Series you were disappointed with...

[Bloodfalcon he/him]

Dresden Files were a snoozefest in my opinion. Bought three of them and just couldn't finish the third. Not in my normal "I don't have time right now *forgets*" way, but I really made a decision not to keep reading. It is a little too.... unexplained for me. 

The Wheel of TIme would have been on this list for me 5 years ago; I picked it up over and over but couldn't get through the first book. Then I really sat down and gave it time and it's my favorite series. Love WoT so much. 

[Topomouse he/him]

If you can, I suggest you try to give Dresden Files a second chance. In the beginning the author was still deciding what to do with the story, the first 2 are almost standalone books, the third things start getting real but it's from the fourth(starting with the consequences of the ending of the third) that you really see the overall plot. I would really recommend trying to get to end of book 4 and then decide.

 

As for me, I was really disappointed with the Maze Runners series. I discoverd the author on Sanderson's blog and i treid the first book and was really hooked. Then the second was kinda meh, and when I was less then halfway through the third I wanted to strangle all the protagonists and the ending was really crem dung imho...

[Satsuoni he/him]

 

As for me, I was really disappointed with the Maze Runners series. I discoverd the author on Sanderson's blog and i treid the first book and was really hooked. Then the second was kinda meh, and when I was less then halfway through the third I wanted to strangle all the protagonists and the ending was really crem dung imho...

That is very true. For me, the ending seemed to invalidate the whole point of the series. And cleaning loose ends by falling rocks... meh.

[TheShogun he/him]

I hate to say it, but The Lord of the Rings. 

I just can't deal with Tolkien's writing style, even though I love the world to death.

[Haradion Drogon]

Eragon. I loved the premise. I loved the first book. Eldest was good too. Brisingr was slightly better... but Inheritance was awful. Huge let down.

Of course, it was still better than the movie...

 

I was disappointed Michael Scott's "Enchantress" as well. I feel like he didn't really know where he was going with the story, and by the time he did, he had too many loose ends to tie up in a way that was fully satisfying...

[Jeckal he/him]

Kingkiller Chronicles for me. I think Rothfuss has a ton of potential and I for the most part really enjoy his writing style, but there were just certain phrases he got hung up with using just a little too much that bothered me some, however this is not my main complaint with the first book.

 

The problem is I just don't like Kvothe, which is weird because I like Kote, and you'd think I'd be interested in finding out how the one became the other...but I just don't know if I can deal with Kvothe long enough to find out. He always comes across to me as the typical arrogant entitled teenager, except he's got the skills to back it up, so he can never be put in his place. Now I know from Kote he at some point does become humbled and broken and a much more interesting sounding character, but I don't know if the journey to find out is worth it.

 

I haven't read the second book yet, but I've heard Kvothe mostly acts the same, and I'm not sure I'm willing to commit to that.

Edited January 5, 2014 by Jeckal

[Argent he/him]

You couldn't read the book for its literary qualities alone? The Name of the Wind has some of the most beautiful prose I've read.

 

For me it was the Recluse series by Modesitt Jr. It was very highly recommended to me by my best friend (and long time reading companion) who read a translated version of it. I absolutely hated Modesitt's style of writing, the way he felt the need to vocalize every sound literary - to the point where he wouldn't say that someone sneezed or that a horse whinnied, he would try to write the sound of it. I am sure it didn't help that at the time I was not very experienced with first person narratives either. At least the worldbuilding was okay-ish.

[Jeckal he/him]

You couldn't read the book for its literary qualities alone? The Name of the Wind has some of the most beautiful prose I've read.

 

While I agree Rothfuss' writing is very pretty (though I don't think I was quite as impressed with it as you were, though I'm certainly not faulting you for really liking it!) there are too many books for me to read that I'm interested in the characters as much as the prose. For me at least, plot and character are more important than the language (though its not unimportant to me), so good prose doesn't necessarily make up for a deficiency in my enjoyment of one of the other two.

