Does anyone read David Gemmell

katarin

subtitle: and how come no one's set up a forum for him!?

well? who else does?
The man should be cannonised.

Tony H

yeah , the late David Gemmell was a great writer , i think theres lots of fan sites and forums dedicated to him already .

Mitch Connor

i think there are only around 3 or 4 of his books that i have not read.

Shame we will never get the read the end of the Troy trilogy, or the war of the twins (would have been freakin awesome)

I'm praying Robert Jordon doesn't lose his fight with illness before he finishes the wheel of time - i have put too much time into it!

Tony H

his wife is actually finishing the last book of the troy triliogy , David had actually written most of it and outlined the remaining chapters

katarin

sure, there are plenty of gemmell forums, but how many irish ones?

darthculain

One of the greats. Pity we'll never get the 4th Waylander, or 3rd Skilgannon books.

c - 13

I've only read Dark Moon but thought it was excellent. Ill be looking up the rest of his stuff once I finish a song of Ice & Fire

Illkillya

katarin wrote:

sure, there are plenty of gemmell forums, but how many irish ones?

Just wondering... how many Irish Gemmell forums do you need? I read a few of his books and I have to say I am not a fan.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

i'd be a fan, def wouldn't consider him to be one of the best.. but probably one of my favourites.

I love druss, and uh.. i forget the coward, who had to wear the golden armour of some lost king defending druss's castle from the uh... mountain people

were they the nadir?.. they were cool

not a great writer, but can think up a great story.

kashi

Ok, I have to admit.......... I didn't know he had died!!! How sad am I?:eek: But I have read some of his books, and I did enjoy them, and they are great for pure escapism!

katarin

Illkillya wrote:

Just wondering... how many Irish Gemmell forums do you need? I read a few of his books and I have to say I am not a fan.

well since i havnt come accross one, i just asked.
fair enough your not a fan, but to be honest your the only person iv come accross to read his books and not be a fan.

definatly rivals LSD for escapism :P

mcgovern

Well know you've just met your second
The ones about Alexander the Great were good, the rest was boring. Its just the same as 90% of fantasy out there.

The_Minister

we could make him a "Legend of the Boards".

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

hrm

that's either an awful pun, or a fantastic pun.

i hate pun's so I'm not the person to ask

Marksie

I have every one of his books in my collection. I am delighted to hear that his last one is being finished off.

It will make a fitting testament.

Its hard to say whihc are my favourites but i would go with
Lion of macedon and wolf in shadow for now.

The former because of the period in history and the characterisation and the latter because of the initial characterisation of jon shannow

Though now i come to think of it, the king beyond the gate was up there as well.

and druss was well, druss lol

katarin

The_Minister wrote:

we could make him a "Legend of the Boards".

hahahaha sorry. if that was intentional, it was hilarious.
if it wasn't its still hilarious.
how does one do that?

Marksie

fitzdragon wrote:

his wife is actually finishing the last book of the troy triliogy , David had actually written most of it and outlined the remaining chapters

It can be pre ordered

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Troy-Fall-Kings-David-Gemmell/dp/0593052250/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3/202-7075647-6035843?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1183025692&sr=8-3

Mitch Connor

Marksie wrote:

I have every one of his books in my collection. I am delighted to hear that his last one is being finished off.

It will make a fitting testament.

Its hard to say whihc are my favourites but i would go with
Lion of macedon and wolf in shadow for now.

The former because of the period in history and the characterisation and the latter because of the initial characterisation of jon shannow

Though now i come to think of it, the king beyond the gate was up there as well.

and druss was well, druss lol

Lion of Masedon was the first Gemmell book i read - still one of my favourites now, that and Knights of dark Reknown, which was the second.

srdb20

I Read the Rigante series first and loved it got me totally hooked, have read nearly all his novels now....

Great Writer, none of his books have really let me down yet always kept my interest.

RIP David Gemmell

Mitch Connor

srdb20 wrote:

I Read the Rigante series first and loved it got me totally hooked, have read nearly all his novels now....

Great Writer, none of his books have really let me down yet always kept my interest.

RIP David Gemmell

I actually disagree - i think he is a great story teller, but not that great a writer. Most of his books are the same (how many times has it been pointed out that the mountains will stand no matter what man does....) and he seems to go through a word of the year kind of thing, like sibilant.

superfly

he was my favourite Fantasy author and he will be sorely missed
my favourites have to be the Shannow books and the Lion of Macedon series

nesf

Tauren wrote:

I actually disagree - i think he is a great story teller, but not that great a writer. Most of his books are the same (how many times has it been pointed out that the mountains will stand no matter what man does....) and he seems to go through a word of the year kind of thing, like sibilant.

