for it to be completely subverted in a way you never would’ve expected. I understand a lot of people have trouble with the first book but honestly I guarantee anyone that finishes the series will have it in there top 3 at least of best story’s ever read/seen. I will write an ‘I told you so’ when you get into the series.
Gardens of the Moon bypasses exposition and gradually fills in the blanks through dialogue. Bludgeoning the reader early with a grocery list of names, undeveloped, uninteresting characters involved in cacophonous, military jargon laced pov in medias res conversations. This slog gets compounded by Erikson's Malazan cosmos, insufficiently fleshed out to feel compelling or for one to care or become truly invested in. Apart from a narrational consensus formed around events such as Kellanved's assassination? Surly/Laseen of the Claw assuming control of Malazan Imperial expansion in Pale and Darujhistan and Anomander Rake floating on Moon's Spawn fighting in a Mage led conflagration in Pale. All the other plots of the novel sink under the weight of multilayered Machiavellian intrigue at the hands of unseen gods, ascendants, guilds, military operations, spies, assassins, witches, demons etc... Malazan is also a universe where a pervasive and distracting Tarot-Shamanistic-Voodoo divination-magic system of "Warrens" envelops everything, making the believable aspects of this world feel oppressive, ugly and claustrophobic. Ultimately, GOTM reads like a knock off Thucydides with smatterings of 19th century Archaeological and Anthropological travel writings from Africa, Middle East and Indonesia.
More eloquently said haha. I did forget about the exposition through dialogue, which is definitely a big flaw for me. Most noticeable during the conversations between Lorn and Tool. I remember glazing over those parts.
Idk if I would categorize this as 'superhero fantasy'. I would 100% put The Way of Kings and much of Sanderson's fantasy work into that category, but Malazan feels much different. Yes, magic is more of a job, a skill that can be learned, than some mysterious aspect of this world, as you say, but it's less about the fantastical elements and more about how they are utilized that put something in that category, I think. The 'chosen ones' of these stories don't feel like Neo from the Matrix or Ang from Avatar, stories in which the hero learns how to utilize his powers so that he can save the world and crush the villain underfoot. You see this type of tale told in Sanderson's The Way of Kings, for instance - the main characters are all learning to use their OP abilities in service of beating the bad guys. That isn't Malazan at all. The 'chosen ones' in Malazan are more like victims and pawns than your typical chosen-one hero. They are individuals who are swept up in something they don't understand, and it affects their lives in very detrimental ways. We see this in Sorry's storyline - an innocent girl who is literally possessed by one of these ascendants, which steals much of her memories and takes her far from her home. We see it in Paran, who has no idea what's going on, half the time (his brushes with these 'deities' really starts to affect him in the third book, but the shades of his torment are already present in Gardens). I would say that the chosen-one elements are more of a subversion of that trope than anything else, at least so far as I've read (the first three books). Perhaps that will change in the sequels, but this is a pretty grimdark world, so I doubt that will be the case. All that said, I 100% understand why someone wouldn't finish Gardens of the Moon. It is very plot-driven - I first tried to read it after a reread of ASOIAF, and I had to put it down - I think it might be impossible to go from the rhythm of GRRM to that of Erikson, and enjoy the latter. I ended up reading a few other things, then revisiting it, and I burned through it. The only things I can disagree with you on are the 'superhero fantasy' and the 'chosen one' comments, but the rest is very understandable.
i am actually listening to all ten books and then i will read all ten books. a helpful tool is to use malazan wiki for help with all the different races and warrens and the numerous characters.
I have just started Book 1 in audio form, so looking forward to how I like it (tried it a long time ago, but steered in other directions back then). Do you still stand firm, or are you swaying to try again perhaps?
I actually tried the audiobook a little after quitting to see if I could finish it off easier, and I just found myself not caring about the story so never did. Hope you enjoy it though!
That's a good way to go about it. Although I feel like I never really lost my way despite how much I heard that this book is complex. Keep me posted on how you feel about it.
Great vid, m'man! I haven't been checking out BookTube in quite a while since my head had been buried deep, deep within a sea of code, but this video was a breath of much needed air for me. I must say that our similar flow continues with your focus on character over plot. We both use the example of James Bond as a plot-driven property (at least traditionally). The core issue, though, is about plot driven vs. story driven writing. Plot is simply the sequence of events in a work that ideally have some cohesive flow. Story is all about the changes within the character(s) due to events, internal and/or external. In the case of James Bond, he is the same guy at the end of the story that he was at the beginning. However, any main character in a Pixar movie will undergo some change by the end. That's why their movies tend to resonate. So, I respect and support your decision to quit that novel, unsubscribers be damned. 👍
thanks man! Good to hear from you again. I knew this would be a divisive video, but I think it's important to not blow smoke and at least articulate why I don't care for something.
Given what you've said you like, I have to recommend Daniel Abraham, anything he's written. Very character focused, magic is rare and mysterious, and his worlds are... alive , is the best descriptor I can think of.
Just started The Dragon’s Path yesterday. I’m only 70 pages in, but it seems pretty cool so far. I’ve had the first 3 books of the series (Kings Blood & Tyrant’s Law) for years & have finally gotten around to it.
I just finished GOTM last week, and am now 40% through the second book Deadhouse Gates. I had my issues with the first book. It felt like if the A Song of Ice and Fire series started in A Storm of Swords, in the middle of the War of the Five Kings and Dany in Slaver's Bay with her three dragons. There were a lot of characters that at times I had trouble keeping track of. There was a lot of high-level magic that had little in the way of explanation, and likely won't until later in the series, but I looked at the wiki for explanations. It throws a lot at you. Erickson could have made it smoother. It wasn't until around halfway into the book that a plot point came up that had me saying "Ok, now things are getting interesting. I'm hooked." The hook villain felt like it fell a little short in some way with a bit of a deux ex machina. Although, I admit I like some of the fantasy elements like a floating mountain fortress, different parallel worlds, zombies with magic weapons and magic greatswords that imprison souls. I just wished there was more explanation. Erickson does play with tropes, opening with an evil empire Malazan ruled by an evil usurping empress Laseen like in a typical fantasy series, but the protagonists, the Bridgeburners, aren't your typical fantasy heroes fighting against the evil empire (at least at the start), but fighting for it. As others have pointed out, the chosen one is subverted a little with Crokus's case as he doesn't do much and if anything it just gets him a target on his back. It's rough start, but it gets better. The second book had me interested early on with plot points that had me wanting to read more, and it is easier to follow the characters as well as their actions having more significance. There's even a little moment that almost made me chuckle when they were dealing with a shapeshifter at sea.
Appreciate the detailed opinion on the second book. I understand it probably improves on a lot of levels, but I don't see it changing much from some of the subjective things that aren't to my tastes: magic being big and ubiquitous, gods speaking to and working with humans, etc. So many people are telling me book 2 is where it's at, so maybe down the road I'll return to it with a fresh perspective and see if it feels any better.
i actually agree with everything you've said. I myself have finished the book, and did like it, BUT there were a lot of nagging things about it that were in line with everything you said. And keep in mind, unlike you, I actually don't mind the more overt fantasy with gods-among-men, and high magic and things of that nature. However, the thing that shocked me most of all, was that this series seemed always billed as this very deeply layered, complex series, and in fact I was kind of stunned to find it reading fairly shallow and superficial to me. Now keep in mind, I still found it pretty enjoyable, in that comic-book popcorn film sort of way. It had a ton of "entertaining" characters, fun scenes, a ton of action. The pace felt very fast because it's constantly headhopping between an endless assortment of characters which are fairly well written, if albeit shallow. But the book itself did not feel very 'deep', I kept walking away with this nagging feeling of a shallow popcorn flick, like sort of watching a summer blockbuster movie like Transformers 3 or something to that effect. The characters themselves were pretty obviously heavily inspired by videogames and have video-gamey names and personalities (I mean come on, Anomander Rake is basically Sephiroth). All in all I still do plan to continue the series, but just wanted to express that I do agree with pretty much all of your points. edit: Oh, and I forgot to mention. A lot of the plot feels a bit contrived in an overly convoluted/complex way as if the author is simply trying really hard to obscure and make everything as densely opaque and oblique as possible to make it "feel" like there's these endless plans within plans and machinations going on, but after a while it actually starts to become tedious because none of these things are ever resolved adequately and the reader never given any satisfaction in resolutions. Every near-resolution just turns into another endless pit of machinations and I feel this is a bit of a poor management of reader's expectations. To me, for a book to be truly gripping, it has to properly manage the push and pull of giving readers satisfying moments, then pulling with reversals/twists, etc. And this felt to me like an endless barrage of un-resolvable twists and reversals that just keep mounting, and mounting, and mounting, and mounting, until it DOES start to become a little tedious when you realize there is NO true "end" in sight to this storyline and nothing ever seems to feel like it gets closer to resolution, things only get darker, and MORE convoluted and entropic, etc, etc.
wow appreciate the in depth perspective! I hear what you're saying about subjective opinions (overt fantasy), and that's why I tried to make sure I explained that that part isn't just to my tastes. Like you, I was surprised by the lack of depth, at least of what I read. I expected something with deeper character work, and overly complex plotwise, but I didn't get that either. It's funny, because that's why I stayed away from the book for so long. The fact that this was based on a dungeons and dragons game that Erikson and his writing partner concocted, really helps put things in perspective. They felt like they were trying to hit beats, rather than it being a progression of characters who are influencing events in the world. That especially hit me when Tattersail blew herself up and became a born again thing. After I read a bunch of comments, I even tried going through the audiobook to finish it out instead of reading chapter summaries but just couldn't do it. To me it comes down to not caring about characters. If I'm not invested in their fates, then the plot is meaningless. As many have said, I may try the second book and see if it solves many of my problems. But from what you've said, the overall tone and approach is pretty much the same throughout.
@@JasonFuhrman it's funny because I've actually tried to start Gardens twice previously and failed both times, and this time I resolved to fully get through it just to see. But in my previous abortive efforts, like you, after failing to get through the opening chapter of Gardens, I went and researched what was the universally best regarded of the Malazan books, and I forget which one it was now at the time, but somewhere in book 3-5 region, and I tried to read that book instead just to see, but couldn't get through the opening of that either lol. With that said, I will say that in the final 20-30% of Gardens alot of stuff comes together much more nicely and is more enjoyable. Of course it's no defense of the other stuff, but it's juts something to chew on in case you ever want to finish it. I personally did find the last 20-30% pretty cool as pretty much EVERY single character plot literally comes together into one thread where they're almost all together in the same room (literally) and all this while a gigantic, unstoppable monstrosity is blowing half the country up and closing in on them, so it was a pretty gripping part which is one of the sole reasons I'm going to attempt to continue the series at least to book 2 and see how it goes, but yea some of the people who said they dropped the series after book 3-4 does leave me feeling very concerned as to how far I'll get in the series. Also, I should say the other big concern is, I've watched a Steven Erikson interview a while back where he said that he deliberately employs a very opaque "literary" writing style because he comes from the literary (lit fiction) tradition, having studied at the prestigious Iowa Writer's Workshop, etc, etc. And what really frightened me was when he said that, the EARLY novels of the series were actually written with too MUCH of a non-literary voice in terms of giving insight into character's motivations and internal 'thoughts', and that as the series goes on, the later books reveal even LESS as he grew into his writing voice. So in short, for the people who view Gardens of the Moon as having way too opaque of a writing style where the reader is never given insight into the character's "head" and everything is done in a very sort of removed/distant perspective, well according to Erikson himself, this actually gets even MORE extreme as the series goes on. So as someone who loves reading very "voicey" style of novels where we're directly inside the character's head, this is extremely concerning to me because the non-voicey nature of the character writing in Gardens is already at an extreme so I can't even imagine how much more 'distant' it can get later on.
@@phaioncirrus3818 I do like the fact that he leaned into more literary styles toward the end. I may have to sample some of those to see how it feels. I guess anyone can interpret what "literary" means, so we'll see. It is funny how for whatever reason we put a lot of effort into enjoying something if we don't immediately. I think it's a good exercise to understand why you don't like something - part of the reason why I do videos like these too. It took me a long time to not just power through something I didn't like. Now I realize there are far too many books out there, so I should move on if something isn't striking me.
@@JasonFuhrman I had the exact same problem in the second book. I only cared about one of the pov's and it was like pulling teeth to get through the rest.
I understand the feeling of watching or reading something and allowing my personal prejudices against certain types of plot details or characters to outshine my enjoyment of the material. I'm convinced that my narrow- mindedness interferes with many experiences, such as enjoying certain books. The evidence that one can be overly swept up by their own beliefs and unable to take off their blinders is that people often change their mind about the same material on a later revisiting. I would not have enjoyed Malazan if I attempted to read it 10 years ago, but now am a huge fan.
I’m about 75% through and while I don’t necessarily disagree with your arguments, I am finding myself really enjoying the book so far. It’s absolutely bonkers and I’m finding that pretty entertaining.
It comes down to personal tastes. Plenty of people love this novel and series. I do argue that the repetition hinders the novel from an editing perspective though. It could have been so much shorter with cleaner storytelling.
Have you read The Iliad lately? Human-gods interaction is meant to follow in this tradition somewhat I believe. Perhaps reading it through this lens might help? No exposition in The Iliad either--they just do stuff or make speeches and you're expected to know the background mythology and figure it all out along the way there too...
Gardens of the Moon was interesting to me and Deadhouse Gates was so beautifully written, but Memories of Ice is where it all came together for me. I appreciate seeing the "I just didn't like it" perspective as opposed to the usual "too complicated/confusing". If you're in for character driven story I do honestly believe you are missing a colossal amount in the series that starts even in the very next book. Characters and their growth through various hardship and trauma is a core theme of the series as a whole
I think I may check out the second book at some point. There's been a lot of comments saying it gets a lot better. We'll see if the setting shifts enough for me, or if it's similar
I remember when I first got Gardens of the Moon, it was for Christmas 3 years ago. I started reading it only to stop after a chapter or two like 10 times. I ended up going camping and forgot to bring any other books with me, so I figured it was either read it then or not at all. I finished it and thought to myself “that was okay, but I’m not sure if it’s worth reading the whole series.” As it turns out I had a friend that owned Dead House Gates, I borrowed it from him on a whim and I just have to say the improvement in characters, plot, and even the magic system was so immediate and fantastic that I read the other 8 books in the span of two weeks. I see and relate to your issues with Gardens of the Moon, and I understand not wanting to slog through the bad to get to the good. But if you ever find yourself drawn back to the world of the Malazan empire it does all turn out to be worth it.
