-
Welcome
to BookAndReader! We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.
Book Discussion- Gardens of the Moon
- Thread starter rune
- Start date
rune
New Member
I found this to be a complex story that begins the things epic series, that follows the battles in the Malazan empire.
There are a lot of character plot lines, and I felt that the author tried to spread these stories to thin, which made the plot jump around from character to character (there were times I thought I needed to take notes
). This jumping from one story line to the next did make things confusing at times and the occassional appearance of gods increased this confusion.
However, there were some really interesting characters in the book, the Bridgeburners were my favourites.
I enjoyed how magic was used in the plot, very gritty and realistic. The author used a lot of violence in this story, and the graphic scenes were well written during battles.
Though I found this book difficult to get my head around, I did continue onto the next in the series, but gave me on that half way through. Erikson is a very good writer, but his stories are just too complicated for my taste
There are a lot of character plot lines, and I felt that the author tried to spread these stories to thin, which made the plot jump around from character to character (there were times I thought I needed to take notes
). This jumping from one story line to the next did make things confusing at times and the occassional appearance of gods increased this confusion. However, there were some really interesting characters in the book, the Bridgeburners were my favourites.
I enjoyed how magic was used in the plot, very gritty and realistic. The author used a lot of violence in this story, and the graphic scenes were well written during battles.
Though I found this book difficult to get my head around, I did continue onto the next in the series, but gave me on that half way through. Erikson is a very good writer, but his stories are just too complicated for my taste
Rune, I agree with you on the bigness of the story. At times there was too much going on. Although I was able to keep up, it was almost distracting having that much going on in a book. However, the variety of characters makes up for the hugeness of the story. I found there were many interesting characters located throughout the story. I also like the way he weaves a very thin line between the good guys and the bad....you're left wondering which side you're going to support. I'd like to think that there will be more characterization in the next book, which I've already started. Overall, I liked it...enough to get the 2nd book. I've started on the 2nd book and it seems to have a good start.
Carlos
New Member
Agreed.
A very complex book lots happening, which is all linked together, just keep at it. There are major factions warring and within those factions there are subplots galore.
I did get lost at some stages of the book, but persistance got me through it as once you read more things are explained.
It's a long book, so if anyone wants to read it I suggest chosing a quiet period in your life so you can read it as fast as possible. This way all the plots and sub-plots will remain fresh.
A very complex book lots happening, which is all linked together, just keep at it. There are major factions warring and within those factions there are subplots galore.
I did get lost at some stages of the book, but persistance got me through it as once you read more things are explained.
It's a long book, so if anyone wants to read it I suggest chosing a quiet period in your life so you can read it as fast as possible. This way all the plots and sub-plots will remain fresh.
direstraits
Well-Known Member
I'm currently doing a concurrent reading of this book with Jemima Aslana, so I thought of using this thread to discuss the book as I read along. I've just finished Chapter 3, so anyone who wishes to join in please don't cause a blooper and drop a spoiler!
My impressions so far: Carnage. If this were a film all the director has to do is to splash fake blood at the direction of the camera every few seconds, with some plastic limbs thrown in for good measure.
It occured to me while I was reading the first and second chapters that while these people were fighting, it's never clear whom they were fighting against. At least to me. Was it civil war? Someone from another empire? It wasn't until the third chapter that Moon's Spawn was introduced. Who were they fighting before? Against whom did Sergeant Ganoes fight against before
? I read this part of the novel while I was on a speeding bus in a 5 hour journey, so I may have missed some details.
On writing: Erikson writes well, but contrary to Jem's opinion, I don't think Erikson writes *that* well. Character-wise all of them seem to behave the same way: war-wearied, with stony facades and hard-as-nails look in the eyes of those who have seen too many deaths. It's like if you've met one soldier, you've met them all.
Also, in the course of explaining a little of the back story, the dialogue between Tattersail and WhiskeyJack seemed a little contrived. Prose-wise, GRRM wins hands down.
Okay, I just realized I'm a certified crazy nitpicker. Yay.
