# Good science fiction and fantasy lit vs. the bad stuff **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [December 31, 2004, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434 "2004-12-31T16:19:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Charlie\_Tan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/charlie_tan/32/12582_2.png) [@Charlie\_Tan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Charlie_Tan)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/41 "2005-01-02T01:56:57Z")
I liked _American Gods_ - to an extent. The setup was awesome, the execution was brilliant, till the last third of the book. Then it just… well fell apart for me. About the same way I felt when I first read Dean Koontz, the book being _Strangers_. I tend to disagree with what people have said about Bob Heinlein. Even though his writing isn’t Nobel Prize worthy, I find his prose to be effective, a little terse, but not all that bad. I can read Asimoc and Clarke for the ideas, but they don’t hold up too well for re-reading. Heinlein does, which I think is a mark saying that he was achieving literature - somewhat. There are a lot of rabid Pratchett fans here, me being one of them. While it’s not fantasy in the traditional sense, it certainly is literature, at least post _Small Gods_. And while his latest outing was a bit of a let down, _Night Watch_ was so good, it’s made my top five list of all time. In fact, as I’m between books right now, and I got inspired by writing this, I’m gonna re-read it for the fourth time, starting tonight. I’ve never read Terry Brooks and the likes, and considering I think Tolkien is pretty bad literature which doesn’t hold up beyond adolescense ( I was totally in love with the books in my teens, but find them unreadable now), I remember a quote, but not who made it, saying Tolkien was such an inspiration to so many eople, a lot of people started writing more of the same stuff, since Tolkien’s production was so limited. Since fan fiction and the Net wasn’t around back then, it got published, as the publishing houses saw that not only were there people who thought there should be more of the same stuff, there were readers too. Also, isn’t SciFi a sub-genre of Fantasy. The stuff we label Fantasy is really Swords&Sourcery. Finally, I think that the _Riverworld_ books by Phillip Jose Farmer are intrigueing and well worth reading. A very interesting take on the afterlife. ---
**Author:** ![Epimetheus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c4cdca/32.png) [@Epimetheus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Epimetheus)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/42 "2005-01-02T02:54:12Z")
Lets not forget Robert Silverberg. Most of his novels are great, and his short stories are very good as well. (I see that lost mentioned silverberg, but can’t hurt to mention him again.) Octavia Butler is another great name with some wonderful story telling talent. Roger Zelazny and Phillip Farmer are two great writers of their times and every story has that vibrance that makes for interesting reading. What everybody else said too! ---
**Author:** ![gentle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/eb8c5e/32.png) [@gentle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gentle)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 8:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/43 "2005-01-02T08:38:31Z")
> [@MacSpon](#): > > Guy Gavriel Kay. This guy’s [writing](http://www.brightweavings.com/passages/summertree1.htm) makes my brain shrivel up in horror. > [@](#): > > The other smiled at that. “Names matter to you? They should. It is Galadan who has come, and I fear it is the end.” Awkwardly flowery prose of the Barbara Cartland persuasion seems to be a hallmark of modern fantasy fiction. But there are some that stand out. Kim Stanley Robinson is one of the more accomplished genre writers, and his [The Years of Rice and Salt](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0553580078) is one of the most original novels of speculative fiction that I have come across. Based on the premise that the bubonic plague wiped out all of Europe in the 14th century, it tells an alternate history of how the world might have developed once the Asian nations were free to take over. Beautifully written in a multitude of literary styles, one for each time period in which the story takes place. Tim Powers is an extremely accomplished writer who more than makes up for his at times pulpy prose with his preternatural gift for atmosphere and setting; the mythological depth (backed by an enormous amount of theoretical research) and seamless, often surreal world-building comes together in set pieces that just _click_. His stories also have a deep sense of humour, too. His finest work to date is probably [The Anubis Gates](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0441004016), about time travel, body switching, Egyptian magic and Lord Byron. _Last Call_, _The Drawing of the Dark_ (dark _beer_, that is), and _On Stranger Tides_ (the best voodoo zombie pirate novel I’ve read) are classics, too. [To Say Nothing of the Dog](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0553575384) by Connie Willis is one of the finest science-fiction fantasies ever written, a wonderfully nostalgic and hilariously whacky time-travel trip to Victorian England inspired by _Three Men in a Boat_. A fresh breath of air in an otherwise all-too-dusty genre. