Love Anne McCaffrey
one of the best sci-fi/fantasy blends ever

LOTR was actually one BIG book til the publishers broke it up.
I also do not consider it a series.

I really enjoyed Terry Goodkind's "Sword of Truth" Series & Robert Jordan's "Eye of the World" for a bit and find myself now growing disinterested for one reason--all the female characters started out great and than became one dimensional.

For example in Terry Goodkinds series it is inevitable that the plot will settle around Richard being betrayed by Kahlan or that Kahlan will be forced to do something she promised herself or Richard she wouldn't.

In Robert Jordan's series the female characters ended up becoming shrill, possessive and positively annoying. I'd love to see a seriesin which the author can write both the male and female characters well, without making them into antiquated stereotypes. If anyone knows of one let me know!

'Best' is remarkably difficult to define. As I have read over 10,000 books - a large number in the fantasy category all I can suggest are the following : Terry Pratchett 'Discworld' series; Douglas Adams 'Hitchhiker' and 'Dirk Gently'; Robert Rankin 'Brentford' series and others; Rober Asprin 'Myth' and 'Phule' and 'Time Scout' (with Linda Evans); Craig Shaw Gardner 'Ebeneezer' series etc and Tolkien 'Lord of the Rings' and Harry Potter and C S Lewis 'Narnia' and many others. Whatever appeals best to your mood. Regards, Tin

You are correct in stating that 'Jack' Lewis was a Christian apologist and academic, viz. 'The Screwtape Letters', but his beliefs do not alter - markedly - the quality of the writing. My views of Shakespeare, Dickens and Percy Shelley are not altered by their adulteries; nor Aldous Huxley by his drug taking. As for Thomas Malory 'Morte D'Arthur' from which we get the Arthurian legends, he was a convicted rapist and thief. Regards, Tin

Quote:

---

Terry Pratchett 'Discworld' series

---

Those are brilliant! Also "Good Omens" (Pratchett and Neil Gaiman).

Vanyar,

Yes I know the discussion with Tin below is off topic but look on the bright side It returns your thread to the top.

Tin,

Welcome to the FT Forum and thank you for responding to my post. Please forgive my long delay in replying.

I have been away for some time due to circumstances not entirely within my control.

My opinions on the odious nature of Christianity and indeed other religions are well known on this Forum as I have made no secret of them but even I am shocked that you would equate the generation and dissemination of Christian propaganda with rape! I suspect you may be going too far.

Your first comment on my past post was:

"You are correct in stating that 'Jack' Lewis was a Christian apologist and academic, viz. 'The Screwtape Letters', but his beliefs do not alter - markedly - the quality of the writing."

This is true but I was not concerning myself with "the quality of the writing" in my post, some of his prose is quite eloquent. I was objecting to the content. That is to say those books which he wrote to infect unsuspecting children with Christian moralities, ways of thought and dogma. Further, I have no problem with "The Screwtape Letters" it is clearly a Christian book, there is no real attempt at subterfuge even though it is aimed at a young readership. I have my real problems with OSP, Perelandra and the Narnia books, as should anyone else with young children. Incidentally I was not aware that Lewis wrote for the scatalogical comic Viz? "The Fat Slags on the Silent Planet" perhaps or maybe "The Lion the Witch and the Exploding Wardrobe with Johnny Fart Pants". I digress.

You go on to say:

"My views of Shakespeare, Dickens and Percy Shelley are not altered by their adulteries; nor Aldous Huxley by his drug taking. As for Thomas Malory 'Morte D'Arthur' from which we get the Arthurian legends, he was a convicted rapist and thief."

I am not really sure of the point you are trying to make here. Of the five authors you mention I can see an analogy with Lewis in only two cases. Of those two cases both with one slight exception support my argument rather your own!

I really do not think that you can always separate what people are, what they believe and what they stand for from the art they produce. To take an extreme example the film "Paracelcus" it is a thoroughly enjoyable movie to watch particularly if your critical faculties are down and you are relaxing. It is also however one of the most insidiously anti-Semitic films that was produced under the Nazis! The film was subtle for its time seeking to change the ideas of the viewer through subterfuge rather than outright assault. Lewis' output has a similar flavour. I shall examine each author in turn in order to make my position clear. I am, I should say, at a bit of a disadvantage when I respond to your criticism, as I am not that familiar with the works of most of the authors you cite.

