Which Fantasy Author Did You Find Most Disappointing? Showing 1,001-1,050 of 1,088

[Mike (the Paladin)]

I started to say more but I suppose we've reached the point of diminishing returns. So in the interest of peace I'll not say more. To each and just think.

[Brenda]

Let us find someone safely dead to be disappointed in. I enjoyed George MacDonald's best-known fantasies, LILITH and PHANTASTES, both highly praised by C. S. Lewis. And he's written some fine children's work like THE PRINCESS AND CURDIE. Alas, MMacDonald wrote lots of other non-fantasy works that are pretty fairly dull. They all fell out of print for years, and then somebody reissued them with drastic cuts, pruning out all the stuff that was supposed to be a turnoff for the modern reader. And they're STILL dull.

[Donna]

Like all real people, rather than constructed idealist notions of people, Wagner had admirable qualities and not so admirable qualities. He used his friends something awful. He was somewhat antisemitic, although some of that was a result of anger at a Jewish music critic who savaged his music in the papers. He was an advocate for humane treatment of animals.

Hitler used what he approved of in Wagner's operas--the Germanic patriotism in Meistersinger and the Teutonic mythology in the Ring cycle--and saw to it that Parsifal, with its Christian mythology and message of redemption from sin, was never performed.

I am wary of condemning other people and their views without at least spending a little time to understand what their viewpoint is. It's too easy to do an injustice to someone by being hasty in condemning. So unless I'm willing to put in the time and thought, I don't have anything to say about an author's politics. It can be, too, a distraction from engaging with the author's book.

The more time has passed, the easier it is to separate an author from his politics. Who cares if Milton supported Cornwall; who knows whether Fielding was a liberal or conservative? Was Shakespeare anti-democratic? (Decisions and actions by the people, usually a mob, didn't come out well in his plays.)

[Donna]

"Cornwall" -- what a brain fail. I meant Cromwell. :)

[carol. , Senor Crabbypants]

*giggle*

[Mike (the Paladin)]

I think Cromwell may have visited Cornwall...

[Carl]

I know he is fantasy royalty, but for me its Tolkein. I find him unreadable. Also, I thought Stephen Donaldson was particularly bad.

[Eric]

Brad wrote: ""Most disappointing" to me means the author started out very high on my 'liked' list but then fell far and badly. In this regard I would have to start with:

Robert Jordan - I loved the first Wheel..."

I have to agree with you, Brad. That series started so well and I was just loving it. Then it seemed like he just set out to milk the books. Suddenly I'm reading 900 pages of nothing much happening and there's 10 pages of climax at the end? I made it through about book 6 and just gave up.

[Brenda]

Donaldson is another author I entirely cannot read. I read exactly one page of THE WHEEL OF TIME, the first volume. I immediately stopped, realizing that I would hate it and why go through twelve volumes of this?

[Carl]

Donaldson was dreadful. I was really disappointed with Neil Gaiman.

[Brenda]

I still feel that Gaiman's true strength is in graphic novels (his SANDMAN stuff is iconic). His prose is definitely hit or miss.

[J.R.]

I'm new to this game. Is anyone keeping score?

[carol. , Senor Crabbypants]

Yes. You are all winners.

[Carly]

I like this thread as a place where it's ok to confess disliking those universally beloved books, but is there a companion thread for converse reactions--"books that were unexpectedly fantastic" or "awesome authors that are generally under-appreciated"?

[Erica]

Carly wrote: "I like this thread as a place where it's ok to confess disliking those universally beloved books, but is there a companion thread for converse reactions--"books that were unexpectedly fantastic" or..."

I'd imagine that doesn't happen much. If I start reading a book I expect it to be good, or I wouldn't be reading it. ;)

[Carly]

Maybe it's a perk of a sceptical/pessimistic disposition, but I think I've been pleasantly surprised as often as I've been disappointed. I start quite a few series because they were recommended to me or because I see glowing reviews, but I'm dubious about how well they will fit me. If I see enough positive reviews from reviewers I trust, I also retry books and realize my initial reactions and prejudices got in the way of enjoying them. I'll bet you've read at least one book you thought you'd vaguely enjoy, only to get to the end and think, "that was fantastic!"

[carol. , Senor Crabbypants]

Erica wrote: "I'd imagine that doesn't happen much. If I start reading a book I expect it to be good, or I wouldn't be reading it. ;) "

That makes sense to me. I scanned some discussions and didn't see an "unexpected pleasures" thread--Carly, you should start one. But I think you are right, Erica. I have picked up books I wasn't sure I'd like, but for the most part, I pick my books hoping I'll like them.

@Carly, I think I mention that concept briefly in my review of Daughter of Smoke and Bone--not a genre I'm normally drawn to at all, YA OR romance-type, but it surprised me.