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/44 "2005-01-02T08:51:33Z")
> [@gentle](#): > > This guy’s [writing](http://www.brightweavings.com/passages/summertree1.htm) makes my brain shrivel up in horror. Hey! Look, Guy Kay readers come in two groups: those who’ve only read the _Fionovar Tapestry_, and those who’ve also read his GOOD books. I suggest you go out and find a copy of _The Lions of Al-Rassan_ to see what I mean. More of my thoughts on the subject [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=291440&highlight=gavriel). ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 8:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/45 "2005-01-02T08:56:53Z")
> [@gentle](#): > > Tim Powers is an extremely accomplished writer who more than makes up for his at times pulpy prose with his preternatural gift for atmosphere and setting Well, except for _Forsake the Sky_ and _An Epitaph In Rust_, which are pretty much crap. He’s actually asked people _not_ to read the latter work. His other books and short stories are great, though. And try to see him talk in person if you ever get a chance–he’s a blast. ---
**Author:** ![gentle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/eb8c5e/32.png) [@gentle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gentle)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 9:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/46 "2005-01-02T09:10:20Z")
> [@Hunter Hawk](#): > > Well, except for _Forsake the Sky_ and _An Epitaph In Rust_, which are pretty much crap. He’s actually asked people _not_ to read the latter work. Haven’t read those, precisely because the consensus seems to be that his earlier (which is what I assume you meant) books are worthless crap. ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 9:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/47 "2005-01-02T09:17:16Z")
> [@gentle](#): > > Haven’t read those, precisely because the consensus seems to be that his earlier (which is what I assume you meant) books are worthless crap. Yeah, they’re his first two novels. Starting with _The Drawing of the Dark_, though, his stuff is a lot better. BTW, if you like Powers but haven’t read Blaylock yet, you owe it to yourself to do so–they’re friends and collaborators. ---
**Author:** ![gentle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/eb8c5e/32.png) [@gentle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gentle)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 9:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/48 "2005-01-02T09:26:54Z")
> [@Hunter Hawk](#): > > Yeah, they’re his first two novels. Starting with _The Drawing of the Dark_, though, his stuff is a lot better. BTW, if you like Powers but haven’t read Blaylock yet, you owe it to yourself to do so–they’re friends and collaborators. I tried reading _Homunculus_, but after a chapter or so I felt like I was being crushed under the heavy prose. It’s supposed to be really good, though, so I’ll try again some day. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/49 "2005-01-02T12:58:12Z")
> [@](#): > > I felt like I was being crushed under the heavy prose. Blaylock’s work is a bit inconsistent that way. Try _All the bells of earth_, or _The last coin_. ---
**Author:** ![gentle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/eb8c5e/32.png) [@gentle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gentle)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/50 "2005-01-02T13:10:37Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Blaylock’s work is a bit inconsistent that way. Try _All the bells of earth_, or _The last coin_. I will. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Archergal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Archergal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Archergal)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/51 "2005-01-02T16:11:51Z")
If you’re looking for a quick way to look for books to avoid, I find that anything recent recommended by Anne McCaffrey should be put back on the bookshelf post-haste. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/52 "2005-01-02T19:22:23Z")