Thanks for the context. A few people have said that book 2 is where things turn for the better. It's been some time since I read this one, so maybe it's time to give that one a try.
@@JasonFuhrman book 2 is definitely MUCH different. Much better, that is. Like, really. Specially the latter half of that book. If you plan on jumping straight to Deadhouse Gates, though, I recommend reading at least a good plot summary of Gardens of the Moon, because otherwise you might be very lost
@@JasonFuhrman Yes. Ian C. Esslemont. I'm currently reading through his Malazan books. Path to Ascendancy is basically about the founding of the Malazan Empire. It is also very hilarious. I mean, the Isle of Malaz, which gives the Empire its name, was just a pirate's nest back then...
I like Malazan but it’s definitely not a character driven work. I liked it more for the world building and lore, but I do think the later books have more interesting characters. Have you read Robin Hobb? Character driven work is her thing. My favorite author of all time
My buddy Raf already said a lot I agree with better than I could, so I’ll just say as a big Malazan fan (on my 2nd read), you’re of course entitled to your opinion - no book’s for everyone, of course - and you haven’t lost this subscriber for it. 😉
I can totally get how the first book can be hard. I have read the main 10 and then did a reread. What I can say is that you can’t actually appreciate the first book on the same level if you haven’t gotten through the series. Another thing I would like to mention about the characters- there is no main/chosen one. For the different POV which are presented I myself find them interesting because they show opposite sides on an argument and in some cases you are not given a finale result, you have to figure it out on your own. And lastly I would like to share my view on some Mages talking with certain gods, the more you get involved in the world you will realise how right you are about gods not being talked to as equal, however, the arrogance of some characters is bigger then most of the gods😂😂😂 PS: I hope you give The Malazan another chance 😀
thanks for the comment! I should have clarified "chosen one" more in the review, meaning people who are literally chosen by higher powers. It doesn't necessarily mean for good only. Could just be used as pawns, which seems to be exactly what's happening. I said this in another reply, but I think if I would have read this back when it would have originally come out, I would have appreciated what Erikson was trying to do here. We'll see if I muster up the courage to comeback :)
So, I finished GOTM. Overall, it was just OKAY. Looking back at the novel, it felt like it took forever to read. I had to refer to the TOR read along articles several times to get all the hidden meaning. While the overall sequence of events was enjoyable, I didn't enjoy the prose and tempo due to the constant character shifts. It felt like someone trying to be too clever. At the end, it felt like work and I kept looking at my kindle hoping for the story to be done. I'm intrigued at some of the elements but I'm not sure if I'll carry on. I might try because I bought all of these on the kindle. But not sure. Other, more easily accessible stories are waiting.
Sounds like you had some of the same problems I did. People keep saying the second book is a lot better, so I may try it, but it'll be a while because, like you said, there are so many other accessible books out there. Thanks for the comment!
Thanks for that review, it was very helpful to me, as I've been debating whether to read the series for a while, and I don't care for magic-heavy fantasy.
Aww this book really picks up at like 70% haha. I think most of the books in this series do that. But the ending is so great. You said already you don't love many of the plot choices, magic, etc so maybe you won't like it, but i don't think you really got the whole flavor unless you finish book one. It's like ordering a meal and eating just the sides and saying you didn't like it.
@@JasonFuhrman it does, but its all the other things going on around the superhero moment that i also love. i think the character interactions are my favorite.
What if you were like in anouther realm lowerer then you thought unaware and the ones the. (Gods 😅look down on have a secret 1 much higher then all and suddenly a sword pierces your realm and your dropped onto the lower realms fallen you find yourself with the cherecter your jate most (the rock) and he starts going crazy ape shit cutting down evrything and everone painting streets red blood of the bastards ??
Malazan is a deep dive so i don't really begrudge anyone for putting it down but i feel like you are missing the point on a lot of things you say you don't like about the book. This is especially true if you're not a fan of high fantasy. Its too bad you didn't finish the book because he lines up a lot of the fantasy tropes you're talking about (super hero, chosen one) in an effort to knock them down. You mentioned you could cut the book down by changing the scenes that are explored from 2 PoVs but often the whole point is to explore an event or theme from different perspectives. One could probably argue this is verbose is an already large novel but Erikson is a master of dancing around a theme from all angles. One of the things to love about malazan is that all of the characters on both sides of a conflict are true to themselves and it makes the world feel real and lived in. Anyways, I hope you find some series you like!
Thanks for the comment! Fantasy is tough for me. I grew up on it and love it, but my tastes have matured the more I read other genres. I think Mark Lawrence and Joe Abercrombie are more to my tastes than mainstream fantasy so hope to find more authors like them.
@@JasonFuhrman It sounds like you should consider Fonda Lee's Green Bone Saga- it's a more modern setting and the fantastical elements aren't as rampant. Its a great series that nails the gritty realism feel and has excellent character work like Abercrombie, Martin and Erikson. To use words similar to the author to describe it: its like the godfather meets house of the flying dragon.
First, I haven’t read Malazan. Second, I think your points are very valid and clearly stated. Third, this seems to be a series which teaches the reader what they find they enjoy and the tropes or aspects of fantasy fiction which they do not enjoy. I’ve watched dozens of booktube videos re:Malazan. But other than “OMG ITS SOOOO GOOD!” All the other “explanations” just leave me feeling like “ugh, no thanks”. If 95% of reviews regard the first book as “just get thru it” than I’m sorry. Eff right off. IMO if you can’t get me in at least the first book? Why would I sludge through the rest? Time is more valuable than a much shorter “ahh that was cool” experience. I work enough. I read more. I’m not interested in combining the two at all. Of course, it won’t stop me from trying out the first 6 chapters. If idc by then I’m good to go.
"If 95% of reviews regard the first book as “just get thru it” than I’m sorry. Eff right off." Exactly thing. If the first book doesn't hook you, then something is broken. Even Malazan fans will tell you that the first book is rough and not as polished as later novels. THEN FIX IT. There is no reason why he couldn't have modified the text and re-released. If anything the first book should be one of the best since it's the introduction to the series.
i had the same expectations going into reading gardens of the moon and also quit halfway though. wayyy too much too fast and not enough character for me
I just finished and found the final 20% good. But I was close to quitting on many occasions. It took me a year I think to finish Gardens. There is no bing reading incentive till very late.
@@JasonFuhrman couldn't keep track of what was happening. Who is doing what, who is who and what is the motive...i was not regular also, perhaps that's why couldn't keep track properly
I finished reading it because as someone who likes multiple POVs I wanted it to all make sense and fit together in the end. But I ended up being disappointed. By the end the things that were happening were no less ambigious and seemingly coming out of nowhere than in the beginning and none of it made sense or felt organic. There was no big payoff to the story for me, just more of the same. It felt like the book was asking so much of me and not giving anything in return. I couldn't even tell you what the title of the book means after finishing it.
This is another problem with first volumes in a series. A lot of writers forget that they need to tell an interesting story per volume as if the reader will never read past that. Too many fantasy authors fall into the trap of only caring about the bigger story.
I dropped it 6 chapters in. Being unceremoniously dropped into a story where it seems like each chapter is a prologue was just too uncomfortable to me. I only got 6 chapters, but in most books I like, that's enough to get a feel for the story, but I felt like I was standing on quicksand the entire time, trying to understand what was going on in any capacity. There didn't seem to be any glue holding the story together. That was years and years ago though, and I've thought about revisiting it several times, but now I'm thinking it might be a waste of time.
From all the comments, I've found that this story is far more about the bigger picture than trying to tell a compelling story in a single novel. Which is unfortunate. As I mentioned in the video, each part of a story needs to hold your attention and be well crafted. This book isn't terrible by any stretch, but it ticked too many of my DNF boxes. I may finish the book down the line just to see if book 2 holds what everyone says. We'll see.
I made it up to those 6 chapters about three seperate times before the quicksand solidified under me, so I definitely feel you there hahaha As an opening to a series it can be seriously disorienting, but there is definitely an intent there in that regard. It is unfortunate that Gardens of the Moon truly shines brightest on a re-read, but I would say that it's definitely worth a try again if it has been something you've been thinking of! The glue can be a little thin at first, but I garuantee it solidifies magnificently!
That is the reason so many people don’t like it, they expect to know what’s going on all the time. In reality it’s a book that treats you as a character, you’re ignorant of so many things for most of the ten books. Then you go back and re read the series and a whole layer is revealed. Then you read again and boom, another layer and so on and so on. It’s the most re readable series I’ve ever picked up 😊
Well I think that's part of the problem. We do know a lot of what's going on most of the time. We see every perspective and how they react. Sure we don't know the gods' plans yet, but every other character motivation is pretty clear.
Big like for this video. Everything you said is exactly what bothered me with Erikson. My favourite authors are Bakker, Martin, Wolfe, Donaldson etc so I was so excited to read Malazan. Sadly, I have tried thrice and everytime I quit somewhere between book 3 and 5. The most recent and probably the last was book three. My two main reasons are the ones you mention. The cast is huge and the stories so many. In book three you are still introduced to dozens of them. Even If I like some of them, I have to wait for hundreds of pages I do not care or even whole novels to get there. But, what bothered me mostly is the feeling that everything is highly powerful, magically significant. Every other person is super powerful, is a god, a demigod, an immortal, can be resurrected etc etc. Every place from a shithole to a vast plain is magical. Every other item. There is no balance. It is so abundant that it loses any meaning for me. Whatever is happening I feel no impact at all. I really wish it was otherwise
Gardens of the Moon is pretty bad, but it does set up some of the lore for the series. I really love the series as a whole, and would recommend powering through. It's up to the individual to spend time or not, delving into this expansive, gritty and fairly humerous world.
You're the first person I've heard say that it's bad. Glad to hear I didn't miss something. I may just read chapter synopses for the rest of it and at the very least try book 2.
Ahh I knew I shouldn't have watched this after seeing it pop up just now (probably cos I've checked out some other Malazan reactions recently), cos I knew I'd disagree 🙊 but appreciate the reasons given and I myself am usually pretty quick to drop a book that I just cant get into. Didn't realise how marmite this series was till well after I'd completed the series! I'm just sad that you couldn't live through the epic tales from this series and find some characters to truly get behind.
@@JasonFuhrman for the most part yeah. There are some important parts in the first book but in my opinion I would just skim through a book summary of the first book because it's so poorly written. The first book was originally intended to be a screen play. The other 9 books are alot more polished in terms of prose.
Hi Jason So glad i heard your review before starting the book as i have a similar taste in grim dark. A taste that prefers the game of thrones and the last word series over others. Can you recommend similar book series?
I'd say a safe bet (with caveats) is The Darkness That Comes Before by R. Scott Bakker. I enjoyed it overall, though it had some drawbacks. I have both a chapter by chapter "vlog" during my reading as well as a spoiler free review on my channel if you want to get an idea if you think you'd like it. That said, it's not perfect. Still looking for that perfect grimdark fantasy novel for me :)
If you want grimdark try Joe Abercrombie. His first trilogy is good but a bit unfocused. If you don't mind starting a sequel trilogy focusing on some of the older main characters, but mostly their children, you could pick up his Age of Madness trilogy starting with A Little Hatred. It's fantastic. You could try Ed Macdonald as well. Maybe some of Mark Lawrence's work? It's also still worth trying Malazan. Maybe start with Deadhouse Gates since you can easily start there and its a stronger book that GotM. The series isn't for everyone, but for the people who do enjoy Malazan, it almost always becomes their #1 favorite series of all time. Also, The Darkness That Comes Before truly isn't that dissimilar to Malazan.
Oh wait I thought of some more good ones in order of best to worst: 1) The Poppy War (skews a bit young for the first half of book one, but that's on purpose because the second half SHATTERS the dreams of these military students who think war is heroic and noble, as they learn war is brutal barbarism). 2) The Forgetting Moon. Really good. Underrated. 3) A Crown For Cold Silver. Hilarious but def grimdark. Funniest books I've ever read. Gallows humor. 4) Priest of Bones 4.5) Sins of Empire by Brian McClellan. It's flintlock fantasy so I'm kinda cheating, but also grimdark. 5) Legacy of Ash, Matthew Ward 6) Godblind
I came into this series blind listening to it on audiobook at work, not going to lie that first day I had to stop and listen to a whole another book series. I was lost and confused. Once I started again and had a better grasp of what I was getting into I love it I'm on book four now now I'm struggling with the new narrator Michael page who I love in the gentleman bastards series. I have a friend that wants to read it but I told him to let me finish it first because I know he'll like it but get frustrated and quit if I can't guide him through.
Well don't force yourself if you don't like it. Books should hook you immediately, in my opinion. You shouldn't have to work for it, especially if it's a mainstream novel.
@@JasonFuhrman No. I also take frequent breaks when I'm reading a book even if I enjoy it. The only time I got captivated in a text heavy activity was when I played video games such as: disco elyisum, pathologic 2, planescape torment.
The repetition in this book kinda reminds me of playing a video game with weird mechanics- it takes a bit of getting used to and even once you do, it might still bother you. That said, I think objectivity is one of those touchy topics a lot of people don't wanna acknowledge, but I think it's critical to growth as an artist. I just quit Royal Assassin from The Farseer trilogy and I wish only wish I had done so sooner. And my issues for not liking it were all on the objective side- characters that were previously very active and competent suddenly becoming passive and incompetent. Characters who were incredibly clever and aware suddenly becoming utterly oblivious and dull, and a major plot-hole from the first book getting glossed over with an "We'll just never know why he did that."
Yeah, that's always the tough thing with series. You can potentially invest so much time into something and then find that it falls apart a few books in. I keep hearing people saying that this series gets better with time. I'm not sure if they fully understand my issues, though.
