Worst. Swords and Sorcery. Ever.

[Lord Mhoram]

Originally posted by Count Zero

Please tell me there is some really good fantasy out there that is mature.

 

Jonathan

 

Try Orson Scott Card's Seventh Son series.

[Catseye]

Originally posted by Count Zero

I picked up the Fafred/Grey Mouser series when White Wolf released them not to long ago. I read the first story and there were things I liked about it here and there, but as a whole I felt like the writer was a sex depraved looser. I really get tired of fantasy that is almost porno.

 

I know what you mean, I'm getting really tired of Porno that is almost Fantasy...

 

Seriously, if you want Porno your looking in the wrong place. I'd suggest either Heinlien's "I Will Fear No Evil" or Niven's "Ring World Engineers" (otherwise known as "Louis does ringworld") as far more sexually explicit.

 

In fact I don't really remember much of ANY sex in F&G. Given what your average White Wolf source materails are like, however, I'm suspicious of an editorial taint to the collection you read.

[Count Zero]

Originally posted by Catseye

I know what you mean, I'm getting really tired of Porno that is almost Fantasy...

 

Seriously, if you want Porno your looking in the wrong place. I'd suggest either Heinlien's "I Will Fear No Evil" or Niven's "Ring World Engineers" (otherwise known as "Louis does ringworld") as far more sexually explicit.

 

In fact I don't really remember much of ANY sex in F&G. Given what your average White Wolf source materails are like, however, I'm suspicious of an editorial taint to the collection you read.

 

But I don't want the sex... I think you misunderstand me... but anyway...

 

It wouldn't suprise me if White Wolf somehow changed it. It is white wolf after all, they were the company that produced a book with a vagina with teeth on the back.

 

Jonathan

[Catseye]

Originally posted by Count Zero

. I grew up a while back, I like a solid story and can do without gratuitous sex.

 

Me too! Give me well justified and plot important Sex!!!

 

But I get the feeling thats not what you really meant.

 

Please tell me there is some really good fantasy out there that is mature.

 

I'm sorry IMO but there is nothing mature about a fear of sex as a subject, in fact the opposite is true. Sex is an important part of the human experience, one of the most important in fact, reaching deep into our origins and bilogical purpose as the most complex system every developed for replicating a peice of DNA. Its one of the strongest drives human beings have and thus a basic of human nature.

 

We here in the US still suffer the twisted reasoning and social ills that come from our puritanical roots. Most other reasonably developed societies are a LOT more mature about the subject and can handle it without either titilation or disgust.

[Catseye]

Originally posted by Count Zero

But I don't want the sex... I think you misunderstand me...

 

No I got it. "If you want" was a turn of phrase. My point was that there are far more pornographic peices of mainstream Fantasy and Sci Fi out there.

[Catseye]

Btw. For a Sci Fi book that I feel deals with sexual issues ina VERY mature manner try "Left Hand of Darkness" by Ursula Leguine

[ZootSoot]

Re: Worst. Swords and Sorcery. Ever.

 

Originally posted by FenrisUlf

Well, having posted what turned out to be a surprisingly robust thread on the /best/ heroic fantasy, now I'm curious as to what you folks think of as the /worst/ heroic fantasy ever.

 

Though that might be a very long list, I will narrow it down by asking that you not post the 'cheese' -- the stuff that is bad but in a good way (i.e., no MST3K material). I'm asking for the just plain *bad* -- the books that you either tossed in the direction of the nearest trashcan or that made you want to track the author down to demand he return the hours you put into reading the book or seeing the movie.

 

There is always something worse out there. There's Piers Anthony's Xanth, Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time, Stephen Donaldson, Eragon,there are endless numbers of books titled Sword(blank), or (blank)Dragon, there is endlessly repulsive selection masticated and vomited up Celtic mythology (in fact, I don't think I have seen any fantasy in at least the last 20 years that wasn't Celtic influenced), and there are any number of second-rate imitations of J.R.R. Tolkien's boys' adventure stories, there is E. Nesbitt and her disciple Edward Eager, and as good as J.K Rowlings' Harry Potter is, it has its share of cheese as well.

