I’m not comparing Chalker’s work to Gor. I’m saying that they’re both works that I’d not recommend to others, because of their content.
In the one example I’ve read (The River of the Dancing Gods series, in which both major protagonists and one minor one end up transformed into overly sexualized sex slaves with no free will (henceforth: OSSWNFW) at some point), neither of the transformations are the deliberate result of action by a bad guy: one is the side effect of a villain stealing one of the hero’s bodies (and parking his mind in the body of an OSSWNFW; in another case, the heroine is transformed into an OSSWNFW as a result of her subconscious interacting with a strong magical area; in a third, the heroine becomes something of an OSSWNFW due to her role changing under the magical Rules that govern the world.
Haven’t read Well World. Have no particular plan to.
These were great! And you don’t have to read them in sequence; they’re not that kind of trilogy.
My favorite China Mieville book is “The City and The City”: it doesn’t have any “magical” or fantastical elements, and yet it is the most mind-blowing read I’ve encountered to date.
Yeah, that’s what I mean. When she first made the comment I thought, "Oh, come on! There are plenty of songs where… " and then I realized that there really aren’t too many songs that I’ve ever heard that are active and concrete rather than passive and abstract. So that aspect is cool.
I’m around page 200. I’ll finish the book but I’m not really expecting to want to read further. That can change in an instant for me, though. Modesitt definitely wears out the repetition. I think he thinks his readers have really short attention spans. Dude, just tell me that she continues to drink a lot of water and I’ll take it as a given, okay? Sheesh! 
And the Devil Will Drag You Under is a one shot and I think showcases Chalker near his best. His psychosexual hangups are still lurking ( you can never fully escape them in his writing ), but they aren’t quite as in your face as in some other works. Chalker can be a fun, inventive writer, but you do have to kinda try to look past his peculiar quirks to enjoy his stuff.
I totally agree about “The City and the City.” I’d call it half police procedural, half urban fantasy, all awesome.
“The Name of the Wind” by Patrick Rothfuss was good, but the series won’t be finished for years and years. 2014 if we’re lucky. That’s too long for me to wait. He’s slooooooooow.
I also enjoyed David Anthony Durham’s Acacia series (the final book comes out next year) but despite some nice worldbuilding, somehow I just don’t like some of the main characters. It’s good but not great.
This may veer into more urban fantasy/steampunk, but Jeff VanderMeer’s “City of Saints and Madmen” is quite astonishing. Some amazing stuff in there, but sometimes you really have to work to get at it.
Re: China Mieville- his newest book is called Kraken. It takes place in our world, in London, and it’s just as weird as his steampunk ones. Really, seriously. Weird.
This is what I came in here to mention. From my review: The story begins with a simple enough conceit - imagine all the mythological fairy tale characters and fantastical places they inhabited might actually be real, but existing on a different plane and separated from the reality you know by a “veil” forged of magic. Golden takes this premise and weaves a richly-imagined world of fantasy where mythology comes to life, and sometimes takes on forms quite different than that of our fond childhood fables. The world beyond the veil also follows its own magical rules, and therein lies the crux of the tale.
Also agree Jim Butcher’s Dresden books are ridiculous good fun.
No mention of Pullman’s His Dark Materials Trilogy (The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife, The Amber Spyglass)? I find if you do not approach them as an anti-christian polemic, they’re quite engrossing.
I have actually already read those, as well.
Loved them, though the last book does push the anti-Christian-God theme a bit heavily. Still loved the series,though.
Well you’re right, Der Trihs. The Gor novels are a lot more honest and upfront about what they are all about than the Chalker novels. Not that I ever found Chalker particularly readable …
Chalker was writing books for the purpose of being entertaining, Norman appeared to be trying to justify his fantasies. Not the same thing at all. Comparing the two is a serious insult to Chalker.
Just wanted to second the Earthsea books (Ursula K LeGuin).
The first three are classic fantasy with the mage/hero doing stuff, though they have a thoughtful aspect that I appreciate more as an adult than I did as her Y/A target audience.
The next two (Tehanu, The Other Wind) were written to question and re-examine the patriarchal basis of Earthsea itself. They’re not really action books, they’re not part of the series as I’ve had my (11y/o) kid read it, but for me they’re now as much a part of the world as the first three.
The sixth book, Tales from Earthsea, is made up of five short stories and an essay on the origins or Earthsea. I’ve got it on order as one of the stories fills the gap between book four and five and another fills the gap between three and four (IIRC). Mainly I want that essay. It’s been described as a ‘shorter and better written’ Earthsea version of Tolkein’s backgrounds to Middle Earth.
Sorry for ranting, the rediscovered joy is still fresh and I have one new book to look forward to.
I really enjoyed the seven books in the Deathgate Cycle by Margaret Weiss and Tracy Hickman. In fact, I liked pretty much every series those two wrote together, but the Deathgate Cycle was my favorite. The pair is probably more famous for their work on Dragonlance.
Two fantasy authors I enjoy have been mentioned: Tom Holt and Gene Wolfe. I’ve recommended both to people and lent out books but usually got back “meh” or “didn’t finish it.”
One series of stories and novellas I’ve had better results recommending is the Enchanter series, aka the Incomplete Enchanter, aka the Complete Enchanter, or maybe just the Harold Shea stories by Fletcher Pratt and L Sprague De Camp. I see there were additions by De Camp after Pratt died and homages by other authors, but I haven’t read them.
They’re good early examples of pulp comic fantasy overlaid with a scientific approach as the heroes travel to mythical or literary worlds and try to sort out how the local spells work and impress the locals with modern skills like fencing. I have fond memories of the stories and when I lent these books out, I usually got a more positive response than “meh”. They’re not great, just fun. It’s been years since I read them, though. They may not have aged as well as I remember. They also appear to be out of print, judging from a quick look at Amazon. Used copies are available, though.
Except, of course, for the second time, I wasn’t comparing the two. I was saying they’re both poor recommendations, because of their content. Which they are.
“Second time”? I was replying to Evil Captor.
So you were. My bad; sorry. (Xmas crankyness.)
Tom Holt is possibly the most inconsistent writer I’ve read. He’s written some really good stuff. He’s written some really bad stuff. He’s done blah books with one or two priceless scenes, and hilarious books with some bizarre loose thread or plot hole in the middle of it. You just never know.
My personal four recommendations are Nothing But Blue Skies, Snow White and the Seven Samurai, Who’s Afraid of Beowolf, and Faust Among Equals.
I thought Who’s Afraid of Beowulf was okay but forgettable and never read any more of his humorous fantasy which seemed likely to be more of the same. But his historical novels (GOATSONG and THE WALLED ORCHARD, which I think now are packaged in one volume as THE WALLED ORCHARD, and OLYMPIAD) are amazing; funny and much darker than Who’s Afraid? was.
They’re all the same.
Don’t get me wrong - some are better than others and I’ve enjoyed several. But I find I really can’t have a Tom Holt reading marathon without getting annoyed. In particular he keeps re-writing the same basic romantic entanglement subplot with the exact same male and female leads, only with different wigs.
The first time it more or less works. The second time it seems oddly familiar. The third time it grates. By the seventh time you just throw up your hands. Or stop reading :D.
Tom Holt isn’t necessarily a bad writer. Like I said I’ve enjoyed some of his books. But with me and Holt familiarity really does breed contempt ( or at least temporary weariness ).