Lets start with Aldous Huxley where I can actually see a clear analogy with Lewis. Huxley did, as I understand it experiment with hallucinogens in later life, in particular LSD and this experience certainly informed some of his writings including "Island". He was also, I understand; somewhat of an advocate for the measured use of such drugs. So in contrast to your assertion I suggest that we should very much consider his advocacy of drugs when examining those of his works written during and after this period. Depending upon ones' views on drugs one may either laud or condemn his position but I do not feel one can ignore it. In this instance I feel you are wrong and our views should be altered by Huxley's stance on drugs just as our views on Lewis should be altered by his views on Christianity.

However, Huxley's most famous work, the Science Fiction U/Dis-topia? "Brave New World" in which the fictional drug "soma" is such an important element of the story was written long before his period of experimentation with drugs. I would suggest that it is not reasonable to consider it in the same context as his later work and that here at least you are correct in your assertion that the drug taking need not alter our views of him.

Moving on to your adulterous trio. P.B. Shelley is different to the other men you placed in his peer group, he is clearly relevant. He presented an intellectual argument against marriage but it did not stop him eloping and marrying a young girl. He went on to promote the concept of "Free Love", it was a very different concept of free love to that we have today and he was not quite clear what it was himself. Whilst doing these thing in intellectual life he left a very young child and his wife who was pregnant at the time to bog off to Europe with Frankenstein's mother. He then gets her in the family way too. Wife tops herself, children dying left, right and centre. I would suggest that in Shelley's case if your views of his works are not altered by a consideration of his treatment and relations with women you have missed the plot somewhat. In the case of Shelley the analogy with Lewis is very clear but again supports my argument rather than your own.

I am in some difficulty when discussing Shakespeare, as, on the whole I am not a great fan. I have read or watched a fair few of his plays, about half of the cannon I suppose and with a few exceptional exceptions; "Forbidden Planet", "West Side Story" and "Ran", I think they are pretty poor. Do you think he did the choreography for the dances as well as the music? I just loved 'La La La La in America'. How amazing that he predicted robots all those years ago! Far, far too many puns, an acute case of sycophancy (Henry V ha!) and a seriously childish 'look what I can do' attitude do not endear his works to me.

Very little is actually known about this bloke's life. Any adultery attributed to him is inferred or deduced rather than a factual statement. I may be wrong in this but I have checked several sources and it seems to be correct. Indeed the only references I can find to his adultery is the recent Holden 'biography' and the tired old 'Beds' issue. In any case I don't recall that in any of his plays I am familiar with that he either made the case for or against adultery. In short I fail completely to see any analogy with what Lewis was trying to do? Are you sure you didn't mean Ben Johnson? "Bartholomew Fair" would at least be relevant.

Dickens is another of my less than favourite writers. I have read rather less of him than I have of Shakespeare. Fortunately I have a childhood full of Sunday afternoon black and white Dickens' films on the telly so I usually know the plot however corruptly it may have been presented. I am also not clear from a quick whiz round the web as to the extent of his extramarital dalliances. I am unclear if he was adulterous with Ternan before his separation. Worse still no one appears to be sure exactly what his relationship with his wife's sisters was. The web is not the best research method I appreciate but I know so little of the man and had no other immediate sources to hand. What is clear is that he went to some lengths to keep his personal life private and that he did not advocate adultery in any of his works of which I am aware. I feel sure I would have noticed a passage in David Copperfield where Magwitch (sp.?) pontificates on: giving the missus the slip and slipping the missus’ sister a quick moaning tune on the anthropomorphic oboe. I too, like Shakespeare can make bad puns and combine them with smutty jokes. Again, as with Shakey I completely fail to see any analogy with Lewis' machinations.