 

I hope that makes sense! Like I said, Rothfuss has the potential to be a writer I could really like; I guess I'll just need to see what he comes up with after KCC

Edited January 9, 2014 by Jeckal

[Who Sharded?]

Another vote for Kingkiller.  Probably the biggest disparity between popular opinion and my own.  It's very well written and I can understand how it has its fans...I just can't fathom why so many people love it.
 

Malazan Book of the Fallen is my all time favorite series btw.  But I can see how it's not for a lot of people.

[Argent he/him]

ohgod, Malazan. I was not disappointed by it, but man, was it hard to read. Even Forge of Darkness, which I had some background for (from the original Malazan series) and was written in a style more similar to standard high fantasy, was difficult.

[Guest Alaxel]

Right now, I'd have to say the King Killer Chronicles. Which is strange because I really, really loved those books when I read them...

...but then I read Brandon Sanderson.

The way Sanderson's books build up to climaxes of epic proportions made me realize how static Rothfuss' books are.

Brandon Sanderson: Gods clash as a world dies.

Patrick Rothfuss: Emo kid has money problems.

[Who Sharded?]

Right now, I'd have to say the King Killer Chronicles. Which is strange because I really, really loved those books when I read them...

...but then I read Brandon Sanderson.

The way Sanderson's books build up to climaxes of epic proportions made me realize how static Rothfuss' books are.

Brandon Sanderson: Gods clash as a world dies.

Patrick Rothfuss: Emo kid has money problems.

Aye.  I'm an accountant so I usually enjoy reading about money in fantasy (Daniel Abraham does it very well).  But with Kvothe it's just the same thing over and over, and it's frustrating.  He rationalizes his purchases in his head, but a lot of them are so dumb.  He's one of the dumbest smart kids in fantasy.

[flyleaffan he/him]

I know I'll probably get backlash for this but Game of Thrones. 

 

I've been told many times the books are great. The first 3 times I tried to read it, I couldn't get 100 pages in. I more recently tried to read the book at a request from a friend and made it further. I was happy it was starting to get good 60-70% of the way through but then it stopped being good again and stopped reading at about 80%. I don't think I'll try it again. I'll watch the show but the book was not engaging enough. 

 

I also couldn't get into the Night Angel Trilogy by Brent Weeks because of how poorly it was written. Although, for context, I had just finished The Name of the Wind for the first or second time so the ability of the writing may have been skewed due to Rothfuss's genius. And I thoroughly enjoy the Black Prism series by Brent Weeks. So maybe I could give it another try. 

[Tamzin Ashevai she/her]

Sword of Truth!

This novel was so predictable that I couldn't stand it and never read, nor ever will read anything by Terry Goodkind again!

[Tamzin Ashevai she/her]

I have to admit that I've not yet read Rothfuss (silly me), nor Erikson (again, silly me). Even so, I remain an advocate for ASoIaF (i.e.: Game of Thrones, for advocates of the HBO series, yet who've not read the novels). Not silly of me. READ, watchers! There's so much more ... there!

[Quiver he/him]

Sword of Truth [/bandwagon]

Ignoring the gratuitous sexual violence, the pacing and plotting of those books threw me off. I described the second book to a friend thusly:

Of course, I'm obsessive-compulsive about finishing series, so I need to get the next one soon.

EDIT: Actually, gratuitous is the wrong word, since it implies there's a degree of it which is acceptable. I don't want to get into the fairly explicit stuff, but after a point, it begins to read as Goodkinds personal fantasy.

Similarly, I was disappointed with certain chapters of A Feast for Crows, which kind of gave a vibe of Martin writing to indulge himself, though that was, arguably, still more important than the mord sith.

 

 

Oh my Shard. One of my first posts on 17th Shard, and I forgot to follow it up?

