Poll: Best Book series of all time

[spartan231490]

So, I believe that the best, most entertaining, most relevant book series ever written is the "Sword of Truth" series by Terry Goodkind. I have been on the internet a while, and have discovered that this is not a popular opinion, and that many people have various complaints against the series, including some of my fellow escapists.
In fact, so many people say this that I have begun to question if it is possible that I am missing something. In the interest of setting this nagging doubt to rest, and flexing my philosophical debate muscles, and maybe even growing as a person, I decided to start this thread

The point: To those of you who have read the series, do you agree with me, why or why not. If you agree, feel free to say why if you want, but I'm more interested in those of you who don't agree. Tell me why but, and this is very important, do not just say "because it was poorly written" or some other sentence fragment of a reason. Please, explain your problems with the series, help me to understand your point of view, and give us both something to debate.
For example, I've heard some people say that many descriptions were too long and monotonous. If you think this is true, tell me which descriptions, and why in particular it bothered you.
Also, tell me which book/series/author you think was the best of all time and why.

Notes:

To prevent the thread from turning into a religious debate, please don't argue that it isn't the best because this religious text or that religious text is better. If you think that the Bible was the best book of all time, feel free to say so, but just don't expect me to comment on it.

Also, this thread is meant to be a friendly debate, please remain civil. Always bears repeating, especially when I know how stubborn both sides of many debates can get.

 

[The Cheezy One]

It wasn't my favourite series of all time, because that title is still held by Animorphs.

 

[Bloodastral]

Kane series by Karl Edward Wagner. The character is a cursed immortal intent on carving out a kingdom for himself. Well written, great stories and an unusual hero. The books are:
Death Angels Shadow
Darkness Weaves
Night Winds
Dark Crusade
Bloodstone

 

[s0denone]

What!?

Best book series "Of all time"??? Are you shitting me?

Why would you write up an actual topic, you know - coherent text and all, if all you're asking is the question of some inane twelve-year-old?

No, it isn't the "best of all time". Get real.

You write as if you somehow came to some sort of objective conclusion, and were able to measure that the "Sword of Truth" was the best of all time. This has to be some sort of elaborate joke, that I'm not getting.

 

[Fenring]

Woah, I'm gonna let you finish, but Frank Herbert's Dune is the best book series of all time.

Seriously, all the Herbert books are good, and the ones his son co-wrote are at least fun if not pretty good.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

The Pendergast series by Lincoln Child / Douglas Preston

 

[Triskitguru]

I would have to say The Diskworld books by Terry Pratchett. It makes you think about things in new light and you always catch something new when you reread them.

Since that is less a of a series and more like several smaller series in one setting I would also like to put forth The Age of Unreason books by Gregory Keyes. Newton invents philosopher's mercury which allows people to control the basic elements of everything. (Not Fire and Air, but flux and such).

 

[spartan231490]

What!?

Best book series "Of all time"??? Are you shitting me?

Why would you write up an actual topic, you know - coherent text and all, if all you're asking is the question of some inane twelve-year-old?

No, it isn't the "best of all time". Get real.

You write as if you somehow came to some sort of objective conclusion, and were able to measure that the "Sword of Truth" was the best of all time. This has to be some sort of elaborate joke, that I'm not getting.

It's not a joke, and it's not objective. That's why I wanted to discuss/debate on why/why not. Why are you so surprised I think it's the best series of all time, there has to be one somewhere, why not SoT?

Why would you write up an actual reply, you know - coherent text and all, if all you're going to do is call me "some inane twelve-year-old?

Why isn't it the best of all time? I asked for detailed responses, not one liners. If you don't want to give a full run-down, why not a top-five reasons that it isn't? Real reasons, with substance.

 

[Lukeje]

I can only think that this is some kind of troll attempt. What other book series have you actually read for comparison against The Sword of Truth?

...I've only read the first one, but as to reasons why I didn't like it:

• The descriptions were long-winded and often contradictory.
  Deus Ex Machina after Deus Ex Machina.
  Trope ridden story with obvious twists (and with no sense of satire about said tropes).

One of the most consistent series of which I've read has to be Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels; well written and satirical.

 

[s0denone]

It's not a joke, and it's not objective. That's why I wanted to discuss/debate on why/why not. Why are you so surprised I think it's the best series of all time, there has to be one somewhere, why not SoT?

Why would you write up an actual reply, you know - coherent text and all, if all you're going to do is call me "some inane twelve-year-old?

