Define well-read. Of the books and authors I listed earlier, how many have you read?

Hold on, so now you're setting the standard on how "well read" people are in the sci-fi/fantasy genre?

Again I ask, why are you so bothered that people like it and have it near or at the top of their list?

mgbfan, I've read probably 2000 - 4000 sci fi and fantasy books (counting from 6th grade on). I used to go to the library, check out 10-15 books, read them all, and then return them for new ones. I did this from about 6th grade - 11th grade. I've got about 150 fantasy and 100 scifi books on my shelf right now.

I read at about 2 pages a minute when I was in 9th grade. And I read over 90% scifi & fantasy. Trust me, I've absorbed a lot of sci fi & fantasy.

I also absorbed some of my Dad's old fantasy & scifi he had laying around - classic stuff like Doc EE Smith's Skylark of Space & Vortex books, a couple of Conan novels, old Heinlen, etc. Up to Asimov, Heinlen, Clarke, etc. I used to pick books off the local library paperback shelf based on whether I had read it or not. As to your 'list' - personally, I've never absorbed much of Dune since I was never big on it. My opinion of Martin is on hold until he finishes his series, but it's excellent so far. I won't comment on my opinion on Mr. Endless Wheel of Time Man.



And yes, Weis & Hickman's DL is in my top ten as well. (Although behind the likes of Wurts & Feist's Empire Trilogy & Hobb's Farseer) You seem to view them as teen fluff novels since you read them in your teens - your perceptions are only of what you remember. You could call Xanth teen fluff and I wouldn't argue. DL is in different company, to most of us.


This kind of conversation will likely not go anywhere, since you haven't read the books in question recently (as an adult, that is). You're arguing about books you dimly remember from your childhood, and we're arguing about books we have re-read several times (at least in my case).


Again, I say - you'd be well off to go back and revisit them - I bet you'd be surprised.

I set no standard. I asked the poster to clarify "well-read."

You have a problem with my seeking a clarifiaction? If by "well-read," he means that he's read all of the Star Wars novels, I'm going to take his opinion in a different light than if he means he's read Herbert, Adams, Bear, Asimov, Simmons, Bradley, LeGuin, etc. I don't think that's unreasonable.

That's not true. I dug the Legends books out maybe 2-3 summers ago for some light reading at the lake. I was excited to read them, actually, remembering how I liked them as a teen. Needless to say, I found them quite wanting as an adult reader. The writing just isn't very good. It's cliche, the characters are all but one-dimensional parodies (the "irrepressable" kender; the stoic knight; the gentle savage) utterly lacking depth and complexity. The only character with any appreciable complexity is the Raistlin character, and he's just overshaded ... basically, we're expected to believe all of his faults stem from jealousy of his twin as a youth. The rest of them are almost laughably one-dimensional, a product of the intended audience - the writers make no effort whatsoever to give them depth of character. Far easier to insert many simple cardboard-cutout personalities than a few truly compelling and complex ones.

I've said before and will say again that the DL novels serve a good role, and in their niche, they're perfectly good books. That niche, though, is as an introduction to fantasy for a more novice reader. To a mature, experienced reader who appreciates good pacing, originality, and complexity of character, they simply don't hold up.

You've made a bad assumption here.

I did, and I was. But not in a good way.

mgbfan

1st: There were no defined parameters for nominations, other than no LOTR. So yes this list is entirely subjective to one's opinion, not your opinion only. If there was a defined set of qualifications that the DL novels failed to meet then you would have a legit gripe about them being on the list. The parameters you use to judge a book, are different from mine, and mine are different from the next guys.

2nd: Your William Hung analogy is flawed, as some where on this planet there is a person who thinks that Music has peaked with William Hung. Hell I think he is better than 90% of the current pop music shit, which is being played right now. Not everybody likes the same things. There are people that Battlefield Earth is a superior movie to the Godfather. I don't agree with them, but I can see how they could feel that way. There are big differences between a cheesy Sci-Fi flick, and an Epic Drama about the Mafia.

3rd: You seem to think that your opinions are the only ones that matter, and that if they don't agree with you then they aren't qualified to making any lists. Who the hell appointed you to be the know it all of Sci-Fi? I sure as hell didn't. I haven't seen anybody else on this thread(s) appointing you.

4th: I read Stranger in a Strange land, last week, and I liked the DL novels better than it gasp!

