Favorite Authors?
 

I'm curious to know what sort of writers people like, and why if people care to explain. Are there any paricular authors you are fond of? Any that you don't normally like but perhaps found a specific book to be good?

I used to read a lot of R.A. Salvatore books. He was my favorite for a while but I make the mistake of reading way too many without taking any breaks and now I find his stuff too predictable.

I've started reading a book by Guy Gavriel Kay, who I've heard lots of good things about, though I'm still deciding myself. One currentn author that I find I like is George R.R. Martin, even though I didn't like Game of Thrones and ultimately got rid of the book (I was 350 pages in so I figured I gave it a fair try). I picked up an anthology of short stories from him though, so see if I like those any better.

I have to say I liked G.R.R Martin's writing, even though I wasn't so fond of the story. I find I have the reverse situation with Tolkein. Great story behind Lord of the Rings, but I wasn't too fond of the actual writing.

...Does Shakespeare count as an author? Seriously, I love love love his works, especially Macbeth and Romeo and Juliet. I've yet to read the whole Hamlet.

I think my friends have mentioned R.A. Salvatore a few times....should go check that out.

Brent Weeks's Night Angel Trilogy is decent as well, albeit a bit dry in a few places. If you read the summary, you'll probably know why I love it. The Ranger's Apprentice series is also decent, although a bit trite.

One of the books/series I really love is Operation Red Jericho. It's action+semi-historical mixed into one, and while it says it's completely factual, I'm not too sure how much the author's edited it....the second/third book (forgot which one) doesn't seem probably, what with the levitating mechanism.

Shakespeare counts (are you referring to the fact that scholars aren't terribly sure if he really wrote all he did or if the name was a cover for more than one writer? Compicated guy, apparently.) I'm more of a Chaucer fan myself though. His stuff can be pretty darn funny, and pretty dark rude! Part of that might depend on how much effort I'm willing to put into reading though. Middle English is sometimes easier to work through than Elizabethan...sometimes.

Chaucer's Book of the Duchess is my favourite of his. For Shakespeare, I do like Hamlet. The guy is a bit of a knob though, but then, it is a tragedy. I actually recomend watching a movie version (perhaps the one with Kenneth Brannah though I don't necessarily agree with his interpretations of some of the lines) after reading it because I found the visual representation and recitation of the lines can bring out details or sequences that one missed while reading. There was a passage where Hamlet met two soldiers going off to fight a battle that I didn't really think about until I saw it on film and it added more to the meaning of the play for me.

Yeah, for Shakespeare, I sometimes need a visual. But then again, I'm one of the few in my class who can actually "fluently" speak in Elizabethan and understand it all. I can do the accent somewhat, too. And I don't look like it XD

For Chaucer, I've only read the Canterbury Tales...part of it. Not too horribly interesting for me.

Marion Zimmer Bradley. Author or The Inheritor, Ghostlight (same series but whatev! XO) Witchlight -- which is where I got my username from, and Mists of Avalon. (other stuff too)

I just love her.

**Warning. Literature student talking. Make way for long post...**

I can understand middle english enough to get the gist of things. There is the odd particular word that one just has to know, though. And as far as accent goes, I don't know if there is a correct accent, seeing as there aren't exactly any recordings around of anyone speaking the language. From the rhythm of the poetry though, one can pick up where the other syllables and such might be.

Wasn't a fan of The Knight's Tale, and only read The Wife of Bath and the Miller's Tale to go with that. I had a really fun teacher for the course though, and it was great fun even without being too interested in Literature. The ones I do like, (besides Book of the Duchess,) would be the little bits and pieces between the tales in the Canturbury Tales (the narrator amuses me) and general character interaction. The Knight's Tale has absolutely nothing to do with the movie in any way (which I've heard is actually closer to the Squire's Tale instead) but then, Chaucer didn't write all that he intended to. Maybe the screen writer really did get it right?!

I can handle Shakespeare only because I forced myself to read and understand Macbeth back in high school. Took me ages to get through but I had a functional understanding of Shakespearean English by then. Besides Macbeth I read Winter's Tale, Hamlet, Titus Andronicus, Henry V (most of it), Twelth Night, Midsummer Knight's Dream, and The Tempest. If anyone out there is interesting in studying English in college, get ready for this stuff, Pre 1800 Lit courses are mandatory. :( (My preferences lie almost entirely in post 1800 stuff.