The setting was set out to be high fantasy early with magic being fairly common on some level. And meddlesome gods are also a fairly common theme. Malazan also has a fairly unique take on divinity. We can agree to disagree on many points but I found the GRRM comparison odd. Malazan is very theme and plot oriented with multiple pov's - some 2000 I have heard - to play their parts. GRRM focuses on characters he forgets about story. So he introduces more character to move things along. Then when that fails characters start acting against type for no particular reason. This is how you end up with Dance of Drivel followed by ....
I've only read the first two GRRM novels in the series. I'm much more of character first, so gravitated toward the way he told those stories. I haven't read far enough to see it fall apart. I'm much more of a fan of fewer POVs. It helps you get deeper into the characters that way. It's not to my tastes when it's spread to thin. With GOTM, I felt like I was jumping around to nearly every character, and it felt far more of an exercise in "completionism" than necessity. Part of why I like fewer POVs is you get a narrower view of the story, through a much more subjective lens. When you see a story from literally every angle, it removes some of the mystery for me and tends to be a form of storytelling I don't gravitate to often at all. Clearly plenty of people like that kind of storytelling. I just found it less to my liking.
Sums up my thoughts. I had read 1-7 and then gave 1-4 a try again before dropping partway through the 4th. The characters aren't compelling and the series collapses under its weight. It seems like a series where events happen, but there is very little emotional involvement even though we're told that this person is a super badass and that thousands were killed in this battle etc.
@@JasonFuhrman There were some great moments. Book 3 and 5 were excellent standalones and the first quarter of 4 was actually some of the best stuff I've read. I was hoping it would go somewhere and it didn't. I'd already been through the introduction of so many characters and plotlines, and it just continued with that to the max and I said screw it
I agree, the gods walking amongst men, Perrin gets trapped in a sword and he's like "Oh, okay" and shrugs it off. The characters seem like they are made out of wood and aren't even human, especially Perrin (even though he's a good character) I have no complaints about Kruppa.
I love the world that has been portrait. Its big and its a lot to digest, but as a fan of battle, tough folks, magic, sex, violence, war, friendships, gore, dimensions, portals, realms, off world entities, demi gods etc etc... there is no other serie like this. For me his world is "real" Ofcourse there are other great "magic series" wich I loved reading (tough with less effort) but this raw one is a league on its own... (not native English so mind my weard way of words) 😅🎉❤
Same here. I gave up somewhere at the middle of the book. I was just not hooked by the plot and the characters. Seems like this book series is just not for me.
I'd really suggest reading the next two books, Deadhouse Gates and Memories of Ice. 2 of the best in the series imo and great indicators to see if you'll like the series. If you're hooked by either one of those (or both) there's a 90%+ chance you'll want to finish the series.
And there's nothing wrong with that. Part of the reason I create these kind of videos is to help people understand it's ok to quit something if it's not doing anything for you. So many people press on for no good reason other than "I should finish this." It took me a while to realize it's perfectly fine to walk away from something that isn't to your tastes. There are far too many books we'll never read in a lifetime, so there is no point in sticking with the ones that are unsatisfying.
Great review. We have very similar taste in fantasy, but I do like Malzan. I am surprised I do like it given the heavy magic use, but something about the way its written interreges me that I ponder on some things expressed. Ericskon sometimes plays on your own biases, then subverts them later. Your review why you did not like it though is spot on, given your taste.
I’m in the, “I absolutely loved it from the beginning!” group and it remains one of my favourites of the series…but we are all different and it would be pretty boring if we all liked the same thing.🤷🏻♀️
I don't understand why you bothered with this video. Malazan isn't intended to be for everyone, and although it's supposed to be read as a series, particular books are more often re-read than others. Many of my Malazan books were stolen but I still have Deadhouse Gates, Memories of Ice, and House of Chains - which I've re-read so many times that the pages are falling out.
One thing I remember when I 1st read this book 20 years ago. The 1st book is extremely confusing. Yes he did do too much too soon. However some of the later books are the opposite. It is pure character driven. Also all the confusing characters are fleshed out a bit too much. They are too slow. So I see where you are coming from. However I would say it's like working out in the gym. At 1st you are like this sucks. Then later you see the results.
I would urge you to read up to book 3 before you give up. This series is amazing, and Erickson really grows as a writer after the first book. Erickson breaks the typical fantasy tropes that you talk of liking, and it does pay off. Having said that, I know the first book is a slog and I gave up on it once and thought the same as you, (it's too much high fantasy, the gods are too much, magic seems too powerful, not attached to the characters, the writing is bad, etc.) but the second book drastically improves and after book 3 I couldn't stop.
My concern is that the core of what he's doing with the genre is just not to my tastes. I don't like magic everywhere. I don't like gods speaking to and literally interfering with humans. I don't like the comic book style villains and minions, etc. I feel that's not going to change.
@@JasonFuhrman I understand, life is too short to read what you don't enjoy! Especially when there is so much to read. I just want you to like it because I like it so much 😂. Also, to anyone looking to give the books a shot, the "Ten Very Big Books" podcast really helped me get into it and I would highly recommend it.
@@JasonFuhrman the magic everywhere and gods interacting with humans doesn't change. However, one thing Malazan DOESN'T have is comically evil bad guys or minions. Erikson does a great job showing all sides of every issue, and always has at least a few characters you care for on every side of any conflict. It's not so much good vs evil and people vs people, each doing what they think is right or what is in their best self interests. I will also say that death DOES have stakes in this series. Yes, characters come back from death, but not very often, when it happens it's very difficult and well explained and it always fundamentally changes them and has real impact.
I felt the same. There is no char development. Erikson's writing style is wonderful as he introduces chars and plots but they turn out to be like GQ photoshoot poses. They look good from the surface but both chars and plots are shallow and nonsensical with very few consequences (like too many resurrections). He is a postmodern writer.
He is a very capable writer, and I understand he gets better, but I did feel much of the character work was weak, especially due to the fact that it was obvious he was more concerned about putting characters in places relating to the plot he had in mind instead of it feeling like a natural progression of who they were, and why they'd be in those locations to drive the story forward. That's something I should have mentioned in the video. It rarely felt like characters were naturally where they should have been due strictly to motivation. It felt far to much like Erikson using them as chess pieces than them being living, breathing people.
@@JasonFuhrman Erikson is very good at introducing villains as world destroyers. Then, you find out that they are really pansies and just about anyone can defeat them. In the second book, Erikson introduces a new dangerous, and powerful char. Because the plot calls for it, this char is attacked by a group of pansy monsters and after defeating them, he succumbs to infections and nearly dies. Why introduce the char as an empire destroyer, then create a plot where he nearly dies of infection? Erikson is like that throughout his series. He writes grandly to set up plots but really fizzles.
I read this series back-to-back. I enjoyed it, but it was very confusing. I think if the author wasn't so confusing this would easily be in Martin and Jordan territory. There is a ton of character building here. And world building. It is definitely high fantasy; in later novels the gods are on earth. But I'm fine with that. Good series except that it was too confusing to fully enjoy. I stopped reading Erikson after this series for that reason.
Thanks for your insight. I didn't find this book confusing, though I expected to after hearing so many things about it. For me it was more about execution and the kind of story he wanted to tell that turned me off.
I'm not sure what @JasonFuhrman meant by the term, but the magic in Sanderson's Mistborn or Stormlight Archive definitely feels superheroey to me (and I can see at least a little similarity with GotM).
![Chris Langan - The Interview THEY Didn't Want You To See - CTMU [Full Version; Timestamps]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9miVG2xT5jY/mqdefault.jpg)
I love Malazen so much I even enjoy listening to why people don't like Malazan. This is a great review, hopefully it can help someone, there is nothing worse than reading something you don't like.
I think it's important to hear different perspectives. I enjoy reading all the explanations from people who do love the series too. But yeah, not every book is for everybody.
kThis was interesting to watch. As someone who has read the whole series three times now I obviously disagree with your assessment in a lot of points but some stuck out. You say that these are your personal opinions and that's fair enough but throughout the video you use "we" a lot which makes it a claim for a larger public. Probably not a deliberate decision but I thought I'd mention that that left a bit of a sour taste with me. The term "chosen one" is a bit of an issue that you probably didn't pick up upon because it is very clear throughout these books that there is no single "chosen one" and being chosen by whatever power is not exactly desirable. In fact, you cold call it a subversion of a trope, something that guy from New Mexico supposedly does so well. Another point: What you call objective or writing craft points is still very much subjective. You say that Erikson can't handle that many povs and that seeing a character go through a thought process, working out things the reader has already been shown is bad. But that is still your subjective taste, possibly a lack of patience with the book. As for the claim about characters, well, if you expect character development within the first 60% of a novel of a 10 book series, a part that does not in fact cover that much in-world time, then maybe that once again is down to a lack of patience or a preferance for very fast-paced narratives. And if you can read through the confrontation between Tattersail and Lorn or the conversations between Lorn and Tool and see no character work done, then maybe that is down to very subjective expectations of how characters should be written. You saying that Whiskeyjack was the only time you felt a character well done does support that as he's probably the closest to a stereotypical character of modern fantasy you can get in this book, the gruff, strong, silent type who's always suffering from his own regrets. As a side-note: The movie script did exist but was much shorter than the novel and I agree you can see this legacy in the novel, in particular the Daruhjistan parts. All good for not liking the book, taste is of course subjective but when talking about writing craft and dropping the o-word, a little care would convince me subjectively more.
Good points Raf. I was waiting for Jason’s reading of the books, thought he would like it 😅
Thanks for the comment! I'll try to respond to your points, and yes, clearly these are my subjective opinions. I know that is redundant ;)
1. "you use 'we' a lot..." You are correct in assuming I'm not trying to speak for everyone's tastes. I don't script these, so it was not my intention to speak for "everyone" if that's how you took it.
2. "there is no single 'chosen one..." Paran is who I'm referring to mostly. I know Tattersail serves a purpose, which is the one I called since I surmised "death" doesn't really have stakes in this book from what I've read, at least to the major players. Whether there are multiple doesn't really matter, it's the fact that a "power" chose an individual or individual for a purpose.
3. "What you call...writing craft is subjective." And I said in the video "you may still think writing craft is subjective."
4. "Erikson can't handle that many POVs...." Yes, I'll stand by my "opinion" that redundancy in writing is poor craft.
5. "If you expect character development in the first 60% of a 10 book series.." That's just patently false. Compelling character development, the key word being "compelling" can be done in a single line. There are moments of it here, but it is sparse for the sheer amount of words written.
6. "conversation between Lorn and Tool." Far too much exposition in these sections for my tastes. Character work happens through action and not information.
7. "Whiskeyjack was the only time you felt for a character..." I don't think it's that he's a stereotype, it's that his struggles are relatable and understandable. That is how you create empathy. Show things that we can grasp onto. It is why 99% of interesting characters in fiction share what some might call "cliche" flaws or tragedies. It's because it works.
It's a shame to see people quit on the first book. This series is an absolute masterpiece. I quit the first book 3 times and kept coming back. On a reread, this book is so much better in seeing how much goes on and how much sets up for later.
You dont know the plot until third book. If you can figure it out.
I think you might like Harry Potter.
Whaaaa?
I was hooked when I read the foreword. (In the store. Yeah, I'm one of those.) It gave me the feeling I had commisioned this book and it was written to fit my taste perfectly. It didn't disappoint and I don't remember ever thinking the ball was dropped, throughout the ten books. That said, the series is LOOOONNNNG!
Glad you enjoyed it. I really thought I was going to get into it, but unfortunately it didn't happen.
Reddit is rarely good for recommendations but honestly when I was looking for a book that had amazing world building they suggested Malazan and they were right on.
Nearly finished with book 7 and ready to for 8
For me a fantasy series succeeds if it makes me feel immersed in the world. So far only 5 fantasy book series have done that: A Song of Ice and Fire, The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Wheel of Time, and The Stormlight Archive.
Malazan fails because it feels like like an RPG and the characters are just not compelling. As a result, I don’t feel immersed in the world. Similar to the way Sanderson’s Mistborn trilogy didn’t work for me because it felt like I was in a video game.
I would have attempted to at least finish the series if it were not for the author himself, Mr Erickson.
I don’t think Mr Erickson takes criticism well. Other reviewers have criticised the series for weak characterisation. Mr Erickson read these negative reviews and responded with a rant on Facebook where he essentially questioned the intelligence of readers. When I read his rant on Facebook I decided it was time to give up on the series. If you are an author who writes for public consumption, your work is fair game- you’re going to get negative and positive reviews. Some people will dislike it and some people (maybe most) will love it. You need thick skin.
But Mr Erickson doesn’t view his series as simple fantasy to entertain people. He sees it as a masterpiece, which is why during an interview he expressed his desire for academics to study his work and lamented that more people are not reading/ studying his books. He specifically wanted a literary scholar to write an academic paper comparing Gardens of the Moon and Dune.
I think the author has an inflated ego or is highly sensitive. Either way his comments really irked me.
I didn't realize Erikson has such a high regard for his work. I agree with you. If you put yourself out there you need to be open to criticism. Getting angry at negative reviews just shows your self consciousness. He probably wants to be regard as Tolkien, but he's not in that class.
I recently finished Gardens of the Moon and overall I enjoyed it and I'm very much interested to read the next books.
I understand your criticisms and they definitely are fair, but I do enjoy the spectacle magic and gods among men. Also the redundancy didn't bother me because, like you said, i did read it from the characters pov, and I liked to see everyone figure things out differently.
For the most part I just went along with what the book was doing, and mostly enjoy the moment to moment storyline.
Glad you enjoyed it and want to continue. I totally understand the magic and spectacle preference. That's part of the equation for me. It could be why I veer away from most mainstream fantasy. I do understand I'm in the minority so there aren't many options for me in the genre.
One of the things I enjoyed which I think you may not have was the dissemination of the information through the characters. An event would happen and you would see some pov's discuss and theorise with each other. An perhaps what I enjoyed more than that was when a specific character was so focused on their own goals they missed out on this information, and so you could see them acting on "outdated" info. characters didn't just "know" things and actually acted on what they thought they knew even if they where mistaken.