5th: And finally an example of what a subjective opinion is. You probably feel that your posts come off as being written by well read person that is very knowledgeable in the Sci-Fi Fantasy genre. Whereas I think you are coming off as an arrogant ass that thinks his opinion is the only one that matters.

Hmmm...

Sturm wasn't a typical stoic knight. He wasn't even really a knight, officially. In the end, he acknowledged that some things were more important that honor. He changed. A sign of a good character.

Kender were a creation of Weis & Hickman, I don't know what is so typical there. There isn't anything like a kender anywhere else - besides, perhaps, that they do share a lot in common with halflings/hobbits.


And who would be the gentle savage? You mean Caramon? He's the big strong guy that doesn't know his own strength. I guess you can call that a cliche. But he grows and changes as well, and eventually finds his own redemption and how to walk his own path.

Raistlin was a good character. Too call him one dimensional seems to me, IMO, totally off-kilter. I think, for me, I was picked on kind of like Raistlin as a kid - sometimes I can see how easy it would be to walk the path that he does. I think perhaps that is his popularity as a character.
Raistlin is pretty much a force of evil that also functions as a force of good. (The only other story I can think of off the top of my head like that is the C.S. Friedman's Coldfire Trilogy). And Raistlin has some good in him too, despite the darkness he walks into.

I don't think Weis & Hickman's primary characters were one-dimensional. You could call a couple of the villains one-dimensional, you can even call the gods (Paladine and Takhisis) 1D. But that doesn't strike true for the main characters.

And if someone thought so, you'd be forced to accept the answer as any other. If it's all subjective.

If it's all subjective, no piece of art, be it music, writing, painting, sculpture, or whatever, is better than any other. It's all equal.


I merely defend my own opinions. Any other connotation you attach is your own.

And yet one of us has remained strictly on topic, while the other has resorted to personal attacks.

Hmm.

In any event, I'm out. If you care to continue the discussion on Monday, I'm game. But let's try to stay on topic and lose the personal attacks. They really make your position look weak.

Except that what society does, is take the general consensus of all or a group and pick those popular choices as the top. If we were ranking music, and everyone picked, everyone is entitled to their choice, be it Hung or something else (and when picking, it is all subjective). Then, when answers were compiled, we would have top choices and those would be considered best. That does not mean that those answers not at the top were worthless in the choosing though. It is an open pick of favorites and everyone will have different standards to pick by. Everyone throws their own pick into the mix, maybe it agrees with others, maybe not.

What you are doing is neglecting some people's choices right out of the gate, saying they don't belong in the thread, forgetting that this is a broad audience picking their favorites based on personal standards. In the end, once everyone here who wants a say has had their say, DL may not be in the top, and therefore not considered the best, however, everyone still gets their say and some say DL. They are allowed to say that, as they base their opinion off of their own standards, like everyone else.

Just because you feel it is not deserving does not mean you can discount their answer. Until criteria are set, it is all subjective. If you want something more in tune with your choices, then you need to set criteria, give a limited list, hand-pick your panel of experts, whatever. You can not simply decry a choice in an open poll like this that has no criteria by which to judge.

outer-edge,
Well said

Actually, what I'm doing is questioning their qualifications to even answer the question right out of the gate.

If you ask who the best singer in history is and all I've ever heard is Britney Spears, a few boy bands, and the American Idol contestants, I'm simply not qualified to answer the question. My lack of exposure invalidates my opinion. There are wrong answers, and "William Hung" is one of them.

Criteria were set. The best ever. Not "your favorite ever," that's a different thread. If the thread was "your favorite," then there are no wrong answers. But that wasn't the thread.

If the thread is "best ever," there are wrong answers. Just as William Hung is the wrong answer to the question of who the best singer is.

.... and yet some people would put the best in actual or metaphorical quotes simply because, when discussing creative works, by definition it can only ever mean something along the lines of "the best of which I am aware": because it is impossible to have in-depth knowledge of all works of [science] fiction one can only really "fairly" judge/assess on what one has encountered.

Furthermore, it seems to me to be quite possible that one's judgement might be swayed by other factors e.g. if generally interested in military matters it may be that SF with a military bent might hold a greater appeal.

The point is taken that a well-read person has a greater pool from which to choose and so his or her opinion as to the best ultimately might prove more insightful. But, then again, some people read and read and still remain fairly uncritical and/or lacking in discriminatory ability.