 

Anyway, yeah, read Blood of the Fold a while ago, and SHARD STORM IT GOODKIND.  (Full spoilers ahead, for anyone who actually cares about that series)

 

Okay, look, I'll start with the positives. Richard has the potential to be an interesting character. His moments as a trickster hero in the earlier books were actually pretty cool. Oh, overdone of course- "Oh, what, this poisoned apple? Yeah, I've been eating 'em all my life. So, which of your daughters should I marry?" comes to mind- but that could be considered part of the point. Hell, Kelsier had some of those sorts of things as well, like having the [euphamism of choice for courage here] to take on multiple Inquisitors and the Lord Ruler in personal combat. Richard even has a similar problem that Kelsier does- both are so devoted to what they believe to be the right course of action that they disregard alternatives and carry their prejudices into how they deal with problems.

 

The difference, obviously, is that in Kelsier's case it's all intentional, with Brandon building him up as a messianic martyr through deliberate choice of symbology which deconstructing it at the same time. Kelsier is charismatic, incredible, almost supernatural, but he's also just a few degrees off of being a sociopath. I kind of got that vibe from him while I was reading The Final Empire, and Brandon confirmed it in his annotations; Kelsier is kind of crazy.

 

Richard Rahl, on the other hand, is completely right.

It seems like Goodkind has deliberatly calculated the "cool" moments Richard gets, like the apple, or summoning the spirits for that reason- to make him "cool". When, during Blood of the Fold, he declares the Midlands disbanded and names himself king, I was curious. After all, that was exactly what the villain of the first book was trying to do, and it wasn't that different from the goals of the villain for Blood. Other political leaders in the novel point that out to him, so clearly Goodkind was aware of the implications. Richard wonders whether this is going to cause a rift between him and Kahlan, and it feels like there's a genuine tension there.

 

Oh, what's that Goodkind? Richard is totally justified in what he is doing, because it's for the Greater Good, so Kahlan just goes along with it? WELL OF COURSE SHE DOES.

 

The Mord Sith are actually better in this book. They are still a bit over done and theatrical, but at least for them it makes sense- in fact, I can rather relate to them. They smirk, and make very obvious, very heavy handed comments- "I AM MAKING A JOKE THAT I WILL SLEEP WITH YOU- because they don't get social mores, and they respond by overdoing it. And I actually liked Berdine- the earlier books had a fetishistic sense to them, but Berdine (and the other Siths) reactions to Richard makes it clear what a horrible situation they are actually in. He demands things of them, and they do it, because, as Berdine basically says, not doing it would be worse for them. Berdine's revelation of what Darken Rahl did to her really does succeed in making him even worse in death, and highlighting how awful the situation was, so I'll give props to Goodkind for that; at least he addressed some concerns he had about the earlier books.

 

He just replaced them with different problems.

 

First of all, Berdine's sexuality, or rather Richards reaction to it. As I say, Richard is so clearly designed by Goodkind to be the cool hero; so when he reacts to the fact that Berdine is a lesbian with "ewwww, gross!" I really don't know how to respond to it. Are we supposed to agree with Richard- he is the main character after all, and he's been right about (almost literally) everything else in the entire series to this point. But he gives no reason for it, other than a vague sort of religious thing. His points are really, really weak on the subject. By contrast, Berdine and Raina are pretty much the only relationship in this series so far that isn't, in some way, disturbing. I don't get a feeling of epic romance from Richard and Kahlan, and Zedd and Adie is kind of nice, but hardly the greatest love story ever told. 

 

When Kelsier was racking up his body count, it had a point. How many of the nobles he killed were Straffs, cruel racist bigots who used and abused the powers of the empire, and how many were or could have been Elends? Kelsier comes to his own relaisation of that, when Vin shows him that Elend isn't, necesarilly, the villain because he's noble.

If Richards response is meant to be Goodkind giving a lesson- "some things are wrong for unexplainable reasons, because morality is an abstract concept anyway"- it fails. If Goodkind is trying to give Richard a flaw to make him more relatable, it fails, because his homophobia doesn't contribute to anything or have any consequences. 

 

And... Tobias Brogan.

Tobias. Brogan.