And then when I was re-reading with your videos you can really see how all the characters have their own motivations and hidden agendas that are working in the background. Obviously you won't pick up on them as you are just meeting them and you don't have the ten thousand pages of context, but it is crazy how you can read Gardens after the series and it feels like an entirely new book, bear in mind I didn't read it as closely as you were analysing it the first time.
Overall its a damb shame that you bounced off the series however I respect that it is a big commitment and that if its not for you its not for you. But even with that being said you have got to at least read Deadhouse Gates come on my dude like it is the best series ever and if you read to DG you will see it I know it to be true hahah. I feel like it is also so hard to accept as there is everything in this series so their will definitely be parts that will blow your mind but evaluating if it is worth getting there is also a consideration to take.
I may eventually go back to it, just out of curiosity to see if the second book is as good as everyone says it is.
The thing with the repetition only bothered me because I didn't feel like it was adding anything personally. It did help in case I missed info the first time, but I don't need to see every character process every event. Maybe the big ones. But the way he structured the book was part of the problem. Way too many POV shifts, which just made the reiteration of the information worse. For me.
@@JasonFuhrman it’s hard at first but you get used to it. And the beauty of the re reads only kicks in once you read a few of the books. I started off with memories of ice for some reason and I much preferred that way of entering the story. Maybe start with that.
@@JasonFuhrmangardens of the moon was also written way before the other books, he really perfects his style as the books go by. Even so, after you’ve read the entire series, going back to gardens of the moon is just amazing. Every death of a major character just hits even harder at that point.
The series is brilliant. Gardens of the Moon drops you in the middle of an unexplained world and is somewhat difficult to follow at times. As the years have gone by I’ve gotten so I sometimes recommend for new readers to read a comprehensive summary of the first book, then read the next 2-4 books and go back and read Gardens of the Moon. The characters and world make so much more sense then. I know it’s a killswitch for some people, but you really get sucked into the series by about book 4. Lot of reading to get there.
I plan to read book 2 because of many of the comments here. If it doesn't redeem itself, I won't go further. I don't believe it should take a number of books to get into a story.
I was so frustrated by this book when I first read it for the same points you brought up, but by the end I was loving it and I'm so glad I carried on for the rest of the series!
Well I'm glad your efforts were worth it. I didn't think this video would be this big, but I've appreciated the discussion to help my get a broader view in case I decide to revisit the series.
Good for you, man. I stuck it out and quit the SERIES at around 60%.. I tried so hard, but I quit.
What did it in for you?
I finished the first book, though on a second try and I just couldn’t make myself continue. I can tell from the writing style that Stephen Erickson is a fantastic author. Just something about this book makes me not care about anything or anyone in it. 😩 and I wanted to love it….
Now that this video has more or less blown up (by my channel's standards), I'd like to say thanks to everyone who had contributed to the conversation. Whether you agree with me or not, I appreciate all the perspectives. Keep 'em coming!
I gave up on this book like five times. Luckily
I’m a stubborn bastard and picked it up a sixth time. Ate the rest of the books up after that.
My favourite series.
Why did you push though if you didn't like it?
@@JasonFuhrman I started on memories of ice, the 3rd book. There was something about the fight scenes that really drew me in. By the time I’d got through the siege of captustan I was converted and devoured the rest of the books obsessively.
Gardens of the Moon was tough. I used to play AD&D a lot in highschool and remember a lot of odd characters, settings, and half baked plots that, if you roll with the punches and tolerate some lameness, you end up having a great time. This book is like a D&D game with a super smart and creative DM who's just cutting his teeth. If you stick with the campaign and keep showing up, you end up having some very memorable evenings.
Makes sense since this was based on a game that Erikson played with his friends.
Lol at least 60% of the reason I'm still powering through is because the author is a fellow Canadian haha. I find I'm not reading the book as much as experiencing it but once I've finished and looked back at the chapter summaries, I feel like it was a positive experience, but it is the most challenging read I've ever done. Somehow, not in a bad way. It's like reading Shakespeare I suppose. I feel like I'm getting something good out of it, but it's hard to understand what's happening moment to moment.
Every once in a while I get flashes of understanding, and in those moments the book is super good and according to readers, that happens more and more until it all makes sense, but this story definitely doesn't hold your hand at all. I do particularly like the T'lan Imass though.
The best thing I can think to say about this series is that EVERY criticism is fair and/or true, but it's still super good.
haha well glad to hear you're powering through.
Maybe it's because I read it so closely and made videos about each chapter, but I never found it extremely tough to follow. Sure there were things that happened that didn't inherently make sense on the spot, but that's fairly common with stories at some point.
The sheer amount of characters, events, and places I can see being a lot to keep up with, and I think that's ok. Internalizing that takes time.
I may do like another commenter suggested and just read chapter summaries and try book 2. Everyone is telling me that's when it comes together, so if it doesn't work for me then, it's just not for me.
This book is not for me either. I found that I didn’t care about any of the characters. Before people bash me, I tried my best to like it. I was able to finally finish it by listening to the audio, but I will not continue with the series.
Read what you enjoy. If this is not the series for you then find something else and have fun.
I will not try to entice you to carry on because the second book is just as difficult to get into and even more brutal. Book 3 , Memories of Ice is my favourite book ever but I understand not everyone will buy into the series.
I have read so many Hugo award winning novels and thought they were garbage so do not feel bad if something is not your cup of tea
For whatever it's worth, the balance skews way more towards character in all of the subsequent books (by the start of the next book you can immediately sense the progression). So much so that by Fall of Light you'll be wishing for more plot and shorter scenes :D.
GotM is full of great ideas with some less than stellar plot progression. Whenever I've recommended the series to people I describe GotM as the hurdle you just have to get through. In retrospect it plays a lot better, which doesn't make getting into the series any easier. I can understand bailing out now, but you really are missing out on some truly special moments as the series continues. Everyone has their own tastes though and at least you gave it a shot!
Edit: I should add that I'm one that tends to prefer "low" to "high" fantasy. Here, the high fantasy is soft enough that the fuzziness of its rules adds to the mystery. A series like ASOIAF relies on its groundedness to establish its sense of place and consequences. Malazan regularly breaks free of what audiences feel is or should be possible, but somehow each of the times it seems to break its own rules, the results feel inevitable. That's a tough balancing act to achieve and I really give Erickson credit for consistently pulling it off.
Thanks for the insight! Maybe down the line I'll give book 2 a shot and see if it solves problems I have. I have never been a fan of slogging through content to get to "the good stuff" but you never know.
@@JasonFuhrman Malazan is a series that succeeds for me because of its problems. Its a weird comment to say, I know, but for me its a series that started at a 6/10 , but has continued to give back to me in unexpected ways as I've read through the main series and into the prequels and side stories. The more you dive, the more questions you have, and the deeper you want to go. But as that happens you also start to realize that you've grown to care about Whiskeyjack and Fiddler, and all the others. For every scene that falls flat, there are others that are spellbinding. Book Five for me may be the high water mark of fantasy.
The thing is, if someone wrote that to me after I'd read just 60% of GotM, I'd think its just someone that has their fan-blinders on. That first book has problems. The tenth book also has problems (that is to say, nothing can ever be perfect). But the series as a whole succeeds for me because it slowly and surely plumbs an emotional depth to match its scope. You may never get there - hard to say, but I think that's the reason that the series resonates so much with people.
As a malaz fanatic it saddens me that it didn't tickle your fancy. May it warm up to you in time 🙂
I think what people mean when they say the series is "confusing" is that the full context and significance of much of what you read in these books is rarely revealed when you first read it. It's not so much that the writing is difficult to understand as it is the author's intent that the reader be in the dark in order to set up a later reveal. It's one of the things that makes the series stand out in comparison to most fantasy series I've read which tend to be fairly linear. But what else should I have expected with source material derived from a tabletop roleplaying campaign? As I recall from my D&D days, every good DM knows how to keep their players in the dark!
Yes, knowing that this came from a D&D campaign makes sense. I didn't find it confusing, like you said, which was a surprise based on what I heard before reading it. I hear the writing craft improves in later novels. It's too bad he didn't go back and revise this one to be a tighter read.
Couple of things: gods talking with men is easily explained through the concept of ascendance in which formerly mortal characters change in cosmic importance in the history of this world. The superhero comment is really strange to me because there are no clear heroes or good vs evil in this series. Another thing, your characterisation of this novel as plot over character is a misapprehension on your part. This series is theme over plot, not plot over character. All plot developments here are in service of thematic exploration. And Erikson’s approach to character building is different because he doesn’t spell things out but only observes behavior. He lets the reader make their own interpretations of their behavior but Erikson is very consistent in slowly building up great characters over the course of the series, but you have to engage with it as an historical text. This book was playing very different games which you didn’t pick up on.
hey thanks for the comment! Let me try to clarify.
1. "Gods talking with men is easily explained through...ascendance." I don't think defining a process is my issue. It's that I just don't care for that in fantasy.
2. "The super hero comment is really strange...because there are no clear heroes or good vs evil." That is a semantic problem on my part. I don't necessarily mean "super hero" as someone who fights for good. I mean it as a term of someone who has powers, physical, magical, or whatever, that elevate them to do great things over the general population. There are many characters in this book that fit that description.
3. "This series is theme over plot, not plot over character." I'm not sure this solves any problems I had with the book. It's still intent to deliver a "message" over creating a story with characters you empathize with. Theme should exist in a story, only when told through characters we feel for. Theme generally develops once you see the arc of the character(s), not before. Of course, everyone creates stories differently, but I'd argue character should begin the process, and theme will naturally emerge. If you start with theme you're in danger of putting puzzle pieces together to serve your theme rather than focusing on an emotional journey through character.
@@JasonFuhrman Well yes, thematic explorations need stories with characters and it would help if those characters are compelling. Many people who like the series seem to have no problems with Erikson's way of character writing, so it might just be a personal thing that it works for some and not for you. The characters do get layered but Erikson stimulates the readers to observe closely their actions instead of clearly explaining their thoughts and feelings as other authors might do. It's a stylistic choice. I'm saying this and also my comment about theme over plot because these are tools that could allow you to take much more enjoyment out of these novels once you accept them. But it seems that Erikson's version of fantasy is simply not to your taste, so I won't try to convince you.
Dude, it's just bad writing.
I quit recommending what I view as the high point in modern literature because nobody can finish it who’s not looking specifically this type of book. With that said, you cannot provide an analysis of this series until the first 3 books are finished(which is really one book).
I can agree with that. But I feel like with any book, regardless of when it comes together needs to hold the interest of the reader. It had far too many things that rubbed me the wrong way: cheesy dialogue and situations in parts, the POV redundancy, character reactions and actions. I'm all for a book to be about bigger things and not fully explain itself. But this one was just not to my tastes in too many ways.
@@JasonFuhrman i read these books the first time in the early 2000s, didn’t know a soul who read them. I like going into books blind; with that in mind, I loved the first book but the second was a struggle for me but I preserved. When I read the 3rd book(the best modern book I’ve ever read) the payoff was huge, and I regretted my attitude towards the second book. Upon reread, I felt #2 is a masterpiece. With that said, I think Malazan fans grieve when strong book readers (like you) abandon the series because it is so dear to us. I appreciate your response, and wish you well. Cheers
I wish I would have read these when they came out originally. I feel like it was doing some interesting stuff from the time, but it's difficult sometimes to see it through that lens. Especially when a lot of fantasy series have learned from this and even creating their own innovations.
I just finished the book. The early parts of the book felt tedious. Then it got interesting and I was hooked in.
Then at the end, everything wraps up rather quickly and some what oddly. And the book managed to introduce new confusing elements.
I still liked the book even with the issues I had with it.
Definitely tedious. Glad it worked out for you.
I just finished the book, and I give up. Malazan is not for me.
Favorite Fantasy series but also one I completely understand folks not getting into or even just not enjoying once they've gotten into it. It has so many quirks that you'll either love or have to endure and for that reason it's gonna be divisive as hell.
Definitely a huge fan base, and I can see why people enjoy it. We all read for different reasons. Some like the sprawling epics with many characters and world-changing plots, and others prefer quieter, more introspective stories.
And there is no universal book that everyone likes. That's just how it is. I'm glad I gave it a go after all these years though.
im reading the book right now, im also at around 60% of the books and i agree that the book is not so hard to read actually. The events that take place are shared among many PoVs, but you know that side A has 3 characters, side B has 3 characters and the chapters are unfolding around them, so it's easier to follow.
As regards to the redundancy of the PoVs, i didnt really feel that. You get to understand better the character's personality as you see how they process each event. In fact i loved how the book was written it made me feel way more immersed to the actual story and to how mysterious everything is.
Yeah I'm always surprised people think this book is difficult. I'd heard that for years before I tried it. While it has a lot going on, I wouldn't call it difficult.
Super hero? Who’s the hero?
Maybe "super hero" is the wrong term. What I mean is a large number of people with great power, physical, magical, or something in between doing "super" acts.
Chapter 2 comes to mind.
Chosen one? Where's the chosen one?
@@AvanToor Yeah honestly on my first read it was pretty clear to me this was not a single protagonist narrative. A typical saying that comes to mind is that Erikson's writing style in terms of plot structure and character dynamics is not unique to litterature, but it is unique to Fantasy. And that's okay! Not everything has to be for everyone :)
I typically think I grasped onto his writing and story elements in Gardens in part because I've read far more classic science fiction than I have fantasy. And Erikson writes much more like Clarke or Hebert than he does Brando Sando (Who I also love)
And still, it's perfectly fine for anyone to feel anyway they feel about any works of art :)
And to the rest of you who have witnessed a certain walk in The Glass Desert (you know who you are) while some of this man's takeaways are funny to us in the grand picture we can look back upon, most people have seen but one or two brush strokes of that painting.
It's okay for new readers to fall off fast, but remember what a certain someone once said, "The fallen know but one challenge, and that is to rise once more."
@@Yoda0VGs I think you're confusing me with someone else. I just reacted to the fact that this man seems to expect certain things. I'm sorry if I gave you the impression of being a Sanderson reader.
Really enjoyed the way you laid out your points. Like you, I am not a fan of magic widely available, not a fan of Gods walking among men, and not a fan of resurrections....so I contended with those things while reading Gardens of the Moon. However, after finishing it and let it sink in my head I felt compelled to read Deadhouse Gates and thought the characters were much better developed on that one. Gardens of the Moon took me like 5 weeks to read, the next 2 books took me 8 days each. Long story short, I am on book 4 and loving the ride.