However, something that really interested me is this book seems to place a lot of emphasis on magic, which is what I wanted in a fantasy epic. It goes into the sort of magical details that neither LOTR or GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire did, and sorta like how Earthsea or WoT's magic is explained.
I was talking about magical battles in another post, and just as if someone upstairs had heard me, I read a magic battle scene in Gardens. Frankly, I'm not really sure yet how I feel about magic combat, at least as it was described by Erikson. I mean, a mage spends his entire lifetime learning the magical arts, only to be enveloped by "ethereal wings of ice" in combat, becomes frozen, and a "split-second" later turned to dust. Wha...? I'm thinking - That's it??
Strange I didn't feel this way in all of my reading of WoT.
ds
My impressions so far: Carnage. If this were a film all the director has to do is to splash fake blood at the direction of the camera every few seconds, with some plastic limbs thrown in for good measure.
It occured to me while I was reading the first and second chapters that while these people were fighting, it's never clear whom they were fighting against. At least to me. Was it civil war? Someone from another empire? It wasn't until the third chapter that Moon's Spawn was introduced. Who were they fighting before? Against whom did Sergeant Ganoes fight against before
he was recruited by the Adjunct
On writing: Erikson writes well, but contrary to Jem's opinion, I don't think Erikson writes *that* well. Character-wise all of them seem to behave the same way: war-wearied, with stony facades and hard-as-nails look in the eyes of those who have seen too many deaths. It's like if you've met one soldier, you've met them all.
Also, in the course of explaining a little of the back story, the dialogue between Tattersail and WhiskeyJack seemed a little contrived. Prose-wise, GRRM wins hands down.
Okay, I just realized I'm a certified crazy nitpicker. Yay.
However, something that really interested me is this book seems to place a lot of emphasis on magic, which is what I wanted in a fantasy epic. It goes into the sort of magical details that neither LOTR or GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire did, and sorta like how Earthsea or WoT's magic is explained.
I was talking about magical battles in another post, and just as if someone upstairs had heard me, I read a magic battle scene in Gardens. Frankly, I'm not really sure yet how I feel about magic combat, at least as it was described by Erikson. I mean, a mage spends his entire lifetime learning the magical arts, only to be enveloped by "ethereal wings of ice" in combat, becomes frozen, and a "split-second" later turned to dust. Wha...? I'm thinking - That's it??
Strange I didn't feel this way in all of my reading of WoT.
ds
Carlos
New Member
If you are looking for magic used in battles / skirmishes, then check out James Barclays books. He melds swords / bow and arrows etc with defensive and offensive battle magic.
Check his website for info on his books, http://www.jamesbarclay.com/
Check his website for info on his books, http://www.jamesbarclay.com/
direstraits
Well-Known Member
Thanks Carlos! Yes, I'm looking for good magic combat scenes, but it must have a good story too. I was lamenting elsewhere about how there isn't an epic like ASoIaF which concentrates on magic.
I'll keep a lookout on Barclay.
ds
I'll keep a lookout on Barclay.
ds
Carlos
New Member
JB writes the fight scenes how I would imagine it works, eg the mage stands behind the fighters and castes a missile shield to prevent them getting shot by arrows, the spell requires the mage to continually concentrate on it preventing the mage casting other spells. The group then moves forward and engaes the enemy as one.
Or the mage infiltrates a camp under a cloak of invisibilty to do some recon, taking with him/her an archer who kills the sentries allowing the others to climb over the camp wall. The mage then chucks a few fireballs around to cause chaos while the fighters hack and slash.
His books are not a dungeon bash, as there are different factions of mages and political powers. I'll have to get his latest, just been to his web site. Great stuff
direstraits are you in KL Malaysia? his books will probably be hard to find there as they are hard to find in Australia!
Or the mage infiltrates a camp under a cloak of invisibilty to do some recon, taking with him/her an archer who kills the sentries allowing the others to climb over the camp wall. The mage then chucks a few fireballs around to cause chaos while the fighters hack and slash.