Finally to Mal(l)ory who may or may not have compiled "Le Mort D'Arthur". If he did he may or may not have been a rapist and a robber. The solid historical evidence for Mal(l)ory is not just spase as is the case of Shakespeare it may well be non-existent! I have read neither "Le Mort D'Arthur in the original or in modern versions nor the later "The Death of Arthur". My very limited knowledge of the book comes from a highly derivative and abridged version read to me at school. However I feel (reasonably) certain that the book does not promote the idea of "rape". So even though Mal(l)ory may indeed have been a rapist just as Lewis was a Christian he was not trying to promote rape. We are not talking Giles De Rais here. The analogy with Lewis is again, as with Shakespeare and Dickens fallacious.

I await your response with interest.

snm,

Finally something we can agree on Discworld is a lot of fun. I must say given your avowedly anti-Left stance your appreciation of Pratchett is a bit of a surprise. Especially given his latest book in the series "Night Watch" is whilst taking the rise somewhat still a homage to the Paris Commune and also the Anarchists, Communists and Trades Unionists who made a stand against Fascism at Cable Street.

Xaosdog,

"Inversions" is not in my (and nearly every one else's) opinion a fantasy novel. It is SF: a Culture novel, it reads better that way and there is clear reference to Culture technology such as the knife. I enjoyed "Vast" by the way and have started on Egan as I can't get any more Nagata.

Well, Tielhard, I suppose at some point we had to agree on something, right? (Actually we agree on two things: I fully share your views on cricket, as expressed in the "greatest leaders" thread. In fact I printed it out and gleefully read it to my South-African family just as the world cup was starting. Some thought it was blasphemy, others simply pointed out that a game can last five days, not just three).

I actually haven't read Night Watch. I have three or four of the older books at home waiting to be read, and I won't look for Night Watch until I've finished those. I wasn't aware that I had an "avowedly anti-Left stance", in fact both of the books I'm reading at the moment (the ones keeping me from reading Discworld) are pretty anti-right: one attacks the Vatican in the 19th century and the other attacks Apartheid, or rather indifference to Apartheid.

My favorite fantasy series is the political fantasy series by Noam Chomsky. It begins with "The Chomsky Trilogy", which is really great, and if you want to follow up you can find a lot of these really imaginative books at this site. . They're all about evil hegemonic superpowers that do really terrible things and murder millions of people in places like Afghanistan and Palestine, and about how a lot of, like, supposedly evil dudes like "Pol Pot" really aren't such bad guys at all once you get to know them and stuff. They're action-packed!

If you liked that you'll certainly love "The Other Side: The Secret Relations Between Nazism and the Leadership of the Zionist Movement" by some guy named Mahmoud Abbas. I'm pretty sure I've heard the author's name on the news lately, can anyone tell me with connection to what his name may have been mentioned?

"Bu**er off" Coolupway there's a good chap.

I have made a big enough mess of this fantasy thread replying to Tin. Your own unique brand of idiosyncratic humour is just going to confuse some of the younger readership. Vanyar gets upset if people go too far off topic and I like this thread. You should after all appreciate this position as founder member and chief head cracker of the Thread Police.

Anyway old Noam he is growing on me. You also seem to be suffering from a problem common to many LOTR fans and Trekkies mistaking Fantasy for reality.

Seriously, if you do have a series of (real) Fantasy (now there is an interesting thought) books you would like to propose please do so otherwise perhaps we should cross pens on a more appropriate Thread.

Rest assured snm I would never suggest that a lady such as yourself "Bu**er off" but you too are ... how shall I put it? In my thoughts on this matter.

Tielhard, I'm just flattered to hear that I'm in your thoughts

Ok, I'll butter off now.

My post was not intended to draw comparisons with the writers I mentioned for their works; what I was trying - inadequately - to express was that any writer may have a past, or indeed, present, which may or may not show through their writing. The evidence I used of the various 'crimes and misdemeanours'
is based on contemporary letters and court records available from various sources from the Public Records Office to the British Museum Library. I am not a Chrisitan (I have no established religion or faith) yet read these
possibly pernicious books in my youth also Enid Blyton, H Rider Haggard and Erskine Childers (who was executed for treason) but still like to think of myself as well-adjusted and not racist or sexist.
P.S. viz. from the Latin vide to see.
Regards,
Tin

Tin,

Thank you for your response. You say:

"what I was trying - inadequately - to express was that any writer may have a past, or indeed, present, which may or may not show through their writing."