I know of no way of explaining what I think is the best science fiction and fantasy except by telling you what my favorites are, so here are my list: My 20 Favorite Science Fiction Long Works (greater than 25,000 words) 1. Olaf Stapledon First and Last Men and Starmaker 2. Philip Jose Farmer The Riverworld Series 3. Frank Herbert Dune (and maybe its sequels) 4. Walter Miller A Canticle for Leibowitz 5. Alfred Bester The Stars My Destination 6. Ursula K. LeGuin The Left Hand of Darkness 7. H. G. Wells The Time Machine 8. Philip K. Dick The Man in the High Castle 9. Frederik Pohl and C. M. Kornbluth The Space Merchants 10. Theodore Sturgeon More than Human 11. Roger Zelazny Lord of Light 12. Arthur C. Clarke Against the Fall of Night 13. Stanislaw Lem Solaris 14. Ken Grimwood Replay 15. Joe Haldeman The Forever War 16. Michael Frayn The Tin Men 17. Larry Niven Ringworld 18. Robert Heinlein Stranger in a Strange Land 19. Clifford Simak City 20. Isaac Asimov The End of Eternity My 20 Favorite Science Fiction Short Works (less than 25,000 words) Isaac Asimov “The Last Question” J. G. Ballard “The Subliminal Man” Alfred Bester “The Men Who Murdered Mohammed” F. M. Busby “If This Is Winnetka, You Must Be Judy” A. J. Deutsch “A Subway Named Mobius” Philip K. Dick “Faith of Our Fathers” George Alec Effinger “The Aliens Who Knew, I Mean, Everything” Harlan Ellison “I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream” Philip Jose Farmer “Towards the Beloved City” Charles Harness “The New Reality” Robert Heinlein “All You Zombies” Norman Kagan “The Mathenauts” Daniel Keyes “Flowers for Algernon” C. M. Kornbluth “The Little Black Bag” David I. Masson “Traveler’s Rest” Lewis Padgett “Mimsy Were the Borogoves” Robert Sheckley “Street of Dreams, Feet of Clay” T. L. Sherred “E for Effort” Howard Waldrop “The Ugly Chickens” Roger Zelazny “A Rose for Ecclesiastes” My 20 Favorite Fantasy Long Works (greater than 25,000 words) 1. Lewis Carroll Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass 2. J. R. R. Tolkien The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings 3. Peter Beagle The Last Unicorn 4. Mervyn Peake The Gormenghast Trilogy 5. C. S. Lewis Till We Have Faces 6. Ursula K. Le Guin The Earthsea Books 7. G. K. Chesterton The Man Who Was Thursday 8. Madeleine L’Engle The Time Quartet (A Wrinkle in Time, The Wind in the Door, A Swiftly Tilting Planet, Many Waters) 9. Ray Bradbury Dandelion Wine 10. John Fowles The Magus 11. T. H. White The Once and Future King 12. Patricia McKillip Stepping from the Shadows 13. C. S. Lewis The Ransom Trilogy (Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and That Hideous Strength) 14. R. A. McAvoy Tea with the Black Dragon 15. H. P. Lovecraft The Dreamquest of Unknown Kadath 16. John Myers Myers Silverlock 17. Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman Good Omens 18. L. Frank Baum The Wizard of Oz 19. Daniel Pinkwater Borgel 20. Mark Twain The Mysterious Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/53 "2005-01-02T20:01:22Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Blaylock’s work is a bit inconsistent that way. Try _All the bells of earth_, or _The last coin_. Yeah, _Homunculus_ is a good book but isn’t the best place to start. Either of the two books above would be good, or you could try _The Paper Grail_ or _The Elfin Ship_ (the latter is more oriented toward children, though). ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/54 "2005-01-02T20:20:52Z")
> [@Exapno Mapcase](#): > > It appears to me more that he cares very much for _style_, literary prose that is highly individualistic. Asimov, Clarke, and Heinlein would all rank below zero on such a scale. Silverberg and Zelazny are harder to explain, but neither had the idiosyncratic or immediately distinctive prose of some of his higher ranked writers, like Gene Wolfe, Cordwainer Smith, Steven Millhauser, or Jorge Luis Borges. It’s nice to see someone who likes scifi admit this. I attempted The Moon is a Harsh Mistress this past year, and gave up on it in frustration because it was so so very horrible on a stylistic scale. What went through Heinlein’s head as he wrote this? " I know! To show it’s the future I’ll remove all pronouns and most of the articles from the prose. I’m so clever. People won’t mind if my narrator sounds like a stupid person trying to learn english as a second language." All the praise for it I’d heard made me wonder if they used to soak the pages in LSD back when it was first published. Most scifi readers seem more, um, forgiving, of atrocious style than I’m willing to be. Dry, like Gene Wolfe, is okay, but when you need hipboots to wade through the text, count me out. OTOH, I’m not a big scifi fan anyway. I’m not too interested in space or robots (Douglas Adams not withstanding) but rather some fantasy, and biology gone odd like Greg Bear and W. Michael Gear sometimes write about. “Flowers for Algernon”, Darwin’s Radio, Raising Abel… those are good reads. ---
