Is "A Song of Ice and Fire" the best epic fantasy since "The Lord of the Rings"?

[myrdden]

I think the best Epic fantasy series is Steven Erikson's Malazan Books of the Fallen.
This is hands down the best fantasy series out there.

It's definitely the best series I have read since LotR. Martin's SoFaI is really quite good, but the two series are radically quite different.

Erikson's story is very much epic, high fantasy with an immensly immersive world dealing with magic, mortal and gods. Incredible setting with a very detailed plot.

Martn's is not quite as epic (IMO) and definitely not high fantasy (at least not what we've seen so far). But the characters are so well done it is hard not to get into the story, what the story may lack in the setting it more than makes up for it with its characters.

 

[shilsen]

As some have already said, it depends on definition. I think the Discworld series is better than LotR or any other fantasy series, and ranks very highly as far as any kind of literature is concerned, but it is not epic - and arguably not even fantasy.

 

[KenM]

IMO Song of Ice and Fire is alot better then LotR. But I also fell that there is much better fantasy novels then LotR. JRRT did not know how to pace the action, plot, he was good with backround and setting stuff up. I love the Peter Jackson movies, the extended edtions are the way to go, but the novels are not that great, IMO. GRRM has the balance between plot, character, action, and backround.

 

[Pants]

It's definitely the best 'fantasy' I've read since LotR, but I'm not sure if they're in the same category.

 

[LightPhoenix]

Best is subjective, since taste is subjective, and thus the question is inherently flawed.

My thoughts on the matter is that one series isn't better than another series. There are authors who are better than others, and while I've only read the first book of his series, George R.R. Martin is right up there, as are (IMO) Tad Williams, Gene Wolfe, and Robin Hobb. Tolkein and Lewis are up there as well of course, but it's tough to really make a comparison to them since they've transcended "fantasy" and have become classics.

My secret shame is that I haven't read Earthsea yet.

To Lazybones, there was a thread on shorter stories a short time ago. Personally my favorite was Tad William's second-to-latest book, The War of the Flowers.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I don't like The Lord of the Rings very much at all as novels - though I very much admire Tolkien's ability to create a world which strongly reflects his thematic concerns, even if I strongly disagree with the concerns themselves.

However, on that basis, I think I must wait until the end of the series to see if Martin has a similar or surpassing ability. I enjoy his narrative, his language, and his characterisation much more than Tolkien; for me, his books are much more worthwhile, as well, since I enjoy stories filled with dangerously flawed people who can be sympathetic even as the reader condemns them strongly. It's why James Ellroy is one of my favourite writers, for example. Even so, I recognise that certain aspects of literature are immune to filtering through personal tastes, and what I've read of Martin so far fails to measure up to Tolkien's achievements in that regard.

On the other hand, Tolkien's no master; he certainly doesn't rank high when compared to great writers of literature, and I think he stumbles at many hurdles of language and characterisation.

Basically, I suppose I disagree with the question's implication that Tolkien produced the "best" epic fantasy, at least by literary and my personal standards, his achievements being limited to strong implementation of theme and a wonderfully coherent creative spirit.

I haven't, myself, read any great epic fantasy yet - I've read great fantasy, and I've read epic fantasy, but I haven't yet seen the two combined.

 

[ShadowDenizen]

I enjoyed reading a "Song of Fire and Ice" alot. I admire GRRM's willigness to buck trends and kill primary characters. But there are many other authors I prefer over him.

Tad Williams is one of the few authors I will buy in hardcover, at full price. Both the "Memory, Sorrow and Thorn" trilgy and the "Otherland" quartet are excellent, and I'm pretty impressed with Volume 1 of "Shadowmarch."

Another author that passes the "Hardcover" test is Janny Wurts. If you haven't read the "Wars of Light & Shadow" series, do yourself a favor and do so. It's both epic (in that it deals with a huge cast of characters and world-spanning issues), and intimate (in that the two POV/ primary characters are half-brothers cursed to eternal enmity.) It's also an incomplete, multi-volume series, but it doesn't feed rushed or drawn-out (unlike GRRM, RJ, and Terry Godkinds' stuff.)

That said, "ASOFIA" is far from being "LotR": Tolkien's work has been, is and will be, the gold standard by which all fantasy fiction will be judged. (There are a host of other seminal fantasy influnces, as well, including luminaries like Robert E. Howard, Frtiz LEiber, and Michael Moorecock.)

 

[Viking Bastard]

It's really really good. The most satisfying fantasy I've read in years.

It's one of the very few satisfying fantasy I've read, period.

 

[Lazybones]

To Lazybones, there was a thread on shorter stories a short time ago. Personally my favorite was Tad William's second-to-latest book, The War of the Flowers.

Thanks for the link... I filled up a sheet of paper, and I'm going to my library site (we have a great ILL system in Sacramento that will deliver any book you want to your local branch).

 

[The Other Librarian]

It's one of the very few satisfying fantasy I've read, period.

Agreed. I don't read much "Fantasy", of the swords and sorcery type, but Martin drew me in quickly. Maybe 'cos it's much less high magic, less about how magic works, less about uber-casting characters and magic as a deus ex device, something LOTR shared.

As far as defining the genre though, I'm not sure. I think when people are talking about "epic" fantasy, they mean one guy, hopefully of humble origin, and his companions on a quest to save the world, preferably drawn out to at least three volumes.

Tolkien used Frodo as a protagonist, I think, because he saw Frodo as exemplifying what he thought was the best of the british character; a aristocratic landowner, down to earth, but with hidden reserves of strength. An epic's main character should be an embody his societies values, at least in the academic formulation of Epic that Tolkien would have been familiar with.

Many writers coming after him misread this and just focus on the "rural" and "humble" aspects of the protragonists background. "Epic" just comes "large in scope".

In Martin, I'm not sure we have one Epic protagonist yet. I think it could run in any number of directions. Maybe Jon, maybe Dany, or both. Maybe the Stark family as a whole is the "epic character".