Who can I consider the Next Tolkien?

[mostlyharmless]

Personally, I would say Jordan's Wheel of Time Series..

I have never seen a guy spill as many words on a page as Robert Jordan and yet advance the plot barely at all. His world is pretty good but he was just milking the audience with the manner in which he wrote the books.

[One Bad Pig]

I have never seen a guy spill as many words on a page as Robert Jordan and yet advance the plot barely at all. His world is pretty good but he was just milking the audience with the manner in which he wrote the books.

:that: And then he up and died trying to bring it all together in one more book.

[Manwë Súlimo]

:that: And then he up and died trying to bring it all together in one more book.

Well, same thing happened to Tolkien. Luckily, he left behind a literary heir and the world wasn't deprived of "The Silmarillion".

In any case, thanks everyone for the recommendations. I'll give these a look-see next time I go book shopping.

[AngelDragon]

Christopher Paolini






































April Fools?

I really like George R. R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series, but he takes so many years just to publish one book, and there are still several books left. . .but still, nice books all the same.

[Philosophickle]

G. R. R. Martin.
I don't think you can get any closer to Tolkien.

[mostlyharmless]

That would be because Dune is science fiction, not fantasy. And although the first book is first-rate, it's all downhill from there.

I disagree about the rest of the books going downhill. Not all of them are as good as the first one, but taken together they are awesome. I was bitterly disappointed when I found out he had died without ever ending the series. Now those new prequels are about as good as the Star Wars movie prequels so stay right away.

If I was going going to pick an author who is equivalent to Tolkien in the scifi genre I would probably pick Frank Herbert.

I had the good fortune to get angry at Robert Jordan when he took 2 years to put out the third book in his series and so I swore I would not buy or read another of his books until he finished his series. And lo and behold he died on me though I did succumb and read book 4 and 5 that a friend had, which cured me of even wanting to read any more of his books, finished series or not.

[Uncouth Angel]

For fantasy authors other than Tolkien, it's pretty hard to go wrong with R. E. Howard (Conan, Solomon Kane, Bran Mac Morn), Michael Moorcock (Elric of Melnibone), Roger Zelazny (Chronicles of Amber), or Gene Wolfe (The Knight, The Wizard, Boook of the New Sun parts 1 and 2).

[Adrift]

For fantasy authors other than Tolkien, it's pretty hard to go wrong with R. E. Howard (Conan, Solomon Kane, Bran Mac Morn), Michael Moorcock (Elric of Melnibone), Roger Zelazny (Chronicles of Amber), or Gene Wolfe (The Knight, The Wizard, Boook of the New Sun parts 1 and 2).

Robert E. Howard is no Tolkien. I really like his Conan novels, but they hardly make it past the realm of cheap pulp fiction. Not that that's bad mind you. I like cheap pulp fiction, but Howard would drown in Tolkien's prose. Also, for me (and maybe this is because I live post-J.R.R.T.) indians (picts) and pirates don't go well with my barbarian fantasy-fiction (actually, I could probably make do with the pirates if they were a little less pirate like). It just breaks my suspension of disbelief. I like the idea of Conan living in a land that time forgot, not jumping through American history. Anyhow, that's just a little annoyance. I really like Howard's Conan, and some of his stories, if not as breathtaking as Tolkien's work, are still great page turners.

Its going to be really hard to find an author who's stylistically as genius as Tolkien. Someone in this thread mentioned Robert Jordan and his Wheel of Time series. I made it through about 1 and 1/2 books before I just had to put them down. It was like reading Tolkien watered down for teens or something. The guy who lent me the series said as much, but I couldn't get over how mediocre I thought it was. Don't know. Its a tall order to be compared to J.R.R.

[The Curtmudgeon]

What do people think of Stephen Donaldson's The Land books, aka The Chronicles (and Second Chronicles, and now Last Chronicles) of Thomas Covenant? I was somewhat disappointed when I first picked up the first book, Lord Foul's Bane, as it seemed very derivative of JRRT, except for Covenant himself, but I grew to really like the first two series. I haven't started the last series yet, as I hate waiting for a series book to appear, but when the whole series is available I plan on reading it.

The (sometimes I can really identify with Covenant) Curtmudgeon

[One Bad Pig]

For fantasy authors other than Tolkien, it's pretty hard to go wrong with R. E. Howard (Conan, Solomon Kane, Bran Mac Morn), Michael Moorcock (Elric of Melnibone), Roger Zelazny (Chronicles of Amber), or Gene Wolfe (The Knight, The Wizard, Boook of the New Sun parts 1 and 2).

