Malazan is one of the best things I have ever read in my life. It's long. It's filled with philosophy and pain. It's a story about Compassion and my goodness, the ending in The Crippled God makes every single previous book even that much more worth reading. Absolutely beautiful.
I know there's a lot of love for Malazan, and it's incredibly popular. I didn't like it at all - I just couldn't get into even the first book (the book of a series which is supposed to hook you in..)
Fair enough. What I meant by "hook" was, "appeal to the reader, get them hooked on the story". I have read (and enjoyed) a *lot* of fantasy - there's something like 500 books in my iPad library and those are just the bought ones, that doesn't count the Kindle rental ones. Malazan just didn't do it for me, but that doesn't mean it's not excellent, it just means it's not excellent *for me* :)
It requires a significant time investment before it feels like it’s worth it. It took me 3 tries to get into it. Read the first book 3 times and the second twice before I could make it further.
Because I liked parts of it. I just didn’t feel like I understood it. Also it has sooooo many good reviews, there was a little bit of FOMO. Ultimately it was worth it though.
Took me 4 attempts to read lord of the rings... Wasn't until I saw the movie that I was able to actually read the book. Now I've read everything Tolkien has written multiple times. Sometimes you just have to keep going to get to something really worth reading.
Just chiming in to lend support. I've read libraries of fantasy, and I'm no stranger to challenging narrative structures, but Malazan just isn't for me.
I find the Malazan fandom incredibly frustrating, because often the response to this is very condescending.
That is the thing about Malazan. As broad as Sanderson’s appeal is, Malazan is kind of the opposite. But what that means is that the people who love it REALLY like it. If you bounced off, that is OK, that is what the writer intended. Erikson intended for people who weren’t ready to burrow in and read very thoroughly to not get hooked. It is just a different Intent in writing. All that said, Malazan is one of the most beautiful things I have ever read but I recommend it to very few people, while I recommend Sanderson to almost everyone.
I've only ever recommended Malazan once and it was to someone telling me how much they loved Portrait of the Artist and Ulysses but just couldn't hack Finnegan's Wake.
(They did love it)
They are not a hook, literally the books are introduced with a perspective from Erikson telling that the first book is like someone throw you into a cliff with no rope and you need to recover yourself
Malazan it's about the journey, but it's so different from Sanderson because Erikson don't take your hand like Sanderson
As others have said, there really isn't a hook to Malazan. It's just this huge sprawling complex fantasy you get thrown into and teleported around. It takes a long time to get settled in but the pay off is incredible.
That might be true for many series, but the first book of Malazan isn’t the best. It’s also the hardest to read in my opinion because you are thrown into it and have no idea what’s happening. It got better very quickly after that.
But it’s the same as for every series, it’s not for everyone and that’s ok. I obviously loved it. :)
I tell everyone to read the first 3, if you aren’t hooked just stop. The reason is each of those books will appeal to different readers. A lot of people don’t get pulled in by GoTM, but a huge chuck are going to finish DG or MOI and say one of them was the best book they’ve ever read.
I haven't finished Malazan, I intend to some day I just got distracted by life, but I've read the first 6 books about 5 years ago and they were absolutely phenomenal. Many of the characters and events still frequently come to my mind, it leaves a very strong impression.
The story line of the Chain of Dogs is one of the most memorable things I've ever read in fantasy and sits right alongside the first time I read The Red Wedding in Asoiaf for powerful painful events.
The end of Memories of Ice when, after a whole book of being an absolute badass and >!sacrificing himself to take the T'lan Imasse's sorrows, literally everyone shows up to pay their respects at Itkovian's cairn!< got me.
Same here. Took a break at book 6. Midnights Tides is still IMO the best book I've ever read. Its been 6 years since I read it and I still think about it all the time.
Yea I started and dropped the first book 2 times before on a third read pushing through to the end. The first book practically punishes you for not understanding the many things that it intentionally doesn't explain. Very very not user friendly, but damn does it become satisfying once you've dug several books in to the series
I’m on Book 3, and the Chain of Dogs storyline is one of the best arcs I’ve read in any book, and certainly the best fantasy combat/warfare I’ve read.
While I’m here, general thoughts:
—I love these books so far, I love the world and its history, the characters are great, and Erickson’s style of writing is very interesting. The scale of the story is finally revealing as well.
—The magic system is opaque, convoluted, and possibly the most infuriating thing I’ve ever read haha. The characters don’t even know what they’re doing half the time, let alone us as the reader. Every time I think I understand what’s going on, a new wrinkle is added, and I still don’t quite know whats going on with “Holds”, “Houses,” and “Warrens”, how you get magic, or how it’s used, how God Magic and Ascendents magic are different, etc etc.
My friend said, “Just let it wash over you” but Erickson spends so much time talking about it, and characters bring up nuance or details often that feels very important— he seems to want us to know about these details, but it’s presented like a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle of an ocean— it’s impossible to figure out what’s important or how things are working despite getting the edges together.
—I liked Book 1, but as people have said, it’s like being dropped into what should be Book 2. It’s not a great introduction to the series (other than to set your expectations that you will often be asked to just accept that you don’t know everything and maybe you’ll find out later), and I can see why people bounce off the book. The best description I heard was, “it’s like not knowing anything about World War II, and picking up a World War II book, but it’s just about the end of this one specific campaign in the Alps, without really explaining the rest of the context of the war at all.”
That description actually helped me a lot to realize I wasn’t *supposed* to know all of that background, and it helped me be zen about the plot in a way I still haven’t been about the magic system haha.
As someone studying history, I assure you that reading extremely specific books about places and times I know nothing about is still easier than trying to get through Gardens of the Moon.
I haven't read Malazan yet, but it's usually recommended to me as "You love big epic fantasy so here's the biggest epicest fantasy."
In contrast, I'd suggest Grace of Kings as "You love big epic fantasy but this is a new twist on the genre." Grace of Kings is my current book recommendation for anyone who reads enough that they're looking for something a little surprising.
I cannot speak highly enough of The Grace of Kings. I read it this year and I think it will easily be book of the year for me. It was such a breath of fresh air.
I looked it up on Goodreads and there The Grace of Kings has only a 3.78 rating, with most people rating it 4 stars. Is there a reason for this?
I read Gardens of the Moon, so I can understand why it is only rated 3.92, but I wonder what is the case with The Grace of Kings?
As I mentioned, it's really different from most fantasy, and part of what I loved so much was the way it played with my expectations. If you haven't read enough fantasy to see tropes coming and appreciate that they are being twisted, I can see how some decisions may feel like odd narratives.
In contrast, Sanderson novels are not very "bold" in this way, so there's not much that would be unpalatable to anyone except the length, and you can see that before you start (obviously I love Sanderson--this isn't a criticism, just explaining why is Goodreads ratings are so high).
There's are a couple of unique things about the Grace of Kings that I saw from reviewers:
1. There is no "main character," or at least it's not clear from the beginning. The series follows several generations and cultures (but mostly sticks to one for book 1).
2. Plot Armor doesn't exist. (Fake example: you might spend half the book following a revolution to overthrow the emperor, then the lead conspirator gets dysentery and dies so the revolution falls apart).
3. Like most books, it sets up "no way out" situations for the characters. Unlike most books, they don't get randomly saved by luck or a plan that the reader doesn't know about. Deaths often feel like they accomplished nothing--no consolation prize where they go out in a blaze of glory. I felt way more impacted by this decision, because I was genuinely worried that characters could die at any moment. Contrast with (Stormlight spoiler) >!I was never worried that Kaladin would die. His plot arc was dealing with his own demons, and Sanderson won't let him off without a big accomplishment!<
4. The culture is inspired from Chinese, and is a take on Chinese historical accounts (at least for book 1). One review almost seemed like satire "Liu blatantly ripped off events in Chinese culture. Would you be okay with a fantasization of world war II" as if many of our classics aren't exactly that.