I definitely agree. I found his books entertaining but as a writer he never really did it for me. A very skilled storyteller but not a great writer imho.

ixoy

nesf wrote:

I definitely agree. I found his books entertaining but as a writer he never really did it for me. A very skilled storyteller but not a great writer imho.

It's actually a trait that many fantasy authors suffer from, I believe. Lots of them can spin great yarns with good characters and fiendish plots but not many are actually skilled writers, often repeating descriptive phrases and character archetypes.

I'm currently reading Robin Hobb at the moment and she, in my opinion, is more the opposite - she's a good writer but there's not much story going on (at least so far in "Soldier's Son"). Regardless, I'm still kept there because I'm drawn in by her style.

As to a writer in the genre whose writing style I truly love (as much as his stories), that goes to China Mieville. The prose can be hard to get through, but he's one of the tiny amount of fantasy authors where I re-read passages just to appreciate the beautiful use of language and imagery.

pwd

I've read all his books I think. I loved most of them. I liked his writing so much for so long that I was quite saddened when I heard he had died.

A lot of people are dismissive or even snobby about his books, saying his writing is cliched.

I find his books inspirational. I have read books by him when I felt down and beaten and they picked me up and gave me spirit. I read a lot of his books while I was a teenager and I am not ashamed to say that some of his characters were role models to me, and therefore his books have probably influenced the person I grew into.

I have heard other people say the same thing about finding role models in his writing. This is probably because his main characters are usually extremely masculine. The only book of his that I didn't finish was Ironhand's Daughter. His femles characters were generally not particularly well realised or interesting, and his best books have them at the periphery.

His early books in particular evoke the setting extremely well. There is a sense of realism or earthiness dispite them being fantasy. Both of which help the escapism of them. He also is superb at writing action scenes.

I liked the way magic was usually kept to a minimum in his stories, which made it seem more mystical and dangerous where it did feature. I particularly liked the way that magic was almost totally absent from the Troy books, but that the characters interpreted normal happenings as magic. This was done so effectively that reading them I was able to see the normal events through the characters eyes as magic.

nesf

ixoy wrote:

It's actually a trait that many fantasy authors suffer from, I believe. Lots of them can spin great yarns with good characters and fiendish plots but not many are actually skilled writers, often repeating descriptive phrases and character archetypes.

I'm currently reading Robin Hobb at the moment and she, in my opinion, is more the opposite - she's a good writer but there's not much story going on (at least so far in "Soldier's Son"). Regardless, I'm still kept there because I'm drawn in by her style.

As to a writer in the genre whose writing style I truly love (as much as his stories), that goes to China Mieville. The prose can be hard to get through, but he's one of the tiny amount of fantasy authors where I re-read passages just to appreciate the beautiful use of language and imagery.

Agreed pretty much. Hobb for me uses the English language quite well in her novels but she does seem to have a bit of trouble keeping you hooked on the story. Another author similar to Gemmel would be Feist, very good at telling stories (imho) but not really that experimental with his characters or themes. Again you could level the same criticism at Eddings who loved his first story so much he decided we needed to hear it again. China Mieville can be a hard read sometimes but the effort is generally worth it.

Fantasy as a genre has a large audience who are in it just for the story. This isn't a bad thing because we get a lot of really great stories told but sometimes it'd be nice to have a few more "wordsmiths" toiling away in the genre.

nesf

pwd wrote:

A lot of people are dismissive or even snobby about his books, saying his writing is cliched.

I find his books inspirational. I have read books by him when I felt down and beaten and they picked me up and gave me spirit. I read a lot of his books while I was a teenager and I am not ashamed to say that some of his characters were role models to me, and therefore his books have probably influenced the person I grew into.

They are cliched if you've read quite a lot of fantasy before finding them. I was the same with Feist, he was one of the first fantasy authors I read and I thought he was very original etc before I got into the genre more.

When it comes down to it Gemmel was a such a good storyteller that despite the cliches his books are very enjoyable and that is not a trivial accomplishment.

pwd

ixoy wrote:

I'm currently reading Robin Hobb at the moment and she, in my opinion, is more the opposite

