Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
TIME's 100 Best Fantasy Books of All Time
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Gradine" data-source="post: 8114705" data-attributes="member: 57112"><p>Some additional thoughts I've had on this list:</p><p></p><p><strong>Recency Bias</strong></p><p>I'll come right out and say it: I'm actually quite impressed with the recency bias in this list. Often when you look at a Top whatever list of whatever you'll find that the list has been dominated by the views of the elitist of the elite critics (old, white dudes, primarily) and the lists look like they were made by somebody who firmly believes "All the best _____ was written before ______" and list contains only the most well-trodden and storied creators.</p><p></p><p>Then you've got this list come out, and say "you know what, actually there is a ton of amazing fantasy fiction being written right now by people you've probably never heard of. We're serious, it's really really good stuff". I actually like that. We could imagine a Top 100 Fantasy Novels list written in, say, 1979, and every grog is probably going to come up with a relatively similar list with the same familiar names that used to dominate the genre.</p><p></p><p>What this list says is that Fantasy, truly <em>great </em>Fantasy, is more accessible than ever, both as a reader and as a writer. That's pretty awesome, frankly. It says that Fantasy, both as a genre of fiction and its audience, is exploding, in far more directions than we ever thought possible.</p><p></p><p><strong>Curious Omissions</strong></p><p>The list neatfully steps over the Sword & Sorcery subgenre for what one could assume to be any number of reasons. I'm sure the most controversial (and probably most true) reason is that a lot of its simply doesn't hold up anymore. The un-stated goal of any list like this is to send eyes to more books, and I'm sure the list's author-creators (or its Time editors) didn't want to send modern readers to be puzzled over some celebrated work filled with racist and sexist caricatures which, like or not, tended to dominate the subgenre from its heyday. You try finding a well-written, well-regarded work of S&S that wouldn't raise a single eyebrow from the average modern day fantasy reader (which, if we were to go by the mode, would probably be a 16-year-old girl who either already has or has given significant thought towards dying their hair a non-standard color).</p><p></p><p>There's the other issue, sidestepped: the dominant delivery mode for fantasy at the time; we can read collections these days but a lot of the best S&S of the time was serialized. <em>The Witcher </em>no doubt suffers here as well; the first "novel" being both the most well-known and rather more a collection of short stories than a traditional "novel". </p><p></p><p>I'll stand by that at least one early Shannara novel should've seen this list (maybe <em>Wishsong</em>?) as well as Lloyd Alexander's <em>The Black Cauldron</em>; I still think these probably got less attention due to some underwhelming adaptations. Maybe this is what hurt <em>The Hobbit </em>too? You'd think Tolkien would get a pass at the very least. Then again, <em>City of Glass </em>still made the list, so who knows.</p><p></p><p><strong>Curious Entries</strong></p><p>I'll begrudge that Harry Potter belongs on this list; its influence on both the genre at large and on its readers is undeniable. You don't get to where Harry Potter is and has been without some measure of greatness. But the books themselves are... not spectacularly well written? Still, one should be on here, and that one is almost certainly <em>The Half-Blood Prince. Prisoner of Azkaban </em>might have the best written (which is no mean feat, considering it's the one with time travel in it) but <em>The Half-Blood Prince </em>was the moment when HP briefly became good, daresay great, adult fantasy. The problem, as has been discussed ad nauseum over the decades, is that HP is rubbish at grand scale worldbuilding; but kept within the confines of Hogwarts there's a lot there that constantly delights the youthful soul. That said, there's probably (hopefully) some distant future that treats Rowling with the same kind 10-foot-pole we keep Lovecraft at now, so we'll see how long this last.</p><p></p><p>Yes, <em>The Name of the Wind </em>is widely loved and probably deserves a spot just for that, but dear lord is it an excruciatingly painful read. Terrible pacing, insufferable protagonist, and enough cringy faux "feminism" to fill at least two <em>Wheel of Time </em>novels, which is <em>really </em>saying something. Rothfuss seems like a chill dude and he does some stuff <em>really well </em>but I will never understand the fascination people have with this book.</p><p></p><p><em>City of Glass </em>and <em>The Night Circus </em>are also well-beloved novels in certain circles, for... some reason. <em>City </em>is boilerplate YA fantasy as far as these things go; not exactly an exceptional example of the craft.</p><p></p><p>Which reminds me...</p><p></p><p><strong>YA Fiction</strong></p><p>Some of the best fantasy fiction being written right now and in at least the past decade and a half would be classified as "YA". If you read fantasy and you don't read YA... get off your <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />. To quote Nick Hornby: “I see now that dismissing YA books because you’re not a young adult is a little bit like refusing to watch thrillers on the grounds that you’re not a policeman or a dangerous criminal, and as a consequence, I’ve discovered a previously ignored room at the back of the bookstore that’s filled with masterpieces I’ve never heard of.” He was speaking generally but it's absolutely true within fantasy as well. It's neither a mistake nor an accident that many of the books on are YA, and many of the older works on the list would've been classified that way in the first. I mean, while we're all complaining about <em>The Hobbit </em>not being on the list.