RR and Hobb

[djellibeybi]

Originally Posted by the smiling weirwood

An Erikson fan? Really? I found his work to be very poorly characterized. He makes a great job of assembling cliches and stereotypes into text copy, but I've found deeper characters and better storylines in video games. Actually, Deadhouse Gates etc. read very much like some action-adventure hack-and-slash game.

When I read fantasy, I want action, adventure, derring-do. If I wanted characterization, I'd go read A Passage to India. And yes, I'm an Erikson/GRRM/David Gemmel die-hard fan.

[the smiling weirwood]

To each his own. It's just that I found a lot of his character interactions to be completely unrealistic.

[TK-421]

To each their own indeed and as an Erikson fan, I would rather keep my own than have yours.

But I would agree that he does not top GRRM.

[Tansy]

I should start reading the threads from the first page as this really threw me as I was wondering what Erikson had to do with Hobb and GRRM, I'm easily confussled

I've not read any Eriksson, but I have read Hobb and GRRM. I do enjoy Hobb's books but they are more the all tied up in a nice little bundle and good prevails against evil in the end, whereas, with GRRM I'm not sure we are going to get a nice, neat happy ever after.

As prevous posters have said, Hobb is more from the POV of one main protagonist (except Liveship Trader trilogy) and her characters are well written and you get to know them well, even to the point of annoyance, which I like as people are annoying, even heroes.

Martin's book are more on the epic side of things, his worlds seem more real, and more deadly, characters aren't always either good or evil they are just human with all the shades of grey that comes with that.

Try them both and see which you prefer. I think I'd read Hobb first as you might be disappointed if you read and love Martin and then read Hobb, his work just seems a bit grander to me, more filling

[the smiling weirwood]

I feel as if I have struck a nerve; any personal offense was not intentional, I was simply making a critique of an author's work.

[kauldron26]

im of the opinion that Hobb is far superior to GRRM. u must remember they debuted the same year with their fantasy epics about a bastard and his wolf. Most of all Hobb completed her Magnum Opus.

[Overread]

Originally Posted by kauldron26

Most of all Hobb completed her Magnum Opus.

here we go again

[djellibeybi]

Originally Posted by kauldron26

im of the opinion that Hobb is far superior to GRRM. u must remember they debuted the same year with their fantasy epics about a bastard and his wolf. Most of all Hobb completed her Magnum Opus.

I'm sure its easier to write a story based on ONE land, based around ONE character POV and based around ONE conflict as compared to GRRM's epic. I would never classify Hobb as an epic fantasy writer anyway.

[Overread]

interesting view and I remember GRRM writing of his jealousy at Hobbs writing speed - which is fast! However as to the complexity of writing stories I don't think its really possible to say which is the harder or easier to write -- remember the Erikson is churning out epic style books like GRRM at a faster rate -- some writers are faster than others, just something we have to accept

[kauldron26]

im guessing u havent read hobb... her writing encompasses continents and centuries. the live ship traders novels have multiple characters as well. The history of her world alone overshadows GRRMs even tho her saga spans 30 years.ur comparing styles not context, it is next to impossible for us to objectively quantify the difficulty of the complexity of a novel. A first person point of view can be as complex as multiple characters. most importantly she has written 9 novels each as long as GRRMs and they came out consistently every year Assassins apprentice and a game of throne both debut in 1996. I love ASOIAF as much as the next guy, but the fanboys are out of control sometimes...

At the end of the day no series has come close to the greatness that is Dan SImmons Hyperion/Endymion Omnibus. That is Epic series at perfection.

[Overread]

careful kauldron - though I forgot (its late!) about liveships which is writtin in the same style as both GRRM and Eriskon's = but to say the history is deeper is a little hazy. Certainly the story relise more upon the past than it does so in GRRM who's characters and world is very much more living in the present, there is still a large history there - and I think that in later novels more of this history might come out. And its 12 novels now -- remember the latest series

[djellibeybi]

Originally Posted by kauldron26

im guessing u havent read hobb... her writing encompasses continents and centuries. the live ship traders novels have multiple characters as well. The history of her world alone overshadows GRRMs even tho her saga spans 30 years.ur comparing styles not context, it is next to impossible for us to objectively quantify the difficulty of the complexity of a novel. A first person point of view can be as complex as multiple characters. most importantly she has written 9 novels each as long as GRRMs and they came out consistently every year Assassins apprentice and a game of throne both debut in 1996. I love ASOIAF as much as the next guy, but the fanboys are out of control sometimes...

