Poll: Best Book series of all time

[Weaver]

It isn't the worst thing I've ever read, but it was pretty awful. So derivative of Tolkien it makes my eyes bleed.

Meh, If I was more awake I'd seriously get involved. It's really bad though. And fans should consider other novels. George RR Martin? Tolkien? Usula Le Guin?

I'm getting really frustrated waiting on George RR Martin personally.

 

[cgaWolf]

I'm getting really frustrated waiting on George RR Martin personally.

http://grrrm.livejournal.com/ ^_^

 

[Flamex]

To the OP: if you dont know already SoT has ben made into a tv show called legend of the seeker, it went on for 2 seasons before being cancelled due to poor advertising, I reccemend anyone to watch the show its pretty awesome.

 

[Crayzor]

In enjoyed the first few books of SoT, but they really go downhill by the middle of the series. As alrady mentioned, Goodkind starts beating the reader over the head with objectivist philosophy. And the so obvious evil of the Imperial Order, which he presents as the only possible alternative to his own ideas, is a very weak argument, as I don't think such a group could exist in such an extreme in reality.

 

[smeghead25]

I haven't read it, so I can't comment on why I don't like it... All I know is that it doesn't interest me. Probably because I really am not interested in fantasy all that much. With some exceptions which brings me to...

Richard K. Morgan writes some of the best books I've ever read. I mean, I LOVED Dune to bits, and Arthur C. Clarke's Rama series was also fantastic, but there's something about Morgan's style that really grabs me. His Takeshi Kovacs series is one heck of a thrill ride, and it doesn't stick to the tired old sci-fi genre conventions, and it manages to weave a damn good story in with the most believeable character development, whilst also exploring the deepest darkest depths of the human condition. If he had any creative freedom when writing Crysis 2, it'll be up there with the deepest of the shooter genre.

On top of that, he is currently writing a fantasy series. The first book is called The Steel Remains, and I highly recommend it. It doesn't focus on an 'epic' story, and for the most part it is simply a noir in a fantasy realm. It presents a bleak fantasy world that ISN'T ruled by an oppressive King who the hero ends up defeating. I mean seriously, enough with that stuff already...

Another fantasy series I like, is the Dresden Files. I suggest it simply because it is accessible and funny and all the subplots are cleverly woven together and a satisfying end is reached everytime. And Jim Butcher is seriously not afraid to change and fuck up his character's life.

That's pretty much all I've been able to read in the fantasy genre apart from Harry Potter. As for other great series, I've always had a soft spot for Matthew Reilly's Scarecrow series (YAY A FIFTH ONE IS HIS NEXT BOOK XD). Sure, the plots are usually unbelievable and unrealistic, BUT they're not meant to be. THey're meant to be a super fast paced entertaining rollercoaster ride, and he is the fucking master at it.

 

[Slycne]

Seeker of Truth
Sword of Truth
Box of Orden
Stone of Tears
Wizard's First Rule
Palace of the Prophets
Temple of the Winds
Sister of the Dark
Sister of the Light

Maybe I am taking a lot of that out of context, but I have a very hard time swallowing that that kind of writing is the very best that's ever been penned ever.

It's accessible. I don't consider that count against it..

So is The Very Hungry Caterpillar, but you're saying that this is the best literature ever written. You need to do a lot better than simply accessible, because to me this looks like poor fantasy writing. Fantasy especially needs to have a well crafted world that feels lived in and believable.

This is just impressions, but as stated, I really picked up on the naming. The author fluctuates between psuedo-fantasy naming and modern naming conventions with apparently no regard for the cultures or regions of his setting. I've been in D&D campaigns that have a better sense of culture and setting.

That's not to say that they are wholly unenjoyable, but you are not making a convincing argument that they are the best.

Out of curiosity, what other fantasy, just to limit the scope, series have you read?

 

[OrokuSaki]

..... I've never even heard of this book, that said, it's difficult to top the Legend of Drizzt, especially where fantasy novels are concerned.

That said, I have a question. Why didn't you name this thread "Sword of Truth" or "Is Sword of Truth the best book series of all time"?
I read the first page and your Original Post makes most people's answers irrelevant and they probably don't know because your title was misleading.

 

[BrionJames]

The Wheel of Time Series by Robert Jordan.

 

[AwesomeExpress]

That was actually the first series that came to mind when I saw this thread, but I can't deny the classics or even the Halo series.

