Warts and all...

[Croesus]

Give us a glimmer of hope.

I was a huge fan of Orson Scott Card's early stuff for exactly this reason. The man had the ability to portray human beings at their complete worst - selfish, cruel, vicious, amoral...then he would come up with an ending that reminds the reader that there's also mercy, tenderness, sacrifice, and hope. He doesn't always pull it off, but when he does, its remarkably uplifting.

 

[Starman]

I was a huge fan of Orson Scott Card's early stuff for exactly this reason. The man had the ability to portray human beings at their complete worst - selfish, cruel, vicious, amoral...then he would come up with an ending that reminds the reader that there's also mercy, tenderness, sacrifice, and hope. He doesn't always pull it off, but when he does, its remarkably uplifting.

My weakness/bad point for Card's novels would be my knowledge of his politics and beliefs. I will always rank Ender's Game as one of my favorite novels, but the first time I read after having grown up and learning more about Card the person made me squirm a little reading it. There are hints of his beliefs in the book, but more than that just knowing the kind of things he does believe made me uncomfortable/angry rereading the book.

I have similar feelings with other authors/artists/creators, but Ender's Game hits me the hardest because I enjoy the book so much.

Also, this isn't the place to get into Card's specific beliefs and politics, so I'm not going to go into any sort of detail on it.

 

[the Jester]

Alistair Reynolds sometimes has a hard time with his conclusions being driven by his characters. There's a bit of Deus ex machina in there somewhat often. But man, I love his work (and am about to reach the conclusion of Terminal City right soon... uh-oh!).

 

[Elf Witch]

I think GRRM series is well written and he had made an interesting world. I like some of the characters as well. That said I have a hard time reading them. As others have said it to bleak. My other complaint is that there are to many characters. Because of that each of their stories seems superficial.

I wanted to like Tolkein after I saw the movies. I read the Hobbit years ago and I liked it. I think he is probably the best world builder around. But his pacing is horrible. It took me over a year to read the first book because I would find it getting tedious and had to stop.

 

[frankthedm]

Stephen King: Sometimes his work just goes into TMI territory. Not talking about padding, just some situations he chooses to include and details he gives the reader go farther than needed.

 

[Mallus]

I like David Eddings. I'm also partial to Ray Feist. I acknowledge no --well, make that few-- warts and make no apologies for either.

Then there's Stephen R. Donaldson.

For years I had a love/hate relationship with the Chronicles of Ur-Lord Thomas Covenant, Unbeliever, White Gold Wielder, and General Piteous and Loathsome Douchebag. It's resolveditself, by this late date, to "like".

I read both original trilogies. They were good books for the time, an antidote to the oncoming tide of purer Tolkien clones. They're fiercely imaginative, with that cool streak of primativism --sure, there's a ring, but mostly there's just magic rocks, twigs, and mud-- and even when they're running headlong into the most irritating genre foibles, there's still something interesting about them (The One Tree might be the best fat, aggravating, middle-of-the-series book of all time, a string of failures saved by Nom and the shenanigans in the Sandhold).

Plus, I kinda dig Donaldson's names: Drool Rockworm, Saltheart Foamfollower, Hile Troy (eveyr super-secret military think tank needs a Hile Troy on the payroll), Revelstone, The Grieve, the three Ravers, and so on.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

The above post reminded me of something. Who in their right mind would trust someone named Wormtongue?

 

[Tinker Gnome]

Stephen King: Sometimes his work just goes into TMI territory. Not talking about padding, just some situations he chooses to include and details he gives the reader go farther than needed.

Yeah...sometimes I am like

 

[Starman]

So [MENTION=1288]Mouseferatu[/MENTION], other than Eddings do you have any examples in mind?

 

[Mouseferatu]

Well, Eddings was the primary, but I have a few others.

So far, my exposure to David Gemmell is limited, so I can't draw any certain conclusions. But of the books I've read, he seems to have the same issue as Eddings--that is, retelling the same basic stories with more or less the same basic character traits.

And I've seen a lot of fantasy authors who I otherwise really like who appear incapable of writing female characters. Women in these books seem to exist solely to be paired off in romantic relationships with the male characters, rescured, as inspiration, or (and this one really bugs me) to show how tough they are by overcoming the trauma of being raped. (Something that I have never, ever seen a male writer handle well. Not saying it's never been done, or can't be done, just that I haven't seen it.)