I think there's noticeable improvement in his writing starting on book 2, except for whenever there's any sort of romance happening (subjective ofc) but those are always 0 to 100 in a split second.
Anyways, great review, wish it would have worked for you cuz now that I discovered your channel, I think your reviews of the series would have been super interesting!
Thanks for the comment! I've heard good things about book 2 and have decided to give it a try after many comments suggesting I do so. Here's hoping it works out for me.
“Kruppe is generous enough this morning to disregard dubious observation regarding his eating habits and the habits of his orifices.”
― Steven Erikson, The Complete Malazan Book of the Fallen
Kruppe was the best thing about this book.
@@JasonFuhrman “Join us, friend,” said Kruppe. “Sit here by this fire: this scene paints the history of our kind, as you well know. A night, a hearth, and a tale to spin…”
― Steven Erikson, The Complete Malazan Book of the Fallen
Malazan is an acquired taste, but I absolutely love it. I love it when pieces start to fall into place and when rereading entire books, after having progressed in the series, you pick up on so many details. The way everything is connected is just beautiful. However I will also say I could not read Malazan the way I read something like Mistborn or Cradle: front to back in one or two days. Malazan takes time. I read it in small pieces over the course of weeks or months per book. If one is a very dedicated reader, who cant put a book away after reading for an hour, I feel like Malazan will burn you out.
I've just finished the book and I enjoyed the review as I felt some of these frustrations. I don't agree with the 'chosen one' trope applying to the book at all though.
I should have probably clarified the "chosen one" trope in the book. When I say "chosen one" I mean someone who is literally chosen. In the book there are arguably two people who are chosen. Paran and Tattersail. I don't mean "to save the world" just chosen and not someone who overcame challenges of their own free will. And I'm not talking about fighting against being "chosen" either. The mere act of being chosen is what I'm referring to.
@@JasonFuhrman I think I get you, maybe, at least with Paran. Not sure about Tattersall as hers was more of a resurrection and she sort of earned by an impressive display of power and she made an effort to remain alive in some form. It was more a giving of aid than a choosing.
Whereas with Paran and Crokus it is difficult to know if the characters choices are their own so it's hard to fully get behind their character. Especially when you don't know why they were chosen in the first place.
Perhaps I still misunderstand you, but either way I think what you describe is not the 'chosen one trope' for most people, or at least for me, but a trope nonetheless.
I think in the latter stages of the book, the mystery of the gods is lessened and they effectively become characters, which other books rarely do, at least as far as I've read. And I think that understanding of character makes these things less frustrating in retrospect. But as you say in the video, it's not necessarily good writing to frustrate your readers and hope they struggle through to the pay off.
Thanks for the response.
i am reading this book right now. this book so far has a lot of information for me to digest. a lot of terms and a lot of types of weird people and a lot of strange events are happening. it's very intriguing, so much so that i want to finish this first book. i want to find out more about the strange customs, the strange magic systems....like what the f is happening?
haha yep. Definitely a lot to digest. Glad you're enjoying it!
Apparently this series is going to get REALLY good later. Just watched a video by Matt's fantasy book Reviews where he asked about 30 booktubers to name their favorite fantasy book and the last book of this Fallen series got the most votes! Personally, I have not heard of Steven Erikson, so I was quite surprised.
I have also heard the same thing, and maybe it does get wildly better. It's hard for me to justify pushing through something to get to "the good stuff." I firmly believe things should be good from the beginning, not in subsequent volumes. That said, I may return to it at a later date to see what I think of the next volume at least.
Full disclosure: I do not have mainstream tastes, so I am quite positive I'm in the minority here. I encourage you to check out the book to see if it's right for you.
@@JasonFuhrman Maybe we should just read the last book to get to the good stuff, lol
@@anttisaksi5735 hahaha
I read enough of those books, and honestly if Dune was considered "fantasy". Dune would be better than practically all of them apart from LOTR. just my two cents.
Malazan is very different from any fantasy novel I read.. I’m almost done and have a 50-50 love hate relationship with it. It has incredible moments and creativity, but mind numbingly frustrating parts
I quit the first book years ago, and just picked it up today again, to see if I was missing something. Nope, it's still tedious :(
yall suck lol jesus im not a good reader and read that thing in 2 weeks no problem and enjoyed it. Just my truth.
You say it in a nicer way than I can. This book isn't for people interested in human relations and how to find out what can make life better for all. All characters are objects with main purpose to kill or be killed in pointless and boring descriptions of violence. It's like reading about a never ending chess game. It has interesting language and some creative ideas. Otherwise it's on a really low level.
haha, well thanks! Yeah, it's painfully obvious the characters are there to serve the plot. Erikson doesn't seem interested in exploring a character-driven plot, but one that is orchestrated from a 30,000 foot view, with gods, or Erikson himself, gazing down at a massive, as you put it, chessboard.
I have to say, Eriksons character work is outstanding.
I wish I agreed. I wanted nothing more than to like this book and series. It's been some time since I've gone through an epic fantasy series. Was hoping this might be the next one.
@@JasonFuhrman to be fair, Gardens of the Moon is the least character driven book of the series. There's only one or two characters in the book that have any real "arc", most stay the same. But most of his characters end up developing over the course of many books or years, especially since there are so many POV's and very few main characters.
Also if you are interested, Erikson did write an interesting piece on characterization on a facebook post he did, I think its worth a read. A lot of people have criticized his character work, but I think its because there are two schools of thought on what the "best" way to do characterization is, and as usual Erikson picks the less accessible option lol
@@dentonholmgren4886 cool, thanks for the info on the article. I'll look for it. I understand that characters probably develop over the series but I still think it's worthwhile doing something in the first book. It's the first chance to win readers over. You can expect them to "get it"after a series of books. If anything, the first volume should hook you the most.
@@JasonFuhrman I understand that for sure. I had read Gardens of the Moon years ago and didn't return til last year, but this time armed with a guide that made things easier to follow since I had a tough time the first time. What hooked me the second time was actually the thing you didn't like, meaning the extremely powerful characters and gods among men. Its something I wouldn't have liked 5 or 10 years ago, but this time I really enjoyed having those elements. Although I'm still not a big fan of the Sanderson types of magic.
I ran across this video while about three-fourths of the way through Gardens of the Moon, and I'm going to force myself to finish it, but I'm not enjoying it that much, for reasons that may not be quite the same as yours but at least have some overlap.
One of the reasons I read fantasy is to immerse myself in another world and vicariously experience that world through the eyes of the viewpoint character(s). That works a lot better when there's only one or, at most, a very few points of view, and when the reader is allowed to know about as much about the world and about what's going on as the viewpoint character does. This book definitely does not give me that.
I agree. Way too many povs in this one so it loses focus and leads to repetition.
I'm just reading it. I am pretty the much same as you but i just haven't read too much of high fantasy so I'm going to finish it and I'm going to read second one and then decide if I'm continuing or not. Funny thing is I'm pretty much clear on what i know and what i don't know as far as plot goes, which is what these books are notorious for right? Not knowing what the hell is going on. I understand what's going on or at least i have connected the dots that are currently given but the multiple character povs that just constantly change are just obnoxious, i swear i read one chapter where he changed three of them in 5-10 pages. I heard he went to the writing "school" in between the first and second book and that the second one is much better written.
I had no trouble following the story either, which isn't what I expected. I heard this was a complex and difficult to follow novel. I she with the POV shifts. He should have stuck to one per chapter.
I'll probably read book 2 at some point to give him a fair shot since so many people say it's way better. If you read it before me come back and let me know how you feel
I can appreciate the opinion. I am actually someone currently reading book 5 and would say we don't get much more explanation about book one even at this point. That said, I enjoyed some of the things you weren't enjoying in this book that made me interested enough to finish the series. For me, the interplay of gods and mortals despite the power difference was compelling, and the sense of spectacle and amount of things happening, even if they may at times seem superfluous or overwhelming, created its own sense of mystery and awe that made me intrigued to continue. Even then, every book has had sluggish parts, or parts I could understand would turn people away. For me, it wasn't until book four when I finished a book and was very excited about the direction of the series. From what I've read most fans felt that after book three, which was certainly good but I found it waned at the end. The series hasn't revealed anything to me that would make it worth the reputation of its diehard fans, but I'm less than halfway and what I've read so far is certainly quite good. Malazan has a certain appeal, but its more detached and historical in perspective which makes it harder to emotionally invest in. Regardless, its entertaining enough for me to keep reading but I understand others losing steam.
Thanks for the comment! I appreciate the perspective. It sounds like you really enjoy it but aren't gushing about how dramatically it changes in book 2, which is a much more even-keeled opinion to me. I find franchises have their die-hard fans that will defend it to the grave, so it's nice to see someone a little more unbiased.
One of my issues when it comes to reading is I rarely DNF a book. Even if I'm not engrossed/enjoying it, I push through to the end. An compulsion for closure? An unrelenting opitimism? I may never know.
I used to be that way. I figured I'd never read all the books I want to, so why waste time on ones that aren't working for me.
@@JasonFuhrman a good perspective. Need to adopt that! Haha...
Quick points:
Not everyone in the Malazan world can use magic. Very few people in Gardens can use magic.
There is no chosen one plot in malazan, especially not in gardens, its activley avoided at all costs. Im confused why this was mentioned?
Gods don't really just walk around. Shadowthrone and Dancer maybe, but obviously there's an in story reason for that with their wanting to get revenge on the empress for their murder
"Not everyone in the Malazan world can use magic. Very few people in Gardens can use magic."
But it's very prevalent in the books. We have a mage battle in the prologue, an epic super-hero level war in chapter 2. We have a character turn into a puppet. We have people possessed. There's even more than that, and that's just the 60% of the novel I read.
"There is no chosen one plot in malazan, especially not in gardens, its activley avoided at all costs. Im confused why this was mentioned? "
Paran is literally "chosen" by the gods of chance, no less. You don't get much more cringey than that. Tattersail is also pretty much chosen after destroying herself to be reborn. Crokus is also chosen. Now when I say "chosen one" I don't mean sent off to save the world. I mean someone who is chosen by a higher power or force for whatever means.
"Gods don't really just walk around. Shadowthrone and Dancer maybe, but obviously there's an in story reason for that with their wanting to get revenge on the empress for their murder"
The mere fact that gods actually speak to anyone was a huge turnoff for me. It's a waste in my opinion to have that kind of transparency so early in a novel. It kills all mystery.
@@JasonFuhrman There's definitely a lot of magic in the books. Due to the fantasy setting. But I think that's a very different point to saying that everyone can do magic. Even in the examples you just gave (assuming none of those people died), that leaves maybe 6 people who can do magic. And thats me including people like Kruppe who will largely just conjure sweet roles, and Tayschren and Topper who are in the book for like a scene. Assumig they did die, or were only present at the start for a scene, there's maybe 3 people who can do magic?
I mean I guess, but surely the fact that whole trope is flipped on its head should be a posstive in your eyes? I.e, Paran legit rejects the Gods of chance, he basically tells them to fuck off, though I can see the issue you could have with that. But I think the way SE tackles the chosen one trope is exactly the antithesis of what you dislike. Also, Tattersall certainly wasn't chosen.
Your last point Im struggling with. I personally found the mystery surrounding those two Ascendants (shadowthrone and Dancer) really intriguing. So im curious what mystery was lost by them interacting with select mortals? Or other gods?
@@kristienwhitney-johns5863 Yes, this is fantasy, and yes there can be magic, but it has more magic than I prefer, which literally kills the "magic" for me. Take something as classic as Lord of the Rings. Magic is ancient and mysteries and only a few can wield its power. This, to me, is what makes magic special. Not when it's a literal profession. Or take something like Joe Abercrombie's work. How many people are performing magic? I hope that helps to explain where I'm coming from.
Maybe I could appreciate the "chosen one" commentary if I'd read the book when it came out in the '90s. But fantasy has taken big shifts in recent times, so while I can appreciate what he's doing from a chronological standpoint, it's not as innovative reading it now, if that makes sense. That reminds me of another thing I forgot to bring up in the video: Paran talking to the gods as if they are ordinary people has a similar effect was many people performing magic. It ruins the mystery and the grand scale of things. Talking to gods and magical super battles in the first half of a novel does little to pique my interest. It makes what should be extraordinary feel ordinary, to me.
I hope my last few sentences help articulate why it ruins the mystery of powerful beings by talking to them as if they are ordinary people. If not, let me know and I can try to explain further. Thanks for the discussion!
@@JasonFuhrman except the actual mystery of those gods went right over your head in this novel 😂
What mystery?
I slogged through the first book. It wasn't "difficult". It's that there was no protagonist. No stakes. No story, character arc, companionship, journey. It was just a bunch of badash clips of flight, teleportation, invisibility, gods, shapechange, resurrection ... with all the magic, how could there be any stakes? I then read reviews that say you have to go in with a spreadsheet and/or reread the series for the first 2 books to make sense.
It does read like the first draft of a movie script.
I have heard it gets way better, but it's really hard to justify my time to push through when there are so many other books to read. Plus, I doubt all of my other issues will be resolved, since it seems that his style of fantasy won't drastically change.
'No stakes'....riight sure if you say so.
The last 100 pages was like a stupid Michael bay film where he smooshed a bunch of action setpieces and set up a sequel. He couldn't stick the landing, even though i thought he started the story strong.
Interesting video. I’ve owned gardens of the moon and deadhouse gates for about 6 years. Got them together in the ladder half of 2017. Tried to pick up gardens but never really had the motivation or time to finish. I read the prologue with young Ganoes probably like 5 times. Furthest I got in those years was tattersail finding out hairlock is in the marionette. I think that’s only like chapter 2. But this year I finally sat down and finished it and man am I glad I did. I’m currently about half way through memories of ice and this series has blown me away so far. I totally understand people not getting into it though. Malazan reminds me of Elden ring in the sense that it’s tough to get through and it’s not for everyone, but if you can push through it you’ll end up experiencing one of the largest and coolest fantasy worlds ever.