At the end of the day no series has come close to the greatness that is Dan SImmons Hyperion/Endymion Omnibus. That is Epic series at perfection.

I do read Hobbs (though i skipped the liveship traders) and her other two series are all based on one main protagonist, set in one kingdom, and over one conflict. I'll admit liveship was a departure for her. I'm speaking also from a writer's point of view, that the time investment needed to craft the complexity of ONE character as compared to the depth GRRM puts into his multiple characters, the intrigues, plot twists, and everything else is overwhelming. Just imagine trying to draw up a graphical representation of GRRM world of plots/characters as compared to the Farseers...see how long each would take.

I loved Hobbs farseer and forest mage series, don't get me wrong, but in terms of complexity, they really cannot compare with GRRM. IMHO.

[Overread]

for a reader longer than the author would I would bet
Each has its own depths in complexity and at the end of the day neither is really a full cut above the other in terms of its world history, but I would say that GRRM has a greater understanding of medival life and army tactics than most authors do in fantasy. However, again, writing speed is determined by author alone --

[Lady of Winterfell]

Just have to throw my two cents in on this topic. I just finished Assassin's Quest, and I have not read any other Hobb books besides the Farseer Trilogy. Having said that, at this point I still prefer Martin to Hobb. I really enjoyed the Farseer story, but I think it will be hard for someone to top Martin for me. And I don't think you can say an author is better than another just because their story has been completed. Each author will write at whatever speed is comfortable for them. To say that Hobb is better than Martin because she finished her series when Martin hasn't yet, that just doesn't seem right to me.

[Qhorin Halfhand]

Originally Posted by kauldron26

im guessing u havent read hobb... her writing encompasses continents and centuries. the live ship traders novels have multiple characters as well. The history of her world alone overshadows GRRMs even tho her saga spans 30 years.ur comparing styles not context, it is next to impossible for us to objectively quantify the difficulty of the complexity of a novel. A first person point of view can be as complex as multiple characters. most importantly she has written 9 novels each as long as GRRMs and they came out consistently every year Assassins apprentice and a game of throne both debut in 1996. I love ASOIAF as much as the next guy, but the fanboys are out of control sometimes...

At the end of the day no series has come close to the greatness that is Dan SImmons Hyperion/Endymion Omnibus. That is Epic series at perfection.

I disagree entirely that ASOIAF has a less complex history than the Farseer universe. I've read all 9 books set in that world and I find the books pretty sketchy in terms of history. Once there were dragons, and from the dragons sprang the Elderlings and the time when wonders were every day occurences. Then there was a great cataclysm and the new world was born. The Outislanders eventually settled the six duchies, so on and so forth. Some history is given on the nations, how they wwere founded and some of the cultural history. Individual legends are presented sometimes, such as the Rooster Crown but only as it pertains to major plot points such as ressurecting the fool and not so much presented to flesh out the history of the world. I know this is an oversimplification but I can't think of anything of import that I have missed. I just finished rereading the Assassin and Fool series as well, so a lot of it is fresh in my mind. If there's anything I have missed from the Liveship books, feel free to correct me but I don't think my representation of the history Hobb creates is inaccurate.

ASOIAF: The history of the children of the forest fighting the first men and then uniting to fight the Others, the coming of the Andals and the Rhoyne then the coming of the dragons, the Blackfyre Rebellion, not to mention the history behind the Free Cities, the Eastern Contintents, the death of Valyria and so on. Then there is more recent history which is even more detailed, Robert's Rebellion, the Greyjoy Rebellion. It's all very complex.

Added to that is the fact that ASOIAF has a half-dozen well fleshed out religions and countless organisations with their own traditions and historical members such as the Nights Watch, Kingsguard, mercenary companies, the great houses and the minor ones. The history given on stuff like the Wit communities and Skill coteries in the Farseer books are good as well.

I really enjoy the Farseer trilogies, though I didn't really like any of the characters in Liveship as much as characters like Fitz and Burrich. Admittedly, perhaps my memory of the history presented in the Liveship Trader books isn't too fresh because I haven't read them in a while.

My point isn't that these books lose out because their history is less detailed, I am saying that as a person who has read both series, I think the history and detail of the world in ASOIAF is way, way more complex. The history of Westeros encompasses continents, races, religions and myths over centuries and not just with a historical look at important events, but with attention paid to individuals.

I also think that the amount of time taken to produce books is a ridiculous indicator of quality.

Lastly, while I loved the Farseer books, the Forest Mage series are some of the worst fantasy novels I have ever read or at least I thought they were absolutely terrible.