I’m re-reading this series for the first time in many years. The last time I read it, it consisted of four books; now there are, what, fifteen? Twenty?
I started with the books I own, the original trilogy, and I’m just about done with Wishsong. Where should I go from here? Would it be best to read them in the order they were published, or should I go back to the “chronological beginning?” Or something else?
Stop now.
Seriously, turn around and walk away.
It’s interminable, and it doesn’t get any better. It stays at a very medoiocre level, and in places is much worse. I gave up after the second trilogy.
When I read them in my Teens, I loved them.
I found my old copy and squeed with delight, until about the third chapter and realized it was meh.
The Fellowship of the Ring, then The Two Towers, then The Return of the King.
IIRC, publication order is chronological order in the series, with the exception of the one prequel (First King?).
GESancMan–first, use them to prop up a table with uneven legs.
Do not use them as booster seats in highchairs, 'cause Baby will get a rash on his lil po-po.
Above all else, do not read them.
Go read Tolkien.
Yeah, yeah, go read Tolkien…if you’re having a lot of difficulty sleeping.
Brooks wrote out of chronological order, so:
First read the Word and The Void trilogy
Then read the Genesis of Shannara trilogy
And then read the older books.
Read Sword of Shannara first. By which I mean read the front cover and put it down again, or if you’ve already bought it, read the first page and then throw it on the fire.
HA-HA-HA-HAHEE-HEE-HOO-HA!
No.
Seriously, junk them.
(Am I allowed to quote myself?)
I’ve slightly changed my mind.
If you are under 20 then carry on. Read the lot. Followed by everything David Eddings wrote. Then move on to anything with a sword on the cover (or a ring (or a crown (or a dragon / unicorn))). Then start on the sci fi - I recommend all the sequels to Dune, especially the ones not written by Frank Herbert. Once you are fully mired in the dross move on to the really dire stuff. Like the Silmarillion and the Lost Tales.
If you are over 20, my advice stands.
(PS I love fantasy and sci fi, but the above is semi serious.)
I feel sorry for Terry Brooks, because Tolkien plagiarised the whole of Shannara.
Admittedly Tolkien’s version was far, far better especially with plot, background, names, history and dialogue.
But Brooks should get credit for originality. :rolleyes:
Although i am in general agreement about the quality of Brooks writing.
I still think Elfstones isn’t bad. Isn’t that the one keeps being rumoured about being made into a movie?
Also Wishsong has it’s moments.
Don’t bother reading beyond the first Trilogy.
But what if I like the general concept of The Lord of the Rings, but want the concepts filtered through someone with much less talent and a smaller vocabulary? Or perhaps a general outline of Tolkien…
(I’m sorry, GESancMan. If you find some enjoyment from them then a list with publication order is going to be found at http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk . So at least you get an answer along with the pile on.)
I can’t speak to the quality of the series, and I don’t think you (the OP) really were asking for comments about that.
I can tell you, though, that IMO the rule is always to read in order of publication, for any series like this. Read them in the order the author wrote them. To do otherwise would be sort of like reading the chapters in a single book out of order. You’d see things revealed before they were supposed to be revealed, the story would come out all choppy, etc etc. Even if a later chapter is a flashback, you shouldn’t read the later chapter first. That would ruin the story.
Read them in publication order. I can’t understand the mindset that would read them in chronological order. Chronological order is not the order in which the story is being told.
It would be like watching Memento backwards.
-FrL-
I think this thread has been hijacked enough with the “Brooks stole from Tolkien” meme, so if you want to continue that conversation, do so in another thread.
Eh… I’ve read the first Brooks trilogy, and the Tolkien books (inc. Silmarillion), and while I see that the basic structure that Brooks used is very Tolkien-esque, what fantasy novel doesn’t use that?
I think Brooks isn’t as bad as everyone makes out- I think he does a better job at developing characters than Tolkien did, actually. Same goes for Eddings- he’s great at that.
Tolkien had the best story, but some of the other writers in the genre do other things better.
It’s like hamburger joints; some use better ingredients, while others cook theirs better, and yet others have the best atmosphere. It depends on what you’re looking for.
Agreed. See any thread in which we discuss the reading order for the Chronicles of Narnia.
And yet, it would seem that the Elric books are best read in chronological, not publication, order.
The Lies of Locke Lamora
Red Seas Under Red Skies
The Blade Itself
Just to name a few.