[assault]

Originally posted by Count Zero

Please tell me Conan isn't that bad. If the other guys, who I have never heard of, are the same maybe I just need to give up on fantasy once and for all. It seems to be part of the genre. I'm not 14 anymore.

 

I was jerking your chain.

 

Actually, it sounds like Conan isn't your cup of tea. At least, there are some bits in there that are a bit iffy, and would probably set you off.

 

The other authors and books I mentioned are classics - in the "if you haven't read them, you haven't read fantasy" category. They are the kind of guys who show up most of the more recent writers as the hacks and drones they are.

 

And I suspect you wouldn't like them.

 

Still, try them. The only one of the books I mentioned that I would suggest avoiding is "Well of the Unicorn". Other Fletcher Pratt is OK, and I thoroughly recommend his "Harold Shea" series (co-written with L Sprague de Camp).

 

Anderson wrote lots of classic SF, and only a few fantasy books - but at least two of them are gems.

"The Broken Sword" is grim, dark, Vikingish stuff, with doomed heroes, and seriously high powered magic. It's not really fun to read, but it's... wow... Give it a try.

 

"Three Hearts and Three Lions" doesn't have much sex, or at least not enough for it to be a problem for anyone who doesn't have a problem. It's a damn fine read. So try it. It's a lot less grim than "The Broken Sword", and might be the better one to read first.

 

If you don't mind juveniles, you might consider Lloyd Alexander's "Prydain" books - "The Book of Three" etc. No sex there, and a lot more plot and characterisation than you would expect.

 

I don't think much of most modern fantasy writing. I started with Tolkien and Ursula Le Guin's Earthsea trilogy (when it was a trilogy!), and then went on to Conan and John Carter of Mars... Of course, I was in my teens at the time.

 

I don't read much fantasy any more - I'm more into detective fiction writers like Dashiell Hammett. It's still pulp literature, but Hammett, at least, is a better writer than most fantasy authors.

 

You might consider him, if fantasy isn't to your tastes.

 

And there's always Shakespeare, Homer, Virgil, Spenser, Ariosto and Malory. There's nothing like getting your fantasy from the source.

 

Alan

[ZootSoot]

Originally posted by Black Rose

I've had a friend (Nu Soard Graphite) tell me that the Thomas Covenant series gets better after the first couple (well, it'd have to, wouldn't it?) but I simply have better things to do with my time than read crap-that-thinks-it's-good fantasy. I'd be much more willing to plunge into the Gender In Writing thread on the old boards (and I tried, but it managed to eat itself) than read Donaldson.

 

I despise Donaldson, but not because Thomas Covenant is unsympathetic. That was the only good thing about his writing, if it had been placed in marginally more competent hands (say those of Koko the gorilla) it would have been a welcome respite from tiresome, pure-hearted cretins saving the world. But Donaldson has the Midas touch, anything he touches turns into mufflers . . .

[ZootSoot]

Re: My 2.5 cents.

 

Originally posted by NuSoardGraphite

About the books:

 

I understand where people are coming from when it comes to Brooks. His first Shannara book is heavily Tolkien influenced (i.e. practically ripped off) but since I read that before I read LoTR, I happen to like it quite a bit (though I did read The Hobbit before I read Sword of Shannara, but those stories are nothing alike)

 

Personaly, I don't understand where people are comming from when it comes to Jordan. I can understand if you don't like his style of writing or you find much of it boring (I do, sometimes, but just when I think I can't stand the boredom, he has his characters do something that catches my attention again) but I so often hear of Jordan's writings as being "bad" but with no explaination of how or why it is bad (just that it is). I want an explaination now!

 

About the movies:

 

My vote for Worst Fantasy Film of All Time goes to:

 

Wait for it...

 

 

DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS

 

Duh!

 

That movie was soooooo awful I got the urge to walk out (I didn't though) and I never walk out of movies, regardless of how bad they may be.

 

I kinda liked the Deathstalker movies...especially the first one. Its very, very fun if you don't try to take it seriously at all.

