Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Fantasy_Books] Getting back in..

Expand Messages
  • Q
    Try the Rhapsody books by Elizabeth Haydon! They are truly addictive. The author s website is http://www.elizabethhaydon.com You can read samples at the site
    Message 1 of 12 , Oct 1, 2007
      Try the Rhapsody books by Elizabeth Haydon!
      They are truly addictive.
      The author's website is
      http://www.elizabethhaydon.com

      You can read samples at the site and I believe
      there is still a
      pretty active message board for her fans.

      Quenby

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Sharyla Yeany" <ilovemyman70@...>
      To: <fantasy_books@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 9:01 AM
      Subject: [Fantasy_Books] Getting back in..


      > Hey everyone. I've been lurking for a couple weeks and decided it's time
      > to delve right in.
      > I use to be a huge fantasy reader, my two favorite authors being David
      > Eddings and George RR Martin.
      > I've recently (within the last year) gone through a historical romance and
      > historical fiction phase and want to get into fantasy again but I don't
      > know where to start.
      >
      > Can anyone recommend a good series and or author to start with when
      > wanting to get grabbed back into the fantasy realm?
      > Sharyla
      >
      > My LJ
      > http://ilovemyman70.livejournal.com/
      >
      > My Pen Palling LJ Community
      >
      > http://community.livejournal.com/maturepenpals/
      >
      >
      >
    • William C. Garthright
      ... Tastes are different, but I was just blown away by Lois McMaster Bujold s *The Curse of Chalion* (2001). The two sequels (different characters on the same
      Message 2 of 12 , Oct 1, 2007
        > Can anyone recommend a good series and or author to start with when wanting to get grabbed back into the fantasy realm?
        >


        Tastes are different, but I was just blown away by Lois McMaster
        Bujold's *The Curse of Chalion* (2001). The two sequels (different
        characters on the same world) are very good, too, but the first book is
        the one to read first.

        Bill





        --
        Science is merely an extremely powerful method of winnowing what's true
        from what feels good. - Carl Sagan
      • Katherine Hooper
        Curse of Chalion: I am reading this on audiobook now. Like Bill, I m blown away. This is the best thing I ve read in a long time. Excellent, excellent!
        Message 3 of 12 , Oct 1, 2007
          Curse of Chalion: I am "reading" this on audiobook now. Like Bill, I'm
          "blown away." This is the best thing I've read in a long time. Excellent,
          excellent!
          BTW, this series has won a lot of awards, which is a really good indicator.
          If you're looking for something good to read, look at award winners and
          nominations.

          Kat
          www.FantasyLiterature.net


          _____

          From: Fantasy_Books@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Fantasy_Books@yahoogroups.com]
          On Behalf Of William C. Garthright
          Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 9:26 AM
          To: Fantasy_Books@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [Fantasy_Books] Getting back in..




          > Can anyone recommend a good series and or author to start with when
          wanting to get grabbed back into the fantasy realm?
          >

          Tastes are different, but I was just blown away by Lois McMaster
          Bujold's *The Curse of Chalion* (2001). The two sequels (different
          characters on the same world) are very good, too, but the first book is
          the one to read first.

          Bill

          --
          Science is merely an extremely powerful method of winnowing what's true
          from what feels good. - Carl Sagan






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • sportpony
          I also highly recommend the Chalion series by Lois Bujold ... but then there only one or two of her books that I don t own personally for my own bookshelves,
          Message 4 of 12 , Oct 7, 2007
            I also highly recommend the Chalion series by Lois Bujold ... but
            then there only one or two of her books that I don't own personally
            for my own bookshelves, to be re-read often, like enjoying a visit
            with an old friend.

            Her newest series is also quite good, the "Sharing Knife" series ...
            two books out and the first is "Beguilement" and the second "Legacy".
            They do need to be read in order and the first was much better for me
            than the second, but both good.

            Mercedes Lackey has two fantasy series I like, the "500 Kingdoms"
            series, which starts with "Godmother" ... and the Elemental Mage
            series. Any of these can actually be read as stand-alone books,
            although with the 500 Kingdoms series the first book gives you a lot
            of background. She also has a series that are based on fairy tales,
            though each book is a stand-alone.

            I have three of Robin McKinley's books on my shelves as well, Beauty,
            The Blue Sword and The Hero and the Crown. Beauty is a stand-alone,
            the other two are set in the same general "world" but generations
            apart.

            Susan Dexter is another I like, particularly the three in the
            Warhorse of Estragon series and the stand-alone The Wizard's Shadow.

