Terry Brooks

[JenFramp]

I'm a huge Tolkien fan..however I've had a hard time getting into other fantasy novels..Is Terry Brooks a rip off of Tolkien's middle earth? Or is Brooks worth reading? I've browsed through it once or twice at the bookstore and they look interesting

[Fingolas]

I would refer you to this thread.

Cheers!

[ May 01, 2002: Message edited by: Fingolas ]

[Fingolas]

Hi JenFramp,

Welcome to the Barrowdowns.

I just finished The Sword of Shannara and boy was it a chore! You ask if Brooks is a rip off of Tolkien, and the answer is yes (IMHO), and a third rate one at that!

Apologies to all the Terry Brooks fans out there. I realize that one mans trash is another mans treasure.

There are several good threads where the regulars discuss their favorite fantasy books and authors. I’ve gotten a lot of good tips from them. Check this thread.

I am currently 400 pages into The Eye of the World by Robert Jordan. It’s the first of the Wheel of Time series. I think there are about 19 or 119 of them so far in the series. It has held my interest to this point but falls far short of Tolkien. But then again, who doesn’t. I don’t know if the rest of the Wheel of Time series is any good but this one is a decent read. Perhaps some other posters that have read more of this series can let us know if the others in this series are any good.

I have come to the conclusion that at least as far as Fantasy is concerned, nothing will captivate me like Tolkien. But that doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy the work of other writers. Perhaps I need to stop comparing other fantasy writers to Tolkien and accept them on their own merits. It can be difficult to do that though since Tolkien defined the genre and so many others seem intent on building their careers by emulating him.

Cheers!

[ May 01, 2002: Message edited by: Fingolas ]

[ May 01, 2002: Message edited by: Fingolas ]

[Birdland]

What I don't understand is: I read The Sword of Shannara when it first came out in 1977. I thought it was crap then, and I frankly didn't even finish the book. (And it was a expensive, trade paperback edition, to boot!)

Now here it is 25 years later, and people still seem to think it is crap, and yet it is still selling! I'm sure many other fantasy novels have come and gone since then. Why has Terry Brooks been able to make a cottage industry out of this particular series, which is so derivative that it borders on plagerism?

[Raefindel]

I read "The Sword of Shannarah" about 1980, maybe... I remember it as being a cheap immitation, and I was still a kid back then.

[Kalimac]

Birdland - I couldn't say for sure why it's still selling, but I will say that reading this thread (plus the other "great idea for a story" thread) has *almost* tempted me to pick up a copy of the book just to witness the desecration myself firsthand. It's sort of like owning a copy of the Rankin-Bass ROTK - you don't buy it because you like it, but because it's so entertaining to watch in an awful sort of way. And also, of course, because you've heard other people reviling it and want to see what they're talking about. Though admittedly movies can be MST3K'd and thus almost made worth the purchase price, while with books it's rather harder to do that.

That's my guess on why it's still selling. And no, I wouldn't buy it new - not going to drop THAT much on it. Rather, if I get it at all, it will be at the same fourth-hand bookstore where I got "Bored of the Rings" for forty-five cents.

[Rimbaud]

I have one barely thought out theory as to Mr Brooks' sales to some degree; I think fantasy readers, who invariably start young, rarely now if ever start with Tolkien. They may well end up there and then realise that most other sword-and-sorcery fantasy is painfully derivative. But in this age of instant thrills oand three second attentions spans, children are more likely to pick up the slimmer more colourful fantasy books first. Therefore when faced with Brooks who is essentially "Fisherprices 'My First Tolkien Spin-Off'", the grubby hands reach into grubbier pockets.

However to be honest with you, the reason for the man's booming sales still escapes me, in truth.

[KayQy]

I managed to get through the first two books in the series. The Sword, IMO, was painfully on the point of plagiarising. By the second book, he managed to get some original ideas (or at least rip off someone else), but it still wasn't enough to hold my interest for the future ones. My brother, however, loves them, and when I point out the obvious similarities between it and Tolkien, he simply disagrees. Which is, I suppose, why it is still selling. There's just no accounting for tastes. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Gryphon Hall]

<span style="text-decoration: none; text-align: justify; color: #80FF00">

I have never read any of the Shannara books yet, but I have a lot of friends and acquaintances that really love the series. I always remember never understanding why: the few excerpts that they showed me displayed a very stilted writing style, the sort that Kalessin complained about in the <strong>Are There Any Valid Criticisms? (aka Kalessin's Rant) </strong> thread. I also found those weaknesses in the Star Wars book Episode I: The Phantom Menace.