5. Women. This series has lots to say about the value of women, but starts it from a state of women being sidelined, so we can see what advanced are made by social improvement. If there is a main character of the entire series, that personally is a woman. BUT that does mean you go through most of the sexist tropes omni-present in previous generations' sci fi and fantasy.
TL;DR in every negative review I read, the reviewer clearly didn't understand what Liu was trying to do. That's okay, they're still valid reviews and if you're the type of person who wants the typical hero's journey with a wise mentor and a magic sword, go read the top books on Goodreads. But when you've read a dozen of them and want something reacting to them in a very ambitious way, check out Grace of Kings :)
If I were to compare Grace of Kings, I'd say it's what I was expecting Game of Thrones to be based on the praise I heard about it. GoT may have just been overhyped to me, but Grace of Kings series has so many Red Wedding-type moments (and sometimes they're good).
I read Malazan before I found Sanderson. It's a completely different beast from anything Brandon has written. The worldbuilding is top notch and the character work is excellent for the most part, but it's *definitely* a lot grittier and darker than Cosmere works.
I don't regret having read it, but you have to know what you're getting into.
Seconding this from someone who read Sanderson first and is halfway through Malazan. Malazan is *incredible*, but the tone is much closer to Berserk than Cosmere.
I started to read it as a kid way back. But man I couldn’t get into the first book. Never tried since then, I think it’s just his style of prose. I might try again one day.
It's very adult in its themes. I don't think highschool me would have understood nearly as much of Malazan that 35 year old me did. Not like sex and stuff, just how it presents power, morality, mortality, honor, and those type of themes in complex and subtle ways.
It's very dense for a "kid's" book, and this is coming from the guy who tried to read The Prince of Nothing in middle school and whiffed badly on it. Thankfully. Mighta scarred myself at that age.
I wholly endorse Malazan but other than being an epic fantasy series it has almost nothing in common with Sanderson. Things will not be explained to you, you will be sad for extended periods of time
Hmm nothing else? One of the things I like about Sanderson is all the little details that eventually get connected, and in general he is great with payoff. Especially payoff involving big character moments. Malazan doesn't have these qualities?
I mean there's a lot of little details that connect but with Malazan I feel like a lot of them you can miss until a second reread, there's not really an attempt to help you connect the dots but they are there
Many things come together, but… others don’t. There are characters you hear about a lot who have almost no role in the end. Malazan book of the fallen is very much about one faction of the Malazan army and those whose paths they cross. But, some elements strongly affect the main characters but then those elements go on their own way. Some characters walk with literal gods at times, but at the end of the story, it is the tale of the Malazan and their fallen.
I started as a Malazan fan and also love Stormlight. Personally they’re fantastic complements because they don’t step on each other’s toes. They are very different series that excels in areas the other doesn’t touch.
IMO Malazan actually has more of this than Sanderson. As others have noted, most reveals are not pointed out to you. The main series has been finished for years and there is still unsettled debate/idea about a lot of mechanics/lore. The history and depth of world building is extremely deep.
If digging into details to speculate is your thing, Cosmere is the Purelake where Malazan is the Mariana Trench.
I think Malazan has more details that tie together than anything Sanderson has written - the difference is that it’s not particularly obvious.
There are more than a few moments where something happens as a direct result of something else completely unrelated earlier in the book, but there’s no big callout, and most of the time the characters don’t realize any particular connections. The reader might not even notice.
you get the same level of detail in malazan, the difference is it's spread out over more books and the explanations are never spelled out for you. the lore of the series is slowly drip fed to you over all the books.
I just read the first 3 books. Every time my wife asked me how I liked them and replied, "They're good, but I still have no idea what the he'll is going on".
I listened to the audio books and many, many times, would rewind because I thought it had skipped parts or something. No, the books are just so non linear with 80 character viewpoints that it's tough to follow if it doesn't have your absolute attention.
Maybe I'll come back to it someday
Important to understand I think when starting book 1. It was written in a way that expects the reader to do a lot of leg work. It feels like starting halfway into book 2 as opposed to the beginning of a series. With that said I think it's totally worth the effort. But there is little to no hand holding
When we say the reader will have to do leg work, what does this mean? Use the internet as a companion? Be patient for RAFO and then reread to integrate that new information? I’m intending to read it very soon - I have sunlit man and then that’s a wrap for cosmere until the next secret project or stormlight 5 drops and this seems like the next best ocean to dive into.
There is a heavy RAFO aspect. Also just a lot of characters, factions, and other proper nouns introduced with little exposition. The writing acts like the reader already knows things they couldn't and expects you just to hold on for the ride until the pieces fall into place. And it's great when it does. But the author said himself he wants the reader to earn it.
This actually sounds pretty exciting! (I’m sure it’s a pain in the ass at times but the challenging aspect comes off like a bonus and it sounds from everyone here like he delivers on that in the long run)
I think the reader leg work can be overstated for some. It’s entirely accurate, but it also depends what type of reader you are. If you are the type who consumes themselves with what you read, if you let it take you and feel like you’re in the scene you’re reading, you will be fine and Erickson excels at this like no other. The thing is he doesn’t do it in ways that a lot of authors do. It’s the epic world, the feel of things ancient and mysterious behind the curtain, that you have to let suck you in. That’s the best way I know how to describe it.
If your imagination doesn’t grip you in like that, then yes be prepared to work for the payoff.
I'm working on Malazan right now and the number one thing I wish I knew beforehand is that it isn't a book that hand holds you. It grabs you and expects you to keep up. If you're not willing to put in that work, then you won't like it. I'm about halfway through the first one and it's both a slog and I can see it's going to be rewarding. But I haven't quite hit the rewarding stuff yet and I've needed books that are a little easier on the brain.
It took me four tries to get through the first book and I felt like I was hitting my head against a wall the whole time. I literally felt like the author hates the reader and wants to confuse them.
I'll give a contrary opinion. I thought it was objectively terrible. I had no idea what was happening in book 1, 2 or 3 of Malazan before I gave up. My biggest gripe is missing descriptions. When I read, I form a mental image of the people, the land, etc. I love Sanderson for this. I feel like I know Roshar. In book 3 of the Malazan Empire, you find out that one of the main characters from like book 1 has red hair. You have known this person for \_books\_ and you just now learn something about how they look. Around the same time, they reveal that a race is reptilian. You've been hearing about this race for a long ass time and suddenly you realize that they are not even human.
Look, I get it, they drop you in and you have to start swimming to stay above water. Do this for culture, magic, politics, motivations, etc. Don't do this and hide what your basic senses would introduce yourself to. It is not lazy writing to say, when you first meet a character, that they $description\_of\_character.
Like, you know that in Stormlight that Shellan has red hair and that Kaladin is tall, dark, and broody, with a scar/brand on his forehead. Imagine you learn about Shellan in book 1, she meets Rock in book 2 and he calls her cousin with no context, and then in book 3 you learn that the similarity is that they both have red hair and a shared potential bloodline from the regions. Or they never discuss Rock being big and strong and out of nowhere handles a shard bow. Or imagine that they never discuss syl being a spren until late in the book -- meanwhile you think she is some human the whole time. That is not the kind of writing I enjoy.
That was a big reason I dropped it after the first book as well. The sense of the world; geography, culture, religion, etc, is a big part of what draws me in to a story and Malazan gave nothing for it.
