Just Read Sword of Shannara...

[GoodKingJayIII]

... and I wasn't all that impressed. Towards the end I found myself skipping entire pages because I was so bored with the way Brooks described scenes in a battle, or the way a character felt, etc. There wasn't any emotion or intensity in his descriptions; I didn't feel emotionally tied to the books at all. I read them as one might read a text book: get the important information and graze the fluff. I also found his dialogue very one-sided. Everyone spoke in the same way, used the same sorts, had the same mannerisms. It just wasn't all that convincing to me.

I enjoyed the characters themselves, and when Brooks bothered to describe something with passion and appropriate flare, he pulled me in.

I'm not trying to knock Brooks at all. If anyone would like to say why they like Brooks, please do. I want to hear what I missed. At the moment I just feel a little let down by the book. Is there another, better book of his I should read?

 

[Crothian]

I enjoyed his books when I was younger, but when I tried to reread them a few years back they just did not excite me as much as before. I really enjoyed them in my youth though, I'd go through them very fast and reread them all the time.

 

[reapersaurus]

GoodKing - how old are you?
It's pretty important to understanding Terry Brook's appeal, as I understand.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

IMO, Brooks is EXCELLENT at character development, but lacking in other areas, such as exposition and plot.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Couldn't even finish Sword of Shannara myself, honestly. I just found most of it boring, and the parts that weren't boring were a direct rip from Tolkien.

Not knocking anyone who disagrees, but for me personally, there's more than enough fantasy out there; I don't need to wade through something I found so utterly dull.

 

[Piratecat]

Luckily, Sword of Shannara wasn't based on LotR at all. Nope. Not even a little bit.

 

[Barendd Nobeard]

How was Sword of Shannara based on the Lord of the Rings? I admit, I haven't read either in a number of years, but I don't remember there being any similarities beyond the typical fantasy stereotypes you tend to see.

Any specific examples I might be missing?

Hmmm:

two short dudes go on an epic quest to retrieve a magical artifact which will vanquish a great evil.
vs
two short dudes go on an epic quest to destroy a magical artifact which will vanquish a great evil.

two short dudes are guided by a powerful magic-weilding normal-sized human
vs
two short dudes are guided by a powerful magic-weilding normal-sized human

powerful magic-wielding human is a member of a council of powerful magic-weilding wizards
vs
powerful magic-wielding human is a member of a council of powerful magic-weilding druids

mysterious nature-loving timeless guy saves short dudes
vs
mysterious nature-loving timeless guy saves short dudes

path blocked, our interpid heroes must venture through a dangerous mountain realm
vs
path blocked, our interpid heroes must venture through a dangerous mountain realm

emotionally, the character who grows/changes the most is not the main character, but his side-kick
vs
emotionally, the character who grows/changes the most is not the main character, but his side-kick

OK, I'll stop now. I read "Sword of Shanarra" about 8 years ago, so my memory is a bit rusty. But when I finally read FotR about 3 years ago, I couldn't believe how much of Shanarra seemed like a LotR rip-off.

 

[Barendd Nobeard]

Oh, and the name Allanon. All I could think of was Al-anon, a support group for relatives of alcoholics. That has nothing to do with LotR, but it made him seem silly while I read the book.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

GoodKing - how old are you?

I'll be 21 in July. I picked up the book mostly because I'd heard good things about it. I admit I hadn't really heard anything about the typical age of a Brooks reader.

And yes, the LotR parallels irked me a great deal. I've read Lord of the Rings three times and am very slowly working my through the Silmarillion. Being a rather large Tolkien fan, the similarities really bothered me. I didn't want to read another version of LotR because it's already been done, and done well IMO. But that's not the main reason I didn't like the story.

IMO, Brooks is EXCELLENT at character development, but lacking in other areas, such as exposition and plot

I agree, I thought his characters were overall pretty interesting.

... oh, a little nitpick: I don't like his names! Did anyone else think of an elven Pirate wearing a doorag when they heard the name "Jon Lin Sandor"?

 

[physicscarp]

I'm not trying to knock Brooks at all. If anyone would like to say why they like Brooks, please do. I want to hear what I missed. At the moment I just feel a little let down by the book. Is there another, better book of his I should read?

Jay,

I read Sword fo Shannara a few years ago myself and I felt much the same way. I pushed on and read Elfstones of Shannara and ended up even more disappointed. I couldn't bring myself to read Wishsong of Shannara, which is a shame because I had already bought it. I actually read LotR after Shannara, so I only noticed the "liberal lifting of material later. Not that I really minded it though.

I also took the time to read a set of books by Terry Brooks called Running With the Demon, Knight of the Word, and Angel Fire East. While the second two became terribly predictable, I thoroughly enjoyed Running With the Demon. It's a modern fantasy book, so you won't find elves and wizards in it. Out of five books I've read by him though, it's the only one still on my shelf.

Carp