Pieter

This series is famous, or infamous, among fantasy fans.

It is said that these books are difficult, and for many people, these books are therefore a formidable opponent. I have only one response to this: don't let it bother you.

Gardens of the Moon is not difficult in the sense that the language used is complex. It's also not difficult due to complicated theories (as in the case of Neal Stephenson).
Yes, there are many characters, but that's the case in many (fantasy) series. And, this is actually the crux, Erikson simply starts somewhere in the middle of a history of an empire. At least, that's how it seems. This empire is the Malazan Empire. No background is given, nothing is explained. The prologue just starts, and as a reader, you can only let yourself be carried along in the story that Erikson is telling you. And you must trust that things will become clearer as the story progresses.
If you, as a reader, find this annoying, then this book can indeed be perceived as “difficult.” Difficult to deal with, difficult to understand, and especially difficult to accept.

I have no problem with this at all. Imagine the Roman Empire, which was immense at its peak. It encompassed countless peoples. There were local rulers, generals, intrigues, wars, assassination plots everywhere. All at the same time. Now, just imagine that you are focusing on a specific event in that vast history and span of the Roman empire. Movies and books do this all the time. It helped me a lot translating this attitude towards this book.

From the beginning, Erikson gives you the feeling that you are part of an immense epic story, even if your view of it is still very limited. On one hand, a high-level chess game unfolds where various individuals are moved around the board like pawns; on the other hand, Erikson also shows the human side.
Everything slowly converges as if it were a kind of comedy. Independent storylines intertwine, with coincidences that sometimes seem like a “deus ex machina.”
This might be a point of criticism from my side. If this were a stand-alone book, the author might have taken some shortcuts in certain respects. A deus ex machina plot device has never been my favorite. So, I also trust that some things will be woven into the story as the series progresses.

For me, after the first read, this is a 4 to 4.5-star book.
It's possible that this could increase or decrease as more of the Malazan world becomes clear.

Summer of Night is a novel about a group of children who fight against evil in their hometown during the summer of 1960. Simmons carefully sets up the stage by introducing all the characters with care. At times, he can be a bit long-winded with his descriptions, but as a reader, you begin to care about the children, their families, and the village.

Spooky events begin to occur right from the start, and the tension slowly builds up to a climax. In many ways, it is a classic setup with a group of kids riding their bikes around the village, noticing strange occurrences while the adults remain oblivious. There are a lot of familiar character archetypes like the “leader”, the “foul mouth”, the “nerd,” the “bully”, the “drunken dad” and the “white trash family”, amongs others.

There is a striking resemblance between Summer of Night and Stephen King's IT. Since Summer of Night was published in 1991, five years after IT, it is possible that Simmons was influenced by King's work. However, this book stands on its own merit and is by no means a weak imitation of King's masterpiece, earning a rating of 4.5 stars.

The father of Stephen Donaldson was a medical missionary in India, where he worked extensively with leprosy patients. This undoubtedly served as inspiration for the character of Thomas Covenant. Thomas, the hero, or anti-hero if you will, is a writer with leprosy. Because of this, his wife left him, and he became an outcast. Survival is his key word.

Covenant finds himself in a fantasy world, where he is seen as the chosen one. He himself is convinced that everything is a dream or hallucination and chooses not to believe his new reality, hence his self-chosen title “unbeliever.”

The first two chapters are excellent. Thomas Covenant could easily be a character from Stephen King. A troubled writer, an outcast, strong character traits, vivid descriptions of the local setting. A very captivating opening.

Then the fantasy part begins. The way Thomas ends up in another world reminded me a lot of the Dark Tower.

Next, there's a first introduction to Lord Foul, which was a big monologue about how evil he is. Almost literally with an evil laugh at the end. Very caricatural. I couldn't reconcile this with the strong opening.

Now a fairly classic fantasy story unfolds, with the difference that Thomas is absolutely not a hero and not likable at all. Donaldson explores questions about reality and mortality, which is interesting in itself. But I didn't find the story itself and the quest very interesting. As the book progressed, it became a bit annoying. After 400 pages of self-pity, it gets old.

Nevertheless, this book is interesting within the fantasy genre. They say that this trilogy is the basis for the current grim dark fantasy genre. And I understand that label. Because of this and the strong opening, it's still a 3-star rating.

Like many people, I watched the Netflix series a few years ago. I found the series good, and now that I came across the book, I definitely wanted to read it.

I certainly don't regret it. Tevis's writing style is somewhat distant; he describes things in a fairly straightforward manner. The dialogues are quite sharp, and what stands out is his knowledge of chess. His expertise is good enough to make it seem realistic.

The story itself is, of course, quite standard and predictable. Even without the Netflix series as a spoiler, the story has no real surprises. An outcast in an orphanage, a girl, turns out to be a prodigy and becomes the world's best chess player.

It's no wonder that the book has been adapted for Netflix because it reads like a movie script.
A very entertaining book, but in this case, the series is better. The characters and the zeitgeist come more to life in the series. Refreshing, for a change.

Ik ben een groot Le Carré fan. Er staan meerdere boeken van hem op mijn 5 sterren lijst
Dit is helaas geen 5 sterren. Ik vond het boek onevenwichtig, zeker het begin kabbelde wat voort zonder dat het richting had. Nu hoef je bij Le Carré nooit echte actie te verwachten, maar dit was wel erg passief. Op ongeveer tweederde van het boek begon de intrige zich echt te ontvouwen en werd het een echt Le Carré boek.
Spionage en internationale politiek op zijn best, met een onbevredigend einde, waardoor het een cynisch boek wordt. Zo cynisch dat het zomaar realiteit zou kunnen zijn.

2,5 ster voor de start, 4,5 voor het eind.