This is quite true. However the issue with Lewis’ fantasy work (and SF for that matter) which I brought up when this thread was young and the position which I am still defending is that it is insidious and subtle propaganda for Christian values. If he were not a Christian he wouldn’t have written them the way he did. Further, any critical judgement of his work must include a consideration of the fact that most of them are works of Christian propaganda aimed specifically at children.

I would be most grateful if you could provide references the documents you mention pertaining (I assume from context) to the adulteries of Shakespeare and/or Dickens in the PRO and BML. I will be most interested to delve further into this matter.

Regarding Mal(l)ory as I understand it, if the attribution of the deeds of one historical Mal(l)ory to another to Caxton’s Mal(l)ory by a scholar (Ketteridge I think but I’m not sure) is incorrect then there is as I say no information at all on the life of the Mal(l)ory who compiled "Le Mort D'Arthur".

PS We shall, I think, leave the works of Enid for a thread on class consciousness or perhaps implicit racism (Golliwogs don’cha know) where we could also consider Haggard. Reading all these dodgy characters as a kid Tin I would say you had a lucky escape!

PPS viz. from the Latin vide to see, hence Viz a comic a jest or witticism of mine.

Harry Potter Series, although all of the other books are EXTREMELY good. Er, maybe His Dark Materials by Phillip Pullman. (They're hard to understand, but very interesting.)

I'll read any of the above. Tolkein's a little too hard to understand, but good reads. I'd go with the Harry Potter Series, my favourite books. My favourite out of it is the Chamber of Secrets. Tolkien does enthrall us, but with Harry Potter, if you read long enough (3 hours straight), it feels like you are actually part of the book.

The first book may not be extremely interesting, but the 2nd and 4th (and I'm absolutely sure the fifth) were probably the best in the series (by my opinion.)

I have also read the Chronicles of Narnia, and they were very good.

I feel that all three of the authors, and their series have enthralled and enchanted us with their beautiful storyline. Also, I suggest for you to buy Harry Potter accessories, as years from now, a certain cup with a picture of the Potions class on it might be worth $85+.

In a summary, ALL of these books are enthralling, enchanting, mesmerizing, and beautiful works of fiction that will be remembered for a long time to come.

'The Lord of the Rings' by a long way!

There's a lot of fantastic reading in this thread alone, don't you think? Would it qualify?

The Sword of Shannara and David Eddings' Belgariad are two that stick out in my head.

"A Song of Ice and Fire" by George RR Martin is a great series. It is set in a medievil world, and many of the main events center on human interaction. Chapters are told from a characters viewpoint, and each of the contending families has at least one of these characters. Therefore, you get both sides of the issue, and neither comes off as pure evil, or evil just for the sake of evil. The main thread of the story focuses on these events.
However, in the background there is a series of supernatural events taking place. In the far north there is a wall, which separates the lands of men from the frozen tundra. A century long winter is approaching, and with it comes ice fiends and their reanimated servants. These are mounting a campaign against all huiman life, but they are alos not evil: they are trying to regain their lost territory.
I think that this series is a great read, and anybody who likes medievil setting fantasy must read it. The first book is "A Game of Thrones".

Also, if someone wants to raed a selection from some of the best authors in this field, they should try the "Legends" short story collection.

I almost forgot another great author. Tad Williams has written some of the best fantasy stories I've read. "Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn" is set in a medievil world, and centers on a young boy named Simon. The storyline is fairly cliche, but the writing style is amazing. The characters are really well developed and each of the different cultures have their own language peculiarites and sayings. "The first book is "The Dragonbone Chair".

Also, each of these series I've listed are epics, and so are very long. If you had trouble reading LOTR because it was long and complicated, you will have a hard time with these.

I have to say I agree with you 100%. The best fantasy series is definitly "A Song of Fire and Ice." It has an excellent storyline with an excellent writing style. I have to say that it really shines with its supporting characters. Who could ever forget Jaquen H'Gkar (something like that), Prince Oberyn Martell, the Hound, Bronn. The most facinating character to me is the one that barely says one sentance in all three books, the Mountain that Rides. I can't wait for the 4th book to come out. I have no doubt it will equal, or perhaps rival, the others.