His books are not a dungeon bash, as there are different factions of mages and political powers. I'll have to get his latest, just been to his web site. Great stuff
direstraits are you in KL Malaysia? his books will probably be hard to find there as they are hard to find in Australia!
Jemima Aslana
New Member
As I wrote to direstraits:
Thinking about it right now, my judgement 'awesome', is over the top I have a good excuse though. I haven't read fantasy at all since sometime in October, and I picked up Gardens on a recommendation I recieved because I moaned about lack of quality in fantasy literature. I was excited - rightfully so, mind you, but too much to see quite clearly. So here is a more tempered evaluation:
To be fair (and comparing with the other books I'm reading) Erikson's prose is by no means 'awesome' lol. It *is* good though. I've read far worse novels. It's not Dostoyevsky nor is it Rutherfurd, but it's a great deal better than Bob Salvatore and David Eddings, some of the 'big' fantasy authors. His prose keeps me entertained at a reasonable pace without getting overly speedy. When prose is too fast-paced it sometimes tempts me to read faster and thus ending up skipping passages once in a while, this did not happen here. Erikson keeps the pace sufficiently down by means of his many plotlines and complicated world.
Having gotten a little further in the book than ds, I'd like to contend the point about all the characters seeming cut after the same model. As I read further on I realised that the tough-as-nails facade does not remain.
If you land in the middle of an army that's been at war for 7+ years people *will* look bleak, and especially so when confronted with people they don't know - like for instance the reader.
As I commented earlier the novel does not ease the reader into the plot. It simply starts smack down in the middle plot-wise. But this is not so for character development. I have noticed that when the books starts the reader (obviously) does not know any of the characters, but none of the characters are actually interacting with people they know on a really close level. So as characters get closer to each other we also get closer to the characters.
So in that way the novel *does* ease the reader into it all. Tattersail is the only who has a close relationship with another character when we meet her though that quickly ends. So further on in the story characterisation makes much more sense than it does at first.
As for magic battles: Alas, I am a mere novice when it comes to reading those. And I haven't read JB (though I do have books by him standing on my shelves, waiting for me) so I can't compare. What I do know is that I was happy to see magic battles described as more than just a Lightning Bolt here and a Fireball there (my inner role-player knows that those two are some of the most efficient spells in D&D, but I like to think that novels can do better than an RPG when it comes to nifty offensive spells).
The magic is better described than it is in many other books and I like the fact that I was having very vivid pictures in my head and I could easily understand the soldiers' fear of such powers that they don't know. I get kinda the same feeling, the magic is described in somewhat vague terms, and that does in fact leave me with the sense that they are mystical powers that not everyone has access to - including me.
I like the magic system of Gardens. The whole concept of Warrens is intriguing (though complicated to keep track of - once again: bless Erikson for providing a list), and how he handles the weaknesses of the mages. It's an issue with all magical worlds: What is to prevent mages from simply getting so powerful that they take over the world and become Gods? Erikson has put limits on the mages by making the Warrens some very independent... entities? places? sources? Not quite sure what I should call them.
And I think I've grasped that sometimes mortals can ascend to Godhood. I think that's what Ascendants are, and also how it's connected to the Deck of Dragons. I may be wrong about this, I hope it'll be explained later, because the possibility of ascending to godhood but also the danger of being utterly destroyed int he attempt is quite in intersting aspect of both the magic and the pantheon of the world. I really want to know more, so in order to remedy that I'm now going to go read some more
Last comment: best chance at getting books, I have one word for you people: eBay! That's where I got Gardens, that's where I got the 4 Barclay books waiting for me. So there.
Sheesh, that ended up being long...