Eh, I don't think Michael Moorcock is anywhere close to JRRT. Same sub-genre, more or less, but I like Lawrence Watt-Evans' (and even Terry Brooks') efforts more.

[One Bad Pig]

What do people think of Stephen Donaldson's The Land books, aka The Chronicles (and Second Chronicles, and now Last Chronicles) of Thomas Covenant? I was somewhat disappointed when I first picked up the first book, Lord Foul's Bane, as it seemed very derivative of JRRT, except for Covenant himself, but I grew to really like the first two series. I haven't started the last series yet, as I hate waiting for a series book to appear, but when the whole series is available I plan on reading it.

The (sometimes I can really identify with Covenant) Curtmudgeon

I enjoyed them, though I'm not all that fond of anti-heroes as main characters. Donaldson is one of the few authors who occasionally has me reaching for a dictionary.

[mostlyharmless]

I enjoyed them, though I'm not all that fond of anti-heroes as main characters. Donaldson is one of the few authors who occasionally has me reaching for a dictionary.

Stephen Donaldson is quite a good writer and all of his books are good, both fantasy and scifi but he suffers from lack of imagination or world building. You get none of the great feeling of depth that Tolkien manages to impart into his work. With Tolkien you know you are participating in a very small part of his imaginary world while Donaldson feels like he only thought up enough of his world to move the story along. Lots of good writers fall into this sort of category for me, which is why I don't think they come close to Tolkien, for instance G G Kay or Ursla la Guin.

For fantasy authors other than Tolkien, it's pretty hard to go wrong with R. E. Howard (Conan, Solomon Kane, Bran Mac Morn), Michael Moorcock (Elric of Melnibone), Roger Zelazny (Chronicles of Amber), or Gene Wolfe (The Knight, The Wizard, Boook of the New Sun parts 1 and 2).

My thoughts:
R. E. Howard - Pulp, guilty pleasure
Michael Moorcock - A little above pulp
Roger Zelanzy - Good, not for C of A but for his book Lord of Light
Gene Wolfe - Good, liked his Book of New Sun

[One Bad Pig]

Stephen Donaldson is quite a good writer and all of his books are good, both fantasy and scifi but he suffers from lack of imagination or world building. You get none of the great feeling of depth that Tolkien manages to impart into his work.

Good point. One example that comes to mind of deep world-building that comes to mind is C. J. Cherry's Foreigner universe (though it's sci-fi rather than fantasy).

[Uncouth Angel]

Nonetheless, I think Howard's work, while written primarily to entertain, is underrated and has a certain vitality which captures his particular youthy world view rather honestly. Conan had philosophical depth, in both his literary and movie form (even if the movie wasn't true to the source material, it's still one of the most underrated fantasy films). What Howard has in common with Tolkien is that both men wrote fantasy that had the courage of its convictions. Both believed in the essential truths of what they were writing, and that's rare.

Eh, I don't think Michael Moorcock is anywhere close to JRRT.

He hated Tolkien with a passion, along with Lewis, Lovecraft, Heinlein, and anyone even remotely conservative in their views, so it's only fitting that he doesn't match up.

But seriously, I don't mean suggest that any of the authors are equal to Tolkien; they merely represent different philosophical approaches toward epic fantasy. It's misguided to think Tolkien (or any other author) should be the bar, anyway. I'm a writer of fiction and I hope to write fantasy novels some day. It certainly wouldn't be my goal to "outdo" Tolkien, Howard, or any of the other above-mentioned authors, nor can I think of a reason I would want to. Instead, I surf fantasy, take whatever tidbits I find interesting and useful, and work to outdo myself.

[lee_merrill]

... while Donaldson feels like he only thought up enough of his world to move the story along. Lots of good writers fall into this sort of category for me, which is why I don't think they come close to Tolkien, for instance G G Kay or Ursla la Guin.

Ursula is a good writer, though her heyday of popularity has passed, and it's kind of a shame, and yes, the Book of the Dun Cow is a keeper (Marrooooooned!). But Tolkien is indeed incomparable, though I do chime in with the mention of Lord Dunsany and Curty's mention of Eddington's Worm Ouroborous.

C.S. Lewis recommended William Morris (though he left me a bit cold) and George Macdonald (suffers from a bit of oversweetness, said Lewis, and he does), "The Golden Key" being Macdonald's best book, and Eddington and David Lindsay's Voyage to Arcturus (though the latter seems to be the toast of a relative few).

You might try a bit of Wagner! of all people. Said Lewis, "as a mythopoeic poet, he is incomparable," though I have not read any of the libretto of his operas.

Blessings,
Lee