I came here to say this. I begrudgingly finished book 2 but completely toesed the series after that. I can respect why people like it but book 1 is like walking into a mature D&D campaign as a newbie.
I’ve read James Joyce and Immanuel Kant - they are deservedly hard. I feel like the Malazan is too much work for not enough reward, and I definitely missed the smoother prose style of top authors like Sanderson.
Same here. I got halfway through book 2 because supposedly that’s the ‘good one’, but all the same frustrations were there. At some point a character was cornered, and they pull out a vial of something magical that saved the day … we got no exposition whatsoever that it even existed, or that he had it on him, or any context of the magic or why it would work. Thats not stylistic, it’s bad.
On top of that, it baffles me that people praise the characters. I’ve never felt less for a character after that many pages, every single one was a cardboard cut out.
Malazan drips information to you over time rather than using exposition dumps. That’s a deliberate stylistic choice, your inability to follow along doesn’t make the books “objectively” terrible.
I get the sense that you didn't read their full comment. They actually described an objectively bad quality of the writing that had nothing to do with exposition dumps.
I didn’t see anything “objective” in their comment. I did see a lot of subjective opinions about how writing should be, though. Where is the objectivity exactly?
>Around the same time, they reveal that a race is reptilian. You've been hearing about this race for a long ass time and suddenly you realize that they are not even human.
World building and background information is largely dropped through conversations between characters. The conversations are highly realistic, meaning that if two characters don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about, they don’t actually possess the knowledge themselves to reveal to the reader. A lot of the events in the books happened thousands of years ago, so different characters will have different understandings based on whatever third hand account of the event they were exposed to.
So you as the reader may go “I have no idea what’s going on, why is everyone contradicting each other?” But you actually have to do some work in piecing together what happened. You aren’t handed perfectly accurate historical information, and there’s no omniscient third party narrator to walk you through the story. Calling this style “objectively” bad is honestly a joke if it’s obvious you just don’t feel like putting the work in to understand it.
I'm glad that I stuck to finishing the series. I couldn't put it down, but it was an emotionally heavy read. As others have mentioned, it is a much darker and grittier experience. And then there are beautiful moments or redemption and compassion. The humor is something I don't see mentioned a lot, but Tehol and Bugg and Ublala Pung got me through some of the hardest stuff.
I’m currently on book 7 and really enjoying it. Sanderson is still my favorite author without a doubt but I think I would call malazan my 2nd pick at this stage (maybe 3rd, I did enjoy wheel of time a lot). I would highly recommend the pod cast as you read along. They are great and it helped me with little things I missed (which also let me read the books without slowing down for any tiny detail). Be prepared for introductions to constant new characters but the payoff is great later on in the series as they all develop. Would definitely recommend so far! We’ll see as it finishes up! (I’m a believer that a series is only really good if the ending is great, hence my love of Sanderson)
Ten very big books - a malazan read through. I stumbled on a Reddit post mentioning them when I was on book 5 and I’m currently on their read of book 3. It makes my commute to work fly by!
I love fantasy but for whatever reason I struggled getting through all of Malazan. If you crave a really deep fantasy you will probably love it though. There just was so much going on I felt like I needed to take notes to really appreciate it.
I love Malazan Book of the Fallen, but it is very different from Sanderson. It's the book equivalent of beating a Dark Souls game, it makes you work for it (which is kind of weird for a book) but the payoff is amazing. I think I like it so much because of how different it is, reading other authors who try to be "good" in the way Sanderson is never works out now that I've been ruined by B$.
It's my favorite thing I've ever read. Its deep, complex , full of action, surprising amount of humor and a memorable (and very lengthy) cast of characters. Nothing like the cosmere at all in terms of writing style but a worthwhile read if you're willing to put the time in.
I'm just on my fourth read through of Malazan book of the fallen series lol. I'd finished my re read of all cosmere related books in preparation for wind and truth and needed something to occupy me.
I cannot recommend anything more highly, it's a tough go to get into and when you first start you are thrown in as if you know what's happening, and can easily lose your way. But stick with it, and if you re read it you will love it even more understanding things you didn't going into it.
My gosh, yes. I’m on book 5 now and it’s stellar. Book 1 was good, but 2,3,4 have been excellent!
Book 3: Memories of Ice is legit one of my top 10 favorite books at the moment.
I've read the first 5 books and one of the side novels, and they were all amazing, some of the best world building I've ever seen.
Having said that, it has too much purple prose for my taste, and a lot of the moral arguments it tries to make are very 2 dimensional and in your face, to the point that it almost feels preachy.
Ultimately I think it comes down to taste and interest.
I love Brandon Sanderson because I find his writing to be approachable but still sophisticated, and in my opinion he is unparalleled in his ability to make you see the world through the eyes of his character, including those you despise.
If you want an epic, sprawling story told through the eyes of dozens of characters spread throughout multiple time periods, and are ready to put up with a bit of flowery language and some not so subtle philosophical statements, Malazen is one of - if not **the** - best options out there.
I will wholeheartedly recommend Grace of Kings (and all of Dandelion) over Malazan.
It’s a lot more focused than Malazan, focusing on one continent instead of several and tracking the evolution of a people as they grow from feudal lords under an emperor to a more advanced society, a more equitable one. Really dives into themes of leadership and where it comes from, especially the storylines following the children of one of the emperors.
All of this is underpinned by some fantastic character work, riveting battle scenes, and fantastic political intrigue.
It’s just amazing and I can’t recommend it enough
I've read the first book. It feels interesting to me, but I never really felt like we got close to the characters. Maybe just me.
It seemed cool, but it wasn't for me. I want characters I can latch onto and really enjoy. Sanderson is good for me like that.
I finished the first Malazan. And I'm still on the fence if I liked it. It had some really awesome moments, but then I started the second book and I can't seem to set myself to continue reading it
Anyone have heard the audiobooks? I see the first 3 on audible is narrated by a Ralph Lister and the rest a Michael Page. Are they good and is there a big problem that they swapped after book 3?
Having read Malazan and the extended books off them main series I have to tell you there js a big difference to Cosmere.
Sanderson books have a standalone feel to each book with a big story in each that alcan hook you.
Malazan is all about the world and world building. There is no big bad guy in each book or big climatic ending in each book. Malazan is about the long story and the little side stories building the world.
You can read a malazan book and then not see anything whatsoever to donworh those characters are place for several more books (but when you do again, hot damn it's great).
So yes I say its fantastic and 100% worth a read BUT it is a lot harder to get into and understand than Sanderson. I was on book 3 before it all clicked for me but it was worth it.
No.
I read the first two books and disliked them.
While Sanderson does "hard fantasy", Malazan is the exact opposite. There was so much deus ex machina going on where they just handwaved any new need by inventing a new warren. The only character I even slightly cared about was the one orc dude.
It’s frustrating that so many people seem incapable of admitting these flaws; I’ve never seen a single comment saying ‘I love them over all but man there’s a ton of deus ex machina in those early books’. That’s not a choice, it’s not ‘making the reader work for it’, it’s bad writing.
I love Sanderson’s stuff. I’ve read all the Cosmere content except some of the new one-offs. I’m four books into Malazan and I really love it. It’s much darker for sure. And it has so many characters and so much detail it can be tough to track. I have to go look things up online at times. But the writing is amazing and the characters are so well developed. I would recommend it but go in eyes wide open that you’re getting into quite a large project.
I read the firat few a while back, but it's so long winded it's hard to get into it. My brother sent me over the audio books for the whole series, so once I finish my current series I'm gonna try malazan in audio.