I wish I could curse on these forums, because this guy... this guy annoyed me. Greatly. In fact, it wasn't just him, as much as it was the entire story surrounding him, which included that of Kahlan.

After responding to the earlier complaints of sexual violence, Goodkind responds by making a character who multiates womens bodies and keeps them as treasures the main villain of this book. (I'm ignoring Jagang, because he's more of a villain in future books, but his behaviour is... yeah.)

 

Anyway, bodily mutilation... again, it kinda-almost has an appropriate point here. Brogan uses magic to control women's minds; their bodily mutilation is symbolic of his mutilation of their will. Okay, I can buy that; the details of what, precisely, he cuts off and the fact he preserves them however go beyond that. Brogan is, quite simply, a disgusting character. What he does to the woman we see him control in the novels is reprehensible in so many ways that I can't even begin to count them. He's also one of the most insulting Strawman figures I've ever seen. Maybe it's just my own baggage, but I can't help but think Goodkind is trying to make a commentary on organised religion, that the people running it are only out for themselves, and their insane, depraved sexual deviants.

 

Brogan is a monster, and therein lies the problem. He's a villain- he's supposed to be scary. He's not supposed to be one-dimensional, which he is, and unfortunatly for him, that dimension is "absurd". 

He does horrible, horrible things, and what I'm about to say doesn't diminish that; if anyone in the book deserved to die, it's him. But sweet Harmony is he ridiculous. 

 

Ignore the violence for a moment (violence which is almost cartoonishly overplayed to begin with). His story is all about how his devotion to the Creator and the evils of magic, even though he uses his sisters magic. Okay, fine; hypocrisy is a great character trait. Except... his opinions on everyone and everything ranges from condescension to disgust. Okay... again, somewhat... plausible, albeit it not realistic; even Darken Rahl had people who he seemed to value even if that was only in a material way, but fine; Tobias Brogan is consumed with pride and self-righteousness, and see's himself as being above everyone else.

 

This, by the way, is the point where I would be hoping for a counter-point, showing that not all religious people are fanatics. After all, the only people we've seen practicing organised religion to this point have been, at best, misguided- the Sisters tortured their students, the Rahls had a cult built around them, and the Blood hunts demons.  If Goodkind has a message here it's that the only good religion is the more nebulous concepts espoused by the mud people, or the vague sorta-religious sentiments of Richard and Kahlan.

 

Anyway, on topic; Brogan views everyone with contempt. The point where he becomes absurd is in how that gets played out... he begins by believing he is the Chosen One of the Creator, then begins thinking the Creator has gone insane, the Creator is a demon, and finally coincides with him tossing lightning around and declaring himself God. 

 

It was a stupid moment, topped only moments later when Kahlan told him to "Stop hurting your beautiful sister, you ugly brute!"

Were those the exact words? No. But that was their intent. Brogan's sister, who had cast a glamour this whole time to appear ugly, is actually beautiful. She is being abused by her brother. Kahlan's objection is based, not on the fact that he's hurting another human being, or even that he's a man beating a woman. It's because she's beautiful, and he's ugly.

 

I hate this series.

 

More level-headed note... I was really looking forward to the Dresden files, but I just couldn't make myself read the second book. A bit disappointing.

Edited March 15, 2014 by Rubix

[zandi she/her]

The Sun Sword series by Michelle West.

Such a shame - great start, interesting political plots, epic in scale....worst editing or lack of editing that I have ever seen. Typos abound, awful convoluted sentences, pronouns that lack reference, cardboard characters...etc. It made me sad. It is possible that this has been corrected in subsequent editions since I attempted to read it ages ago - at least I hope so - but I was too disappointed to ever go back.

The Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind.

Blech. Started out ok with Wizard's First Rule and went downhill fast. A cliche wrapped in a stereotype hidden in formulaic prose. Another one that made me sad because of the lost potential. Still better than the Michelle West series - at least it had a minimum of editing!