 

and finally...

 

 

LEAVE Hawk: The Slayer ALONE!!!!

Thats one of my favorite movies ever!

 

okay, well, not ever, but I like it a lot. I also happen to eat a lot of cheese, so its no problem for me to stomach it...

 

An explanation on why Jordan is bad? All right, first there is the premise of a world in which the same story happens over and over and over again for all eternity with people only being saved fom the boredom inflicted on the readers because their memories fade; and all the little sub bits of nonsense such as legendary heroes whose legends grow of the course of many re-incarnations but with the heroes themselves having no memory of having lived before when they are alive (how does that multiple lifetime legend thing work again?). Then there is the hodge-podge of invention, with him coming up with random magical notions to cover his butt as he goes along (the gholam, the resurrection of the Forsaken when they are slain, etc). There is his painful geography (an excellent match for his painful history) as the entire story is set on a square continent. The tiresome and predictable misogyny (probably not really Jordan's fault, as he did attend the Citadel). His endless dissection of military maneuvers (probably not really Jordan's fault, as he did attend the Citadel). His use of the tiredest cliche in all fantasy fiction, the BAD. Finally, and probably wrst, his hero is endlessly successful in his opposition to the Bad, never once suffering a setback at the hands of his foe, combined with the central premise of the story, Jordan renders the experience of reading his prose about as intriguing as reading the ads in the real estate section of your local big city newspaper.

[Count Zero]

Originally posted by Catseye

Originally posted by Count Zero

. I grew up a while back, I like a solid story and can do without gratuitous sex.

 

Me too! Give me well justified and plot important Sex!!!

 

But I get the feeling thats not what you really meant.

 

Please tell me there is some really good fantasy out there that is mature.

 

I'm sorry IMO but there is nothing mature about a fear of sex as a subject, in fact the opposite is true. Sex is an important part of the human experience, one of the most important in fact, reaching deep into our origins and bilogical purpose as the most complex system every developed for replicating a peice of DNA. Its one of the strongest drives human beings have and thus a basic of human nature.

 

We here in the US still suffer the twisted reasoning and social ills that come from our puritanical roots. Most other reasonably developed societies are a LOT more mature about the subject and can handle it without either titilation or disgust.

 

Once again... I think you misunderstand me. I'm not a hormone soaked 14 year old. I am tired of these stories that have sex which does nothing for the story. I am tired of the unnecessary sex and the abusive sex which shows up so often in fantasy and sci-fi stories. It is childish and pathetic. If the sex moves the story along and is done with taste rather than being softcore/hardcore porn then I am fine with it. If you can tell that Freud would have a field day analyzing this writer's work for sexual repression, then I really have no urge to read it. I don't need to read about sex... I will just go ahead and have it. That's more fun than reading about it.

 

I have noticed that most gamers can't seem to realize that the sex in the stories is unnecessary. It often does nothing for the plot. I don't need to read about some abusive brother pinching his sister's nipples so the will stand up straight and impress the lord (i.e. Game of Thrones) or the sorid affairs of Fafhrd (i.e. The Snow Women, Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser). It just feels like I am reading Penthouse. Those are the things that make me roll my eyes and put a book down. I don't need to know the character of the story is a stud. Would Lord of the Rings have been better if there would have been a detail sex scene between Aragorn and Arwen? I seriously doubt it. A lot can be implied without details... that is the sign of a really good writer. Kind of like in the old Star Trek where in one scene Kirk would be kissing the girl and the next scene he is sitting on the edge of the bed pulling on his boots.

 

It seems the writers can't seem to communicate evil with out rape and abusive sexual activity and communicate skill without having the main character a stud.

 

Jonathan

[Count Zero]

Originally posted by assault

I was jerking your chain.

 

Actually, it sounds like Conan isn't your cup of tea. At least, there are some bits in there that are a bit iffy, and would probably set you off.

 

The other authors and books I mentioned are classics - in the "if you haven't read them, you haven't read fantasy" category. They are the kind of guys who show up most of the more recent writers as the hacks and drones they are.