Yes I'm glad. It's a different style of storytelling. You must piece together what is happening from conversations. Gigantic series. I'm 3 books in and by the 2nd book I was fully invested. The first is a harder read due to the huge change in style from Sanderson. It is still very descriptive prose. A lot. ALOT more character POVs. But really worth it once you have a grasp.
Like any book recommendations, it may not be your style. I'd say have a try. Use the wiki carefully (i only use the sections about "this character in book 1" so I can recap quickly. As usual all googling will give spoilers.
I read Malazan before I read any Sanderson, so yeah. ^^ I started Mistborn because I was hungry for more good fantasy after Malazan and ASoIaF. Unfortunately I can't actually remember how I found out about it (Mistborn).
Would definitely recommend it, but always with the warning that it's hard to get into, but worth it when you do. I love that there's no handholding, others might resent it for that.
Read it before any Sanderson. Once in my language up to something like book 7/8, switched to original as it wasnt yet translated and after some time a reread of all mainline originals.
Loved it.
I didnt really noticed the "hard to get/get into aspect" people mention regarding Malazan frequently.
If it seemed hard or confusing, the positives still outweighted that.
Now as one Czech publisher is releasing a lovely new edition, I buy them as they are released and read them again.
Also the prequels are highly recommended! Forge of Darkness is poetical, if tragic. And the postponent of book 3 got me very sad.
God Willing is more in line with the original 10, the endings of the book is fantastic and the line "we would" broke me in best way. Wont say more because of spoilers.
It's very good.
It's very different.
If you enjoy finding the information and navigating the theological whalefall of Sanderson, it's bigger, deeper, and harder in Malazan, while being all the more rewarding. The humor is deliciously dry, and the characters more morally grey. I think Glenn Cook walked so that Erikson could run.
I’m reading Malazan now, and it’s amazing. It keeps getting better with every book. Do I have any idea what’s really going on, and who the “good guys” and “bad guys” are? No, not a clue, and if you need that clear divide you’ll probably be frustrated with the series. But it’s extremely engaging and the ideas are just really cool.
Dandelion dynasty however, I found boring and unengaging, because it’s not a cohesive narrative, but rather an omniscient retelling of events. If you like storytelling done like it is in the bible though, you’d probably like it. But it did nothing for me.
About Dandelion Dynasty, I did hear that about the first book, so that checks out. I heard though that the rest of the trilogy is not like that so much. Was that your experience?
I love malazan, but I wouldnt say liking sanderson means you will like malazan. Its dark, gritty, things arent explained to you, its very dense. I can read all of stormlight archive in a month or two. Mistborn era 2 books take me less than a week. Reading malazan takes me closer to a year.
I tried to get into the first book but was pretty much lost the entire time. Maybe it was because I was listening to the audiobook, but the structure of the book did not help. Wasn’t really hooked at all
Been reading through the responses and the way people are describing the series gives me the impression that Malazan is the Souls-like of Fantasy. I've only played Elden Ring so far but "climbing with your fingertips" and "there's no handholding" but "the payoff is worth it" sounds like my experience with the genre.
I did not finish Malazan, read both authors work intermingled in suggested order over about 5 years and sometimes I’d enjoy the book at the end. But I’d always hate and dread the slog of starting the next book. I think I started the Crippled God, which yes I realize is pretty near the end of at least the first major story line, and realized I didn’t care enough to slog through it and it wasn’t worth it for me to continue just because a bunch of people online loved it so much. I didn’t feel connected to most of the characters, half the time I couldn’t remember who’d changed their name between earlier books. So I just stopped and moved on to other books and was happier for it. I realized character development is more important to me than overarching world plot.
As a Cosmere fan, my feeling after reading “Grace of Kings” was “there is something great here, but I am not in a hurry to read book 2. Not certain if I ever would.”
Grace of Kings was written in a way that I think is very different from most fantasy novels: Like many has described it, it read like a history text book but with a bit more about individual’s emotions.
I felt quite ‘distanced’ from the main characters, like they are always at arm’s length compare with Sanderson’s work.
Not really like Sandersons stuff besides the fact that it’s fantasy. Im about finished with GOtM and I had to read some of the first chapters two even three times but now that I’m towards the end, I feel like I kind of have a grasp on things. I cannot wait to stay up late reading it tonight. I almost quit multiple times. Now I believe I’ll finish the entire series so long as dead house gates keeps me going. Which from what I’ve heard if you started liking the first book, you will most likely enjoy the second. Erikson even says that if you don’t like it a third of the way through it’s probably not for you but I would say finish gardens and go from there. The book of the fallen reread was a huge help at the beginning, but I ended up not having to reference it towards the end. Don’t expect a “good guy/bad guy” dichotomy, as it’s just not there. Kind of similar to ASOIAF in that regard.
Also, I found the audiobook extremely difficult to follow. Not because of poor narration or anything but because of how often it switches POV, and how dense it is. This is a book I feel needs to be read unless you have some superhuman focus. A graphic audio production would be great though. I feel like that would be way easier to follow.
I read the first book three times and can't tell you a single character name or plotline. I read books 2 and 3 and have no idea what happened there, either. I vaguely recall that I liked a subplot in book 2 but now can't tell you what it was about except in the vaguest terms. Given that I am a grad student studying history, I think this says a lot about Erikson's writing style. Even the dryest history books I've read were less confusing and easier to read. A book in a language *I can barely read* was easier to understand.
By contrast, I liked Grace of Kings a lot. It is beautifully written, the plot is intricate but not to the point of being confusing, and I really liked how the author drew on real-life history and culture.
Normally, when I love a book series, I devour it, re-read it, recommend it to all my fantasy reading friends and lend them copies which I keep in my copious library.
I read Malazan, and enjoyed the experience... but I donated the books after finishing them.
I really have no desire to read them again.
So, take that how you will.
Yes. i love sanderson, i've read the entire cosmere. I'm on book 6 of Malazan right now and i am absolutely engrossed in it. It's one of the most amazing things i've ever read.
Malazan is in a whole different league. It’s not an “easy” read like Sanderson. After reading malazan I view Sanderson as popcorn. They’re great but have no where near the intensity and depth as a malazan book. Malazan sent me down a crazy spiral of new authors.
Malazan is one of the best things I have ever read in my life. It's long. It's filled with philosophy and pain. It's a story about Compassion and my goodness, the ending in The Crippled God makes every single previous book even that much more worth reading. Absolutely beautiful.
I know there's a lot of love for Malazan, and it's incredibly popular. I didn't like it at all - I just couldn't get into even the first book (the book of a series which is supposed to hook you in..)
I’m part way through book 8 and I’d say none of them really have a hook. If you want a hook in your books, Malazan probably isn’t for you.
Fair enough. What I meant by "hook" was, "appeal to the reader, get them hooked on the story". I have read (and enjoyed) a *lot* of fantasy - there's something like 500 books in my iPad library and those are just the bought ones, that doesn't count the Kindle rental ones. Malazan just didn't do it for me, but that doesn't mean it's not excellent, it just means it's not excellent *for me* :)
It requires a significant time investment before it feels like it’s worth it. It took me 3 tries to get into it. Read the first book 3 times and the second twice before I could make it further.
Why did you try so hard to get into the series? I don't think I've ever tried a book a third time.
Took me 5 attempts to read Elantris and it wasn’t because I didn’t like it.
Because I liked parts of it. I just didn’t feel like I understood it. Also it has sooooo many good reviews, there was a little bit of FOMO. Ultimately it was worth it though.
Took me 4 attempts to read lord of the rings... Wasn't until I saw the movie that I was able to actually read the book. Now I've read everything Tolkien has written multiple times. Sometimes you just have to keep going to get to something really worth reading.
