Picked up Gardens of the Moon a few weeks ago, and I couldn't understand a darn thing about what was going on, who the characters were or what they were doing. I was told that the sequel, Deadhouse Gates, would be better and make more sense, but that wasn't true at all.
Coming from a fan of Jacqueline Carey, Neil Gaiman, and George R.R. Martin, authors whose names are often uttered in the same breath as Mr. Steven Erikson, this series doesn't even come close to the polish and cohesion of the works of the aforementioned authors, for the following reasons:
1.) Plot: Take this criticism with a grain of salt, because usually when I'm condeming a book's plot, it's from a position of understanding what the plot is, but since I have absolutely no clue what the story is about here, I must refrain from blasting it completely aside from acknowledging that it is one of the more unstructured, unusual plots I've come across in modern literature. Everything happens at once, and the exact moment you feel that you're close to attaining some understanding of the story, the book launches you into another disjointed point-of-view of a character you know nothing about. This happens ALL THE TIME. Speaking of characters...
2.) Characters: In the first book, you have WhiskeyJack, the Sergeant of the Bridgeburners, a kick-ass infantry unit down to its last leg. He and his team nearly got their collective asses kicked taking down one city and are poised to try to take down another for the Empire. Then there's Anomander Rake, an alien mage with a billion different names to keep track of. Finally there's Tattersail and Palin, a duo investigating the presence and intentions of the gods. Now, the problem with these characters and the supporting cast is that they're empty and erratic -- there's never any readily identifiable basis for the things they do or the things they say. They're basically blurting out a bunch of stuff regarding the gods and whatnot without giving the reader any background on the discussion at hand.
3.) Magic: The magic in the world doesn't make much sense to the main characters, as alien magic forces are at play. The problem is, it doesn't make sense to me, either. The magic is all over the world with no fundamental principle to govern it. In fantasy, magic is either from nature or of nature, and, for the most part, they must subscribe to the laws of the land (or nature), providing its users with a pattern or set of laws to devise a formula from which to control it. When that doesn't happen, you're left with some unexplainable set of events in the story, which is accentuated by the overall scattered plot.
4.) World: I believe this is the strength of the series and its author. He can definitely build a world, and I think the emphasis on world-building might have contributed in the marginalization of virtually everything else, from character development to plot to pace, etc. While I'm not going to compare it to the extravagant worlds created by the likes of Robert Jordan and Terry Brooks since those authors borrowed heavily from the modern template established by JRRT, I will definitely give Erikson props for originality and effort. For some, it's enough to carry the other failed attributes of the series, but for others who need for those attributes to be fleshed out and organized (like me), it isn't enough.
Whelp, I hope this review doesn't strike the wrong cord with some of its fans on this board. I'm not positive that others on this forum feel quite the same way about the series, but judging from the other reviews on Amazon, I'm guessing I'm not the only reader who harbors similar criticism.
Coming from a fan of Jacqueline Carey, Neil Gaiman, and George R.R. Martin, authors whose names are often uttered in the same breath as Mr. Steven Erikson, this series doesn't even come close to the polish and cohesion of the works of the aforementioned authors, for the following reasons:
1.) Plot: Take this criticism with a grain of salt, because usually when I'm condeming a book's plot, it's from a position of understanding what the plot is, but since I have absolutely no clue what the story is about here, I must refrain from blasting it completely aside from acknowledging that it is one of the more unstructured, unusual plots I've come across in modern literature. Everything happens at once, and the exact moment you feel that you're close to attaining some understanding of the story, the book launches you into another disjointed point-of-view of a character you know nothing about. This happens ALL THE TIME. Speaking of characters...
2.) Characters: In the first book, you have WhiskeyJack, the Sergeant of the Bridgeburners, a kick-ass infantry unit down to its last leg. He and his team nearly got their collective asses kicked taking down one city and are poised to try to take down another for the Empire. Then there's Anomander Rake, an alien mage with a billion different names to keep track of. Finally there's Tattersail and Palin, a duo investigating the presence and intentions of the gods. Now, the problem with these characters and the supporting cast is that they're empty and erratic -- there's never any readily identifiable basis for the things they do or the things they say. They're basically blurting out a bunch of stuff regarding the gods and whatnot without giving the reader any background on the discussion at hand.
3.) Magic: The magic in the world doesn't make much sense to the main characters, as alien magic forces are at play. The problem is, it doesn't make sense to me, either. The magic is all over the world with no fundamental principle to govern it. In fantasy, magic is either from nature or of nature, and, for the most part, they must subscribe to the laws of the land (or nature), providing its users with a pattern or set of laws to devise a formula from which to control it. When that doesn't happen, you're left with some unexplainable set of events in the story, which is accentuated by the overall scattered plot.
4.) World: I believe this is the strength of the series and its author. He can definitely build a world, and I think the emphasis on world-building might have contributed in the marginalization of virtually everything else, from character development to plot to pace, etc. While I'm not going to compare it to the extravagant worlds created by the likes of Robert Jordan and Terry Brooks since those authors borrowed heavily from the modern template established by JRRT, I will definitely give Erikson props for originality and effort. For some, it's enough to carry the other failed attributes of the series, but for others who need for those attributes to be fleshed out and organized (like me), it isn't enough.
Whelp, I hope this review doesn't strike the wrong cord with some of its fans on this board. I'm not positive that others on this forum feel quite the same way about the series, but judging from the other reviews on Amazon, I'm guessing I'm not the only reader who harbors similar criticism.