            Sharon in KY
          • William C. Garthright
            ... I d have to disagree about this series. It s the only time that Lois McMaster Bujold has ever disappointed me. The first book started off very well, but it
            Message 5 of 12 , Oct 7, 2007
              > Her newest series is also quite good, the "Sharing Knife" series ... two books out and the first is "Beguilement" and the second "Legacy". They do need to be read in order and the first was much better for me than the second, but both good.
              >


              I'd have to disagree about this series. It's the only time that Lois
              McMaster Bujold has ever disappointed me. The first book started off
              very well, but it soon became clear that this was just a romance in
              fantasy clothing. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy some romance in my fantasy
              and science fiction. I prefer character-based fiction, after all. But
              this was almost pure romance - complete with an over-abundance of
              wedding preparations - and a rather creepy romance at that, between a
              very young girl and a far older man. Not quite child abuse, but out of
              line and completely unnecessary, as far as I could see.

              I'm not against explicit sex, either,... in theory. But I must admit
              that fictional accounts rarely seem very realistic. And sex is normally
              a private act, so I suppose I tend to feel like a voyeur at such scenes.
              I mean, are the details any of my business? I have nothing against
              soft-core porn, in its place, but this isn't the right place. I wouldn't
              expect to read detailed descriptions of bowel movements, either, though
              that would no doubt be realistic. Some things are not really important
              to the story. Well, I guess I can't explain what is probably just a
              personal preference. And I'm getting way off track, aren't I? :-D

              If you read romances as well as fantasy, this might be your cup of tea.
              Otherwise, you might be as disappointed as I was. This is nothing like
              her Chalion series (which also has plenty of romance, though the type of
              romance you normally expect in a fantasy).

              Bill

              --
              The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to
              moralists - that is why they invented hell. - Bertrand Russell
            • Sharon
              Bill writes: I d have to disagree about this series. It s the only time that Lois McMaster Bujold has ever disappointed me. I have to agree with some of
              Message 6 of 12 , Oct 7, 2007
                Bill writes:
                I'd have to disagree about this series. It's the only time that Lois
                McMaster Bujold has ever disappointed me. >>>

                I have to agree with some of the things you say and I do think it is her "weakest" series to date ... and the second book did disappoint me. However, I did like the first book ... I definitely prefer character-driven books and I thought both characters well done. It was more "romance" than "fantasy" which I tend to be pretty critical of but I do read the occasional romance. I will even admit to having several of the Georgette Heyer period romances on my bookshelf that date back to my 20s ... and I still re-read on occasion with enjoyment, though I very rarely will take a book out of the library to read that is "romance" ... and nothing else.

                I didn't get the feeling you did about the age difference. Not sure why ... I may be more oblivious to some of that than some, being from an older generation and coming from a western ranch community where it was not uncommon for a widowed rancher to remarry, often someone quite a lot younger.

                I also definitely agree with you about explicit sex in books as well ... I think my own imagination is adequate and that is pretty much as far as I want to go, thank you! And although I read a lot of mysteries, I tend to shy away from the ones where the author feels that graphic descriptions of sex abuse is required for authenticity.

                This is one of the reasons I have such a difficult time finding books/series in the occult type books ... which I do like ... that I can continue with. I started out with Lyn Hamilton and quit ... same thing with the Charlaine Harris "vampire/shape changer" books.

                Sharon in KY


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Katherine Hooper
                The problem with romance fantasies is the same as in all romance novels: the goal is for the hero and heroine to go to bed, and the rest of the plot revolves
                Message 7 of 12 , Oct 7, 2007
                  The problem with "romance fantasies" is the same as in all romance novels:
                  the goal is for the hero and heroine to go to bed, and the rest of the plot
                  revolves around that goal. So, while the romance may be touching, the rest
                  of the plot is often shallow. I like a romantic sub-plot in my fantasy, but
                  I don't like for that to be the focus. In a romance novel, it's just the
                  same plot and the same climax (sorry) over and over and over. . . .

                  Kat
                  www.FantasyLiterature.net


                  _____

                  From: Fantasy_Books@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Fantasy_Books@yahoogroups.com]
                  On Behalf Of William C. Garthright
                  Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 10:17 AM
                  To: Fantasy_Books@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [Fantasy_Books] Re: Getting back in..




                  > Her newest series is also quite good, the "Sharing Knife" series ... two
                  books out and the first is "Beguilement" and the second "Legacy". They do
                  need to be read in order and the first was much better for me than the
                  second, but both good.
                  >

                  I'd have to disagree about this series. It's the only time that Lois
                  McMaster Bujold has ever disappointed me. The first book started off
                  very well, but it soon became clear that this was just a romance in
                  fantasy clothing. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy some romance in my fantasy
                  and science fiction. I prefer character-based fiction, after all. But
                  this was almost pure romance - complete with an over-abundance of
                  wedding preparations - and a rather creepy romance at that, between a
                  very young girl and a far older man. Not quite child abuse, but out of
                  line and completely unnecessary, as far as I could see.