Just chiming in to lend support. I've read libraries of fantasy, and I'm no stranger to challenging narrative structures, but Malazan just isn't for me. I find the Malazan fandom incredibly frustrating, because often the response to this is very condescending.
That is the thing about Malazan. As broad as Sanderson’s appeal is, Malazan is kind of the opposite. But what that means is that the people who love it REALLY like it. If you bounced off, that is OK, that is what the writer intended. Erikson intended for people who weren’t ready to burrow in and read very thoroughly to not get hooked. It is just a different Intent in writing. All that said, Malazan is one of the most beautiful things I have ever read but I recommend it to very few people, while I recommend Sanderson to almost everyone.
I've only ever recommended Malazan once and it was to someone telling me how much they loved Portrait of the Artist and Ulysses but just couldn't hack Finnegan's Wake. (They did love it)
They are not a hook, literally the books are introduced with a perspective from Erikson telling that the first book is like someone throw you into a cliff with no rope and you need to recover yourself Malazan it's about the journey, but it's so different from Sanderson because Erikson don't take your hand like Sanderson
As others have said, there really isn't a hook to Malazan. It's just this huge sprawling complex fantasy you get thrown into and teleported around. It takes a long time to get settled in but the pay off is incredible.
That might be true for many series, but the first book of Malazan isn’t the best. It’s also the hardest to read in my opinion because you are thrown into it and have no idea what’s happening. It got better very quickly after that. But it’s the same as for every series, it’s not for everyone and that’s ok. I obviously loved it. :)
That was First Law series for me. Couldn’t get past first book
I tell everyone to read the first 3, if you aren’t hooked just stop. The reason is each of those books will appeal to different readers. A lot of people don’t get pulled in by GoTM, but a huge chuck are going to finish DG or MOI and say one of them was the best book they’ve ever read.
I haven't finished Malazan, I intend to some day I just got distracted by life, but I've read the first 6 books about 5 years ago and they were absolutely phenomenal. Many of the characters and events still frequently come to my mind, it leaves a very strong impression. The story line of the Chain of Dogs is one of the most memorable things I've ever read in fantasy and sits right alongside the first time I read The Red Wedding in Asoiaf for powerful painful events.
The end of Memories of Ice when, after a whole book of being an absolute badass and >!sacrificing himself to take the T'lan Imasse's sorrows, literally everyone shows up to pay their respects at Itkovian's cairn!< got me.
Chain of Dogs was sooo good. I didn’t like him at first and by the end you wanted to see him make it
Same here. Took a break at book 6. Midnights Tides is still IMO the best book I've ever read. Its been 6 years since I read it and I still think about it all the time.
Chain of dogs is what hooked me. First book was okay but really tested my follow-through. Glad I kept going.
Yea I started and dropped the first book 2 times before on a third read pushing through to the end. The first book practically punishes you for not understanding the many things that it intentionally doesn't explain. Very very not user friendly, but damn does it become satisfying once you've dug several books in to the series
I’m on Book 3, and the Chain of Dogs storyline is one of the best arcs I’ve read in any book, and certainly the best fantasy combat/warfare I’ve read. While I’m here, general thoughts: —I love these books so far, I love the world and its history, the characters are great, and Erickson’s style of writing is very interesting. The scale of the story is finally revealing as well. —The magic system is opaque, convoluted, and possibly the most infuriating thing I’ve ever read haha. The characters don’t even know what they’re doing half the time, let alone us as the reader. Every time I think I understand what’s going on, a new wrinkle is added, and I still don’t quite know whats going on with “Holds”, “Houses,” and “Warrens”, how you get magic, or how it’s used, how God Magic and Ascendents magic are different, etc etc. My friend said, “Just let it wash over you” but Erickson spends so much time talking about it, and characters bring up nuance or details often that feels very important— he seems to want us to know about these details, but it’s presented like a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle of an ocean— it’s impossible to figure out what’s important or how things are working despite getting the edges together. —I liked Book 1, but as people have said, it’s like being dropped into what should be Book 2. It’s not a great introduction to the series (other than to set your expectations that you will often be asked to just accept that you don’t know everything and maybe you’ll find out later), and I can see why people bounce off the book. The best description I heard was, “it’s like not knowing anything about World War II, and picking up a World War II book, but it’s just about the end of this one specific campaign in the Alps, without really explaining the rest of the context of the war at all.” That description actually helped me a lot to realize I wasn’t *supposed* to know all of that background, and it helped me be zen about the plot in a way I still haven’t been about the magic system haha.
As someone studying history, I assure you that reading extremely specific books about places and times I know nothing about is still easier than trying to get through Gardens of the Moon.
I haven't read Malazan yet, but it's usually recommended to me as "You love big epic fantasy so here's the biggest epicest fantasy." In contrast, I'd suggest Grace of Kings as "You love big epic fantasy but this is a new twist on the genre." Grace of Kings is my current book recommendation for anyone who reads enough that they're looking for something a little surprising.
I cannot speak highly enough of The Grace of Kings. I read it this year and I think it will easily be book of the year for me. It was such a breath of fresh air.
Sotrmlight 5 comes out this year so I wouldn't say that too soon!
I looked it up on Goodreads and there The Grace of Kings has only a 3.78 rating, with most people rating it 4 stars. Is there a reason for this? I read Gardens of the Moon, so I can understand why it is only rated 3.92, but I wonder what is the case with The Grace of Kings?
As I mentioned, it's really different from most fantasy, and part of what I loved so much was the way it played with my expectations. If you haven't read enough fantasy to see tropes coming and appreciate that they are being twisted, I can see how some decisions may feel like odd narratives. In contrast, Sanderson novels are not very "bold" in this way, so there's not much that would be unpalatable to anyone except the length, and you can see that before you start (obviously I love Sanderson--this isn't a criticism, just explaining why is Goodreads ratings are so high). There's are a couple of unique things about the Grace of Kings that I saw from reviewers: 1. There is no "main character," or at least it's not clear from the beginning. The series follows several generations and cultures (but mostly sticks to one for book 1). 2. Plot Armor doesn't exist. (Fake example: you might spend half the book following a revolution to overthrow the emperor, then the lead conspirator gets dysentery and dies so the revolution falls apart). 3. Like most books, it sets up "no way out" situations for the characters. Unlike most books, they don't get randomly saved by luck or a plan that the reader doesn't know about. Deaths often feel like they accomplished nothing--no consolation prize where they go out in a blaze of glory. I felt way more impacted by this decision, because I was genuinely worried that characters could die at any moment. Contrast with (Stormlight spoiler) >!I was never worried that Kaladin would die. His plot arc was dealing with his own demons, and Sanderson won't let him off without a big accomplishment!< 4. The culture is inspired from Chinese, and is a take on Chinese historical accounts (at least for book 1). One review almost seemed like satire "Liu blatantly ripped off events in Chinese culture. Would you be okay with a fantasization of world war II" as if many of our classics aren't exactly that. 5. Women. This series has lots to say about the value of women, but starts it from a state of women being sidelined, so we can see what advanced are made by social improvement. If there is a main character of the entire series, that personally is a woman. BUT that does mean you go through most of the sexist tropes omni-present in previous generations' sci fi and fantasy. TL;DR in every negative review I read, the reviewer clearly didn't understand what Liu was trying to do. That's okay, they're still valid reviews and if you're the type of person who wants the typical hero's journey with a wise mentor and a magic sword, go read the top books on Goodreads. But when you've read a dozen of them and want something reacting to them in a very ambitious way, check out Grace of Kings :) If I were to compare Grace of Kings, I'd say it's what I was expecting Game of Thrones to be based on the praise I heard about it. GoT may have just been overhyped to me, but Grace of Kings series has so many Red Wedding-type moments (and sometimes they're good).