 

And I suspect you wouldn't like them.

 

And there's always Shakespeare, Homer, Virgil, Spenser, Ariosto and Malory. There's nothing like getting your fantasy from the source.

 

When I watched the movie Conan I liked it. I have always liked the Conan movie. I felt the sex scene between Conan and his girlfriend was handled well, if not a bit corny, but I thought the stuff with the witch in the hut was just kind of silly. I could understand its placement and Conan's reaction at the time, but it was still silly and not needed. The orgy scene didn't bother me because the followers of set were decadant and they didn't spend a lot of time on it. It was to show the decadance and it was handled well. As long as that is the extent of sex I can expect from Conan then I figure I will like the stories. Outside of the sex... are the stories good? I have heard they are very well done and the battle scenes are amazing for the detail of weapons and armor.

 

I will pick up a couple of those books and check them out. I have also been eyeing the Grey Mouser books again because I expect the story I read might have been a bad one.

 

I have been looking at the classics recently because I have never managed to read enough of them. Of course... I have read enough Shakespere to kill an elephant, so I will pass for a bit.

[keithcurtis]

Originally posted by Count Zero

I have noticed that most gamers can't seem to realize that the sex in the stories is unnecessary. It often does nothing for the plot.

 

Good Lord, agreed!

 

Maybe it's a sign of advancing age, but more and more I am noticing the gratuitous use of sex. If it has something to do with the plot, fine. But if it's there for ratings or ticket sales, count me out. It's frankly insulting to my intelligence. Like the creators feel I wouldn't be interested in their story without some T&A.

 

Keith "Now a story where T&A is the whole purpose is a different thing" Curtis

[Blue]

I am graded so far down the geek curve when it comes to fantasy books... I'm a horror reader, and the ocassional sci-fi novel.

 

Here's an excerpt from nearly every fantasy game session I've ever had:

"The creature looks like [monster] from [book name], you know... with the [body feature] and he's . You know."

[After a moment of staring at them blankly I give a half nod]

"I think I've heard of that."

 

I was always far more interested in creating fantasy than reading it. Now horror however... if someone could manage to give me chills, I'm a fan for life.

 

SO I'll just mention my short list of movies:

 

HERCULES (Entertaining only for the first few minutes where someone is dubbing Ferrigno's voice... then it quickly becomes less amusing until ultimately unconsciousness ensues)

 

CLASH OF THE TITANS (My God! Ray Haryhausen needed to retire before this movie was made. What was he thinking?)

 

THE SWORD AND THE SORCERER (I'll admit a fondness for this when I was a kid... mostly the scene where he frees himself from crucifiction. But I saw it again recently... somewhere... and couldn't find the wonder or even the originality I'd thought it had once.)

 

THE BARBARIAN BROTHERS (WINNER! WINNER!) (I've got an idea; Let's hire two muscle-bound Conan knock-offs who can't speak or act, and actually give them dialogue! It's great fantasy... FOR ME TO POOP ON!)

 

----EXCUSE ME! There's a Return of the King musical cartoon?!?! Why am I just hearing about this now!!! ...must...find...online...

[austenandrews]

Not that I'm vastly well-read in the genre, but I've noticed that fantasy authors tend to include a lot of gratuitous material in general - loving descriptions of landscapes, detailed explanations of weapons and armor, intricate religious ceremonies, long histories that are ultimately irrelevant, etc. I've got to the point where I skim George R.R. Martin any time a character sits down to eat, because I'm not interested in any more lavishly-described meals. God forbid someone starts talking about his relatives, or I'm in for a catalog of names that I'll never see again. And he's regarded as one of the best in the field.

 

My point is, I think readers of fantasy like details and events that further the mood and not just the plot. I know women who can read sex scenes all day, but could not care less about the use and maintenance of a suit of armor. For them, the sex is important and the fighting is skimworthy. Some people like a richly-detailed landscape. Others want the particulars of sailing ships or exotic smokes or unusual bits and bridles. Still others want to see the characters' unusual daily routines, regardless of whether it matters to the plot. Any of these details could be called gratuitous, but a fantasy book would be spare without such color.

