Yes. I really enjoyed the story. Interesting use of magical system. The relationship between gods and humans was very unique
Great Voice acting. Kept me drawn in
Steven Erikson has written a story that is very original and relies very little on Fantasy genre tropes. I can honestly say that throughout the reading, I very rarely predicted what would happen next, and had a genuine investment in the outcome, and that isn't meant as faint praise. This was aided by a fine reading from Lister, who excels at both drama and at a variety of character voices (even if a couple weren't as pleasant to listen to as one might wish).
So, I can say that I enjoyed listening to Gardens of the Moon in its entirety. I won't, however, be listening to the next installment, thanks to a number of aspects that had me rolling my eyes. It often seems as if characters are all teetering on nervous breakdown. Even the hardest, most stoic of these will suddenly appear to be fighting off the loss of their soul and on the verge of crying as soon as they're given a POV passage. Further, a major part in this story is played by a character named Anomander Rake, whom the author goes to so much effort to make out as a strong but silent badass that I was constantly rooting for him to die a gruesome death. The author also has a penchant for flowery prose, which can sometimes border on the absurd 'the must of rotting ice?' and the less spoken of his brief passages of poetry, the better.
I'd say by all means give Gardens of the Moon a shot if you're interested in a sweeping high-magic fantasy setting. Even if you find yourself agreeing that it isn't worth carrying on through the rest of the series, I doubt you'll feel you wasted your time.
The narrator ( Lister) did a fantastic job modulating his voice to give each character their own voice
Kruppe is best
What a great series. This is just the first and they get better from there. I was soooo happy to finally see this in audio form.
If you like epic stories with awesome characters you should like this one. I can hardly wait for Chain of Dogs.
This book series is on my top 10 list. Be careful though as the books are very complex and take some effort to appreciate. Think I started on book one three times before I finally got through to it and it was only around book three that I really started understanding what a gem these books are.
The books are read very good. There is a nice distinction between the characters (which is impressive considering how many they are). I would give it a 4.5 if there was an option for it only because I might not agree with some of the voice/character pairings.
More fecund than any book of its kind. No other writer has a menagerie of fleshed out characters like Erikson.
If they could have built up the story line better
He did a good job on a bad story
After 10 hours of trying to get into the story, I had to give up. I started from the beginning 3 times. You just don't get attached to any of the characters so its hard to stick with all of the bouncing around. Lots of story lines but none good enough to cause you to want to listen. Maybe it's better if you read it.
Masters in Fiction from Johns Hopkins, aspiring science fiction/humor writer. Give me the unexpected with a bit of grit and humor, please.
I returned the book.
It is so . . . ignorable? I found myself rewinding most passages several times, but the passages were just too mundane despite the subject matter. The characters are easily forgettable and interchangeable (except for Cropper, who is much like Falstaff, a character borrowed from Shakespeare). There are LOTS of characters and lots of names. But, unlike other authors who make each one memorable, most times the name and profession is all we’re given.
It's like the author is TELLING a story, (SIMPLY telling) and not taking the reader along on the journey. The reader never has a sense of place, never quite knows where he is are or how he got there Things happen, but it's hard to care about the events when the reader has no frame of reference.
Part of the Hero's Journey is establishing what is at stake and the motivations for the characters. I'm all the way through part one and I still have no idea. People fighting for the sake of fighting. That's it. This book is like reading an instruction manual, with lists of dry details. It reads like part II of a series where the reader is already familiar with the background of the characters so the author has no reason to show depth.
Here's an example:
I still don't know what Moonspawn, the floating fortress, looks like. Is it round like an actual moon? Is it a floating hill or a construct of brick? I don't know where I missed it, but looking for a particular description, if one even exists, within an audio book is all-but impossible. I'm leaning toward the assumption that Erikson mentions it in passing long before it had any relevance to the story, as with most of this book. I think it's too much to ask that I memorize irrelevant details in hopes that they may become important later. How am I to tell what’s important and what isn’t?
In my re-reading while looking for what the heck Moonspawn is, a character mentions, "A sapper named Fiddler took me down" (into the tunnels). Fiddler is a character that is described in some detail MUCH later in part I. How is a reader supposed to reference one un-memorable line, seven chapters ago? In re-reading, I have a frame of reference because now I know who fiddler is, what he looks like, etc. This happened again and again and again with many details. It's like Erikson is writing backward.