                  I'm not against explicit sex, either,... in theory. But I must admit
                  that fictional accounts rarely seem very realistic. And sex is normally
                  a private act, so I suppose I tend to feel like a voyeur at such scenes.
                  I mean, are the details any of my business? I have nothing against
                  soft-core porn, in its place, but this isn't the right place. I wouldn't
                  expect to read detailed descriptions of bowel movements, either, though
                  that would no doubt be realistic. Some things are not really important
                  to the story. Well, I guess I can't explain what is probably just a
                  personal preference. And I'm getting way off track, aren't I? :-D

                  If you read romances as well as fantasy, this might be your cup of tea.
                  Otherwise, you might be as disappointed as I was. This is nothing like
                  her Chalion series (which also has plenty of romance, though the type of
                  romance you normally expect in a fantasy).

                  Bill

                  --
                  The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to
                  moralists - that is why they invented hell. - Bertrand Russell






                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Sharon
                  In a romance novel, it s just the same plot and the same climax (sorry) over and over and over. . . . Kat Very descriptive ... and much the way I feel about
                  Message 8 of 12 , Oct 7, 2007
                    In a romance novel, it's just the same plot and the same climax (sorry) over and over and over. . . .
                    Kat

                    Very descriptive ... and much the way I feel about most "romance". I like the dynamics of a relationship as a part of the book, though as you say, a sub-plot rather than the plot. Done well, it can add a great deal to maintain my interest in a book or a series.

                    Sharon in KY


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • William C. Garthright
                    ... I agree with you on this, too. And not just sex abuse, but detailed descriptions of torture or other vile actions. I mean, I read for pleasure, and it s
                    Message 9 of 12 , Oct 8, 2007
                      > And although I read a lot of mysteries, I tend to shy away from the ones where the author feels that graphic descriptions of sex abuse is required for authenticity.
                      >


                      I agree with you on this, too. And not just sex abuse, but detailed
                      descriptions of torture or other vile actions. I mean, I read for
                      pleasure, and it's not pleasurable to read about those sorts of things.
                      If it happens off-scene, it's bad enough. I certainly don't want to
                      dwell on it. I really can't understand the popularity of such books. But
                      I read mysteries (not that many) for the mystery and for the characters
                      (like most of my reading). I don't need serial killers, torturers, or
                      child molesters, just simple, greedy murderers. Mild-mannered, almost. :-D

                      I did like the early Laurell K. Hamilton urban fantasies, despite the
                      blood and gore. They were just so over-the-top that there was no
                      connection to reality. I didn't see the victims as real people. Of
                      course, we didn't see them suffering, either - just the bloody mess left
                      behind. That helped. And I can enjoy 'occult-type' books, but I dislike
                      seeing television awash with the stuff. Perhaps that's because so many
                      people actually believe in it in real life. Maybe I think that if you're
                      smart enough to read a book, you're probably smart enough to distinguish
                      fantasy from reality? Heh, heh.


                      > Very descriptive ... and much the way I feel about most "romance". I like the dynamics of a relationship as a part of the book, though as you say, a sub-plot rather than the plot. Done well, it can add a great deal to maintain my interest in a book or a series.


                      I really need to care about the characters in a book, and especially in
                      a series. Romance can be a big part of that. Whatever the genre, romance
                      can bring a lot to a book, a lot to the characters - humor, love, other
                      worries besides the main plot, etc. It can help demonstrate that the
                      characters are real people. I have no interest in romance as a genre,
                      but in moderation, I'd agree that it's an important part of many books.

                      Bill

                      --
                      All religions united with government are more or less inimical to
                      liberty. All, separated from government, are compatible with liberty. -
                      Henry Clay
                    • Sharon
                      Message 10 of 12 , Oct 8, 2007
                        <<<I read mysteries (not that many) for the mystery and for the characters
                        (like most of my reading). I don't need serial killers, torturers, or
                        child molesters, just simple, greedy murderers. Mild-mannered, almost. :-D

                        There have only been two books/authors I can think of that managed a main character who was (oddly, in both cases) a professional "hit man" ... pretty much no socially redeeming qualities at all ... but they did it so well that the books are, in fact, on my personal book shelf and I re-read them quite often. Though I do, occasionally, wonder what that says about my own psyche!


                        <<< I can enjoy 'occult-type' books, but I dislike
                        seeing television awash with the stuff.

                        I am actually one of the few people I know personally that watches very little television, morning news and weather is about the limit for me. I think some of it may be because I did not "grow up" with it ... isolated western ranch background and I didn't own a television until after I was married, had children and was living in a city. But I am not a movie-goer, or a watcher of television and I think much of that because I was a reader long before I watched movies or TV ... I'm used to "seeing" the characters in my own mind, with my own imagination ... if I have one "type" of character in mind it is vaguely "wrong" to see someone that doesn't fit in that role on screen.

                        Sharon



                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.