 

I'm not excusing juvenile writing, of course, just pointing out that there's a difference between not furthering the plot and being gratuitous.

 

-AA

[PhilFleischmann]

I'm not familiar with the Ferrigno Hercules, but I do know the Schwartzenegger "Hercules in New York," which was intentionally campy, and stars another Arnold alongside the governor - Stang. Unfortuenately, the funniest part of this movie is the glaring difference between the dubbed voice and the real guy's voice.

 

I kind of liked Clash of the Titans. I thought it was pretty good for the time (pre-CGI), except for the changes they made to the actual mythological story. Oh, and the R2D2-ripoff mechanical owl.

 

There's another thread for you: How many R2D2 ripoff characters can you name? There was quite a spate of them in the late 70's and early 80's. Tweeky, W1K1, the owl, there was one in "The Black Hole"...

 

And the RotK musical cartoon was pretty good. The original plan was to do the entire LotR, but I guess they didn't get the budget. It goes along with the Hobbit cartoon they did.

 

And what's wrong with singing orcs? Take any musical - the bad guy songs are often the best ones. It's fun when the villain sings. Their songs almost always have much more character and style and memorability than the often plain boring ballads sung by the romantic leads.

[keithcurtis]

Originally posted by Blue

----EXCUSE ME! There's a Return of the King musical cartoon?!?! Why am I just hearing about this now!!! ...must...find...online...

It was made by Rankin Bass (same folks who gave you the Hobbit) sometime around 1980, IIRC. Besides the "Where there's a whip, theres a way" song, it featured the entirely mis-cast Roddy McDowell as Samwise Gamgee.

Sample Dialog: [sam to Ring] "I can feel you growing in power and mailgnancy as we near the forges wherein the depths of time you were shaped and formed!" Mind, this is said in full Juliard-style Shakespearean 'let's hear it in the back seats' form. Cool if it were Macbeth or Henry V delivering the line, but Samwise Gamgee?

 

Still, despite all that, I enjoyed it. I wouldn't call it a musical, any more than the R/B Hobbit though. Tolkein's characters sing a LOT. the biggest difference is that other than "The Greatest Adventure" all the music in the Hobbit was adapted from the original book. The RotK just made up all new stuff.

 

Ultimately, the picture suffered from the fact that they only had rights to the last book. Therefore you couldn't explain basic things like why Merry and Pippin were in Rohan and Gondor respectively, where the Phial of Galadriel came from and so on.

 

Keith "Guilty Pleasure" Curtis

[keithcurtis]

Originally posted by PhilFleischmann

And what's wrong with singing orcs? Take any musical - the bad guy songs are often the best ones. It's fun when the villain sings. Their songs almost always have much more character and style and memorability than the often plain boring ballads sung by the romantic leads.

 

I get a real kick out of "Fie on Goodness" and "The Seven Deadly Virtues" from Camelot.

 

Keith "Now that was good casting for Roddy McDowell" Curtis

[Blue]

I *MUST* disagree with the "pretty good for the time" comment on CLASH. Let me set the stage for you: It's 1981; Just the same month RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK has been released in theatres. It has been a full year since the 2nd starwars film EMPIRE STRIKES BACK came out.

 

Mind you those were big-budget flicks. But Clash had enough money to hire Harry Hamlin (L.A. Law), Burgess Meredith (Rocky), Ursula Andress (Dr. No), and Laurence "Freakin'" Olivier (Boys from Brazil, A Bridge Too Far).

 

The problem with the SFX was that Harryhausen was trying to do things the way he always had; the very same way he made Sinbad movies seem kinda cool.

 

Fact is, I *LOVE* Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger, but at the time only Star Wars had better effects. The same SFX were put into CLASH 4 years later but by then they were really dated.

[assault]

Originally posted by austenandrews

Not that I'm vastly well-read in the genre, but I've noticed that fantasy authors tend to include a lot of gratuitous material in general - loving descriptions of landscapes, detailed explanations of weapons and armor, intricate religious ceremonies, long histories that are ultimately irrelevant, etc.