**Author:** ![Kallessa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7993a0/32.png) [@Kallessa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kallessa)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/55 "2005-01-02T21:30:49Z")
Someone mentioned **Charles DeLint** , so I’ll second that–he is one of my favorites (maning I buy his books in hardcover). I didn’t see **Steven Brust** mentioned, and I think he should be on the list of worthy fantasy writers. He has a couple of different styles–books like _The Phoenix Guard_ are written like a semi-scholarly history–it can take some getting used to. then, the _Vlad Taltos_ series are straight-forward (albeit convoluted) action with just a dash of philosophy. His stand-alones-- _Cowboy Feng’sSpace Bar and Grille; the Sun, the Moon and the Stars; To Reign in Hell_ and _Brokedown Palace_ show a range I find similar to Roger Zelazny, which is high praise indeed from me. A particular subset of fantasy are the King Arthur tales. If you are interested, I think **Mary Stewart** did a wonderful job with her Merlin series, _The Crystal Caves; The Hollow Hills; The Last Enchantment;_ and _This Wicked Day_, although some may find the last two less compelling than the first two. For realistic Arthur, **Rosemary Suttcliff** is still the best in my eyes (she may be in the children’s section, although _The Sword at Sunset_ isn’t a children’s title. I avoid the _Avalon_ series, but other will proclaim it to be fantastic. For a fantasy of a fantasy, try **Patricia Kennealy-Morrison’s** _Keltoid_ series–the premise it that the Celts went into space about the time the Dark Ages took over Europe, their civilization continued to grow, there’s a King who will return in a time of trouble, yadda, yadda–with sword fights and space battles, how could it miss? ---
**Author:** ![Algul\_Siento](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f17d59/32.png) [@Algul\_Siento](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algul_Siento)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/56 "2005-01-02T21:56:45Z")
Stephen King’s **The Dark Tower** series is excellent. Everyone thinks of him as a horror writer, but he actually wrote some great scifi/fantasy stories. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/57 "2005-01-02T22:33:31Z")
> [@elfkin477](#): > > It’s nice to see someone who likes scifi admit this. I attempted The Moon is a Harsh Mistress this past year, and gave up on it in frustration because it was so so very horrible on a stylistic scale. What went through Heinlein’s head as he wrote this? " I know! To show it’s the future I’ll remove all pronouns and most of the articles from the prose. I’m so clever. People won’t mind if my narrator sounds like a stupid person trying to learn english as a second language." All the praise for it I’d heard made me wonder if they used to soak the pages in LSD back when it was first published. Or it might sound like the man was brought up in a polyglot society in which his first language was Russian – as happens to be the case in the story, and is brought out there. Heinlein did a lot of experimentation with adapting various literary styles to SF – he was the founder of the **character-based** story, as opposed to the “gadget stories” that had preceded his entry into the field. Some of his experiments came out less than satisfactory – _I Will Fear No Evil_ as the classic interior-monologue gimmick adapted to a rather novel premise, falls far short of what it might have been. _Job_ as the product of what sounds like a collaboration between James Branch Cabell and Sinclair Lewis is a bit more successful, but leaves a bit to be desired. But don’t sell the man short – he knew what he was essaying in each experiment. Some worked, some didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/58 "2005-01-02T22:37:02Z")
> [@Kallessa](#): > > For a fantasy of a fantasy, try **Patricia Kennealy-Morrison’s** _Keltoid_ series–the premise it that the Celts went into space about the time the Dark Ages took over Europe, their civilization continued to grow, there’s a King who will return in a time of trouble, yadda, yadda–with sword fights and space battles, how could it miss? How could it miss? I bought _The Copper Crown_ some time ago because I liked the cover art. After rereading LOTR (just before the movies came out) I was in a very pro-fantasy mood, so I opened the book. Big mistake. The characters were totally cardboard–the heroine & most of her family are textbook “Mary Sues” (for you fanfiction readers). The style is more leaden than copper–no wit, no humor, no style–nothing but pedestrian plodding. And the “Celtic” background is based more on 19th-century Celtic mist than anything found in real Celtic legends or archaeology. Worst of all–the book interested me just enough to make me read the sequel–which I was glad to find very used & very cheap. However, the story didn’t get any better. I actually tossed the it in the trash–& I didn’t miss. ---