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Gradine, post: 8114705, member: 57112"] Some additional thoughts I've had on this list: [B]Recency Bias[/B] I'll come right out and say it: I'm actually quite impressed with the recency bias in this list. Often when you look at a Top whatever list of whatever you'll find that the list has been dominated by the views of the elitist of the elite critics (old, white dudes, primarily) and the lists look like they were made by somebody who firmly believes "All the best _____ was written before ______" and list contains only the most well-trodden and storied creators. Then you've got this list come out, and say "you know what, actually there is a ton of amazing fantasy fiction being written right now by people you've probably never heard of. We're serious, it's really really good stuff". I actually like that. We could imagine a Top 100 Fantasy Novels list written in, say, 1979, and every grog is probably going to come up with a relatively similar list with the same familiar names that used to dominate the genre. What this list says is that Fantasy, truly [I]great [/I]Fantasy, is more accessible than ever, both as a reader and as a writer. That's pretty awesome, frankly. It says that Fantasy, both as a genre of fiction and its audience, is exploding, in far more directions than we ever thought possible. [B]Curious Omissions[/B] The list neatfully steps over the Sword & Sorcery subgenre for what one could assume to be any number of reasons. I'm sure the most controversial (and probably most true) reason is that a lot of its simply doesn't hold up anymore. The un-stated goal of any list like this is to send eyes to more books, and I'm sure the list's author-creators (or its Time editors) didn't want to send modern readers to be puzzled over some celebrated work filled with racist and sexist caricatures which, like or not, tended to dominate the subgenre from its heyday. You try finding a well-written, well-regarded work of S&S that wouldn't raise a single eyebrow from the average modern day fantasy reader (which, if we were to go by the mode, would probably be a 16-year-old girl who either already has or has given significant thought towards dying their hair a non-standard color). There's the other issue, sidestepped: the dominant delivery mode for fantasy at the time; we can read collections these days but a lot of the best S&S of the time was serialized. [I]The Witcher [/I]no doubt suffers here as well; the first "novel" being both the most well-known and rather more a collection of short stories than a traditional "novel". I'll stand by that at least one early Shannara novel should've seen this list (maybe [I]Wishsong[/I]?) as well as Lloyd Alexander's [I]The Black Cauldron[/I]; I still think these probably got less attention due to some underwhelming adaptations. Maybe this is what hurt [I]The Hobbit [/I]too? You'd think Tolkien would get a pass at the very least. Then again, [I]City of Glass [/I]still made the list, so who knows. [B]Curious Entries[/B] I'll begrudge that Harry Potter belongs on this list; its influence on both the genre at large and on its readers is undeniable. You don't get to where Harry Potter is and has been without some measure of greatness. But the books themselves are... not spectacularly well written? Still, one should be on here, and that one is almost certainly [I]The Half-Blood Prince. Prisoner of Azkaban [/I]might have the best written (which is no mean feat, considering it's the one with time travel in it) but [I]The Half-Blood Prince [/I]was the moment when HP briefly became good, daresay great, adult fantasy. The problem, as has been discussed ad nauseum over the decades, is that HP is rubbish at grand scale worldbuilding; but kept within the confines of Hogwarts there's a lot there that constantly delights the youthful soul. That said, there's probably (hopefully) some distant future that treats Rowling with the same kind 10-foot-pole we keep Lovecraft at now, so we'll see how long this last. Yes, [I]The Name of the Wind [/I]is widely loved and probably deserves a spot just for that, but dear lord is it an excruciatingly painful read. Terrible pacing, insufferable protagonist, and enough cringy faux "feminism" to fill at least two [I]Wheel of Time [/I]novels, which is [I]really [/I]saying something. Rothfuss seems like a chill dude and he does some stuff [I]really well [/I]but I will never understand the fascination people have with this book. [I]City of Glass [/I]and [I]The Night Circus [/I]are also well-beloved novels in certain circles, for... some reason. [I]City [/I]is boilerplate YA fantasy as far as these things go; not exactly an exceptional example of the craft. Which reminds me... [B]YA Fiction[/B] Some of the best fantasy fiction being written right now and in at least the past decade and a half would be classified as "YA". If you read fantasy and you don't read YA... get off your :):):). To quote Nick Hornby: “I see now that dismissing YA books because you’re not a young adult is a little bit like refusing to watch thrillers on the grounds that you’re not a policeman or a dangerous criminal, and as a consequence, I’ve discovered a previously ignored room at the back of the bookstore that’s filled with masterpieces I’ve never heard of.” He was speaking generally but it's absolutely true within fantasy as well. It's neither a mistake nor an accident that many of the books on are YA, and many of the older works on the list would've been classified that way in the first. I mean, while we're all complaining about [I]The Hobbit [/I]not being on the list. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
TIME's 100 Best Fantasy Books of All Time
Top