 

This is called page bloat, and is a result of poor editing.

 

If you look at the _good_ Conan stories, as opposed to the ones written within the last twenty years, you will notice that they are very sparsely written. This is particularly true of those written by Howard himself. The Carter/de Camp stories are a bit more verbose. The fake stories are almost as flatulent as anything else on the market.

 

Of course, these are the very same Conan stories that feature some rather gratuitous T&A! Actually, that's part of the formula - it's not a Conan story without it, any more than it's a Conan story without the supernatural bit. Actually, the latter is probably more disposable...

 

Alan

[austenandrews]

Originally posted by assault

This is called page bloat, and is a result of poor editing.

 

For short stories, yes. For a fantasy novel, it's almost a requirement. Of course I don't read Robert Jordan or other notorious ramblers, so I've been spared the brunt of it (Tolkien being the exception, but he gets a pass).

 

-AA

[assault]

Originally posted by austenandrews

For short stories, yes. For a fantasy novel, it's almost a requirement. Of course I don't read Robert Jordan or other notorious ramblers, so I've been spared the brunt of it (Tolkien being the exception, but he gets a pass).

 

The thing is that it has become far worse over the last few decades.

 

Tolkien's three volume epic was an exceptional work that literally took decades to write. It wasn't "the standard fantasy novel".

 

Now, on the other hand, every book seems to be part of at least at trilogy, and each book is two or three times a long as earlier fantasy novels. And very little of that extra tonnage is worthwhile...

 

Alan

[caris]

Originally posted by assault

The thing is that it has become far worse over the last few decades.

 

Tolkien's three volume epic was an exceptional work that literally took decades to write. It wasn't "the standard fantasy novel".

 

Now, on the other hand, every book seems to be part of at least at trilogy, and each book is two or three times a long as earlier fantasy novels. And very little of that extra tonnage is worthwhile...

 

Alan

 

Part of the issue is simply business. Publishers don't really want single novels. They want introductions to series, so that they can count on selling more books than just the first if the first sells well.

[austenandrews]

Originally posted by caris

Part of the issue is simply business. Publishers don't really want single novels. They want introductions to series, so that they can count on selling more books than just the first if the first sells well.

 

Yeah, it's a shame that the business aspect drives the genre so much. On the other hand, most fantasy fans I know don't seem to mind long series. I still don't get statements like "The first three books sucked, but then they got good." If the first book sucks, why do you read the second one? But they do, and the publishers know it.

 

From a writer's perspective, though, I'm all for those multi-book contracts.

 

-AA

[AnotherSkip]

Hmmm Well Mercedes Lackey is breaking the "Must... Have... Trillogy..." loop that many people get pigeonholed into.

Frankly I suspect it is an Editor thing. (trilogies SELL! If it worked for Tolkien it will work for you!!!!)

 

I think that you need alot of success in order to get rid of the unnecessary page bloating.

 

On Tolken and Sex: There is something kinda strange from this side of the sexual revolution about Sam Gamgees "loyalty" to Frodo. Perhaps it is one of the great things we have lost to the changes of times that men have a difficulty trying to express asexual fellowship without someone thinking they are trying to lay the object of their affection.

 

Now if you _want_ sexscene crap I can suggest about every non-Lackey book my Ex wife has read. ie: "Sci Fi/Fantasy" (and I use that term very loosely) romance novels.

 

This is the bottom of the barrel as far as _any_ genre goes. Talk about a metagenre!!!!

 

Ugh! I once asked her for the _VERY BEST_ scifi/Fantasy romance novel she had ever read.... It was such dung that I was _almost_ begging for Covenant...

 

I can probably summarise the plot: Virgin girl resists attraction to hearty male put in her power. Their relationship changes to him being in power but he, though tempted, does not take advantage of her. when the situation again puts her in power they have an intial fling. -wallow in self doubt wallow in self doubt wallow in self doubt-. end of book triumph over evil that is significantly less important than the relationship between the heroic couple.