**Author:** ![Kallessa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7993a0/32.png) [@Kallessa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kallessa)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2005, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/59 "2005-01-04T09:19:31Z")
Well, yes, [b[Bridget\*\*, I will admit that the wife of the late, great Jim Morrison is better at selling herself than at writing, but I do think her premise is interesting, and with a little reader imagination, some of her characters get off the ground. It’s also possible that her second series–which, if I remember, takes place farther back in the history, was better than the _Copper Crown_ series, or that I’m remembering how good I wanted the books to be and not how bad they really were. However, I will stand by my declaration that, as a fantasy of a fantasy and a pretty cool idea, the books are worth a sampling at least. If the reader can make it through one with any interest left, keep reading, if not, it creates quite a backdrop for “I could write this concept much better, heck, a monkey could do it better” daydreams. ---
**Author:** ![Bites\_When\_Provoked](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bites_when_provoked/32/18073_2.png) [@Bites\_When\_Provoked](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bites_When_Provoked)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2005, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434/60 "2005-01-04T09:53:16Z")
> [@Misery Loves Co.](#): > > I just finished reading Hobb’s third trillogy, and she managed to do something that I’ve never seen done: three sequential Trillogies that are internally consistent, yet tell a greater story - and it’s all well planned out. Details that seem insignificant in her first series are developed at length in her third, and a throway line in book 4 may be the pivotal point of book 7. > > She’s what I would call a _dark_ writer - lots of really bad stuff happens to her characters, but she fits the bills that **Kytheria** mentioned: " engaging characters, good pacing, an interesting, suspenseful plot, good description. Your book has to be able to stand on its own merits if the scifi / fantasy elements are removed. " > > F.Y.I.: Assassin’s Apprentice, Royal Assassin, and Assassin’s Quest are the the books of the first series. Sound’s cheesy but they absolutely aren’t. Seconding the recommendation of Robin Hobb. She creates fascinating characters - very complex, and extremely believable. This would be my recommendation. Funnily enough, I found the Liveship Traders (second trilogy) to be unappealing when I first read it, but having re-read it recently I don’t know why that would have been. I suspect I was probably just not in the right frame of mind and skimmed too much the first time around! On a lighter note, Melanie Rawn is pretty good. Her Sunrunner series is innovative and cleverly written. Katherine Kerr’s Deverry books are also good for light reading, and have an unusual plot which jumps around different timelines as the central characters are bonded to each other through past-life incarnations. Interesting idea, and a good read. Neither author is a patch on Hobb when it comes to making you really \*live \* the characters, though. Terry Pratchett is well worth reading. I’m working towards owning the full set of his novels as well. It’s a strange but endearing mix of light-hearted comedy, sharp satire and occasionally pointed - but mostly subtle - social commentary. Patricia Kennealy-Morrison’s books (mentioned by \*\*Kallessa \*\* and \*_Bridget Burke \*\* with opposing opinions) have an innovative basis but are essentially story-driven rather than character-driven. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing_, and they’re actually quite a good read if you’re prepared for that fact. They’re worth reading for the sake of the interesting concept and the clever way in which Celtic mythology is worked into the story - just don’t go looking for intense character development. - For example, Harry Harrison’s \*Stainless Steel Rat \* books. A futuristic sci-fi comedy of the sort that tend to attract the phrase ‘a rollicking good read’ on the cover. Great for light entertainment, but you have to be prepared for the fact that all the characters talk exactly alike. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/good-science-fiction-and-fantasy-lit-vs-the-bad-stuff/282434.md?page=4)