 

[Gildan Bladeborn]

While I'd love to say "The Discworld series" in answer to this thread's main non-Sword of Truth question, those books aren't so much a "series" as they are books that share and collectively advance a setting (much like the other massive collection of books I'm typically immersed in, Warhammer 40,000 novels), with myriad 'sub-series' and one-offs inside of the overall package.

So instead I'll put forward my favorite fantasy series (that has a single unifying overall narrative and which has concluded), the Death Gate heptalogy[footnote]A series in 7 parts, comprised of the initial 4-book cycle and 3 closing novels.[/footnote].

 

[spartan231490]

Seeker of Truth
Sword of Truth
Box of Orden
Stone of Tears
Wizard's First Rule
Palace of the Prophets
Temple of the Winds
Sister of the Dark
Sister of the Light

Maybe I am taking a lot of that out of context, but I have a very hard time swallowing that that kind of writing is the very best that's ever been penned ever.

It's accessible. I don't consider that count against it..

So is The Very Hungry Caterpillar, but you're saying that this is the best literature ever written. You need to do a lot better than simply accessible, because to me this looks like poor fantasy writing. Fantasy especially needs to have a well crafted world that feels lived in and believable.

This is just impressions, but as stated, I really picked up on the naming. The author fluctuates between psuedo-fantasy naming and modern naming conventions with apparently no regard for the cultures or regions of his setting. I've been in D&D campaigns that have a better sense of culture and setting.

That's not to say that they are wholly unenjoyable, but you are not making a convincing argument that they are the best.

Out of curiosity, what other fantasy, just to limit the scope, series have you read?

In no particular order: Wheel of Time. Hobbit. Ranger's apprentice. Percy Jackson. Night angel. Inheritance. Drizzt Do'Urden. Vlad Taltos. LoTR. Harry Potter. Hellgate: London. Fifth Ring. Artemis Fowl. Deltora quest. In quasi fantasy: Vampire Huntress. Alpha and Omega. Mercy Thompson. Crimson Moon. Twilight. Non-Fantasy: Atticus Kodiak. Great Gatsby. Giver. Scarlet Letter. Macbeth.
That's not even close to everything, that's just off the top of my head. The world feels lived in and believable. The naming might be simple, but so are people.
Seeker of Truth: is a title, it was a position meant to uncover the truth.
Sword of truth: is the mark of said position, also that person's greatest tools.
Boxes of Orden: What is the problem with this naming? they are 3 boxes of the magic of Orden, which I believe means life in High D'Haran.
Stone of tears: looks like a tear, it is a key to unleashing hell itself, and can be protected by a wizard's tear.
Wizard's First Rule: It's a series of rules that only wizard's know, about human behavior
Palace of the Prophets: Spoiler, but it makes sense.
Temple of the Winds: This one I can see. I think it was the temple's original name, they should have changed it when they changed the temple's purpose.
Sisters of the dark: An organization meant to mirror the sisters of the light.
Sisters of the light: Serve the creator, the light, and had that simple name so that a force consisting of thousands of sorceresses who are immortal wouldn't scare the common people into pitchforks and torches mode.
All of this makes sense, would you prefer if it was in latin, or some other long-dead language. Aes Sedai from Wheel of Time means, servant of all. Names in fantasy are always simple, some authors just prefer to put them in long dead languages. Me, I prefer it when it's in common, makes more sense.

 

[spartan231490]

, I wasn't suggesting that it "got good 20 hours in" I was just pointing out that you were incorrect. a possibility which you acknowledged by saying you had only gotten halfway through book two.

While this point may be true and my lack of knowledge streams from the fact I haven't finished the book, what I was complaining about was that, although the circumstances were a little different, at the point I stopped reading the book was in the same situation as Book One, ergo why I didn't continue reading further. Saying that it changes later on suggest that I must continue reading until it reaches the different state. This is what I meant by the quote.

Anyway, to answer the question about the books. The book I've enjoyed the most, and read more times that I can remember (somewhere in the double digits) is "The Silmarilion".

Honestly, I'm still not seeing that it was the same situation. It was vastly different. Yes there were similarities, but only on the surface. For example, his captivity. In the first, the captivity was forced on him from outside. In the second, he was effectively holding himself captive. The solutions to the problem are also inherently different. it's kinda hard to get away from yourself like Richard got away from Denna.(sorry if I'm being oblique, I'm trying to avoid spoilers) The romantic issue you pointed out. The first had to do with Kahlan's magic and Richard's stubbornness. In the second, the issue was Richard's insane fear of a collar, and of magic.

