...you should go with Eddings first. As Wert mentioned, there are many better contemporary series out there, but Eddings is light fun, and though some of his characters start to grate on your nerves by the end of the Mallorean series, many of them are memorable. The first quarter of the first book is clunky, and the narrative voice much too heavy, but it gets better. There are some silly elements, but overall it's worth your time. For me, reading David Eddings is like a pleasant trip down memory lane.
Runelords is just okay. The premise is interesting, the first book was pretty good, the middle two rather lame, and the last one was moderately entertaining. When I finished the series, however, the strongest feeling I had about it was, "In the right hands, this series could have been very good." The world and cultures lack depth, and the characters aren't the least bit memorable. There are bits and pieces that stand out, but not much.
Runelords is just okay. The premise is interesting, the first book was pretty good, the middle two rather lame, and the last one was moderately entertaining. When I finished the series, however, the strongest feeling I had about it was, "In the right hands, this series could have been very good." The world and cultures lack depth, and the characters aren't the least bit memorable. There are bits and pieces that stand out, but not much.
/Discussion: David Farland "The RuneLords" or David Edding "The Belgariad"
26/09/2009 03:19:44 AM
- 899 Views
Re: /Discussion: David Farland "The RuneLords" or David Edding "The Belgariad"
26/09/2009 12:50:59 PM
- 707 Views