Why isn't it the best of all time? I asked for detailed responses, not one liners. If you don't want to give a full run-down, why not a top-five reasons that it isn't? Real reasons, with substance.

You're asking for "substance" when your topic revolves entirely around personal preference. Do you see the problem?

If not, here is the problem:

I don't think "ToS" is the best book series of all time.
No burden of proof lies with me.
I don't need to name any reason, as they would be subjective anyway, and only to support my already very subjective opinion.

You, likewise, have no other substance in your argument other than:
I think "ToS" is the best book series of all time.

You aren't making some sort of scientific claim that others have to dispute. You are simply telling us that you like some book series. That's good, you found some books you think are awesome. Congratulations.

What more to it is there, than that?

Don't ask of me "Name reasons it isn't the best book series". Instead look inward. All of your reasons why you personally think it is the best, are as subjective as the reasons you are asking me to list as to why it isn't.

Do you see the idiocy at play here?

And just for reference, I didn't call you an inane twelve-year-old. I said that I thought the question you posed, might as well have come from one who was inane, and, incidentally, twelve years of age.

 

[Mr Thin]

Well I liked that series a lot, though it's not my favourite.

I think the best author of all time might be Stephen King, not just for the outstanding quality of his writing, but for the sheer volume of literature he's given to the world over the years.

As for best series... I'm more reluctant to comment, but my favourite series is probably 'The Wheel of Time' series by Robert Jordan.

So good... and so long! Awesome.

 

[cgaWolf]

I voted "worst thing i ever read" - although to be quite honest, that was because you didn't give me the option of "most disappointing". The worst thing i ever read has to be the book "Spellfire".

Here's my argument:

The book starts of with the usual cliché setup (bad evil guy "over there" becoming an actual threat, young male guy set up to become hero via coming of age story) to reel its audience in, and it does so in very competent way. That's actually a good way to start a story, as it handles your audience familiar elements, and they feel right at home without having to read The Compiled History of Fantasyworld #4316 - Song of Ice and Fire also does this in a similar way.

It's often said that the first sentence of a novel is the most important one, and while i'd argue that's not strictly true, the sentiment that the setup needs to reel the reader in is still valid. WFR does this well, and then it deviates.

And it deviates in a good way - it shatters the usual frame of reference we often have, and takes us into a world where the female heroine isn't just a sidekick, but a power of her own, where the hero is the hero not because he was born to be (regardless of the fact that he actually was ^_^), but because he stumbled into it & sees it through; it didn't set us into a standard LOTR copypasta world, nor did it attempt to explain magic in a formulaic way.

In some parts, it also was a lot more adult then other comparable stories; the twist at the end that everyone had to see from miles away was competently implemented, and the style of writing is adequate & easy to read without making you cringe.

So, if i had been asked whether the series is worth reading, i would say "read the first 3 books". There's a lot worse out there.


Throughout the first 2-3 books, Richard is set up as a hero because he genuninly wants to do the right thing, is motivated by love, and has the tenacity to hold on against really bad odds. And then for some reason - i can only presume a major tragedy or trauma in the life of the author - it all goes wrong.

Between writing #3 and #4, the author apparently was apparently hit over the head with a copy of Atlas Shrugged (the aforementioned trauma), and desperately tries to convince his readers Randian dogma is The Right Thing (tm) - and the books not only suffer from that, it completely annihilates the worth of the series as a whole.

Whereas before the threats where real (at least as far as the fanatsy world is concerned), in latter books the author goes out of his way to setup weak strawmen as nemesi, but it's so transparent that - barring all else - the story simply sucks.

Richard shifts away from trying to be good, and hides behind a dogma of "everyone is responsible for himself and his own actions only, and any other viewpoint is morally evil and needs to be destroyed"; while Kahlan - who was formerly one of the few valid female characters in a fanatasy novel - becomes a blind enarmoured sidekick, and stops being interesting or a valuable addition to the story.

The weakness in the latter stories is accompanied in a drop of literary quality / writing style, a massive drop in the quality of how the stories are build and how moral issues are argued. Strawmen, red herrings & deus ex run rampant; the characters flatten out into stale cardboards propped up to carry Goodkinds newfound "wisdom" out into the world, and he is so preoccupied with waggling his moral finger, that he fails to come up with a good story to tell in first place.