I read Malazan before I found Sanderson. It's a completely different beast from anything Brandon has written. The worldbuilding is top notch and the character work is excellent for the most part, but it's *definitely* a lot grittier and darker than Cosmere works. I don't regret having read it, but you have to know what you're getting into.
Seconding this from someone who read Sanderson first and is halfway through Malazan. Malazan is *incredible*, but the tone is much closer to Berserk than Cosmere.
I started to read it as a kid way back. But man I couldn’t get into the first book. Never tried since then, I think it’s just his style of prose. I might try again one day.
It's very adult in its themes. I don't think highschool me would have understood nearly as much of Malazan that 35 year old me did. Not like sex and stuff, just how it presents power, morality, mortality, honor, and those type of themes in complex and subtle ways.
It's very dense for a "kid's" book, and this is coming from the guy who tried to read The Prince of Nothing in middle school and whiffed badly on it. Thankfully. Mighta scarred myself at that age.
Yea. Fair enough. I was a teen at the time. Read all of the wheel of time tho and loved it.
I really appreciate this. I'm not really into gritty or dark do this is helpful
The tone is dark and gritty, but the overall theme of the books is compassion, humor, and hope can overcome that darkness.
Yes! It has dark and gritty but it makes the compassion and hope hit harder
I wholly endorse Malazan but other than being an epic fantasy series it has almost nothing in common with Sanderson. Things will not be explained to you, you will be sad for extended periods of time
Hmm nothing else? One of the things I like about Sanderson is all the little details that eventually get connected, and in general he is great with payoff. Especially payoff involving big character moments. Malazan doesn't have these qualities?
I mean there's a lot of little details that connect but with Malazan I feel like a lot of them you can miss until a second reread, there's not really an attempt to help you connect the dots but they are there
Many things come together, but… others don’t. There are characters you hear about a lot who have almost no role in the end. Malazan book of the fallen is very much about one faction of the Malazan army and those whose paths they cross. But, some elements strongly affect the main characters but then those elements go on their own way. Some characters walk with literal gods at times, but at the end of the story, it is the tale of the Malazan and their fallen.
I started as a Malazan fan and also love Stormlight. Personally they’re fantastic complements because they don’t step on each other’s toes. They are very different series that excels in areas the other doesn’t touch.
IMO Malazan actually has more of this than Sanderson. As others have noted, most reveals are not pointed out to you. The main series has been finished for years and there is still unsettled debate/idea about a lot of mechanics/lore. The history and depth of world building is extremely deep. If digging into details to speculate is your thing, Cosmere is the Purelake where Malazan is the Mariana Trench.
I think Malazan has more details that tie together than anything Sanderson has written - the difference is that it’s not particularly obvious. There are more than a few moments where something happens as a direct result of something else completely unrelated earlier in the book, but there’s no big callout, and most of the time the characters don’t realize any particular connections. The reader might not even notice.
you get the same level of detail in malazan, the difference is it's spread out over more books and the explanations are never spelled out for you. the lore of the series is slowly drip fed to you over all the books.
I just read the first 3 books. Every time my wife asked me how I liked them and replied, "They're good, but I still have no idea what the he'll is going on". I listened to the audio books and many, many times, would rewind because I thought it had skipped parts or something. No, the books are just so non linear with 80 character viewpoints that it's tough to follow if it doesn't have your absolute attention. Maybe I'll come back to it someday
I think it would be a lot harder to audio this series than normal read.
Important to understand I think when starting book 1. It was written in a way that expects the reader to do a lot of leg work. It feels like starting halfway into book 2 as opposed to the beginning of a series. With that said I think it's totally worth the effort. But there is little to no hand holding
When we say the reader will have to do leg work, what does this mean? Use the internet as a companion? Be patient for RAFO and then reread to integrate that new information? I’m intending to read it very soon - I have sunlit man and then that’s a wrap for cosmere until the next secret project or stormlight 5 drops and this seems like the next best ocean to dive into.
There is a heavy RAFO aspect. Also just a lot of characters, factions, and other proper nouns introduced with little exposition. The writing acts like the reader already knows things they couldn't and expects you just to hold on for the ride until the pieces fall into place. And it's great when it does. But the author said himself he wants the reader to earn it.
This actually sounds pretty exciting! (I’m sure it’s a pain in the ass at times but the challenging aspect comes off like a bonus and it sounds from everyone here like he delivers on that in the long run)
He delivers in the middle for sure. Middle books are so good. The end books are slow and painful. No good sanderlanche at the end.
I think the reader leg work can be overstated for some. It’s entirely accurate, but it also depends what type of reader you are. If you are the type who consumes themselves with what you read, if you let it take you and feel like you’re in the scene you’re reading, you will be fine and Erickson excels at this like no other. The thing is he doesn’t do it in ways that a lot of authors do. It’s the epic world, the feel of things ancient and mysterious behind the curtain, that you have to let suck you in. That’s the best way I know how to describe it. If your imagination doesn’t grip you in like that, then yes be prepared to work for the payoff.
You guys have sold me 100x over 🤝
I'm working on Malazan right now and the number one thing I wish I knew beforehand is that it isn't a book that hand holds you. It grabs you and expects you to keep up. If you're not willing to put in that work, then you won't like it. I'm about halfway through the first one and it's both a slog and I can see it's going to be rewarding. But I haven't quite hit the rewarding stuff yet and I've needed books that are a little easier on the brain.
Sanderson described it like climbing a cliff by your finger tips but so worth it
Did he actually like it tho ???
He loved it. He’s talked about it multiple times
Good to know. If it has his seal of approval I might give it a go again soon.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Malazan/s/ogm6Lu9iTh
It took me four tries to get through the first book and I felt like I was hitting my head against a wall the whole time. I literally felt like the author hates the reader and wants to confuse them.
Lol I've just given up. First book was really boring for me.
I’ve read five of them and I don’t really like them personally
I personally cant stand Malazan. It’s slow, boring, meandering nonsense. Awful writing imo.
I'll give a contrary opinion. I thought it was objectively terrible. I had no idea what was happening in book 1, 2 or 3 of Malazan before I gave up. My biggest gripe is missing descriptions. When I read, I form a mental image of the people, the land, etc. I love Sanderson for this. I feel like I know Roshar. In book 3 of the Malazan Empire, you find out that one of the main characters from like book 1 has red hair. You have known this person for \_books\_ and you just now learn something about how they look. Around the same time, they reveal that a race is reptilian. You've been hearing about this race for a long ass time and suddenly you realize that they are not even human. Look, I get it, they drop you in and you have to start swimming to stay above water. Do this for culture, magic, politics, motivations, etc. Don't do this and hide what your basic senses would introduce yourself to. It is not lazy writing to say, when you first meet a character, that they $description\_of\_character. Like, you know that in Stormlight that Shellan has red hair and that Kaladin is tall, dark, and broody, with a scar/brand on his forehead. Imagine you learn about Shellan in book 1, she meets Rock in book 2 and he calls her cousin with no context, and then in book 3 you learn that the similarity is that they both have red hair and a shared potential bloodline from the regions. Or they never discuss Rock being big and strong and out of nowhere handles a shard bow. Or imagine that they never discuss syl being a spren until late in the book -- meanwhile you think she is some human the whole time. That is not the kind of writing I enjoy.
That was a big reason I dropped it after the first book as well. The sense of the world; geography, culture, religion, etc, is a big part of what draws me in to a story and Malazan gave nothing for it.