[Brenda]

It is also worth remembering that everyone's taste is different, and if we all liked the same books there wouldn't be any need for Goodreads at all. Earlier this week on ZITS (the comic strip) the two teen boys are selecting a movie. One checks his smartphone and says, "This one got 99% thumbs down on Rotten Tomatoes, but one kid in Indiana said it was awesome." The other replies, "Great, let's go!"

[R.A.]

This is an interesting thread-I just hope I never end up being the subject of a post!

[Carly]

R.A. wrote: "This is an interesting thread-I just hope I never end up being the subject of a post!"

Well, as Brenda says, a mention here means that people had really high expectations of the book, but that it didn't work for them. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing...for a reader to have such high expectations, it must mean that the book is highly regarded in general.

[R.A.]

Well there's a nice way of looking at it :).

[Jalilah]

Carly wrote: "R.A. wrote: "This is an interesting thread-I just hope I never end up being the subject of a post!"

Well, as Brenda says, a mention here means that people had really high expectations of the book,..."

Often when I have just finished either a book or a series that I really loved and am looking for something like it, I will be disappointed with the books that were suggested to me because they were supposed to be similar to the one I just finished but were not.
Then there are the books that have been so hyped that one has really high expectations. That was the case with Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell.

[R.A.]

I think maybe that's one of the reasons I tend to read my favorite books/series over and over-I know I won't be disappointed in them. The down side to that is that I haven't read nearly as many books as I aught to have, considering how much I love to read.

[Brandon]

Terry Goodkind I would have to agree with, and Robert Jordan I did not make it very far into.

[Donna]

Brenda, I agree with your comment on Gaiman. I've read some of his novels--Stardust, Neverwhere, and quit before getting halfway through American Gods--and even the ones I finished were not that memorable. The Sandman comics I really liked, and I really liked one of his short stories, "A Study in Emerald."

I'll still read him (haven't read Good Omens yet), but I do think of him as one who frequently, bitterly disappoints.

[Jalilah]

R.A. wrote: "I think maybe that's one of the reasons I tend to read my favorite books/series over and over-I know I won't be disappointed in them. The down side to that is that I haven't read nearly as many boo..."

What I do now when I am just getting over a book I really love, is rather than try and find something similar, is read something completely different, maybe even a different genre. It makes me more open to books that I probably would like but just not if I am expecting them to be like something else.

[Reading]

Terry Goodkind because he made me love the characters, but then let the go until it was marshy worth reading.

[R.M.F.]

Donna wrote: "Brenda, I agree with your comment on Gaiman. I've read some of his novels--Stardust, Neverwhere, and quit before getting halfway through American Gods--and even the ones I finished were not that me..."

Same here. Never really understood the fuss with Gaiman. Decent writer, but no more than that.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, *good karma*]

Carly wrote: "R.A. wrote: "This is an interesting thread-I just hope I never end up being the subject of a post!"

Well, as Brenda says, a mention here means that people had really high expectations of the book,..."

If a book has too many good reviews I tend not to like it. The book has been hyped so much that I know I will be disappointed. That plus I am a hipster. *adjusts monocle*

[carol. , Senor Crabbypants]

Jalilah wrote: "What I do now when I am just getting over a book I really love, is rather than try and find something similar, is read something completely different, maybe even a different genre. It makes me more open to books that I probably would like but just not if I am expecting them to be like something else."

I do this too! It's like I want the taste of the book to linger. I'm also afraid the next book will suffer by comparison.

[Brandon]

MrsJoseph wrote: "Carly wrote: "R.A. wrote: "This is an interesting thread-I just hope I never end up being the subject of a post!"

Well, as Brenda says, a mention here means that people had really high expectation..."

Amen to that.

[Brandon]

Does anyone here read Jonathan Carroll? So much talk of Gaiman, I wondered what you thought. He is so imaginative, lyrical, with a mix of the surreal, the bizarre, the fantastic, even horrifying, I thought he might be a good subject. Although, that would require a different thread, and is kind of off the subject.

[Donna]

I read Land of Laughs. Loved it till the end; hated the ending.

[Christopher Ruz]

I loved Terry Brooks as a teenager, but when I returned to him as an adult I was horrified. Those vast, fascinating fantasy worlds were suddenly dull and formulaic, and his prose is grade-school awful. I suppose you should never try to revisit your childhood...

[carol. , Senor Crabbypants]

Christopher wrote: "I loved Terry Brooks as a teenager, but when I returned to him as an adult I was horrified. Those vast, fascinating fantasy worlds were suddenly dull and formulaic, and his prose is grade-school aw..."

Totally agree. I read them so many times as a teen.