In short: the latter books read like someone decided to write a Lord of the Rings + Atlas Shrugged crossover fanfiction - and i'm pretty sure that if i head into the deepest recesses of the internet & comission a fanfiction there (let's say finding a piece of Twilight fanfiction secretly written by a /b/ guy), it would be less painful to read.



tl;dr:
The first 3 books are ok to read, after that for the love of god spare yourself & do something more enjoyable, like stabbing a rusty fork into your eye. The series as a whole is nowhere near "best ever", and (outside the first 3 books) is on my top-10 do not read list. It's really disappointing though, because it started of so well :/

PS: Wheel of Time has it's own bag of issues, so this isn't a WoT vs. SoT rant. In fact, the first 3 SoT are better reads than WoT, although you'll only discover that around halfway through the 4th book of WoT when you realize Jordan was a good worldbuilder, but terrible narrator; and that WoT only redeems itself when you read it the second time around because as a reader you can then skip all the fluff that whould have been cut out had the editor done his job.







Fantasy novels - Serious Business

If you like reading fanatasy, there's tons of decent material out there that beat both WoT & SoT as far as i'm concerned.

For light reads:
- Raymon E. Feist (start of with Magician: Apprentice)
- Tad Williams (start of with The Dragonbone Chair)
- Weis & Hickman (Death Gate cycle, start with Dragon Wing)
- David Eddings (start with Pawn of Prophecy)
- Terry Pratchett (start with Colour of Magic)

For more adult reads:
- George R.R. Martin (start with A Game of Thrones - warning: series not finished)
- Robin Hobb (start with Assassin's Apprentice)
- Jacqueline Carey (start with Kushiel's Dart)

 

[merman]

I voted good but not that good - I enjoyed reading them (the five I have read), and there was some very interesting ideas on how a fantasy world runs, particularly in regards to magic. However, for me the better series in fantasy terms were the David Eddings books.

But if I was to pick my favourite series of all time it would have to be the Hitch-Hiker's books by Douglas Adams - including the recent 6th book by Eoin Colfer. Sci-fi humour that pokes fun at the human condition.

 

[Bobbity]

Huge wall of text incoming. Sorry
I've never read the series, but I'll go through the aspects of a few of the series that I like, and maybe you can compare them for me.
Okay, I've finished writing, and I'll be damned if I don't post this now, but as I realize I've gone on a bit long, maybe someone nice could just scan through this and compare it to the Sword of Truth stuff?
I spoilered it for space, because it is huge.

Spoiler

World: I like a world to feel real, and to give a true sense of authenticity and history. I like distinct cultures, with well defined beliefs and nations. For a fantasy series to work for me, I have to feel that the world is real, and not just the creation of an author who needs a convenient setting[1]. Even things such as unique animals and glimpses of unfamiliar eco-systems can make a world seem more real. Immensity is also good, but only if the author can adequately put a large world together in a good way.

Setting: Either highly focused, or grand in scale. The book "Legend", by David Gemmel is set entirely in the besieged fortress city of Dros Delnoch, and I liked that. This gives time for the author to describe the city, define the area, and do all sorts of interesting things in the one place.
On the other hand, a grand sense of scale also contributes vastly to my enjoyment of a book/series. To name two examples: The Lord of the Rings, and the Wheel of Time. Both series have an enormous sense of scale, with entire nations being drawn into war. Reading about entire nations being enveloped in chaos; vast forces that defy description clashing with one another, there's a definite sense of awe.
What I don't like are books that shoot for an epic feel, but end up feeling minute and undersized, or, alternatively, series originally intended to be small in scale, but grow and grow with each passing sequel until they feel almost ludicrous.

Fantasy elements: This basically encompasses fantasy specific things, such as fantasy races and magic. Despite the obvious fact that the stuff in this category doesn't exists, I still like it to feel real. A totally overpowered system of magic with no boundaries and that therefore has to be curtailed by the author really grates on me. For example, if magic were an acceptable solution to a situation, then why isn't it used? Incredibly contrived plot reasons for the lack of magic in order to increase the sense of danger just annoys me. On the other hand, magics such as the Source in "Wheel of Time" and the true names of things in Ursula K. Le Guin's Earthsea stuff are original, limited, and interesting.
As for different races, I despise the Tolkeinesque arch-types, unless Tolkien himself is using them. For an author to simply rip them out of his works[3] and place them into their own really grates on me. If the author is using dwarves, elves and whatnot, then at least some originality with their characteristics is always nice.