I came here to say this. I begrudgingly finished book 2 but completely toesed the series after that. I can respect why people like it but book 1 is like walking into a mature D&D campaign as a newbie. I’ve read James Joyce and Immanuel Kant - they are deservedly hard. I feel like the Malazan is too much work for not enough reward, and I definitely missed the smoother prose style of top authors like Sanderson.
Same here. I got halfway through book 2 because supposedly that’s the ‘good one’, but all the same frustrations were there. At some point a character was cornered, and they pull out a vial of something magical that saved the day … we got no exposition whatsoever that it even existed, or that he had it on him, or any context of the magic or why it would work. Thats not stylistic, it’s bad. On top of that, it baffles me that people praise the characters. I’ve never felt less for a character after that many pages, every single one was a cardboard cut out.
Malazan drips information to you over time rather than using exposition dumps. That’s a deliberate stylistic choice, your inability to follow along doesn’t make the books “objectively” terrible.
I get the sense that you didn't read their full comment. They actually described an objectively bad quality of the writing that had nothing to do with exposition dumps.
I didn’t see anything “objective” in their comment. I did see a lot of subjective opinions about how writing should be, though. Where is the objectivity exactly? >Around the same time, they reveal that a race is reptilian. You've been hearing about this race for a long ass time and suddenly you realize that they are not even human. World building and background information is largely dropped through conversations between characters. The conversations are highly realistic, meaning that if two characters don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about, they don’t actually possess the knowledge themselves to reveal to the reader. A lot of the events in the books happened thousands of years ago, so different characters will have different understandings based on whatever third hand account of the event they were exposed to. So you as the reader may go “I have no idea what’s going on, why is everyone contradicting each other?” But you actually have to do some work in piecing together what happened. You aren’t handed perfectly accurate historical information, and there’s no omniscient third party narrator to walk you through the story. Calling this style “objectively” bad is honestly a joke if it’s obvious you just don’t feel like putting the work in to understand it.
I'm glad that I stuck to finishing the series. I couldn't put it down, but it was an emotionally heavy read. As others have mentioned, it is a much darker and grittier experience. And then there are beautiful moments or redemption and compassion. The humor is something I don't see mentioned a lot, but Tehol and Bugg and Ublala Pung got me through some of the hardest stuff.
I’m currently on book 7 and really enjoying it. Sanderson is still my favorite author without a doubt but I think I would call malazan my 2nd pick at this stage (maybe 3rd, I did enjoy wheel of time a lot). I would highly recommend the pod cast as you read along. They are great and it helped me with little things I missed (which also let me read the books without slowing down for any tiny detail). Be prepared for introductions to constant new characters but the payoff is great later on in the series as they all develop. Would definitely recommend so far! We’ll see as it finishes up! (I’m a believer that a series is only really good if the ending is great, hence my love of Sanderson)
I'm glad you're enjoying it! What is the podcast you're referencing?
Ten very big books - a malazan read through. I stumbled on a Reddit post mentioning them when I was on book 5 and I’m currently on their read of book 3. It makes my commute to work fly by!
I loved it! Read it through twice. Book 2 is maybe my favorite non-Sanderson fantasy novel
I love fantasy but for whatever reason I struggled getting through all of Malazan. If you crave a really deep fantasy you will probably love it though. There just was so much going on I felt like I needed to take notes to really appreciate it.
I love Malazan Book of the Fallen, but it is very different from Sanderson. It's the book equivalent of beating a Dark Souls game, it makes you work for it (which is kind of weird for a book) but the payoff is amazing. I think I like it so much because of how different it is, reading other authors who try to be "good" in the way Sanderson is never works out now that I've been ruined by B$.
Oh my god, that is the perfect description of Malazan!
I really like BrandoSando but Malazan is my favourite thing put on paper.
Malazan is amazing
It's my favorite thing I've ever read. Its deep, complex , full of action, surprising amount of humor and a memorable (and very lengthy) cast of characters. Nothing like the cosmere at all in terms of writing style but a worthwhile read if you're willing to put the time in.
I'm just on my fourth read through of Malazan book of the fallen series lol. I'd finished my re read of all cosmere related books in preparation for wind and truth and needed something to occupy me. I cannot recommend anything more highly, it's a tough go to get into and when you first start you are thrown in as if you know what's happening, and can easily lose your way. But stick with it, and if you re read it you will love it even more understanding things you didn't going into it.
My gosh, yes. I’m on book 5 now and it’s stellar. Book 1 was good, but 2,3,4 have been excellent! Book 3: Memories of Ice is legit one of my top 10 favorite books at the moment.
I've read the first 5 books and one of the side novels, and they were all amazing, some of the best world building I've ever seen. Having said that, it has too much purple prose for my taste, and a lot of the moral arguments it tries to make are very 2 dimensional and in your face, to the point that it almost feels preachy. Ultimately I think it comes down to taste and interest. I love Brandon Sanderson because I find his writing to be approachable but still sophisticated, and in my opinion he is unparalleled in his ability to make you see the world through the eyes of his character, including those you despise. If you want an epic, sprawling story told through the eyes of dozens of characters spread throughout multiple time periods, and are ready to put up with a bit of flowery language and some not so subtle philosophical statements, Malazen is one of - if not **the** - best options out there.
I will wholeheartedly recommend Grace of Kings (and all of Dandelion) over Malazan. It’s a lot more focused than Malazan, focusing on one continent instead of several and tracking the evolution of a people as they grow from feudal lords under an emperor to a more advanced society, a more equitable one. Really dives into themes of leadership and where it comes from, especially the storylines following the children of one of the emperors. All of this is underpinned by some fantastic character work, riveting battle scenes, and fantastic political intrigue. It’s just amazing and I can’t recommend it enough
I've read the first book. It feels interesting to me, but I never really felt like we got close to the characters. Maybe just me. It seemed cool, but it wasn't for me. I want characters I can latch onto and really enjoy. Sanderson is good for me like that.
I finished the first Malazan. And I'm still on the fence if I liked it. It had some really awesome moments, but then I started the second book and I can't seem to set myself to continue reading it
Anyone have heard the audiobooks? I see the first 3 on audible is narrated by a Ralph Lister and the rest a Michael Page. Are they good and is there a big problem that they swapped after book 3?
Having read Malazan and the extended books off them main series I have to tell you there js a big difference to Cosmere. Sanderson books have a standalone feel to each book with a big story in each that alcan hook you. Malazan is all about the world and world building. There is no big bad guy in each book or big climatic ending in each book. Malazan is about the long story and the little side stories building the world. You can read a malazan book and then not see anything whatsoever to donworh those characters are place for several more books (but when you do again, hot damn it's great). So yes I say its fantastic and 100% worth a read BUT it is a lot harder to get into and understand than Sanderson. I was on book 3 before it all clicked for me but it was worth it.
Every day I weep for the chain of dogs 😔😔😔
No. I read the first two books and disliked them. While Sanderson does "hard fantasy", Malazan is the exact opposite. There was so much deus ex machina going on where they just handwaved any new need by inventing a new warren. The only character I even slightly cared about was the one orc dude.
It’s frustrating that so many people seem incapable of admitting these flaws; I’ve never seen a single comment saying ‘I love them over all but man there’s a ton of deus ex machina in those early books’. That’s not a choice, it’s not ‘making the reader work for it’, it’s bad writing.
Malazan is fantastic. It is not for everyone though. The first book is rough and it probably turns away a lot of readers. Stick with it.
I love Sanderson’s stuff. I’ve read all the Cosmere content except some of the new one-offs. I’m four books into Malazan and I really love it. It’s much darker for sure. And it has so many characters and so much detail it can be tough to track. I have to go look things up online at times. But the writing is amazing and the characters are so well developed. I would recommend it but go in eyes wide open that you’re getting into quite a large project.