An acquaintance who liked Shannara, in fact, actually criticized Tolkien's The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring, part 1, because 'there was just too much detail; describing a mountain in two pages makes boring reading.' [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] Yep, a Tolkien & Lewis fan like me can't take that sitting down (as revenge, I later immersed him so much in the Middle Earth mythos that he's now bewailing that he can't find a copy of Silmarillon; wait til he finds out it is even more 'boring' [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]


However, I do have a theory why Shannara has so many fans. All my friends who like it, down to the last one, were first introduced to fantasy by Dungeons & Dragons and continue to be avid role-players. Apparently, whatever mediocre writing other fantasy genres have (not just that of Terry Brooks, which may still have some merit, but also that of the Dragonlance series), it is exactly the fuel role-players need and crave for. I mean, the role of Hobbit was parodied and ridiculed on Dexter's lab and nobody I know wanted to be one in any of our games. They wanted to be elves or rangers, heck! even trolls, but not any hole-burrowing hobbit. They want characters with real abilities and with even real attitude.


LotR, unfortunately, isn't built Dungeons and Dragons style. There are no dangerous quests to get weapons, magic or abilities. You don't see anyone trying to gain a lot of experience and use it on the battlefield. So, except for the detailed histories, LotR is left on the shelf and safely criticized for its 'detail'. Shannara, on the other hand, has sentient weapons, dangerous quests for such weapons, etc. LotR have several different characters, none the main protagonist, but within a central storyline. Shannara (as I understand from my friends trying to explain it to me; I may be wrong) have several small sub-plots, with each character the main protagonist in each one.


When role-playing fantasy, it is normal I guess to want to be the main hero or heroine. No one wants to be a side character comparable to a lowly NPC. No one I know wants to role-play in Middle Earth ever since the Ruling Ring was destroyed, whereas in Shannara, evil will always come back to threaten everybody. In a sense, Shannara and other titles may present an evil that cannot be conquered absolutely so that there will always be a need for heroes. Role-players want not only to emphatize with characters like Frodo, they need to actually <em>be</em> the hero that saves the day.


Or at least be the git who gets a lot of experience points at the end of the session.


I would still want to read the Shannara titles. Who knows?

All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost.
<div align=right>LotR, Book I, Chapter 10</div>

Maybe Shannara will be worth reading.
</span

[*Varda*]

Your links don't seem to be working properly.

[Kalla]

I dunno about Terry Brooks, but I really liked Melanie Rawn's Ruins of Ambrai (it's book one of a set...don't remember the name of the set though) as well as Michelle West's Sun Sword Series. However, if you like the "fantasy" themes, but want a lighter, or funnier side to them, Terry Prachett is witty and funny, at least I think so. Course I like Monty Python..soo...depends on what you're into. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Amberle]

The first book is a bit like lotr, but you should read the books none the less, they are soooooooo good. I suppose it would depend on your taste, but I love them.

[ June 23, 2002: Message edited by: Amberle ]

[Elrian]

. But in this age of instant thrills oand three second attentions spans, children are more likely to pick up the slimmer more colourful fantasy books first. Therefore when faced with Brooks who is essentially "Fisherprices 'My First Tolkien Spin-Off'", the grubby hands reach into grubbier pockets.

The Shannara series is hardly slimmer than any of Tolkiens books, anyone who has The Elfstones of Shannara or The Wishsong of Shannara should find that comment amusing. The Shannara series is hardly a fisherprice version of Tolkien, one who has read the entire series would know that. If Brooks is a plagiarist, then so is every other fantasy author including Tolkien who's ideas came from other sources also.

[The Silver-shod Muse]

The LotR books were the among the first real fantasy world novels that I read. Consequently my love for fantasy is rather less than moderate. After the first page I've already found so many similarities that I can't enjoy the book. I've given up on numerous fantasy novels, The Sword of Shannara among them.

[Naaramare]

I always find it rather puzzlingly amusing that many avid Tolkien fans seem to so dispise other fantasy writers.

Granted, most of the fantasy writers don't have such a wealth of detail to their stories as Tolkien did; there are days when even I don't want there to be. Tolkien, for me, demands a complete and total immersion into his world and mythos, and always gets that immersion, whether I want it to or not. But that's tiring and distracting: rereading LotR once can send me into an outward daze for several hours (a very dangerous thing should I need to use the car for some purpose, or walk in busy down town).

I personally have never read Brooks' work other than the novellization of SW: EpI (That was him, yes?). I did enjoy that novellization; if and when I get money, I plan on reading something of the Shannara series. I'm not going to do so because I expect Brooks to be another Tolkien. I'm not going to do so because I expect Brooks to come up with something completely and originally independant of Tolkien. I'll do so because I want an entertaining fantasy read; the same way I watch things like Buffy not because I think they're going to change my life or even be anything but hopelessly derivative, but because they amuse me.

[Tarthang]

I've read just about all of the Shannara books. I've never noticed the least bit of similarity to JRRT, especially once getting past the first three (Sword of, Elfstones of & Wishsong of). In fact I've read a very large number of Fantasy books and find very few similarities to JRRT. But, I don't go comparing one authors works to anothers in the first place, which it sounds like a great many people here are doing.

[The Silver-shod Muse]

Don't ever start, Tarthang. For me, it's an involuntary reflex. My mind works in connections and comparisons, so I can hardly escape it, even though it often seriously impedes simple enjoyment.

rereading LotR once can send me into an outward daze for several hours

That daze is the reason I read Tolkien. I suppose I'm not much more than a common escapist when it comes to fantasy [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img].