I'm planning on giving this series one more shot by trying book 2. We'll see how it goes.
@@JasonFuhrman ...without finishing the first book ?
For anyone who struggles with GOTM I would recommend Ian esstlemonts Paths to Ascendency series first; introduces the world, characters and magic system a lot more easily for people who haven’t read epic fantasy series.
Personally I cannot agree with anything you’ve said in this review and I believe that if you even just got to the 2nd book ‘Deadhouse Gates’ by the end your entire view will change.
‘The chosen one’ the whole point of the series is that there is no one chosen person who can ‘save the day’ everyone in the series plays a part no matter how small a character they are.
Erikson MPOV cannot be touched even by GRRM to have a series with 100s of named characters who are all distinguishable from each other is genius.
Honestly if you ever finished this series nothing you will ever read again will come close to it. I think you do yourself a disservice by not atleast trying to finish the first 3 books. If you can get to that point and still have the views you currently have on the series then the greatest fantasy series every written just isn’t for you.
I do keep hearing about book 2. I wonder, though, it doesn't seem like magic everywhere and a good number of all powerful characters, interactions with the gods, and so on are going anywhere though, right? That's one thing I just don't care for in my fantasy. Of course I like magic, wonder, etc, but here it's cranked up a little high for my tastes.
I appreciate you sharing your opinion and am not trying to detract from anyone's enjoyment. I just like to share when a book doesn't work for me, and I've seen many others come to my same conclusion. That said, maybe down the road I'll revisit it and see if book 2 solves the issues I have. I'm sure it will with some, but it seems the high fantasy tropes it uses are here to stay.
I was skeptical about the series after the first book but as soon as I finished the 2nd I was sold on everything. In the 2nd there is very little magic used at all and only a handful of POVs so I think will work better for you.
As for the rest of the series yes the magic system is high end but it’s actually very rarely used like the scene of pale where it’s all out. You see the consequences of having this power and the toll it takes on the mages.
There are no ‘all powerful characters’ you will quickly learn that as you go through the books.
The gods are very rarely seen at all after the first book it’s more subtlety implied when a god is influencing events and you never really are shown the plans each has in place you have to work that out for yourself.
‘Tropes’ cannot be associated with this series at all, you believe you are seeing one for it to be completely subverted in a way you never would’ve expected.
I understand a lot of people have trouble with the first book but honestly I guarantee anyone that finishes the series will have it in there top 3 at least of best story’s ever read/seen. I will write an ‘I told you so’ when you get into the series.
Gardens of the Moon bypasses exposition and gradually fills in the blanks through dialogue. Bludgeoning the reader early with a grocery list of names, undeveloped, uninteresting characters involved in cacophonous, military jargon laced pov in medias res conversations. This slog gets compounded by Erikson's Malazan cosmos, insufficiently fleshed out to feel compelling or for one to care or become truly invested in. Apart from a narrational consensus formed around events such as Kellanved's assassination? Surly/Laseen of the Claw assuming control of Malazan Imperial expansion in Pale and Darujhistan and Anomander Rake floating on Moon's Spawn fighting in a Mage led conflagration in Pale. All the other plots of the novel sink under the weight of multilayered Machiavellian intrigue at the hands of unseen gods, ascendants, guilds, military operations, spies, assassins, witches, demons etc... Malazan is also a universe where a pervasive and distracting Tarot-Shamanistic-Voodoo divination-magic system of "Warrens" envelops everything, making the believable aspects of this world feel oppressive, ugly and claustrophobic. Ultimately, GOTM reads like a knock off Thucydides with smatterings of 19th century Archaeological and Anthropological travel writings from Africa, Middle East and Indonesia.
More eloquently said haha. I did forget about the exposition through dialogue, which is definitely a big flaw for me. Most noticeable during the conversations between Lorn and Tool. I remember glazing over those parts.
Idk if I would categorize this as 'superhero fantasy'. I would 100% put The Way of Kings and much of Sanderson's fantasy work into that category, but Malazan feels much different. Yes, magic is more of a job, a skill that can be learned, than some mysterious aspect of this world, as you say, but it's less about the fantastical elements and more about how they are utilized that put something in that category, I think.
The 'chosen ones' of these stories don't feel like Neo from the Matrix or Ang from Avatar, stories in which the hero learns how to utilize his powers so that he can save the world and crush the villain underfoot. You see this type of tale told in Sanderson's The Way of Kings, for instance - the main characters are all learning to use their OP abilities in service of beating the bad guys. That isn't Malazan at all.
The 'chosen ones' in Malazan are more like victims and pawns than your typical chosen-one hero. They are individuals who are swept up in something they don't understand, and it affects their lives in very detrimental ways. We see this in Sorry's storyline - an innocent girl who is literally possessed by one of these ascendants, which steals much of her memories and takes her far from her home. We see it in Paran, who has no idea what's going on, half the time (his brushes with these 'deities' really starts to affect him in the third book, but the shades of his torment are already present in Gardens). I would say that the chosen-one elements are more of a subversion of that trope than anything else, at least so far as I've read (the first three books). Perhaps that will change in the sequels, but this is a pretty grimdark world, so I doubt that will be the case.
All that said, I 100% understand why someone wouldn't finish Gardens of the Moon. It is very plot-driven - I first tried to read it after a reread of ASOIAF, and I had to put it down - I think it might be impossible to go from the rhythm of GRRM to that of Erikson, and enjoy the latter. I ended up reading a few other things, then revisiting it, and I burned through it. The only things I can disagree with you on are the 'superhero fantasy' and the 'chosen one' comments, but the rest is very understandable.
i am actually listening to all ten books and then i will read all ten books. a helpful tool is to use malazan wiki for help with all the different races and warrens and the numerous characters.
Damn that is quite the task
@@JasonFuhrman i must agree. but also note that not everyone requires wiki and so on. i sure don't and I like the books. so.
I have just started Book 1 in audio form, so looking forward to how I like it (tried it a long time ago, but steered in other directions back then). Do you still stand firm, or are you swaying to try again perhaps?
I actually tried the audiobook a little after quitting to see if I could finish it off easier, and I just found myself not caring about the story so never did.
Hope you enjoy it though!
@@JasonFuhrman we shall see, thx! I am planning to use Chapter summaries (if I find decent ones) to see what I missed...
That's a good way to go about it. Although I feel like I never really lost my way despite how much I heard that this book is complex. Keep me posted on how you feel about it.
Great vid, m'man! I haven't been checking out BookTube in quite a while since my head had been buried deep, deep within a sea of code, but this video was a breath of much needed air for me. I must say that our similar flow continues with your focus on character over plot. We both use the example of James Bond as a plot-driven property (at least traditionally). The core issue, though, is about plot driven vs. story driven writing.
Plot is simply the sequence of events in a work that ideally have some cohesive flow. Story is all about the changes within the character(s) due to events, internal and/or external. In the case of James Bond, he is the same guy at the end of the story that he was at the beginning. However, any main character in a Pixar movie will undergo some change by the end. That's why their movies tend to resonate.
So, I respect and support your decision to quit that novel, unsubscribers be damned. 👍
thanks man! Good to hear from you again. I knew this would be a divisive video, but I think it's important to not blow smoke and at least articulate why I don't care for something.
Given what you've said you like, I have to recommend Daniel Abraham, anything he's written. Very character focused, magic is rare and mysterious, and his worlds are... alive , is the best descriptor I can think of.
thanks for the recommendation!
Just started The Dragon’s Path yesterday. I’m only 70 pages in, but it seems pretty cool so far. I’ve had the first 3 books of the series (Kings Blood & Tyrant’s Law) for years & have finally gotten around to it.
I just finished GOTM last week, and am now 40% through the second book Deadhouse Gates. I had my issues with the first book. It felt like if the A Song of Ice and Fire series started in A Storm of Swords, in the middle of the War of the Five Kings and Dany in Slaver's Bay with her three dragons. There were a lot of characters that at times I had trouble keeping track of. There was a lot of high-level magic that had little in the way of explanation, and likely won't until later in the series, but I looked at the wiki for explanations. It throws a lot at you. Erickson could have made it smoother.
It wasn't until around halfway into the book that a plot point came up that had me saying "Ok, now things are getting interesting. I'm hooked." The hook villain felt like it fell a little short in some way with a bit of a deux ex machina.
Although, I admit I like some of the fantasy elements like a floating mountain fortress, different parallel worlds, zombies with magic weapons and magic greatswords that imprison souls. I just wished there was more explanation. Erickson does play with tropes, opening with an evil empire Malazan ruled by an evil usurping empress Laseen like in a typical fantasy series, but the protagonists, the Bridgeburners, aren't your typical fantasy heroes fighting against the evil empire (at least at the start), but fighting for it. As others have pointed out, the chosen one is subverted a little with Crokus's case as he doesn't do much and if anything it just gets him a target on his back.
It's rough start, but it gets better. The second book had me interested early on with plot points that had me wanting to read more, and it is easier to follow the characters as well as their actions having more significance. There's even a little moment that almost made me chuckle when they were dealing with a shapeshifter at sea.
Appreciate the detailed opinion on the second book. I understand it probably improves on a lot of levels, but I don't see it changing much from some of the subjective things that aren't to my tastes: magic being big and ubiquitous, gods speaking to and working with humans, etc.
So many people are telling me book 2 is where it's at, so maybe down the road I'll return to it with a fresh perspective and see if it feels any better.
i actually agree with everything you've said. I myself have finished the book, and did like it, BUT there were a lot of nagging things about it that were in line with everything you said. And keep in mind, unlike you, I actually don't mind the more overt fantasy with gods-among-men, and high magic and things of that nature. However, the thing that shocked me most of all, was that this series seemed always billed as this very deeply layered, complex series, and in fact I was kind of stunned to find it reading fairly shallow and superficial to me. Now keep in mind, I still found it pretty enjoyable, in that comic-book popcorn film sort of way. It had a ton of "entertaining" characters, fun scenes, a ton of action. The pace felt very fast because it's constantly headhopping between an endless assortment of characters which are fairly well written, if albeit shallow. But the book itself did not feel very 'deep', I kept walking away with this nagging feeling of a shallow popcorn flick, like sort of watching a summer blockbuster movie like Transformers 3 or something to that effect. The characters themselves were pretty obviously heavily inspired by videogames and have video-gamey names and personalities (I mean come on, Anomander Rake is basically Sephiroth).
All in all I still do plan to continue the series, but just wanted to express that I do agree with pretty much all of your points.
edit: Oh, and I forgot to mention. A lot of the plot feels a bit contrived in an overly convoluted/complex way as if the author is simply trying really hard to obscure and make everything as densely opaque and oblique as possible to make it "feel" like there's these endless plans within plans and machinations going on, but after a while it actually starts to become tedious because none of these things are ever resolved adequately and the reader never given any satisfaction in resolutions. Every near-resolution just turns into another endless pit of machinations and I feel this is a bit of a poor management of reader's expectations. To me, for a book to be truly gripping, it has to properly manage the push and pull of giving readers satisfying moments, then pulling with reversals/twists, etc. And this felt to me like an endless barrage of un-resolvable twists and reversals that just keep mounting, and mounting, and mounting, and mounting, until it DOES start to become a little tedious when you realize there is NO true "end" in sight to this storyline and nothing ever seems to feel like it gets closer to resolution, things only get darker, and MORE convoluted and entropic, etc, etc.
wow appreciate the in depth perspective! I hear what you're saying about subjective opinions (overt fantasy), and that's why I tried to make sure I explained that that part isn't just to my tastes.
Like you, I was surprised by the lack of depth, at least of what I read. I expected something with deeper character work, and overly complex plotwise, but I didn't get that either. It's funny, because that's why I stayed away from the book for so long.
The fact that this was based on a dungeons and dragons game that Erikson and his writing partner concocted, really helps put things in perspective. They felt like they were trying to hit beats, rather than it being a progression of characters who are influencing events in the world. That especially hit me when Tattersail blew herself up and became a born again thing.
After I read a bunch of comments, I even tried going through the audiobook to finish it out instead of reading chapter summaries but just couldn't do it. To me it comes down to not caring about characters. If I'm not invested in their fates, then the plot is meaningless.
As many have said, I may try the second book and see if it solves many of my problems. But from what you've said, the overall tone and approach is pretty much the same throughout.
@@JasonFuhrman it's funny because I've actually tried to start Gardens twice previously and failed both times, and this time I resolved to fully get through it just to see. But in my previous abortive efforts, like you, after failing to get through the opening chapter of Gardens, I went and researched what was the universally best regarded of the Malazan books, and I forget which one it was now at the time, but somewhere in book 3-5 region, and I tried to read that book instead just to see, but couldn't get through the opening of that either lol.
With that said, I will say that in the final 20-30% of Gardens alot of stuff comes together much more nicely and is more enjoyable. Of course it's no defense of the other stuff, but it's juts something to chew on in case you ever want to finish it. I personally did find the last 20-30% pretty cool as pretty much EVERY single character plot literally comes together into one thread where they're almost all together in the same room (literally) and all this while a gigantic, unstoppable monstrosity is blowing half the country up and closing in on them, so it was a pretty gripping part which is one of the sole reasons I'm going to attempt to continue the series at least to book 2 and see how it goes, but yea some of the people who said they dropped the series after book 3-4 does leave me feeling very concerned as to how far I'll get in the series.
Also, I should say the other big concern is, I've watched a Steven Erikson interview a while back where he said that he deliberately employs a very opaque "literary" writing style because he comes from the literary (lit fiction) tradition, having studied at the prestigious Iowa Writer's Workshop, etc, etc. And what really frightened me was when he said that, the EARLY novels of the series were actually written with too MUCH of a non-literary voice in terms of giving insight into character's motivations and internal 'thoughts', and that as the series goes on, the later books reveal even LESS as he grew into his writing voice. So in short, for the people who view Gardens of the Moon as having way too opaque of a writing style where the reader is never given insight into the character's "head" and everything is done in a very sort of removed/distant perspective, well according to Erikson himself, this actually gets even MORE extreme as the series goes on. So as someone who loves reading very "voicey" style of novels where we're directly inside the character's head, this is extremely concerning to me because the non-voicey nature of the character writing in Gardens is already at an extreme so I can't even imagine how much more 'distant' it can get later on.