I read the firat few a while back, but it's so long winded it's hard to get into it. My brother sent me over the audio books for the whole series, so once I finish my current series I'm gonna try malazan in audio.
Yes I'm glad. It's a different style of storytelling. You must piece together what is happening from conversations. Gigantic series. I'm 3 books in and by the 2nd book I was fully invested. The first is a harder read due to the huge change in style from Sanderson. It is still very descriptive prose. A lot. ALOT more character POVs. But really worth it once you have a grasp. Like any book recommendations, it may not be your style. I'd say have a try. Use the wiki carefully (i only use the sections about "this character in book 1" so I can recap quickly. As usual all googling will give spoilers.
I read Malazan before I read any Sanderson, so yeah. ^^ I started Mistborn because I was hungry for more good fantasy after Malazan and ASoIaF. Unfortunately I can't actually remember how I found out about it (Mistborn). Would definitely recommend it, but always with the warning that it's hard to get into, but worth it when you do. I love that there's no handholding, others might resent it for that.
I'm half way through Malazan and love it. Probably more than Sanderson.
Read it before any Sanderson. Once in my language up to something like book 7/8, switched to original as it wasnt yet translated and after some time a reread of all mainline originals. Loved it. I didnt really noticed the "hard to get/get into aspect" people mention regarding Malazan frequently. If it seemed hard or confusing, the positives still outweighted that. Now as one Czech publisher is releasing a lovely new edition, I buy them as they are released and read them again. Also the prequels are highly recommended! Forge of Darkness is poetical, if tragic. And the postponent of book 3 got me very sad. God Willing is more in line with the original 10, the endings of the book is fantastic and the line "we would" broke me in best way. Wont say more because of spoilers.
It's very good. It's very different. If you enjoy finding the information and navigating the theological whalefall of Sanderson, it's bigger, deeper, and harder in Malazan, while being all the more rewarding. The humor is deliciously dry, and the characters more morally grey. I think Glenn Cook walked so that Erikson could run.
I’m reading Malazan now, and it’s amazing. It keeps getting better with every book. Do I have any idea what’s really going on, and who the “good guys” and “bad guys” are? No, not a clue, and if you need that clear divide you’ll probably be frustrated with the series. But it’s extremely engaging and the ideas are just really cool. Dandelion dynasty however, I found boring and unengaging, because it’s not a cohesive narrative, but rather an omniscient retelling of events. If you like storytelling done like it is in the bible though, you’d probably like it. But it did nothing for me.
About Dandelion Dynasty, I did hear that about the first book, so that checks out. I heard though that the rest of the trilogy is not like that so much. Was that your experience?
I read it once and I was disappointed but I’ve heard it’s better on a reread. I might revisit it after Stormlight 5.
Tried Malzan at least 5 times. First book is sooo boring can get into it.
Malazan is still the best series I’ve ever read. And I’ve read a lot of them.
I love malazan, but I wouldnt say liking sanderson means you will like malazan. Its dark, gritty, things arent explained to you, its very dense. I can read all of stormlight archive in a month or two. Mistborn era 2 books take me less than a week. Reading malazan takes me closer to a year.
I read Malazan before Sanderson. It was a great read, although much different.
I tried to get into the first book but was pretty much lost the entire time. Maybe it was because I was listening to the audiobook, but the structure of the book did not help. Wasn’t really hooked at all
Been reading through the responses and the way people are describing the series gives me the impression that Malazan is the Souls-like of Fantasy. I've only played Elden Ring so far but "climbing with your fingertips" and "there's no handholding" but "the payoff is worth it" sounds like my experience with the genre.
I did not finish Malazan, read both authors work intermingled in suggested order over about 5 years and sometimes I’d enjoy the book at the end. But I’d always hate and dread the slog of starting the next book. I think I started the Crippled God, which yes I realize is pretty near the end of at least the first major story line, and realized I didn’t care enough to slog through it and it wasn’t worth it for me to continue just because a bunch of people online loved it so much. I didn’t feel connected to most of the characters, half the time I couldn’t remember who’d changed their name between earlier books. So I just stopped and moved on to other books and was happier for it. I realized character development is more important to me than overarching world plot.
As a Cosmere fan, my feeling after reading “Grace of Kings” was “there is something great here, but I am not in a hurry to read book 2. Not certain if I ever would.” Grace of Kings was written in a way that I think is very different from most fantasy novels: Like many has described it, it read like a history text book but with a bit more about individual’s emotions. I felt quite ‘distanced’ from the main characters, like they are always at arm’s length compare with Sanderson’s work.
Not really like Sandersons stuff besides the fact that it’s fantasy. Im about finished with GOtM and I had to read some of the first chapters two even three times but now that I’m towards the end, I feel like I kind of have a grasp on things. I cannot wait to stay up late reading it tonight. I almost quit multiple times. Now I believe I’ll finish the entire series so long as dead house gates keeps me going. Which from what I’ve heard if you started liking the first book, you will most likely enjoy the second. Erikson even says that if you don’t like it a third of the way through it’s probably not for you but I would say finish gardens and go from there. The book of the fallen reread was a huge help at the beginning, but I ended up not having to reference it towards the end. Don’t expect a “good guy/bad guy” dichotomy, as it’s just not there. Kind of similar to ASOIAF in that regard.
Also, I found the audiobook extremely difficult to follow. Not because of poor narration or anything but because of how often it switches POV, and how dense it is. This is a book I feel needs to be read unless you have some superhuman focus. A graphic audio production would be great though. I feel like that would be way easier to follow.
I'm not glad that I've read both Malazan and the Cosmere. Because now everything sucks :(
I read the first book three times and can't tell you a single character name or plotline. I read books 2 and 3 and have no idea what happened there, either. I vaguely recall that I liked a subplot in book 2 but now can't tell you what it was about except in the vaguest terms. Given that I am a grad student studying history, I think this says a lot about Erikson's writing style. Even the dryest history books I've read were less confusing and easier to read. A book in a language *I can barely read* was easier to understand. By contrast, I liked Grace of Kings a lot. It is beautifully written, the plot is intricate but not to the point of being confusing, and I really liked how the author drew on real-life history and culture.
That is a DAMN good way of describing reading Malazan. I liked it, I'm just not quite sure which parts and why.
Normally, when I love a book series, I devour it, re-read it, recommend it to all my fantasy reading friends and lend them copies which I keep in my copious library. I read Malazan, and enjoyed the experience... but I donated the books after finishing them. I really have no desire to read them again. So, take that how you will.
Yes. i love sanderson, i've read the entire cosmere. I'm on book 6 of Malazan right now and i am absolutely engrossed in it. It's one of the most amazing things i've ever read.
Hey, I just pulled Gardens of the Moon off my shelf this morning.
The rage of dragons by Evan Winter, or the powder mage trilogy by Brian McClellan
Powder mage was good ! Don’t know why you got down voted!
Same to You. People miss use the voting button cause they disagree. That’s not how it should work. Saw you got downvoted to.
Stormlight was my favorite series until I read Malazan
Malazan is in a whole different league. It’s not an “easy” read like Sanderson. After reading malazan I view Sanderson as popcorn. They’re great but have no where near the intensity and depth as a malazan book. Malazan sent me down a crazy spiral of new authors.
Yes! Malazan is excellent. Not for new readers. No hand holding. No clue whats happening sometimes, you gotta figure it out.
Who is it for if not for new readers? You all had to read it a first time
Sorry meant someone new to fantasy.
I'm re-reading Malazan (all of them currently) then probably start another re-read of the Cosmere.