Edited March 15, 2014 by zandi

[twilt]

A song of fire and ice

 

It started off so brilliantly! But by book 5? i just didnt care anymore about any of the characters and stopped reading

[veriviette]

Like others here, I was really disappointed by the Farseer trilogy. I was fascinated by the world and the dynamics, but after a while everything was just such a drag; seriously, could no one else see how goddamn evil Regal was? And don't even get me started on that ending.

 

Another series I couldn't even get through was the Night Angel trilogy. I found the writing just so awful, and starting off the series with a child getting raped just made me close the book and go, "WELL, time to find something else to read!"

[HydrogenAlpha he/him]

Like others here, I was really disappointed by the Farseer trilogy. I was fascinated by the world and the dynamics, but after a while everything was just such a drag; seriously, could no one else see how goddamn evil Regal was? And don't even get me started on that ending.

 

Another series I couldn't even get through was the Night Angel trilogy. I found the writing just so awful, and starting off the series with a child getting raped just made me close the book and go, "WELL, time to find something else to read!"

Even if you didn't liked the Night Angel trilogy ( which i can totally understand ) you should give Brent Weeks The Lightbringer Series a shot. It's in my opinion as much Sanderson as you can get while not reading anything by Sanderson ( in terms of awesomeness, he doesn't copy anything ), but stands amazingly on it's own feet aswell. Brent Weeks is in my opinion the author that has improved the most since he started writing. Some ideas are just borderline genius and this guy know how to create a magic system and write fighting scenes. Although he has some really interesting character, that get a lot of growth he has to get rid a few generic support characters. 

Back to the topic: You can call me a heretic if you want but i absolutely hated Harry Potter. I didn't like the characters, the plot, the setting.. it just seemed so much like a fairy tale to me. 

[Velnica]

I'm so glad lots of people mentioned Sword of Truth... I friggin held out until book 8 then I started reading book 9 (Chainfire) and holy hell is Richard just the most one dimensional, preaching, patronising hero there is. He's quite literally got no flaws! And Kahlan does whatever Richard says even though, you know, she's THE Confessor. The amount of crap that Goodkind put the less fortunate through (including Jensen and others like her) is just ridiculous.

 

But only 3 more books you say? Well, screw that.

[Nepene he/him]

I'm so glad lots of people mentioned Sword of Truth... I friggin held out until book 8 then I started reading book 9 (Chainfire) and holy calamity is Richard just the most one dimensional, preaching, patronising hero there is. He's quite literally got no flaws! And Kahlan does whatever Richard says even though, you know, she's THE Confessor. The amount of crap that Goodkind put the less fortunate through (including Jensen and others like her) is just ridiculous.

 

But only 3 more books you say? Well, screw that.

 

There are the flaws of him being a psychopath who slaughters unarmed protestors, endorses torture, a coward who abandons his men, one who beats up children, who is a brutal dictator, who attacks civilians. He has a short temper, egomania.

 

I agree that those are seen as positives in the novel of course.

[Observer]

Though I can barely remember it anymore, I distinctly remember the whole "Let's read Inkheart" think it did with the little ones turned out poorly because we all hated it as it went on.

And of course, in the name of beating a dead thing that could have once been a horse but we're not really sure anymore, the Super-preachy Sword of Truth series.

EDIT: I should probably just change my siggy to say "All my posts can't have line breaks until edited" knowing how many times today this has happened.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Observer

[Quiver he/him]

I am seriously tempted to start a topic devoted to a re-read riffing on the Sword of Truth. I don't think anyone has stepped up to defend it yet.

[Levian]

I really, REALLY liked the Sword of Truth series. I started reading it in grade 7 or 8 and some of the concepts in it blew my mind at the time. Kahlan was a strong female lead (at least at the start). I think the last book I enjoyed was Faith of the Fallen, and the rest I just read because I have to know how stories end. I couldn't NOT finish reading a series I had been reading for years. 

 

And to top it off, the newest book in the SoT world feels like a complete ASOIAF rip off.