Thinking about it right now, my judgement 'awesome', is over the top
I have a good excuse though. I haven't read fantasy at all since sometime in October, and I picked up Gardens on a recommendation I recieved because I moaned about lack of quality in fantasy literature. I was excited - rightfully so, mind you, but too much to see quite clearly. So here is a more tempered evaluation:To be fair (and comparing with the other books I'm reading) Erikson's prose is by no means 'awesome' lol. It *is* good though. I've read far worse novels. It's not Dostoyevsky nor is it Rutherfurd, but it's a great deal better than Bob Salvatore and David Eddings, some of the 'big' fantasy authors. His prose keeps me entertained at a reasonable pace without getting overly speedy. When prose is too fast-paced it sometimes tempts me to read faster and thus ending up skipping passages once in a while, this did not happen here. Erikson keeps the pace sufficiently down by means of his many plotlines and complicated world.
Having gotten a little further in the book than ds, I'd like to contend the point about all the characters seeming cut after the same model. As I read further on I realised that the tough-as-nails facade does not remain.
If you land in the middle of an army that's been at war for 7+ years people *will* look bleak, and especially so when confronted with people they don't know - like for instance the reader.
As I commented earlier the novel does not ease the reader into the plot. It simply starts smack down in the middle plot-wise. But this is not so for character development. I have noticed that when the books starts the reader (obviously) does not know any of the characters, but none of the characters are actually interacting with people they know on a really close level. So as characters get closer to each other we also get closer to the characters.
So in that way the novel *does* ease the reader into it all. Tattersail is the only who has a close relationship with another character when we meet her though that quickly ends. So further on in the story characterisation makes much more sense than it does at first.
As for magic battles: Alas, I am a mere novice when it comes to reading those. And I haven't read JB (though I do have books by him standing on my shelves, waiting for me) so I can't compare. What I do know is that I was happy to see magic battles described as more than just a Lightning Bolt here and a Fireball there (my inner role-player knows that those two are some of the most efficient spells in D&D, but I like to think that novels can do better than an RPG when it comes to nifty offensive spells).
The magic is better described than it is in many other books and I like the fact that I was having very vivid pictures in my head and I could easily understand the soldiers' fear of such powers that they don't know. I get kinda the same feeling, the magic is described in somewhat vague terms, and that does in fact leave me with the sense that they are mystical powers that not everyone has access to - including me.
I like the magic system of Gardens. The whole concept of Warrens is intriguing (though complicated to keep track of - once again: bless Erikson for providing a list), and how he handles the weaknesses of the mages. It's an issue with all magical worlds: What is to prevent mages from simply getting so powerful that they take over the world and become Gods? Erikson has put limits on the mages by making the Warrens some very independent... entities? places? sources? Not quite sure what I should call them.
And I think I've grasped that sometimes mortals can ascend to Godhood. I think that's what Ascendants are, and also how it's connected to the Deck of Dragons. I may be wrong about this, I hope it'll be explained later, because the possibility of ascending to godhood but also the danger of being utterly destroyed int he attempt is quite in intersting aspect of both the magic and the pantheon of the world. I really want to know more, so in order to remedy that I'm now going to go read some more
Last comment: best chance at getting books, I have one word for you people: eBay! That's where I got Gardens, that's where I got the 4 Barclay books waiting for me. So there.
Sheesh, that ended up being long...
direstraits
Well-Known Member
Yo Carlos... thanks for the recommendation. I've just checked out Barclay in my local Borders, and I actually went and bought (what I thought was) the first in his series of books, Dawnthief. Looks interesting. And yes, I'm in KL, but I suppose I was lucky.Carlos said:
One thing that irritates me about fantasy/scifi book series is when there is no clear indication of the book number of the series on the individual books itself. Like Barclay's series. I had to check the publication date of each book to see which one comes out first.
Dawnthief was earliest, so I got that one.Another series that has this irritating attribute is the Night's Dawn Trilogy.
Haven't really gotten too much headway into Gardens, but pleasantly surprised to how the Deck is worked into the story. Nice, nice...
ds
Carlos
New Member
I have the same irritation, I actually write down what is in the series and then go hunting for them, Finding Number 1 in the series is normally very hard to find. Book shops always have number 2 and 3 in the series, only occassionally number 1.direstraits said:snip/
One thing that irritates me about fantasy/scifi book series is when there is no clear indication of the book number of the series on the individual books itself. Like Barclay's series. I had to check the publication date of each book to see which one comes out first.
