Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
161 of 174 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
One of the best recent fantasy debuts (if you like war), October 16, 2000
There's good new and no so good news.The good new is, Erikson's "The Gardens of the Moon" is a fat, intelligent and wonderfully convoluted fantasy novel. Along with Ricardo Pinto's quite dissimilar but equally intelligent "The Chosen", this is one of the best genre debuts to appear in the last two or three years. (As an aside: Erikson is a Canadian, now living in the UK. Pinto is Portuguese, but also lives in the UK. Hmm, wonder if I should emigrate too? After all, look at Poirot... Quite good for the little grey cells, it seems). The not so good news (well, the daunting news, at least) is that "Gardens" seems to be the first of a projected 10-volume series. Oh dear! Not again! Of course, the good news is not going to sound too good if you don't like "military" fantasy. "Gardens" is very much about war, dealing as it does with the Empress of Malazan attempting to conquer, by foul means rather than fair, everything in (and indeed out of) her site. There's a lot of intrigue and a lot of politics, and there's a hell of a lot of (deftly distributed) historical background, but in this first instalment at least, that's what it pretty much boils down to. Conversely, the not so good news is going to sound very sweet if you're the sort of reader who gobbles up each and every of Glen Cook's "Black Company" books the moment they appear. "Gardens" is not only similar to the Black Company series in that it deals mainly with the often magical struggles between irreconcilable and not quite comprehensible adversaries, but also in that it generally depicts events from the viewpoint of the more or less "ordinary" soldier (sorcerous or otherwise). Erikson is, however, better at this than Cook; he is also rather more ambitious. Think of it this way: "Gardens" is reminiscent of Cook, if Cook wrote like George R.R. Martin. That should give you an idea. Finally: this is not a book for the casual reader. If you tend to read a chapter or so every few weeks, don't bother. You're bound to get confused. There're just too many characters, too many deviations, too many goings-on. This is one of those books that demands your attention. Well then, that's that. I'm off to England!
|
|
|
46 of 49 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Get into the Malazan world if you can., March 29, 2005
Now where do I start? Gardens of the moon is the first book in a series of 10 (5 out so far) based on at least 5 continents and I estimated over 10 different character POV per book. There is also about 300, 000 years of relevant history, numerous different species and a completely different system of `magic' to the regular fantasy fare. With countless mysteries and good number of extremely powerful beings it is quite hard to get your head around it at first. So I will try my best in this review to give you a good idea of what to expect from the series as a whole.
Firstly if you are looking for any of the following, beware!
A young nobody (or lost prince) finds famous sword, hacks up baddy, saves the world
Main characters that never seem to die
A light read i.e. Few brain cells or imagination required (Harry Potter?)
Author spoon feeding i.e. everything is explained immediately
Elves, Orcs, Hobbits, goblins etc
After about 100 pages of gardens of the moon you will be very confused, after about 200 it will be even worse, it was for me when I first read it. The story does pick up, but there are still a number of things that will have your head spinning. Erikson is not the type to give info dumps so the brain cells will have to stay sharp while reading this book since the info is spread through all the books. The first book is the weakest of the 5 currently published simply because it is impossible to fully understand everything that happens since you don't have enough information about the Malazan world. But perseverance pays of tenfold as soon as the second book and there is hardly any filler (WOT?) so it is worthwhile not to skim through.
To give a head start I would say that there are 2 definite constants in the Malazan world. The first is convergence which means that power draws other power. And the second one is a balance of that power. It is also useful to condition your thinking and remember that this is a completely different world and is not based on LOTR or D&D, for example a god is not one in the conventional sense, but is just a powerful being who commands a warren (a realm can be used to release magic into the Malazan world).
Even though gardens is a good book, there will always be debate about its quality since it is quite complex and a lot of people can't take that. However, that debate dies off after Book 2 (Deadhouse Gates) , which even with a good dose of extra mystery is easier to follow and the Erikson proves himself as top class with incredible story that leaves most people very numb and wanting more. If you are not hooked after that there is still some hope as book 3 (memories of ice) is in my opinion even better.
There will invariably be comparisons made to George Martin's (another favourite of mine) song of ice and fire. Which is fair since they are both gritty and main characters can and do die. However, I would say that Martin is more character driven, while Erikson is more event or plot driven. But both do it so well that they are arguable writing the best ongoing fantasy series at present, other really don't come close.
So you should get into the Malazan series if you're looking for:
A powerful story that will blow you away
An intriguing web of plots with no clichés
A chance to test the limits of your imagination
A different world you can really get into
Enjoy.
|
|
|
24 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Love it or hate it? How about something in between?, August 17, 2006
After reading the reviews, but also talking to some people who have read Erikson's works, I must say I found myself to be an oddity. I neither love nor hate Erikson's works. Or, to be more precise, I love and hate them at the same time.
The problem with this book (as well as the entire Malazan series) is that both the proponents and the opponents are right. That is, Erikson's writing has some excellent points, but it has some major weaknesses itself. It's one of the very rare cases where I'd describe the quality of the writing as "controversial".
First, the strong points. Erikson is an excellent worldbuilder. He's an excellent character builder. He's a great plotbuilder. He's got all the qualities a good fantasy writer needs. If you find a plotline, you're guaranteed to find it well constructed. If you find a well-formed character, you'll find him/her believable and coherent. If you find some world description, it'll surely be breathtaking.
Now, the weak points. It's no coincidence that I started each of the sentences in the previous paragraph with "if you find". The problem with Erikson is, sometimes you get tired of searching. I think the one quality Erikson lacks most is underlining. Even mediocre fantasy authors know that in order to get the reader focused on their writing, they have to let him know what's important in the book and what's not. Erikson seems to ignore this truth - he seems to be constantly poking the reader, telling him "there are no less important parts in the book, everything is equally important".
To show how much this is an issue, a comparison. I find that Martin actually cares for the reader's attention and keeps track of his main characters and plotlines - I don't have such feeling with Erikson. The Malazan series are full of intricate descriptions of places that you'll never again see and that have no plot meaning, of characters that you focus on and study their development only to have them disappear and never show up again, finally, of plotlines that you consider major but that suddenly turn up to be only side-events of no real meaning.
Then again, though I consider myself a capable reader, I also tend to be somewhat impatient. For a more patient reader, the abovementioned downsides might not be a problem at all - if you're the type of reader who reads the entire book inside out and remembers all the tiny details such as what the serving maid on page 154 wore, you're bound to love Erikson's books. Remember, his writing is really excellent - it's the "look and feel" that might scare you off. If you've had problems tracking through Martin or Hobb, you might want to stay off this one - just to avoid straining your nerves.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Steven Erikson
by Steven Erikson
by Steven Erikson
by Steven Erikson
by Steven Erikson
See all Editorial Reviews
