What other fantasy books do YOU read?

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

I thoroughly disliked Pullman's book. The writing was good but I felt the characters were flat and cliched. I don't think he's one to talk about anyone's book being 'fancy spun candy with no substance to it'. His own work, to me, seemed like utter drivel. It was incredibly childish, IMHO.

You know, that's what I thought at first - that his characters were rather flat and childishly-written. But then I found that it's almost like Pullman did that on purpose, so that you can read it on different levels - you can see or not see, in a sense.

I only read the books because my sister was reading them, and I did not expect the characters to be anything but childishly done and flat (since they are the kind my sister usually resonates to the most - as you can tell I do not approve of her reading list, but at least she reads something), but then I realised that if I don't read it with the assumption that they are flat they wouldn't be.

I mean, I'm not crazy about the series , but I liked it better than, say, the inevitable example of Harry Potter - much much better, in fact.

And I have to praise Pullman for the breadth of his knowledge and references - science, linguistics (both within English and in other languages), culture, and etc - in addition to the epic plot.



I know it's not the best way of putting it in words, but I usually measure books in breadth and depth. A book that is both deep and broad is something I really really like. There are books that are one but not the other, that I sometimes like. And there are those that are neither - which I don't know how anyone could like. Romances tend to be deep but narrower. Adventure stories (like, in this case, His Dark Materials) tend to be broad but seldom are as deep. And then it's a question of ballance and what you care about.

Books like Tolkien's are pretty rare. You can dig in any direction and you unearth more and more and more.

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I mean, I'm not crazy about the series , but I liked it better than, say, the inevitable example of Harry Potter - much much better, in fact.

Books like Tolkien's are pretty rare. You can dig in any direction and you unearth more and more and more.

Truly? I quite liked the middle three books of HP. I mean, yeah, it had gaping plot-holes, but I had to admire Rowling's flair for creating a magical atmosphere. I would have rather loved it if she had put in more detail.

That, of course, is true. XD I keep trying to compare fantasy books to LotR, and so far most of them have been at least somewhat disappointing. Game of Thrones was the only one, for me, that came close to the standards I set.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

That, of course, is true. XD I keep trying to compare fantasy books to LotR, and so far most of them have been at least somewhat disappointing. Game of Thrones was the only one, for me, that came close to the standards I set.

For me Game of Thrones was like a mix between LOTR and HP - it had some of the depth of LOTR and addictiveness of HP.

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

For me Game of Thrones was like a mix between LOTR and HP - it had some of the depth of LOTR and addictiveness of HP.

Good way of putting it. Though I didn't find HP 'addicting', I certainly found it entertaining. Well. At least books 3, 4 and 5. :P The others didn't appeal to me much.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

Good way of putting it. Though I didn't find HP 'addicting', I certainly found it entertaining. Well. At least books 3, 4 and 5. :P The others didn't appeal to me much.

I found HP addicting because I couldn't put it down while I read it, but when reflecting on it later I wondered if it was worth reading. It is certainly entertaining while it's new. It has a way of making you read on.

I agree with you on books 3, 4, and 5. The first book was simple and a bit too straight-forward, at least compared with the rest, as first books of series are wont to be (compare: Game of Thrones, The Golden Compass/The Northern Lights). The second was plain boring. The sixth was quite overdone, and the seventh brought all the worst qualities to the highest level. The middle ones were the best.

You know, sometimes I want to ask Rowling if in our days one absolutely cannot write a book without any swearing in it. She made it until the end of book 7, but then what happened?... It's not like the swearing shows any insights into character, or society, or plot, or anything else.

She is good at making you wonder - at first. But then she is kind of, well, not obvious, but she does like to reuse her characters, so the reader knows much more than the people inside the book. For example, the reader can logically figure out that she wouldn't bring in a new character with the initials R.A.B in the last book, therefore it has to be someone mentioned earlier, and there is only one such person. She needs to read a bit more Sherlock Holmes.