I would say that if the thread is "best ever," there are still no wrong answers because it is impossible to point to a set of 10 books and have everyone agree that they constitute the best. Even well-educated, well-read people disagree bitterly over such matters: just listen what happens after to the judging of literary awards! If it was so easy, and total objectivity was possible, then surely there'd never be any disputes!?

And it could just be that the person asking the question is not familiar with and does not crave fine writing. Even a panel of Hugo & Nebula award winners might choose something that bored the threadstarter rigid! Unlikely, methinks, but a possibility nonetheless.

Exactly. Best of lists are the same thing as favorite lists 9/10 as it's still subjective. The exception being lists where people rank books/movies/music/whatever on it's artistic merit or whatever, rather than just simply on which the enjoyed the most. But that's still subjective.

Most cases, "best" lists are just personal favorites being spouted off by people who think there opinion is better than anyone elses.

DL isn't teen fiction by a far cry. RL Stine is teen fiction. Hardee Boys, Babysitter's club, etc. DL is very far from teen fiction. And nothing like "Dude where's my car". Maybe it's not literature, but it is definitely not teen fiction.


Dude, let it go. You are the ONLY ONE who thinks Weis & Hickmans's DL is empty teen fiction. The majority of the rest of us have some very good reasons for having it in our top ten.

Do you deny that to have a valid opinion on the subject, one must have at least some bredth of the award-winning novels in the genre in question? Of course not - which is just a softer way of saying what I'm saying. You say as much below.

Is someone who has never read a Hugo- or Nebula-winning novel really qualified to offer an opinion on the subject?

Agreed. No way around that problem. But if you've already got to deal with a lack of discrimination, then you might as well eliminate ignorance as yet another source of bad answers.

There is a huge pool of good answers, a pool of questionable answers, and a pool of downright bad ones. But not all answers are created equal, which I think you're even acknowledging in your own way.

Don't get me wrong, I don't propose there there is a definitive list here. There's nothing of the sort and never will be. But I think you're agreeing with me, just to a softer degree. While there's no definitive list, there are answers that are ... indiscriminate. Or as I would put it, wrong. The DL novels belong in that category. They have no place being in the same zip code as the books that truly deserve to be mentioned for this list.

RL Stien is adolescent fiction. Dragonlance is written for a teenage audience. That's who it's marketed to and that's where the reading levels are at.


I am? Are you sure of that? Do you want to stick with that answer? Hows about we look at where Barnes & Noble, the USA's leading bookseller, catagorizes it:

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...X&kids=y&itm=2

For those who want the short version: "Age Range: Young Adult," which in the book business is a fancy way of saying "teen."

I'm not telling you it doesn't belong on your Top-10 favorites list. By all means, put it right at the top. But it sure as heck doesn't belong on a list of the best ever. They're different lists.

As for insisting that it's not teen fiction, I don't know what else to tell you, man. You can deny it until you're blue in the face, but it won't change the fact that they're written for, marketed to, and sold as YOUNG ADULT novels, and that means, my friend, that they're teenage fiction. No ifs, ands, or buts. It's a fact.

Congratulations, you went to the children's tab and did a search for dragonlance, and got a few (out of many products) that happened to be cross catergorized there. The set you link to is just a gift set not even in print. If DL was considered young adult, then B&N would have the individual books linked in that list as well, but they do not, those are found on the regular book tab. Heck, you might have an argument if even one of the six books people are discussing was listed in there, but they aren't. Just because one gift set was at one point labeled in that catergory does not set the series forever in stone there. Go to a bookstore, they will show you DL in the SF or Fantasy area, not young adult.

DL was not written to appeal to teens. It was written to appeal to fantasy and Dungeons & Dragons fans. It was written as a companion to the release of a new gaming world, and as such, appeals to a wide range of readers.

Now I'll twist this around and say you seem to be agreeing with me. I said until you define criteria, everything is acceptable. You are now talking about people who are qualified to answer. That is setting criteria. One you define who is qualified by saying "X must be read to qualify", you have set criteria for your list, and therefore all answers are no longer equal, as some may not qualify.

However, in almost every best of thread, this is not done. People ask for what others consider the best, not just qualified individuals, and therefore all answers are equal and acceptable. The poster then chooses who to listen to based on their own criteria of what they are looking for.

A to the other posters as well.