Funny, I was thinking same thing as I wrote my previous post. I didn't say that because it didn't really fit in with what I was saying.
Robin Hobb realises complex interesting characters extremely well. The most interesting one being Captain Kennit in the Liveship Traders trilogy in my opinion.
She is a terrific story-teller also though. Soldier's Son is very very easily her worst book. The sequel is better, but still falls a little flat and is a bit anti-climatic at the end, though it does set the stage well for the third book - so I remain hopeful that will be as good as her earlier ones. You really should check out her earlier books - especially the Liveship Traders.
I think Robin Hobb is the opposite in many ways to David Gemmel as a writer for several reasons. She uses anti-heroes who generally suffer a lot. Gemmel's characters tend to be idealised in ways and glorious, including Waylander in my opinion. She draws characters far better but does not evoke setting as well as Gemmel. She focuses on details of clothes a lot in her writing, which seems peculiarly feminine. There is far more magic in her books - it is common, and her main characters usually possess some form of magic - I can't think of any protagonist in a Gemmel novel who used magic. Hobb uses far more shades of grey then Gemmel in her writing.

pwd

nesf wrote:

They are cliched if you've read quite a lot of fantasy before finding them. I was the same with Feist, he was one of the first fantasy authors I read and I thought he was very original etc before I got into the genre more.

When it comes down to it Gemmel was a such a good storyteller that despite the cliches his books are very enjoyable and that is not a trivial accomplishment.

Yeah I agree I meant that people often dismiss them because they are cliched and fail to appreciate how good they are despite that.

I read Magician by Feist recently and was very disappointed.

nesf

pwd wrote:

Yeah I agree I meant that people often dismiss them because they are cliched and fail to appreciate how good they are despite that.

I read Magician by Feist recently and was very disappointed.

Fair enough. Magician happens to remain one of my favourite books (first fantasy book I read after Tolkien). That said, I keep it that way by refusing to reread it. I know that the flaws in it would ruin my memories of it if I did.

ixoy

pwd wrote:

Robin Hobb realises complex interesting characters extremely well. The most interesting one being Captain Kennit in the Liveship Traders trilogy in my opinion.

Personally, I always liked the ambiguity of the Fool but my real favourite was Fitz (handily enough). It was her use of the first person narrative that helped here - we really got to know him and see the world through his eyes. It helped us empathise in his moments of anger, justified at times and others clearly irrational. He's always struck me as one of the most believable protagonists of any series I've read.

She is a terrific story-teller also though. Soldier's Son is very very easily her worst book. The sequel is better, but still falls a little flat and is a bit anti-climatic at the end, though it does set the stage well for the third book - so I remain hopeful that will be as good as her earlier ones. You really should check out her earlier books - especially the Liveship Traders.

Oh I've read both Assassin trilogies and the Liveship Traders and I didn't mean her story telling abilities were lacking. If nothing else, she's done the best job with re-inventing dragon mythos that I've ever seen. However, I do believe that her greater skill is her ability with writing, in creating characters especially.
I'm a third of a way into "Soldier's Son" now and it does strike me as weak (by her standards). The fact that nothing much has happened isn't too important in a skilled hand like hers but that I'm not yet drawn to the main character in the same way as Fitz or the Fool, etc. is a bit more so. She's earned the benefit of my doubt though and I've already purchased "Forest Mage".

There is far more magic in her books - it is common, and her main characters usually possess some form of magic - I can't think of any protagonist in a Gemmel novel who used magic. Hobb uses far more shades of grey then Gemmel in her writing.

I wouldn't have thought Hobb made any particularly strong use of magic, not when compared to others such as Erikson or Feist, where the spells can shatter continents.

One thing I've noticed in passing, and it's certainly not a rule, is that female fantasy writers tend more towards characterisation, generally putting their characters through some sort of hell (e.g. Janny Wurts, Kate Elliott, Robin Hobb) whereas male writers tend more towards the world building, politics, sagas and mechanics of magic (Steven Erikson, George R.R. Martin, David Gemmell). It's not that they don't share some skill in both, but there seems to be a stronger emphasis on different areas between the two sexes (IMO of course).

pwd

ixoy wrote:

I wouldn't have thought Hobb made any particularly strong use of magic, not when compared to others such as Erikson or Feist, where the spells can shatter continents.

In comparison to Gemmell she uses magic a great deal. I haven't read Erikson, and only read one book by Feist, so I can't compare her books with theirs really, but magic is unusually prevalent (rather than unusually powerful) in most of Hobb's books. In the Assassin trilogies and the Liveship Traders almost all her main characters possess some form of magic. Some of the characters are even born of magic.

ixoy wrote:

One thing I've noticed in passing, and it's certainly not a rule, is that female fantasy writers tend more towards characterisation, generally putting their characters through some sort of hell (e.g. Janny Wurts, Kate Elliott, Robin Hobb) whereas male writers tend more towards the world building, politics, sagas and mechanics of magic (Steven Erikson, George R.R. Martin, David Gemmell). It's not that they don't share some skill in both, but there seems to be a stronger emphasis on different areas between the two sexes (IMO of course).