@@phaioncirrus3818 I do like the fact that he leaned into more literary styles toward the end. I may have to sample some of those to see how it feels.
I guess anyone can interpret what "literary" means, so we'll see.
It is funny how for whatever reason we put a lot of effort into enjoying something if we don't immediately. I think it's a good exercise to understand why you don't like something - part of the reason why I do videos like these too. It took me a long time to not just power through something I didn't like. Now I realize there are far too many books out there, so I should move on if something isn't striking me.
@@JasonFuhrman I had the exact same problem in the second book. I only cared about one of the pov's and it was like pulling teeth to get through the rest.
I understand the feeling of watching or reading something and allowing my personal prejudices against certain types of plot details or characters to outshine my enjoyment of the material. I'm convinced that my narrow- mindedness interferes with many experiences, such as enjoying certain books. The evidence that one can be overly swept up by their own beliefs and unable to take off their blinders is that people often change their mind about the same material on a later revisiting. I would not have enjoyed Malazan if I attempted to read it 10 years ago, but now am a huge fan.
I’m about 75% through and while I don’t necessarily disagree with your arguments, I am finding myself really enjoying the book so far. It’s absolutely bonkers and I’m finding that pretty entertaining.
It comes down to personal tastes. Plenty of people love this novel and series. I do argue that the repetition hinders the novel from an editing perspective though. It could have been so much shorter with cleaner storytelling.
Have you read The Iliad lately? Human-gods interaction is meant to follow in this tradition somewhat I believe. Perhaps reading it through this lens might help? No exposition in The Iliad either--they just do stuff or make speeches and you're expected to know the background mythology and figure it all out along the way there too...
I haven't since high school, but thanks for the suggestion!
Gardens of the Moon was interesting to me and Deadhouse Gates was so beautifully written, but Memories of Ice is where it all came together for me.
I appreciate seeing the "I just didn't like it" perspective as opposed to the usual "too complicated/confusing".
If you're in for character driven story I do honestly believe you are missing a colossal amount in the series that starts even in the very next book. Characters and their growth through various hardship and trauma is a core theme of the series as a whole
I think I may check out the second book at some point. There's been a lot of comments saying it gets a lot better. We'll see if the setting shifts enough for me, or if it's similar
I remember when I first got Gardens of the Moon, it was for Christmas 3 years ago. I started reading it only to stop after a chapter or two like 10 times. I ended up going camping and forgot to bring any other books with me, so I figured it was either read it then or not at all. I finished it and thought to myself “that was okay, but I’m not sure if it’s worth reading the whole series.” As it turns out I had a friend that owned Dead House Gates, I borrowed it from him on a whim and I just have to say the improvement in characters, plot, and even the magic system was so immediate and fantastic that I read the other 8 books in the span of two weeks. I see and relate to your issues with Gardens of the Moon, and I understand not wanting to slog through the bad to get to the good. But if you ever find yourself drawn back to the world of the Malazan empire it does all turn out to be worth it.
Thanks for the context. A few people have said that book 2 is where things turn for the better. It's been some time since I read this one, so maybe it's time to give that one a try.
@@JasonFuhrman book 2 is definitely MUCH different. Much better, that is. Like, really. Specially the latter half of that book. If you plan on jumping straight to Deadhouse Gates, though, I recommend reading at least a good plot summary of Gardens of the Moon, because otherwise you might be very lost
@MultiWar22 so I've heard. I might give it a go sometime.
@@JasonFuhrman I hope you do, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts about it
@@MultiWar22 thanks!
I always tell people to read the Path to Ascendancy - trilogy first. Makes Gardens of the Moon a lot easier to grasp.
Interesting. That's the series his co-creator wrote, right?
@@JasonFuhrman Yes. Ian C. Esslemont. I'm currently reading through his Malazan books. Path to Ascendancy is basically about the founding of the Malazan Empire. It is also very hilarious. I mean, the Isle of Malaz, which gives the Empire its name, was just a pirate's nest back then...
I like Malazan but it’s definitely not a character driven work. I liked it more for the world building and lore, but I do think the later books have more interesting characters. Have you read Robin Hobb? Character driven work is her thing. My favorite author of all time
I have not but funny you mention her. I was thinking and giving her work a try. Is Assassin's Apprentice the best place to start?
@@JasonFuhrman yep, thats book 1 in the farseer trilogy. It’s part of a larger series called the realm of the elderlings.
@@SarahJ70 awesome, I will start there!
My buddy Raf already said a lot I agree with better than I could, so I’ll just say as a big Malazan fan (on my 2nd read), you’re of course entitled to your opinion - no book’s for everyone, of course - and you haven’t lost this subscriber for it. 😉
glad I didn't lose you :)
I can totally get how the first book can be hard. I have read the main 10 and then did a reread. What I can say is that you can’t actually appreciate the first book on the same level if you haven’t gotten through the series. Another thing I would like to mention about the characters- there is no main/chosen one. For the different POV which are presented I myself find them interesting because they show opposite sides on an argument and in some cases you are not given a finale result, you have to figure it out on your own. And lastly I would like to share my view on some Mages talking with certain gods, the more you get involved in the world you will realise how right you are about gods not being talked to as equal, however, the arrogance of some characters is bigger then most of the gods😂😂😂
PS: I hope you give The Malazan another chance 😀
thanks for the comment! I should have clarified "chosen one" more in the review, meaning people who are literally chosen by higher powers. It doesn't necessarily mean for good only. Could just be used as pawns, which seems to be exactly what's happening.
I said this in another reply, but I think if I would have read this back when it would have originally come out, I would have appreciated what Erikson was trying to do here.
We'll see if I muster up the courage to comeback :)
Do you have a a recommendation how much time you should wait before rereading?
Was this question for me?
@@JasonFuhrman No for the original comment, as he has reread the series
@@marthvader14 to be honest I think I waited around 3 months after finishing The crippled God before I started the reread
So, I finished GOTM. Overall, it was just OKAY. Looking back at the novel, it felt like it took forever to read. I had to refer to the TOR read along articles several times to get all the hidden meaning. While the overall sequence of events was enjoyable, I didn't enjoy the prose and tempo due to the constant character shifts. It felt like someone trying to be too clever. At the end, it felt like work and I kept looking at my kindle hoping for the story to be done. I'm intrigued at some of the elements but I'm not sure if I'll carry on. I might try because I bought all of these on the kindle. But not sure. Other, more easily accessible stories are waiting.
Sounds like you had some of the same problems I did. People keep saying the second book is a lot better, so I may try it, but it'll be a while because, like you said, there are so many other accessible books out there. Thanks for the comment!
@@JasonFuhrman You bet!
Thanks for that review, it was very helpful to me, as I've been debating whether to read the series for a while, and I don't care for magic-heavy fantasy.
Glad it was helpful!
Aww this book really picks up at like 70% haha. I think most of the books in this series do that. But the ending is so great. You said already you don't love many of the plot choices, magic, etc so maybe you won't like it, but i don't think you really got the whole flavor unless you finish book one. It's like ordering a meal and eating just the sides and saying you didn't like it.
I heard it ends in kind of a superhero way, so you're probably right.
@@JasonFuhrman it does, but its all the other things going on around the superhero moment that i also love. i think the character interactions are my favorite.
What if you were like in anouther realm lowerer then you thought unaware and the ones the. (Gods 😅look down on have a secret 1 much higher then all and suddenly a sword pierces your realm and your dropped onto the lower realms fallen you find yourself with the cherecter your jate most (the rock) and he starts going crazy ape shit cutting down evrything and everone painting streets red blood of the bastards ??
Malazan is a deep dive so i don't really begrudge anyone for putting it down but i feel like you are missing the point on a lot of things you say you don't like about the book. This is especially true if you're not a fan of high fantasy. Its too bad you didn't finish the book because he lines up a lot of the fantasy tropes you're talking about (super hero, chosen one) in an effort to knock them down.
You mentioned you could cut the book down by changing the scenes that are explored from 2 PoVs but often the whole point is to explore an event or theme from different perspectives. One could probably argue this is verbose is an already large novel but Erikson is a master of dancing around a theme from all angles. One of the things to love about malazan is that all of the characters on both sides of a conflict are true to themselves and it makes the world feel real and lived in.
Anyways, I hope you find some series you like!
Thanks for the comment! Fantasy is tough for me. I grew up on it and love it, but my tastes have matured the more I read other genres. I think Mark Lawrence and Joe Abercrombie are more to my tastes than mainstream fantasy so hope to find more authors like them.
@@JasonFuhrman It sounds like you should consider Fonda Lee's Green Bone Saga- it's a more modern setting and the fantastical elements aren't as rampant. Its a great series that nails the gritty realism feel and has excellent character work like Abercrombie, Martin and Erikson. To use words similar to the author to describe it: its like the godfather meets house of the flying dragon.
Thanks for the recommendation. I will check it out.
First, I haven’t read Malazan.
Second, I think your points are very valid and clearly stated.
Third, this seems to be a series which teaches the reader what they find they enjoy and the tropes or aspects of fantasy fiction which they do not enjoy.
I’ve watched dozens of booktube videos re:Malazan. But other than “OMG ITS SOOOO GOOD!” All the other “explanations” just leave me feeling like “ugh, no thanks”.
If 95% of reviews regard the first book as “just get thru it” than I’m sorry. Eff right off. IMO if you can’t get me in at least the first book? Why would I sludge through the rest? Time is more valuable than a much shorter “ahh that was cool” experience.
I work enough. I read more. I’m not interested in combining the two at all. Of course, it won’t stop me from trying out the first 6 chapters. If idc by then I’m good to go.
"If 95% of reviews regard the first book as “just get thru it” than I’m sorry. Eff right off."
Exactly thing. If the first book doesn't hook you, then something is broken. Even Malazan fans will tell you that the first book is rough and not as polished as later novels. THEN FIX IT. There is no reason why he couldn't have modified the text and re-released. If anything the first book should be one of the best since it's the introduction to the series.
@@JasonFuhrman 100%.
@@JasonFuhrmanoh and to try to make up for the softies who felt invalidated bc you didn’t like a fkng book? 😂- you gained a new subscriber. ⚜️
Thanks!
i had the same expectations going into reading gardens of the moon and also quit halfway though. wayyy too much too fast and not enough character for me
I just finished and found the final 20% good. But I was close to quitting on many occasions. It took me a year I think to finish Gardens. There is no bing reading incentive till very late.
What held you back originally?
@@JasonFuhrman couldn't keep track of what was happening. Who is doing what, who is who and what is the motive...i was not regular also, perhaps that's why couldn't keep track properly
I finished reading it because as someone who likes multiple POVs I wanted it to all make sense and fit together in the end. But I ended up being disappointed. By the end the things that were happening were no less ambigious and seemingly coming out of nowhere than in the beginning and none of it made sense or felt organic. There was no big payoff to the story for me, just more of the same. It felt like the book was asking so much of me and not giving anything in return.
I couldn't even tell you what the title of the book means after finishing it.
This is another problem with first volumes in a series. A lot of writers forget that they need to tell an interesting story per volume as if the reader will never read past that. Too many fantasy authors fall into the trap of only caring about the bigger story.
I dropped it 6 chapters in.
Being unceremoniously dropped into a story where it seems like each chapter is a prologue was just too uncomfortable to me.
I only got 6 chapters, but in most books I like, that's enough to get a feel for the story, but I felt like I was standing on quicksand the entire time, trying to understand what was going on in any capacity. There didn't seem to be any glue holding the story together.
That was years and years ago though, and I've thought about revisiting it several times, but now I'm thinking it might be a waste of time.
From all the comments, I've found that this story is far more about the bigger picture than trying to tell a compelling story in a single novel. Which is unfortunate. As I mentioned in the video, each part of a story needs to hold your attention and be well crafted. This book isn't terrible by any stretch, but it ticked too many of my DNF boxes. I may finish the book down the line just to see if book 2 holds what everyone says. We'll see.
I made it up to those 6 chapters about three seperate times before the quicksand solidified under me, so I definitely feel you there hahaha
As an opening to a series it can be seriously disorienting, but there is definitely an intent there in that regard. It is unfortunate that Gardens of the Moon truly shines brightest on a re-read, but I would say that it's definitely worth a try again if it has been something you've been thinking of!
The glue can be a little thin at first, but I garuantee it solidifies magnificently!
Try starting with deadhouse gates
That is the reason so many people don’t like it, they expect to know what’s going on all the time. In reality it’s a book that treats you as a character, you’re ignorant of so many things for most of the ten books. Then you go back and re read the series and a whole layer is revealed. Then you read again and boom, another layer and so on and so on.
It’s the most re readable series I’ve ever picked up 😊
Well I think that's part of the problem. We do know a lot of what's going on most of the time. We see every perspective and how they react. Sure we don't know the gods' plans yet, but every other character motivation is pretty clear.
Big like for this video. Everything you said is exactly what bothered me with Erikson.
My favourite authors are Bakker, Martin, Wolfe, Donaldson etc so I was so excited to read Malazan. Sadly, I have tried thrice and everytime I quit somewhere between book 3 and 5. The most recent and probably the last was book three.
My two main reasons are the ones you mention.
The cast is huge and the stories so many. In book three you are still introduced to dozens of them. Even If I like some of them, I have to wait for hundreds of pages I do not care or even whole novels to get there.
But, what bothered me mostly is the feeling that everything is highly powerful, magically significant. Every other person is super powerful, is a god, a demigod, an immortal, can be resurrected etc etc. Every place from a shithole to a vast plain is magical. Every other item. There is no balance. It is so abundant that it loses any meaning for me. Whatever is happening I feel no impact at all. I really wish it was otherwise
Yeah he was so interested in building a world with powerful characters that he forgot that's not why most people read stories.
Gardens of the Moon is pretty bad, but it does set up some of the lore for the series. I really love the series as a whole, and would recommend powering through. It's up to the individual to spend time or not, delving into this expansive, gritty and fairly humerous world.
You're the first person I've heard say that it's bad. Glad to hear I didn't miss something. I may just read chapter synopses for the rest of it and at the very least try book 2.