Politics, factions and nations Nations should be clearly defined, each with agendas, cities, leaders and peculiarities of their own. For a nation to exist as a kind of shapeless entity is just annoying. Detail is the key word here, as always. Detail and at least a weak sense uniqueness. Anything but a bunch of identical kingdoms that seem to have all been cloned from each other. As for different factions, they need a real reason to be fighting each other, not just something quickly contrived for the sake of creating conflict.

Characters
Characters and villains need to be interesting. They need to have motivation for acting as they do, and their actions need to make sense; at least to them. Characters need to have reasons for acting as they do, and they must act according to their own view of the world, not for the convenience of the plot. If a character is cowardly, then to have them suddenly turn around and defeat the villain because they happen to be nearby is just stupid. For a merciless and pragmatic veteran to suddenly rescue a caravan of refugees, then he'd better have a damned good reason for doing so. The fact that the caravan is important to the plot is not a reason for the person to suddenly act out of character; he's going to need a real, solid reason.
By the same token, bad guys need reasons for what they do. Spite against the world and traumatic childhoods are perhaps the weakest of reasons, but they're still better than "Why are they evil? Because they are! They also eat puppies and scare orphans!". Far, far better. Characters also need to be relatable, or at least bear the semblance of an ordinary person, rather than a specific character who's only reason for existence is to drive the plot.
I realize that in the last ten minutes or so of writing I've done a terrible job of relating my specifications for an interesting series to the topic, and other fantasy works, so for the sake of remaining at least somewhat on topic, try to imagine a character you've read about who genuinely had no connection with the rest of humanity, as opposed to one who does. They don't have to be from fantasy works though.
Plot
I'd write about this, but it's pretty much covered by a combination of all the other important aspects I've mentioned, and I've already gone waaaaaaaaaaaay too long. Just so long as the plot's not too unbelievable, you're good.

[1]The world of Christopher Paolini's "Eragon" is an excellent example of a world that was smashed together in a couple of spare hours.

[2] Like Raymond Feist's "Magician" series. The series actually started on a definite high note, but with each passing sequel more and more demon realms and unimaginable evils were been introduced so that it's now all but unreadable.

[3]Again, Eragon.

 

[Ironic_Rak]

In the red corner we have Wheel of Time, winner of 13 title fights and still looking strong and ready for more despite the death of its author

In the blue corner we have Song of Fire and Ice, a young upstart recently given a boost by the soon to be screened television series

Who will win this world title weight best series of all time, the juggernaut form beyond the grave or the quick and dirty contender! GET READY TO RUMBLEEEEEEEE!!!

Never ready Sword of Truth, i have heard good things but nothing that suggests it is the best of all time

 

[Astoria]

Well I'm not sure about best book but I'm pretty sure the Harry Potter is the most popular, going by statistics (I'm not 100% on that).

 

[cgaWolf]

@Boobity

In a world/Setting way, SoT is about as good as the Belgariad (Eddings) for example, that is to say it's there, but it's not what matters. SoT probably leverages the geography a bit more, as there's a distinction between "most of the world" and the small part the hero comes from, that's sort of relevant to the sotry, but SoT doesn't go out of its way to flesh them out more. (Belgariad does neither, but that's because it's not very relevant to the story being told there).
In PoV of settings/world being well build, Wheel of Time is deecent (but Jordan sucks at storytelling); Williams (epic scale), Hobb (small scale), Carey & Martin (see list in my post above) do that a LOT better, and manage to make the surroundings feel real, regardless of their scope.

Fanatasy Elements: ...is always a tough one to argue. I'd go so far to say that SoT does this well, because it doesn't try to fit the worlds magic into a D&D rulebook. Stuff left unexplained, or simply not being understood by the denizens of the world works in SoTs favor. SoT doesn't have the default array of elves/dwarves/hobbits, and while technically there was a collegely order of wizards, the "was" is sort of important.
As comparison: Martin has little to no magic which works exteremely well, whereas Hobb's first books technically revolve around a certain kind of magic - which also works very well. All of them work without the usual tolkienesque races, and all of them profit from it. Williams in comparision does have your elves & dwarves, but he puts a very hefty spin on them, and excels at fleshing out side characters, so my guess is that wouldn't annoy you either.


Politics, factions and nations: SoT takes a "hero vs. world" approach, and while there may be different factions and political powers, they either do not matter, are subjects to "evil guy", or are victims in need to rescue. Nothing much in SoT where this is concerned.
WoT does this a bit better, but again fails a bit on the sotrytelling side. If you're looking for works thar are really strong in this department, George RR Martin and Tad Williams are who you're looking for; Carey too, in a way.