[ June 25, 2002: Message edited by: The Silver-shod Muse ]

[Tarthang]

Silver-shod Muse
I wasn't pointing any fingers. Just making a personal observation, which I did not point out was a personal observation.
I should probably point out that it isn't easy trying not to compare authors.
And I've had a little time to recall the first three Shannara books (in order of writing/publication) and can recall some similarites. The later Shannara series are what's freshest in my mind, and they are the ones without the similarities.

[ June 25, 2002: Message edited by: Tarthang ]

[Lothiriel Silmarien]

Ooh, good thing I looked at this one.

I read all of the series; The Sword of Shannara, The Elfstones of Shannara, The Wishsong of Shannara, and I'm on the prequel now, The First King of Shannara. I love them, they're really good books, but of course, is he Tolkien? No, and that's why it's not the best. Tolkien's books are always gonna be my favorite and are always the best (my opinion)
But, in reading Brook's books, they're good but they don't seem to have much detail. Tolkien described everything to the fullest. Everything. And I loved that about his writing. Brooks seems to leave some details out, and he doesn't go back to his writing to support things. After I finished The Sword of Shannara, I read the Elfstones of Shannara and I was wondering where Durin and Dayel were! Hey, if Eventine was still alive, how come his cousins weren't even mentioned at all!? He could have atleast cleared things up.

Also, I put off reading them because I felt as if I was betraying Tolkien in a sense. I thought maybe I would get too attached to the other books and like them about just as much as Lotr, and all of the other of Tolkien's books. But I realized that could never happen. Nothing could make me like other books more than Tolkien's. But here's one thing: People are saying how they've read other books and they seem REALLY similar to Tolkien. Of course they do. Most fantasy novels are closely related to Tolkein's because they were influenced so much by his works. Some might feel upset about that, and I understand. I mean, how come they can't get their own ideas? But Tolkien covered everything so much and it's hard to think that there are other aspects of fantasy. It's hard to believe that it could be different.

[Lothiriel Silmarien]

Hey, I forgot. Amberle, is that where you got your name from? I was wondering that for a while!

[Brinniel]

I just finished reading The Sword of Shannara myself. At first it may seem similar to LOTR and I thought my obsession with LOTR drove me to think that, but about halfway through it takes a turn and it doesn't seem as similar anymore. So, is it worth reading? Yes. It is much more simple than Tolkien's writing, but it kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time and I squealed each time another exciting thing happened. I think you would enjoy this book as long as you aren't bothered by the similarity of the two books. People who judge too much on what characters or events are similar to other books aren't able to appreciate the original parts of the book. Remember that many of races/creatures that Tolkien put in his books weren't original either. Many of these things come from ancient legends or myths.

[Gryphon Hall]

Naaramare,
<span style="text-decoration: none; text-align: center; text-indent: 12pt; color: #00FF00">


Good point! Who said that fantasy have to be the best before one can enjoy it?
</span>
Tarthang,
<span style="text-decoration: none; text-align: center; text-indent: 12pt; color: #00FF00">


Only one thing bothered me, actually. When a friend of mine once said that Tolkien was boring and criticized not only his version of the Elven mythos but the way he takes two pages to describe something, it really biased me against what he said next. He said that Terry Brooks was better because he wasn't boring.


Well, I want to read Shannara now, but not to compare (although it sometimes is worthwhile to do so, so that other budding fantasy writers can learn something) but so I can have "a good read".


Thanks.
</span>
Suilad Lothiriel,
<span style="text-decoration: none; text-align: center; text-indent: 12pt; color: #00FF00">


What is the best order to read the Shannara series? Should the prequel be read first?


I don't think it is a betrayal to Tolkien to read other fantasy novels. He worked hard for their acceptance. I, myself, love CS Lewis.


Peace.
</span>
<center>

<font size=1>A formidable creature half lion and half eagle, the Gryphon is said to be one thousand times stronger than any lion and five thousand times as farsighted as an eagle. It has a strange talent that when people are around it, they find themselves unable to lie. The Gryphon is also said to be feirce and untamed. It was a protecter against evil and people often wore talismans of a griffin's claw to protect them from demons. Gryphons were often used as trasport for the gods. They were also reputed to swoop down from the montains on occasion and pick up goats and small horses and bring them back to their nests for their young.

What mythical beast best represents you? http://www.yayajon.com/watercircle/beastquiz.htmlTake the quiz!</a></center>

[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: Gryphon Hall ]

[Lothiriel Silmarien]

Gryphon, the best way to read them would be to start with The Sword of Shannara, then the Elfstones of Shannara, then The Wishsong of Shannara, and then The First Druid of Shannara. Well, that's only in my opinion because I'm reading the prequel after I read all those. When I started these series, I didn't realize that there were sequels and stuff, so I finished reading the rest then went back. But if you would like, you could read the prequel first. It might clear everything up as you read the others. And when you start reading, let me know who's your favorite characters! I like Allanon..