FYI - I did an Internet search on "Dragonlance chronicles age range" to get that link, but believe what you will. If you'd prefer to imagine how I got where I got, by all means, invent away. Your assumptions to date have been pretty far off, so why stop now?

That being said ... if you have access to text-leveling software, use it on the DL novels, then use it on an adult novel. See what you get. The language and structure are simple, and you're going to find a level consistant with the Harry Potter books.

Just because they're 300 pages doesn't mean they aren't YA, as with Potter, which is why you see them reviewed in children's literature publications. Find me a Marion Zimmer Bradley Darkover novel reviewed in a children's literature publication. I dare ya.

I understand and respect their place in the market. They capture new, unsophisticated readers, and hopefully funnel them eventually into legitimate speculative literature. That's great. It's why I applaud the Harry Potter novels (even more cliche than DL), the RL Stien books, etc. Anything that can bring new readers to the world of speculative fiction is worthwhile. Like many here, I loved the books when I read them as a youngster. But I really think some people here need to forget the nostalgia that comes with their memory and look at the product at face value. At face value, these are YA novels frought with cliche, ENTIRELY derivative, with what is, frequently, substandard plotting and dialogue (and substandard for the dialogue may be putting it kindly ... it's often outright laughable).

The memories are warm and fuzzy, for me as much as anyone, but to consider their place on a best-ever list, one has to take them at face value. And there, they don't hold up. The writers are simply not original enough and talented enough to place titles on this list. They're not in the same league with the likes of LeGuin, Bradley, Simmons, Herbert, etc. They're barely even in the same sport.

To pre-empt those who will, without doubt, inform me that I should "let it go," I'll suggest that you consider your own hypocrisy. If you want it to be "let go," then do so yourselves. If you'd like to continue discussing, then by all means, respond. I'm happy to continue with those who wish to continue. To those who do not, you're welcome to leave the discussion whenever you please.

Ease of reading does not mark a novel at a certain level. There are some graphic novels that have very few words, could be read by very young readers, yet would not be easily comprehended by even most adult readers. Same for a book, just because its reading level can be read by young adult, it can still be more than that, and may still be targeted at adults.

I may be wrong about how you found your link, but it was still a bad example.

Now, I will take your suggestion and drop this issue. This argument is pointless and silly as you feel in a "best" thread only "qualified" people have a right to answers, or only certain answers are acceptable, whereas I feel in a general thread about "best", anyone can answer what they want for whatever reason they want, as everyone has different tastes and qualifies their choices for different reasons, and readers can then decide for themselves who to listen to.

I think you're wrong. 100% wrong. About it being a young adult book, especially.

But this is going nowhere. I wouldn't have spent this much time on this discussion if I didn't have a lot of time to kill at work on some days.

Later!

mgbfan,
The original thread title was "best sci-fi/fantasy series ever? NOT LOTR!!!" Bearing that in mind, if there is any standard, it is LOTR. Do your self a favor. Go to the New York Public library website; do a little brousing, you might learn something. I doubt it , but you might. One thing you might learn ids that you can find LOTR in a search of "Children's Title." Guess it wouldn't qualify under your criteria.

I just want to say that I was proud to participate in one of the dumbest arguements ever posted.

Lets just all agree that mgbfan is wrong since no one in this thread has agreed with him yet,and this guy will argue till you just give up and let him have the last word,i got into an argument with him once where he stated sci-fi and science fiction are not the same things, like starship troopers is sci-fi(because its dumb sci-fi) and bladerunner is science fiction(because its smart sci-fi) and so on and so on.this guy never gives up.He came into this thread and ridiculed someone for saying dragonlance is one of there favorite series,he stated it does not belong on this thread.every poster came to the defense of the guy that liked dragonlance and said it could be in a thread like this,but mgbfan still has to persist in his vision(arrogance?)that his view is the VIEW so just give up on argueing with this guy it is not worth it

Sure it does. Language and structure are what determine reading level. Bear in mind that the term "reading level" is not the same as "intended audience," but they frequently go hand-in-hand.


Of course they CAN, but it doesn't mean their answers are good, does it? The guy asked for the "best," and he got a list of favorites instead. All I did was point out that a few of the favorites pointed out most certianly don't belong on a list of the best.

The Hobbit wouldn't qualify, as it's YA. LOTR doesn't read at a YA level and it's not marketed to a YA audience. The same can't be said for Dragonlance.

I suppose you imagine you've scored some sort of point here, amusing as that is.