I don't think I've become interested in any contemporary author for some time. One of the "newer" authors I like is Knut Hamsen. I read his Hunger which was one of the oddest books I've ever read. I have a collection of his on my eReader. Being an out of copywrite author his stuff is dirt cheap! (Unless you buy phyical books).

Augusten Burroughs. God I love that man, I adore his writing, and am always eager for more of his books. I've read them all <3

Charlaine Harris for the Sookie Stackhouse Series, I always wait each year faithfully for the new one to come out. I have this year's, but won't read it till July on my road trip.

Mmm... otherwise, I dunno. I look into a lot of authors from books I've read, but... those are the only ones that really stand out for me like, author wise.

I recently packed away all the books I own that I don't like, and... I only have about 20 books left on my shelves, where there used to be a couple hundred.

Looking at those, we have:

Steven Erikson and his monstrous Malazan Book of the Fallen
Scott Bakker's Prince of Nothing and Aspect-Emperor trilogies
Stephen Donaldson's Thomas Covenant Chronicles
and Glen Cook's Black Company novels.

Oh, and I've recently started reading Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire, which I'm relatively enjoying (not quite to the degree I've seen some people devour his work) so those make the list, too.

On the other hand, I tried to start reading Follett's The Pillars of the Earth yesterday (loved the t.v. series on Starz) and that has to be one of the most poorly-written books I've ever read. I despair at that thought of slogging through 1,200 pages of that man's writing.

I didn't mind Golden Compass but I'm not in any hurry to read the rest of the novels, if I bother to get around to it at all.

I haven't made enough of an inroad into Lord Foul's Bane yet to make any comment on Donaldson so far though I've heard good things from relatives.

Surpised about Pillars of the Earth. I've seen a piece of the series but I'm only heard of the book and it's always been rave reviews. Hmm.

Brought books to read at the farm here but haven't made any inroads yet. Liking GG Kay so far but again, not enough info to make a judgement call. Brought Mrs. Dalloway and Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe too. I find I like what's I've read of Virginia Woolf so far, which isn't much beyond A Room of One's Own and the earlier mentioned partial book. I still remember the cat line from Room. Hee hee. As far as kids books go, I am liking C.S.Lewis too. Magician's Nephew was a interesting start to Narnia and I liked the character of Cedric quite a bit. He's a bit brash sometimes but has very strong ideas about what it right and what is not.

Yeah, I heard the same and was expecting... well, something different. I'll rant about it next time you're on MSN, since I have a long list of complaints and don't want to derail this thread.

To stay on topic, I forgot to mention Tolkien above. I keep his books out, too, though I like his expanded-world stuff more than Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit. The Silmarillion is one of my favorite books.

Never read The Chrysalids. My sister did in high school and she liked it.

I took a course on dystopian literature in Uni. Interesting stuff. My favourite what Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake, and I'd like to venture more into her stuff. Besides O&C I've only read Surfacing.

Along with that we read I am Legend, which is better than the movie in my opinion, and not at all like it. Didn't keep the book though. I have a couple other books that I didn't get through that are still on my shelf to read.

I loved the Watership Down movie when I was little, and did read into the book. Got as far as Efrafa before I put it down and haven't picked it up since. I read pieces of Plague Dogs as well as a thought for a reearch paper I was doing which I ultimately scrapped. Saw the movie of that too which was kind of odd with the ending. Not sure if it was disturbing or not. It ends before the book did, where the author takes some pity for the feelings of the reader but the screen writer did not.

So be it.

To begin with, in case anyone's not aware, this book is considered to be great, as far as I can gather, an epic, both in scope and length. And that's the first problem right there.

I'm only 80 pages into it, but the story so far could have been written in 10. Literally, not even 15 minutes of the first episode of the t.v. series has been covered. Follett goes into endless, excruciating detail about the most banal minutiae he seemingly contrive to write about. And he often isn't content to do so once, but will repeat the same useless information over and over throughout a character's point of view.