[Brenda]

I did pick up Gaiman's newest (THE OCEAN AT THE END OF THE LANE) and it was good. But it is minor. What weighs upon me with Neil is that he has never yet written the book that he could write. He has a superb novel in him, somewhere, I just know it. If only he could get it out.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, *good karma*]

Christopher wrote: "I loved Terry Brooks as a teenager, but when I returned to him as an adult I was horrified. Those vast, fascinating fantasy worlds were suddenly dull and formulaic, and his prose is grade-school aw..."

The Suck Fairy got it, huh?

[Mimi]

Brenda wrote: "I did pick up Gaiman's newest (THE OCEAN AT THE END OF THE LANE) and it was good. But it is minor. What weighs upon me with Neil is that he has never yet written the book that he could write. He has a superb novel in him, somewhere, I just know it. If only he could get it out."

This is also my issue with Gaiman. He's a great prose writer, but his storytelling has always seemed a little off to me, somehow. Can't point to what it is exactly. I think it has to do with his endings; they always seem hollow.

[R.M.F.]

Christopher wrote: "I loved Terry Brooks as a teenager, but when I returned to him as an adult I was horrified. Those vast, fascinating fantasy worlds were suddenly dull and formulaic, and his prose is grade-school aw..."

One of life's most bitter lessons: revisiting books you enjoyed as a teenager.

[Greg]

I enjoyed the first 3 to 4 books of the SoT series by Goodkind. Perhaps what turned me most off about the books, and which caused me to stop reading, were all the comments over the years from people saying the books got worse and more ideological. I decided to not even continue on to that point.

Another author was Erikson. I really did not like the writing style of the Malazan series at all and struggled through the first few books.

by Terry Goodkind

by Steven Erikson

[Judy]

I thought Terry Brooks was awful even when I was a young teenager. But then that might have been because I'd read Lord of the Rings at age ten.

And this may produce some booing, but I never saw the appeal of Marion Zimmer Bradley either. I preferred Andre Norton or Anne McCafferey.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, *good karma*]

Judy wrote: "And this may produce some booing, but I never saw the appeal of Marion Zimmer Bradley either. I preferred Andre Norton or Anne McCafferey. "

I like all three! Andre Norton is my favorite, hands down. (Collecting her Witch World series in print but I've branched out from there :)

But I enjoyed MZB's Darkover series (never did finish the entire series) and I loved book 1 of The Mists of Avalon. I also am really, really grateful to MZB for creating her Sword and Sorceress series. That series launched a thousand careers...and the career I am most grateful for is Mercedes Lackey. HUGE fan of hers, too.

I haven't read McCaffrey's most well known series - Pern - but I love, love, LOVE the first few books in the Brainship & Brawn series.

[Erica]

I read The Mists of Avalon and absolutely loved it.

I have tried to re-read it at least three times since, and couldn't get past page 50. And that wasn't a teenager vs. adult thing, because I'm pretty sure I was already an adult when I first read it. It's one of the things that still baffles me.

[Christopher]

C. S. Friedman. Tried so hard to get through Black Sun Rising and just couldn't.

[Bryan]

I enjoyed Friedman, but haven't tried Norton or Bradley. I'd like to read Mists Of Avalon, because my wife said it's quite good, and I'm not really sure where else to start with MZB. However, I will never again inflict Anne McCafferey on myself. For some reason, every time I've read anything by her I feel as if I'm reading somebody's attempt at their first novel. Tons of people seem to love her stuff, but...I dunno.

[Brett]

Andre Norton is the absolute best in any contest. She wrote fantasy and science fiction equally well. I grew up reading her and ER Burroughs (who isn't bad, lol) and still own those books.

As for the subject of this, I am most disappointed with Raymond Feist. I loved his books, but then met the man during a book signing and he was the most off-putting, dismissive person I have met to this day. Maybe he was having a bad day, but he made such a negative impression that I have never read one of his books again.
Hurting only myself perhaps, but there it is.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, *good karma*]

Bryan wrote: "I enjoyed Friedman, but haven't tried Norton or Bradley. I'd like to read Mists Of Avalon, because my wife said it's quite good, and I'm not really sure where else to start with MZB. However, I w..."

MZB's Darkover series is pretty good - and a good place to start as well (if you aren't in the mood for an Arthurian tale).

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, *good karma*]

Brett wrote: "Andre Norton is the absolute best in any contest. She wrote fantasy and science fiction equally well. I grew up reading her and ER Burroughs (who isn't bad, lol) and still own those books."

There is no way I could agree with you more. Andre Norton is...wonderful.

[Carl]

Greg wrote: "I enjoyed the first 3 to 4 books of the SoT series by Goodkind. Perhaps what turned me most off about the books, and which caused me to stop reading, were all the comments over the years from peop..."

I find Goodkind hard to read and have given up on trying to read any more novels by him.

[Carl]

For me, it has to be Neil Gaiman. People love his writing, but I don't get it.