Hope this helps
direstraits
Well-Known Member
Oh yeah, this helps a lot. Thanks!
This Barclay chap seems like a prolific writer - averaging a novel a year.
ds
This Barclay chap seems like a prolific writer - averaging a novel a year.
ds
direstraits
Well-Known Member
Hey Jem... where are you in the book?
ds
ds
Jemima Aslana
New Member
I've just finished it. I got rather caught up in it It took away from my History reading but hey, it was worth it lol
It took away from my History reading but hey, it was worth it lol
Spineshank
New Member
Im excited i just saw Deadhouse Gates in mass market paperback in Borders today, i havnt bought it yet but im going to. Man the US has to wait a long time for these to get here.
direstraits
Well-Known Member
Any comments?Jemima Aslana said:I've just finished it. I got rather caught up in it
ds
I thought Gardens of the Moon was a pretty good start, and I especially liked how Erikson treated the reader as intelligent by not explaining everything. Some characters were interesting, others entertaining (I know lots will disagree with me, but I love Kruppe), others clearly homages to other authors - perhaps not his strong point, but given the size of his cast it's pretty impressive. And he's something a lot of authors today aren't - ambitious! The only other series I can think of which is more ambitious is Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle. That said, the writing isn't always amazing and it shows it's a debut, but the improvement from this to Deadhouse Gates is remarkable. It's one of the few books really deserving of a re-read, because it seems almost like an entirely different novel.
direstraits
Well-Known Member
That's a wonderful overview, Brys, and I agree with your comments on Gardens. About the writing isn't always amazing, I have one scene that stuck out in me, which is the part when Lorn invited Dujek and Toc the Younger and.... Tattersail. The whole backstory between Lorn and Tatts were simmering, then... nothing. It seemed to contrived.
Haha, I'm not one of them who'll disagree with you - I thought Kruppe is an interesting character with plenty of potiential. I must warn you I haven't finished the book yet (I'm very slow this month) so don't tell me things like "What potential? He bit the dust!"
ds
p.s. I actually don't know if Kruppe did bite the dust... I hope I didn't get it dead-on (dead-on, geddit?)...
Haha, I'm not one of them who'll disagree with you - I thought Kruppe is an interesting character with plenty of potiential. I must warn you I haven't finished the book yet (I'm very slow this month) so don't tell me things like "What potential? He bit the dust!"
ds
p.s. I actually don't know if Kruppe did bite the dust... I hope I didn't get it dead-on (dead-on, geddit?)...
direstraits
Well-Known Member
Maybe it's the hype, the build up... but I didn't find Gardens all that incredible. It was alright, I think. Not the 'Oh my goodness that was bloody good!' effect I got from reading Guy Gavriel Kay or GRRM, but not too bad.
His writing is a little strange - it did seem like he incorporated lots of modern mannerisms into his characters dialogues, which was just weird.
Arrrrrgh! I'm nitpicking again!
Here's something more substantial: Besides Quick Ben, nobody in the Bridgeburners were properly fleshed out... too many things happening. And as for Paran... what was that all about?
And I cannot stop picturing Anomander Rake 'lounging' on a chair in Baruk's place.
Erikson I suppose is good enough for me to consider picking up the subsequent books. Lemme do a little research and see if I will be picking the rest up as well.
ds
His writing is a little strange - it did seem like he incorporated lots of modern mannerisms into his characters dialogues, which was just weird.
Arrrrrgh! I'm nitpicking again!
Here's something more substantial: Besides Quick Ben, nobody in the Bridgeburners were properly fleshed out... too many things happening. And as for Paran... what was that all about?
And I cannot stop picturing Anomander Rake 'lounging' on a chair in Baruk's place.
Erikson I suppose is good enough for me to consider picking up the subsequent books. Lemme do a little research and see if I will be picking the rest up as well.
ds