The first Harry Potter was released over a month before LoTR-The Fellowship of the Ring.

hm interesting thread, im not really into all these fantasy books, read them with 15/16, mostly Stackpole, Tolkien, Hohlbein, i think 1-2 books from Salvatore ( but didn't like it ). Fantasy books just are so similar it even hurts while reading ^^
Not very interested in Sci-Fi too, but i'd really like to read Stanislav Lem, cause i only heard good things about his books.
Not quite accpeting your ''fact'' about Orwell, there are also Hemingway, Golding and more which fight for that throne (though i read most of my books in German ).

This post was edited by ZaftigFetus on Dec 22 2007 12:12pm

Yes, But it wasnt SUCCESSFUL until after the movie of fellowship was as well. Then, less than a year later we got a hp movie. Seems pretty fast to me.

Proof read what you write. If you don't understand it, don't push reply. The first Harry Potter movie was successful before LoTR was released.

This post was edited by darken99 on Dec 22 2007 06:04pm

bah. i looked it up and yes hp movie came out one month earlier.......too bad it took 3 yrs to make fellowship..... while jk sold the rights to hp one month after book came out lol.
Shes a greedy, fairly untalented old bag......cant wait for her next book to come out w/out hp shes nothing

I've read and enjoyed every author you've listed there, in the good and bad categories.

Ayn Rand was hard to read through at times, but I have more patience than most, I suppose.

Style, tone, voice, and content all depend on the depth in which your imagination can conceive them. It's rather simple... the higher your level of understanding, the higher the level of interest. I have read most of the mentioned works from the authors above. In my biased opinion, fantasy is fantasy, and to categorize every single book under the category of the author is foolish. Not every work by certain authors will be incredibly great or horrible. To think otherwise would be rather prejudice; like how a movie with good/famous actors wont necessary mean it's going to be a good movie.

On a lighter note, the ability ( or lack of) to comprehend and visualize the image which these authors try to convey are your own fault. Sure we can play point the finger and take every fan. fict. author in juxtapose and evaluate the flaws of each, but really life would be a bit dull with just one or two authors writing these books wouldn't it? So what's the point of criticism and argument here? If you would rather just read books from a select few number of writers, then fine that's your preference. But really, why dull the colors of life for the rest?

Like the old question rather asks, would you rather know alot about a few, or know few about a lot?

On the side discussion, Harry Potter was popular because of Harry Potter. It was a phenomenon unto itself and does not owe its remarkable success in books or films to LotR or any other outside fantasy influence. (I'm not talking about content or outside inspirations for the work, I'm simply saying that Potter became popular largely on its own) By the time the first Potter film came out, they could have shat on a screen and collected several hundred million. The books were huge. Each release became a global craze. LotR had absolutely nothing to do with the HP film's success.



WTF? Speaking of lack of understanding, what the hell are you talking about? Sure there can be variations in quality between one work or another by a writer, but it doesn't change the fact that there are good authors and bad authors. Just like there are good and bad actors, directors, musicians, etc. Now a bad director could overachieve and make a good film, but its generally rare. And you almost never see a bad author write a good book. (though you will see some good authors slip up and miss the mark from time to time) Now there is a HELL of alot of entertainment options out there. Can't read it all, can't see it all, and I really wouldn't want to. One of the surest ways to distinguish between what's worthwhile and what's not without actually having to suffer through 500 pages is to ask the question 'who wrote this?' If my past experiences with that person have been bad, than there's really no reason to slip my neck into the noose again.

I'll give any of those guys a try once. But if its utter shit, that's about all that they're getting. If an author by contrast has earned my respect with some great or very good work, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt through some of their lesser volumes as well. And there are more than enough good authors out there to never be at a shortage for good stuff to read. And I don't feel the least bit unfulfilled simply because I never got past book 1 of Goodkind or Eragon. Reading their drivel is actually quite painful and I'm not one for needless masochism. Why would I wish to inflict pain upon myself by suffering more of their crap? They are shit authors who write shit books...why the hell should I bother?

None of that demonstrated my lack of understanding...like...at all. It purely sought out the differences in our opinions, hence.... "In my biased opinion"

This post was edited by Holland on Dec 24 2007 12:16pm

I agree with you that the writer of eragon is freaking worthless. Rushed story, haphazardly put together world. He ripped ideas from about every fantasy author, and somehow managed to make it tasteless. He does not even compare to even the lesser of fantasy authors. I felt like he rushed through every sentence of the book, then randomly decided to add a little detail here or an explanation there with no apparant tact or reason. The idea and world behind the books are not bad, but as a writer.... he blows