 

[cannot_aim]

A Song of Ice and Fire. The best book series I've ever read.

 

[Lukeje]

I can only think that this is some kind of troll attempt. What other book series have you actually read for comparison against The Sword of Truth?

...I've only read the first one, but as to reasons why I didn't like it:

• The descriptions were long-winded and often contradictory.
  Deus Ex Machina after Deus Ex Machina.
  Trope ridden story with obvious twists (and with no sense of satire about said tropes).

One of the most consistent series of which I've read has to be Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels; well written and satirical.

Can you remember one of the descriptions that were contradictory?
Never been familiar with Deus Ex Machina, are you saying the story was the same?
The first one was very obvious yes, but that is not true, at least in my mind, for the rest of the series. If you care, you can probably find a short summary on wiki of the later books.

I can't remember specific examples, I can just remember being annoyed each time I found one.

 

[Slycne]

The world feels lived in and believable. The naming might be simple, but so are people.

snip

All of this makes sense, would you prefer if it was in latin, or some other long-dead language. Aes Sedai from Wheel of Time means, servant of all. Names in fantasy are always simple, some authors just prefer to put them in long dead languages. Me, I prefer it when it's in common, makes more sense.

That's the thing, simple people don't speak like that though, the most common time you constantly see that of style is governments: department of defense, federal bureau of investigation, etc. Seeker of Truth would much more likely be Truthseeker in a common vernacular and the same for most of the rest of them. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be used ever, but that constant repetition and literal naming just seems bland and lacking in any sense of history, quite like the world has only now come into being for this story.

Jedi certainly wouldn't be improved by calling them Knights of the Force nor a more simple example if the Night's Watch was Watchers of the North Wall / Watchers of Night.

I am at least willing to find and read the first book, I might not be giving it a fair chance.

 

[thylasos]

Never read it. I'm a big fan of Discworld, but I wouldn't say it's the "best of all time"... it's fairly wild hyperbole.

I dare say a vast number of people would bring up the term "literature"; I'm not above that sort of elitism, when it's well-grounded.

I'd bring up Gogol's "Dead Souls" as an unfinished series which is excellent, designed as a sort of contemporary Russian "Divine Comedy".

 

[walk_star]

Richard K. Morgan writes some of the best books I've ever read. I mean, I LOVED Dune to bits, and Arthur C. Clarke's Rama series was also fantastic, but there's something about Morgan's style that really grabs me. His Takeshi Kovacs series is one heck of a thrill ride, and it doesn't stick to the tired old sci-fi genre conventions, and it manages to weave a damn good story in with the most believeable character development, whilst also exploring the deepest darkest depths of the human condition. If he had any creative freedom when writing Crysis 2, it'll be up there with the deepest of the shooter genre.

Can't agree with this enough. I just finished reading Broken Angels (Takeshi Kovacs novel #2, for the uninitiated) for the second time. My favorite part of Morgan's writing is how he takes well-understood human behavior and thrusts it into a strange future, where technology stretches the limits of what's possible. He takes hold of your understanding and twists it in surprising and challenging ways.

Take for example the concept of torture. While reasonable people acknowledge that humans' capacity to inflict torture on each other is reprehensible, we also understand torture's limitations. When used to set an example (as opposed to extracting information) too little pain and damage won't convey the message, and too much pain and damage will cause the victim to mentally check out, lose consciousness, or simply (and mercifully) die. But what happens when the torture method is supplemented by a computer program neurally and chemically linked to the victim, monitoring vital signs and administering various sedatives and stimulants as necessary to keep him alive and conscious during the entire ordeal? (If such a concept exists today - and it may well - I don't think it appears in the popular awareness of torture... certainly not to the degree Morgan constructs it.)

The torture scenes in Morgan's Kovacs novels are some of the most brutal to endure as a reader, but not to the point of utter revulsion. The villains of the future operate with the same basic cruelty humans always have, only with half a millennium of technological "advancements" enabling them. The thoughtful reader comes away with - as I hope is intended - a clearer perspective on the villains of our own time.

When I found out Morgan is penning Crysis 2, I about shat myself with glee.