Tying into this, he constantly uses parentheses in an obvious, after-the-fact explanatory way that is completely, completely unnecessary. Not once, in 80 pages and dozens of such parenthetical afterthoughts has the information conveyed been anything but blindingly apparent from the preceding narrative. This is outright insulting for an author to do.

Now, onto the the characters and characterization. I'll admit to having a bias from watching the t.v. series, but apparently Tom Builder is mentally-challenged, repressed rapist in the making, and I never knew it. I'm sorry, but lines like "Tom had always found the thought of taking a woman against her will secretly erotic" are worthy of nothing but eye-rolling. I realize this is the "oh-so-Dark Ages", (actually, the high Middle Ages...) but come on, is this man an animal? This is seriously what he's thinking about while his daughter is unconscious and bleeding and miss pagan sex-goddess witch is tending her?

On the other hand, we have Prior Phillip of Kingsbridge, whose characterization is more of a technical flaw. In chapter 2 (which is somehow after chapter 5... this book is weird. I'm assuming sub-chapters) he is introduced for precisely one page in the present. Then we unceremoniously flash back and get 25 pages of exposition following his entire life's story from childhood until now, filled with utterly irrelevant details, particularly those of his difficulty coping with monastic vows of personal purity. Once again, I do NOT need to know the details of this man's private sexual desires. Subtlety, dammit! These things can be conveyed in narrative and dialogue without wasting pages and pages pulling the story to a screeching halt so we can read about how a monk pleasures himself. If that's actually important to his character (*rolls eyes*) there are better ways of including it.

All in all, this book is just a bloated mess. The writing is full of anachronisms and facile similes that couldn't possibly be more cliched. Follett, an amazingly successful author, has seemingly never learned the absolute, crowning attribute of good writing: show, and do not tell, except where it cannot be avoided and even then... subtlety! Creativity! Thoughtfulness! I despair, truly, of ever getting anything published, if this is what publishers are looking for.

The Starz series seems to have shared my opinion, because the show bears almost no resemblance to the book, and the show is better off for it. Instead of this obese wreckage of a plot, it actually does a passable job at portraying a compelling drama with somewhat deep characters (except the laughably-one-dimensional villain, who none the less is pleasure to watch).

My verdict: skip the book, watch the show. It's possible that it gets better (and I mean to read the rest of it, just taking a break to finish Storm of Swords) but I don't see how these flaws could go away.

*takes deep breath* *exhales* I warned you it would be long-winded and ranting. :p

I really liked them cause they're more adult-oriented. I adore the characters, and the story never gets boring. The only thing I don't like is she sometimes fits too much into one book so a couple of them blend together for me. >3<' like the first three, the 5 and 6.

I like the House of Night books okay, but I haven't read the last two because Burned is in that one girl's POV and I HATE HATE HATE that writing. God it's hard to get through for me, so I'm really stuck right now x.x' But everything was too "oh woe is me and my five boyfriends" most of the time, so I was already having a hard time with them.

Gee, and here I thought Pillars of the Earth was supposed to focus on the lives of people that circulate around the building of a chathedral. They *are* building a cathedral, aren't they?

I'd like to mention more authors that I can say I liked but unfortunately it's been a long time since I've read more than one or two books by any single author to make any comments. I have a couple more Kay books around that I might look into, (Sailing to Sarantium, Lord of Emperors, and Lions of Al-Rassan) though I'll admit I'm a little afraid of them after my experience with Game of Thrones (anything that mentions intrigue, really). Has anyone read the Fionavar Tapestry series of his? My sister loved it but it looks a little more standard fantasy style than I care for at the moment.

Well, yes, they are, or rather, will be building a cathedral at some point. I stopped after reading the 8-page description of Tom's wife giving birth in the wilderness. I understand "gritty realism, yay!" and all that, but... I really didn't need that level of detail. It was almost like an instruction manual for delivering a baby in the middle of nowhere.

And, sorry, but the only thing I've heard about the Fionovar Tapestry is what you mentioned, though it's supposed to be fairly good. I've seen it recommended as an entry to the genre before.

Mm, used to find demonology fascinating as a teenager, but I lost interest in it as I got older. I like angelology a lot better, especially the more apocryphal sources. Of course, most works involving angels tend to be cheap, Hollywood Apocrypha drivel. I'm planning to write a book incorporating the Kabbalistic hierarchies, but don't expect to see it on shelves any time soon. :p

And, I'm still reading A Storm of Sword by Martin. I heard this was his best book, but so far, it doesn't feel any better than the first two, to me. Some parts of it are actually boring, I find. This may be heresy, but I groan every time I come upon a Jon Snow chapter.