Characters: All of the ones i mentioned in my above post are strong in character depiction, the weakest probably being Weis & Hickman or Feist, the strongest being Hobb, Williams and Martin (by far). SoT does this ok-ish in the first 3 books, and massively fails beyond that; WoT fails from the second book onward.

PS: When you read Eragon, you need to make a drinking game out of it. Everytime you recognize a copypasta from another author (Tolkien, McCaffrey, Eddings, etc..) you need to have a shot

 

[Zannah]

PS: When you read Eragon, you need to make a drinking game out of it. Everytime you recognize a copypasta from another author (Tolkien, McCaffrey, Eddings, etc..) you need to have a shot

Don't try that at home Kids, you'd be in hospital before the end of the third chapter.

From existing series, I'd say it's a close tie between "Song of Ice and Fire" and the Blades-trilogy by Joe Abercrombie (look it up). But then, the best fantasy book(series) I've read so far, has yet so be published :|

 

[Bobbity]

@Boobity

In a world/Setting way, SoT is about as good as the Belgariad (Eddings) for example, that is to say it's there, but it's not what matters. SoT probably leverages the geography a bit more, as there's a distinction between "most of the world" and the small part the hero comes from, that's sort of relevant to the sotry, but SoT doesn't go out of its way to flesh them out more. (Belgariad does neither, but that's because it's not very relevant to the story being told there).
In PoV of settings/world being well build, Wheel of Time is deecent (but Jordan sucks at storytelling); Williams (epic scale), Hobb (small scale), Carey & Martin (see list in my post above) do that a LOT better, and manage to make the surroundings feel real, regardless of their scope.

Fanatasy Elements: ...is always a tough one to argue. I'd go so far to say that SoT does this well, because it doesn't try to fit the worlds magic into a D&D rulebook. Stuff left unexplained, or simply not being understood by the denizens of the world works in SoTs favor. SoT doesn't have the default array of elves/dwarves/hobbits, and while technically there was a collegely order of wizards, the "was" is sort of important.
As comparison: Martin has little to no magic which works exteremely well, whereas Hobb's first books technically revolve around a certain kind of magic - which also works very well. All of them work without the usual tolkienesque races, and all of them profit from it. Williams in comparision does have your elves & dwarves, but he puts a very hefty spin on them, and excels at fleshing out side characters, so my guess is that wouldn't annoy you either.


Politics, factions and nations: SoT takes a "hero vs. world" approach, and while there may be different factions and political powers, they either do not matter, are subjects to "evil guy", or are victims in need to rescue. Nothing much in SoT where this is concerned.
WoT does this a bit better, but again fails a bit on the sotrytelling side. If you're looking for works thar are really strong in this department, George RR Martin and Tad Williams are who you're looking for; Carey too, in a way.

Characters: All of the ones i mentioned in my above post are strong in character depiction, the weakest probably being Weis & Hickman or Feist, the strongest being Hobb, Williams and Martin (by far). SoT does this ok-ish in the first 3 books, and massively fails beyond that; WoT fails from the second book onward.

PS: When you read Eragon, you need to make a drinking game out of it. Everytime you recognize a copypasta from another author (Tolkien, McCaffrey, Eddings, etc..) you need to have a shot

Thanks for this I didn't think anyone would actually go through that Anyway, I've read David Eddings, and from what you're saying, it seems to be highly reminiscent of the Belgariad. I loved that series, so I'm tempted to give this one a go now. I've also heard very good things about the Game of Thrones/Song of Ice and Fire stuff, so while I haven't read George RR Martin yet, it's definitely on my list of things to read, once I get through the million and a half works of Terry Pratchett and finish Robin Hobb's newest series.

PS: When you read Eragon, you need to make a drinking game out of it. Everytime you recognize a copypasta from another author (Tolkien, McCaffrey, Eddings, etc..) you need to have a shot

Don't try that at home Kids, you'd be in hospital before the end of the third chapter.

From existing series, I'd say it's a close tie between "Song of Ice and Fire" and the Blades-trilogy by Joe Abercrombie (look it up). But then, the best fantasy book(series) I've read so far, has yet so be published :|

Hehe, too right about that drinking game.
I'm already determined to read the Song of Ice and Fire, but now I'll add the blade series to that list - which is getting more and more intimidating by the day - as well, so thanks