So LOTR will be a No then?
haha what do you mean? I did read it years ago, and actually finished it :)
Ahh I knew I shouldn't have watched this after seeing it pop up just now (probably cos I've checked out some other Malazan reactions recently), cos I knew I'd disagree 🙊 but appreciate the reasons given and I myself am usually pretty quick to drop a book that I just cant get into. Didn't realise how marmite this series was till well after I'd completed the series! I'm just sad that you couldn't live through the epic tales from this series and find some characters to truly get behind.
I would honestly skip the 1st book and just start with the second and continue from there.
And it still makes sense?
@@JasonFuhrman for the most part yeah. There are some important parts in the first book but in my opinion I would just skim through a book summary of the first book because it's so poorly written. The first book was originally intended to be a screen play. The other 9 books are alot more polished in terms of prose.
@@randallk6812 nice
Hi Jason
So glad i heard your review before starting the book as i have a similar taste in grim dark. A taste that prefers the game of thrones and the last word series over others. Can you recommend similar book series?
I'd say a safe bet (with caveats) is The Darkness That Comes Before by R. Scott Bakker. I enjoyed it overall, though it had some drawbacks. I have both a chapter by chapter "vlog" during my reading as well as a spoiler free review on my channel if you want to get an idea if you think you'd like it.
That said, it's not perfect. Still looking for that perfect grimdark fantasy novel for me :)
@JasonFuhrman I know what you mean when you say still looking for perfect grimdark fantasy novel.
@@mustajabamjad well if you find one, let me know
If you want grimdark try Joe Abercrombie. His first trilogy is good but a bit unfocused. If you don't mind starting a sequel trilogy focusing on some of the older main characters, but mostly their children, you could pick up his Age of Madness trilogy starting with A Little Hatred. It's fantastic.
You could try Ed Macdonald as well. Maybe some of Mark Lawrence's work?
It's also still worth trying Malazan. Maybe start with Deadhouse Gates since you can easily start there and its a stronger book that GotM. The series isn't for everyone, but for the people who do enjoy Malazan, it almost always becomes their #1 favorite series of all time. Also, The Darkness That Comes Before truly isn't that dissimilar to Malazan.
Oh wait I thought of some more good ones in order of best to worst:
1) The Poppy War (skews a bit young for the first half of book one, but that's on purpose because the second half SHATTERS the dreams of these military students who think war is heroic and noble, as they learn war is brutal barbarism).
2) The Forgetting Moon. Really good. Underrated.
3) A Crown For Cold Silver. Hilarious but def grimdark. Funniest books I've ever read. Gallows humor.
4) Priest of Bones
4.5) Sins of Empire by Brian McClellan. It's flintlock fantasy so I'm kinda cheating, but also grimdark.
5) Legacy of Ash, Matthew Ward
6) Godblind
Agree completely about a book series having to work from page one, not book five. Life is only so long....
Exactly. And if you're not a particularly fast reader like I am, then it's an easy decision haha
I quit about 200 pages into the 2nd in the series. Just could not get into the story, did not hold my interest.
Start MBoTF with Memories of Ice. I did that and enjoyed it a lot.
I came into this series blind listening to it on audiobook at work, not going to lie that first day I had to stop and listen to a whole another book series. I was lost and confused. Once I started again and had a better grasp of what I was getting into I love it I'm on book four now now I'm struggling with the new narrator Michael page who I love in the gentleman bastards series. I have a friend that wants to read it but I told him to let me finish it first because I know he'll like it but get frustrated and quit if I can't guide him through.
I do like the narrator. It's too bad they changed
Just started book 1 and I am really on the fence here. Could be either way. Not sure if this is for me either. But I have only read 15%
Well don't force yourself if you don't like it. Books should hook you immediately, in my opinion. You shouldn't have to work for it, especially if it's a mainstream novel.
@@JasonFuhrman there's nothing that hooks me immediately when it comes to books. I think forcing yourself can be a good thing.
@@robosapiens-yd1hb I'm surprised. You've never been taken in by a book immediately?
@@JasonFuhrman No. I also take frequent breaks when I'm reading a book even if I enjoy it.
The only time I got captivated in a text heavy activity was when I played video games such as: disco elyisum, pathologic 2, planescape torment.
@robosapiens-yd1hb love those games. I have pathologic 2 but have yet to play it
The repetition in this book kinda reminds me of playing a video game with weird mechanics- it takes a bit of getting used to and even once you do, it might still bother you. That said, I think objectivity is one of those touchy topics a lot of people don't wanna acknowledge, but I think it's critical to growth as an artist.
I just quit Royal Assassin from The Farseer trilogy and I wish only wish I had done so sooner. And my issues for not liking it were all on the objective side- characters that were previously very active and competent suddenly becoming passive and incompetent. Characters who were incredibly clever and aware suddenly becoming utterly oblivious and dull, and a major plot-hole from the first book getting glossed over with an "We'll just never know why he did that."
Yeah, that's always the tough thing with series. You can potentially invest so much time into something and then find that it falls apart a few books in. I keep hearing people saying that this series gets better with time. I'm not sure if they fully understand my issues, though.
The setting was set out to be high fantasy early with magic being fairly common on some level. And meddlesome gods are also a fairly common theme. Malazan also has a fairly unique take on divinity.
We can agree to disagree on many points but I found the GRRM comparison odd. Malazan is very theme and plot oriented with multiple pov's - some 2000 I have heard - to play their parts. GRRM focuses on characters he forgets about story. So he introduces more character to move things along. Then when that fails characters start acting against type for no particular reason. This is how you end up with Dance of Drivel followed by ....
I've only read the first two GRRM novels in the series. I'm much more of character first, so gravitated toward the way he told those stories. I haven't read far enough to see it fall apart.
I'm much more of a fan of fewer POVs. It helps you get deeper into the characters that way. It's not to my tastes when it's spread to thin. With GOTM, I felt like I was jumping around to nearly every character, and it felt far more of an exercise in "completionism" than necessity. Part of why I like fewer POVs is you get a narrower view of the story, through a much more subjective lens. When you see a story from literally every angle, it removes some of the mystery for me and tends to be a form of storytelling I don't gravitate to often at all.
Clearly plenty of people like that kind of storytelling. I just found it less to my liking.
@@JasonFuhrman One thing I find interesting is that the reasons people love or hate the series are almost identical. Just a matter of preference.
@@EricMcLuen Exactly.
Sums up my thoughts. I had read 1-7 and then gave 1-4 a try again before dropping partway through the 4th. The characters aren't compelling and the series collapses under its weight. It seems like a series where events happen, but there is very little emotional involvement even though we're told that this person is a super badass and that thousands were killed in this battle etc.
Wow, you really gave it a good shot. Very generous of you.
@@JasonFuhrman There were some great moments. Book 3 and 5 were excellent standalones and the first quarter of 4 was actually some of the best stuff I've read.
I was hoping it would go somewhere and it didn't. I'd already been through the introduction of so many characters and plotlines, and it just continued with that to the max and I said screw it
@@MN-wg8qd yeah this seems to be a series you either love it or hate it. Definitely not for everyone.
I agree, the gods walking amongst men, Perrin gets trapped in a sword and he's like "Oh, okay" and shrugs it off. The characters seem like they are made out of wood and aren't even human, especially Perrin (even though he's a good character)
I have no complaints about Kruppa.
Kruppa is great.
I made a small critique in another video once about Malazan and the Malazan fans didn't leave me alone for months.
Anyway, I like this review. Kudos.
Thanks! And, yes, I can understand that. It's a very popular series, so I can see why many people aren't a fan of people who aren't into it.
I love the world that has been portrait. Its big and its a lot to digest, but as a fan of battle, tough folks, magic, sex, violence, war, friendships, gore, dimensions, portals, realms, off world entities, demi gods etc etc... there is no other serie like this. For me his world is "real"
Ofcourse there are other great "magic series" wich I loved reading (tough with less effort) but this raw one is a league on its own... (not native English so mind my weard way of words) 😅🎉❤
Same here. I gave up somewhere at the middle of the book. I was just not hooked by the plot and the characters. Seems like this book series is just not for me.
I'd really suggest reading the next two books, Deadhouse Gates and Memories of Ice. 2 of the best in the series imo and great indicators to see if you'll like the series. If you're hooked by either one of those (or both) there's a 90%+ chance you'll want to finish the series.
And there's nothing wrong with that. Part of the reason I create these kind of videos is to help people understand it's ok to quit something if it's not doing anything for you. So many people press on for no good reason other than "I should finish this."
It took me a while to realize it's perfectly fine to walk away from something that isn't to your tastes. There are far too many books we'll never read in a lifetime, so there is no point in sticking with the ones that are unsatisfying.
Great review. We have very similar taste in fantasy, but I do like Malzan. I am surprised I do like it given the heavy magic use, but something about the way its written interreges me that I ponder on some things expressed. Ericskon sometimes plays on your own biases, then subverts them later.
Your review why you did not like it though is spot on, given your taste.
Now subverting tropes is a trope itself, which is why I might have liked it more if I read it when it came out.
Haven't finished the video, but so far my biggest shock is that someone stopped at book 4.
Just to clarify, I mean "book 4" in the single novel, since the book is broken up into "books."
@@JasonFuhrman oh sorry lol, I was talking about a commenter. No you was perfectly clear dont worry.
@@kristienwhitney-johns5863 ok no worries :)
I’m in the, “I absolutely loved it from the beginning!” group and it remains one of my favourites of the series…but we are all different and it would be pretty boring if we all liked the same thing.🤷🏻♀️
I'm glad you enjoyed it! Plenty of commenters here convinced me to try book 2. Hopefully it's more to my tastes.
I don't understand why you bothered with this video. Malazan isn't intended to be for everyone, and although it's supposed to be read as a series, particular books are more often re-read than others. Many of my Malazan books were stolen but I still have Deadhouse Gates, Memories of Ice, and House of Chains - which I've re-read so many times that the pages are falling out.
I made it because I was doing a read along series and didn't finish, and also to express my opinions about what I had read.
One thing I remember when I 1st read this book 20 years ago. The 1st book is extremely confusing. Yes he did do too much too soon. However some of the later books are the opposite. It is pure character driven. Also all the confusing characters are fleshed out a bit too much. They are too slow. So I see where you are coming from. However I would say it's like working out in the gym. At 1st you are like this sucks. Then later you see the results.
I hear you, I just hate it when you have to plod through hundreds of pages just to get to the good stuff.
I would urge you to read up to book 3 before you give up. This series is amazing, and Erickson really grows as a writer after the first book. Erickson breaks the typical fantasy tropes that you talk of liking, and it does pay off. Having said that, I know the first book is a slog and I gave up on it once and thought the same as you, (it's too much high fantasy, the gods are too much, magic seems too powerful, not attached to the characters, the writing is bad, etc.) but the second book drastically improves and after book 3 I couldn't stop.
My concern is that the core of what he's doing with the genre is just not to my tastes. I don't like magic everywhere. I don't like gods speaking to and literally interfering with humans. I don't like the comic book style villains and minions, etc. I feel that's not going to change.
@@JasonFuhrman I understand, life is too short to read what you don't enjoy! Especially when there is so much to read. I just want you to like it because I like it so much 😂.
Also, to anyone looking to give the books a shot, the "Ten Very Big Books" podcast really helped me get into it and I would highly recommend it.
@@JasonFuhrman the magic everywhere and gods interacting with humans doesn't change.
However, one thing Malazan DOESN'T have is comically evil bad guys or minions. Erikson does a great job showing all sides of every issue, and always has at least a few characters you care for on every side of any conflict. It's not so much good vs evil and people vs people, each doing what they think is right or what is in their best self interests.
I will also say that death DOES have stakes in this series. Yes, characters come back from death, but not very often, when it happens it's very difficult and well explained and it always fundamentally changes them and has real impact.
Plot over character is a tough sell for me as well. Great review of this. Love and agree with the objective/subjective breakdown.
I read about the first half of this book and hated it. It’s not even that confusing it’s just not that good.
Glad to have you. We are few.
I felt the same. There is no char development. Erikson's writing style is wonderful as he introduces chars and plots but they turn out to be like GQ photoshoot poses. They look good from the surface but both chars and plots are shallow and nonsensical with very few consequences (like too many resurrections). He is a postmodern writer.
He is a very capable writer, and I understand he gets better, but I did feel much of the character work was weak, especially due to the fact that it was obvious he was more concerned about putting characters in places relating to the plot he had in mind instead of it feeling like a natural progression of who they were, and why they'd be in those locations to drive the story forward.
That's something I should have mentioned in the video. It rarely felt like characters were naturally where they should have been due strictly to motivation. It felt far to much like Erikson using them as chess pieces than them being living, breathing people.
@@JasonFuhrman Erikson is very good at introducing villains as world destroyers. Then, you find out that they are really pansies and just about anyone can defeat them.
In the second book, Erikson introduces a new dangerous, and powerful char. Because the plot calls for it, this char is attacked by a group of pansy monsters and after defeating them, he succumbs to infections and nearly dies. Why introduce the char as an empire destroyer, then create a plot where he nearly dies of infection?
Erikson is like that throughout his series. He writes grandly to set up plots but really fizzles.
I read this series back-to-back. I enjoyed it, but it was very confusing. I think if the author wasn't so confusing this would easily be in Martin and Jordan territory. There is a ton of character building here. And world building. It is definitely high fantasy; in later novels the gods are on earth. But I'm fine with that. Good series except that it was too confusing to fully enjoy. I stopped reading Erikson after this series for that reason.
Thanks for your insight. I didn't find this book confusing, though I expected to after hearing so many things about it. For me it was more about execution and the kind of story he wanted to tell that turned me off.
You should read Prince of Nothing by R Scott Bakker, it's much more character focused and low magic with very similar politicking to ASOIAF.
I did buy that one and have gotten a lot of good recommendations. So it is definitely on the list.
Superhero fantasy??? Not in the least. You missed the boat entirely.
Walking and talking with gods and blowing up armies with magic isn't what I'd call ordinary skills.
I'm not sure what @JasonFuhrman meant by the term, but the magic in Sanderson's Mistborn or Stormlight Archive definitely feels superheroey to me (and I can see at least a little similarity with GotM).