I think so too.

katarin

i can accept people saying that DG is cliche'd in his storytelling, but I think that's the beauty of it. you always know what your getting, its like macdonalds for the brain. its enjoyable, you can skim it in a weekend if you just need to kill time.

i think the best thing about DG are his charachterisations. I may be hardpressed, from this vantage point of i-cant-count-how-many-of-his-books-read to give particulars on individual storylines, but i can recite charachter traits and talk about individual charachters for hours.

nesf

katarin wrote:

i can accept people saying that DG is cliche'd in his storytelling, but I think that's the beauty of it. you always know what your getting, its like macdonalds for the brain. its enjoyable, you can skim it in a weekend if you just need to kill time.

That is exactly why there are quite a few of his books on my shelves. In my opinion, cliched, predictable fiction most definitely has its place in the world.

Thanx 4 The Fish

I have read everything that he has written, shame we will not be getting any more from him. I have to say that I really enjoyed most of his stuff, there were a few that fell flat but then with such volume there is bound to be one or two bad apples.

As for Hobb, try reading some of her earlier stuff (when she used to write as Megan Lindholm) they are a bit raw but you can see from them that she can tell a story.

nesf

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote:

As for Hobb, try reading some of her earlier stuff (when she used to write as Megan Lindholm) they are a bit raw but you can see from them that she can tell a story.

When I read the Assassin Trilogy a good few years back I felt that she lost herself a bit in characterisation and lost focus on the story in the third book. I remember feeling that the momentum was lost. The first two books were excellent though.

This was a good few years back though, so my memory might be failing me a bit and I might be confusing the last book in that series with something else.

ixoy

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote:

As for Hobb, try reading some of her earlier stuff (when she used to write as Megan Lindholm) they are a bit raw but you can see from them that she can tell a story.

I might just do that. I do think "The Liveship Traders" told a very good story but I'm with nesf in that she can lose herself in her characters - both her greatest strength and her Achille's heel.

I wonder where she'll end up next after all this or if she'll try and venture beyond the fantasy mould. Think it would be nice to see her tackle sci-fi and bring some characterisation to that genre, where it's often lacking in favour of the Big Ideas.

Thanx 4 The Fish

She seems to re-invent herself when se goes off on a tangent, although she has had a lot of success as Hobb now so may be an easy way to break into a new genre.

pwd

David Gemmell wrote a non-fantasy book called white knight, black swan under the pseudonym Ross Harding.
It is no longer in print and existing copies cost over a grand typically apparently.

Gingervitis

Just finished Troy: Fall of Kings, and all I can say is WOW.
This is possibly the best stuff he's ever written, and given the context of his death, the ending of it is probably the most powerful thing i've read this year, and that includes HP7 and the Dark Tower. Stella did an absolutely fantastic job, and I honestly couldn't see any difference in writing styles, but seeing as he had given her the outline of the remaining chapters, there was little chance of deviation.
Sounds a bit hyperbolic, but I think the Troy series could possibly be his magnum opus. Any opinions?

Iago

pwd wrote:

I haven't read Erikson, and only read one book by Feist

correct this when you get a chance, you're missing out on fantastic worlds and stories imho. Also when you get done with Erikson, look up The Black Company by Glen cook, an older series but comparable if you like Eriksons work.

Vokes

Gingervitis wrote:

Just finished Troy: Fall of Kings, and all I can say is WOW.
This is possibly the best stuff he's ever written, and given the context of his death, the ending of it is probably the most powerful thing i've read this year, and that includes HP7 and the Dark Tower. Stella did an absolutely fantastic job, and I honestly couldn't see any difference in writing styles, but seeing as he had given her the outline of the remaining chapters, there was little chance of deviation.
Sounds a bit hyperbolic, but I think the Troy series could possibly be his magnum opus. Any opinions?

Nearly finished it - I cant say ive noticed any transition in writing styles.

I don't think its one of his best but it is very enjoyable and what you expect from a Gemmell book.

Particularly liked the

re-imagining of the Trojan Horse ploy for getting the invaders into the city (as a wooden horse filled with soilders does not seem realistic and in keeping with the rest of the book). Quite ingenious I thought!

Waylander

Funnily enough as my name would suggest I am a big Gemmell fan. Also think Feist and Hobb are very good writers. Thought Eddings first couple of series were very good too, but became a bit same ould same ould after that. Have also read books by Valerio Massimo Manfredi lately, recommend his Alexander trilogy also.

pwd

I also liked that a lot sofaking.

I thought the book started out a bit weak, but that it got better as it went along, finishing quite well.

I remember reading a paragraph about Helikaon's arm-hair glistening in the sun and thinking that bit was definitely written by a woman.