Oh, don't hold your breath on that, I'm a hopeless perfectionist as a writer, with a miserable work ethic... and two other books in line ahead of that particular project.

Sigh.

Anyway, never heard of Nix before (checked, you got the name right), I'll have to look into him.

Recycle them? :D

When I had textbooks I didn't like my punishment to them was to ship them to Africa. Bye bye astronomy! Or rather, the math part of astronomy.

Read a little more of Ysabel and was pondering the narrative (can't help it. It's become habit to 'lit brain' everything I read). I noticed that the narrative really felt simple to me, condiering other books I've read and quotes mentioned in the forums here. However, it does seem to match really well with the main character who is only 15. Now I'm wondering if this is Kay's natural style or if he's taking into account the age of the character. I do find it rather annoying when I come across characters that don't seem to "think" their age.

I think that sort of thing only really stands out to me when it's done wrong. For whatever reason, I don't find myself thinking about the narrative and it's reflection of the narrator. I think most writers have a fairly good grasp on that sort of thing, which is probably why it's so glaringly obvious when it's done poorly.

You'd have to name a few, Gallows. I don't know the name off hand.

I don`t usually pay attention to the narrative in books that aren`t first person but it`s something that I pay more attention to now, perhaps because it`s something I pay a lot of attention to in my own writing. I think it`s interesting to note though that my favourite books are mostly in first person writing, Doctor Glas and All Quiet on the Western Front for instance.

I so very much want to read more books by Erich Maria Remarque but damned if his stuff isn`t hard to find! I`ve been searching books stores, the net, and used places for some 5 years now, possibly more and all I`ve come up with is one copy of `Heaven has no Favourites` from my mom`s bookstore she bought some years ago that we finally sorted. (I`m not kidding. My mom bought a bookstore at a flea market! Alas, most of the fantasy sci-fi stuff was already picked over.)

aaannd my keyboard is stuck on French Canadian again, hence the funny apostrophes. Not sure how to fix it so my question marks may looke like É that for a while until I restart or figure out to set it back to US english.

Speaking of hard to find, one of my favorite books is ever is a short little 250-page affair called The Fortress of Eternity by Andrew Whitmore, which doesn't seem to exist anywhere online. I'm so glad I own a copy, it's easily one of the most original fantasies I've ever read.

J.K rowling idk why but harry potter books are reall interesting so props to her :D

I`ve read up to the fifth book, which I`m considering on skipping actually since I wasn`t all that fond of the movie, or at least digging up an online synop because it seems to contain the kind of stuff that I`d rather not deal with, like too many mean people being mean! Still debating it with myself.

I've been into Lillian Jackson Braun these past few years. Her "The Cat Who" Series is definitely one of my favorite series.

XD the House of Night books by P.C. have a lot, I just... I could barely get through the one before burned. Sucks cause I actually rather like the story but the writing style got intolerable.

Sookie Stackhouse has... 11? 10 or 11, I loose count to be honest. But I love them terribly. >3<'

I had been huge into the Blue Bloods but for some reason got real tired of them... again, sucks cause I loved the story but just... there's always something happening. I like drama but I hate the characters never quite seeming to have enough time to recover from the /last/ disaster.

Um, Oh I am rather fond of a couple of Neil Gaiman books...

I became more interested in Oscar Wilde after reading his De Profundis. I could quote something from it but it's already been done to the nines. Pick any Oscar Wilde quote and chances are it's in that book somewhere. One of my favourite Simpon's quirk was to have Oscar Wilde's ghost show up green like the absinthe fairy after Homer inhales too much glue while building a popsicle stick Westminster Abbey. Wilde speaks only in his own quote the entire time, and at the and *tings* the screen with a quilll or want thing like Tinkerbell in the old Disney intros. :D.

One of my favourite movies when I was a child was an old cartoon my grandmother sent us called "The Happy Prince." I only learned last year I think that it was one of Oscar Wilde's short stories after finally deciding to look up online.