The Belgariad

Remove all ads!

I've had the Eddings books sitting on my shelf for some time now and about 4 days back decided to pick up the first of the set, Pawn of Prophecy. Since then, I've read the first 3 books and am ready to start Castle of Wizardry.

Though I don't know why, I'm surprised to find them as good as they are -- quite a nice interlude to FR and DL novels. Anyone else have the same experience?

 

I adored and loved Eddings with all my heart as a kid, I still do. He it was who truly brought me into the swamp of fantasy that I am in now. Perfect books for the 14 year old boy that I was then. Sadly his work does not age well, atleast I could not stand to read it again. It is so simplistic, cliche and totally lacking depth. But man did I love it when I was younger! I was honestly all upset when the Belgariad ended, I had to reread it right away. Then again. I think I reread the series four times in a month. I have since then reread it perhaps 6 more times, and the sequel the Mallorean almost as many. I worshipped them. For the novice in fantasy literature Eddings is the man! As you progress you will probably find that he is unoriginal and increative but he is the gateway to a wonderful world. The fact that he has recycled the same plot in 4 series of books kinda bugs me too.

 

He's really a great author. I even liked Sparhawk and the other knights in that other series he wrote. (Can't remember the name)

I read Polgara the Sorceress, and it was terrible. I think he wife wrote it.

Enjoy!

 

I loved edings too when i was little... he also introduced me to fantasy, and it seems alot of others too. but joacqin is right it's too simplistic, i think his books are written for the ages from 10-16? ok, you can read them when you're older but i think that's what he concentrates on.

 

He seemed to me to be so innovative when I was young. He did try to strike a balance between funny and serious. But as I got older, well, I needed more depth. The same thing happened for me with Piers Anthony (though in his case, every series he writes starts off fairly well and then tanks after the 2nd or 3rd book..

 

Yes, Edding is not bad. I've read his books more times that I can count. Well, you can't expect some deep philosophical thoughts from it but who would?

Just stay away from that crap that the Redemption of Althalus is and everything will be all right.

 

I will third what joacqin said. I read the Belgariad several times. I couldn't get enough. Then I started the Mallorean. I got about halfway through, noticed that Eddings had basically run out of ideas, and stopped.
This pattern is pretty typical. I found the first Shanarra series to be pretty good, but once Brooks decided to camp out there and run his franchise, I gave up. The same thing with Fiest. The first series was great, then I moved on.

 

I agree with the opinion that *some* depth is lacking from these books. (I suspect that the 5 books could have been written in 3.) But I don't think I was looking for that when I picked them up -- I had just finished LoTR the day before. I am certainly enjoying them for what they are and, -- as we've beat this associated topic to death ad nauseum in previous posts -- one can enjoy "easy read" books at ANY age.

 

I made the mistake of reading the blegarath book first, so it ruined a lot of suprises but still enjoyed the belgariad.

The Mallorean was treading on used ground a fair bit though so youve got to wonder if the necessitys repeating everything was just a scapegoat for old ideas. Redemption of athkalaus (sp?) was like a carbon copy with different names. Started the elenium and even is starting to see familar.

 

I agree with Zephyria about Althalus: that book was too cutesy for it's own good. Overall Eddings is a decent storyteller, but looking back he simply cannot compare to the likes of David Gemmel or Robin Hobb. If you are looking for depth in a novel (and don't mind a first-person perspective) then Hobb is the way to go.

 

he writes long winded quite witty stories, but they lack thrill, and all the characters are so cool, that you just can't worry for them. Comes to be boring quite quickly. Eddings is no Tolkien, no Sapkowski, no Herbert, and not even a Salvatore or Gemmel.

 

If he doesn't make the Salvatore benchmark then perhaps it explains why I loathed his "work" when I was 13. Or perhaps I was just plain dumb? (I still am...)

I won't read a fantasy story that can't make it to the Salvatore benchmark, it must be crap if it can't reach that.

 

I have read all of the Mallorean books, and I love them. Yes, maybe he's uncreative, and yes, maybe they lack some depth, but they remain great books that I would recommend everyone. But, I think he tends to slow things down too much so he can fill five books. It does get boring sometimes.

 

It's a shame that Eddings repeats himself repeatedly. I actually did like the Malloreon (I started with the third book when I was 14 or something ) because of the humor. But since I bought the Elenium and Tamuli together, he lost a lot of attraction to me. It's all the same. Why I did buy Althalus I cannot say.
The only book which IMHO is really good, is "Belgarath the Sorceror" who is IMHO Eddings' alter ego.

I know, I bashed Salvatore and I did like Eddings. But hey, Eddings is funny at least.

 

I have read the Belgariad, the Mallorea, Elenium and Tamuli far too many times to count. Also, Polgara/Belgarath books as well as Redemption of Althalus. Heck, I evewn have the Rivan Codex!

Yeah, for me, too, Edings was something really good when I was 13 or so. Now, older and having rewad more, I can see the lacking of originality in everything coming after Belgariad, and the, well, lack of depth.

But I still laugh my butt off at some of those witticsms.

 

david eddings' books are fun - light-hearted, easy to read stuff. agreed, by the time every man and his wolf has had the chance to retell their version of the belgariad, it's getting a bit repetitive. my main beef with eddings is that he's too fond of his characters - can't bear to kill them off, or for them to lose. they end up being way too powerful about 2/3's of the way thru' a series, and you lose any tension - the final battle's just an anticlimax.

jordan, on the other hand, well i've given up waiting for the final battle. i think i got bogged down in book 5, and have just been reading the synopsises (is that correct?) ever since, trying to work out if i can be bothered with the actual books.

 

I read the Belgariad and Mallorean back to back about like thirty times when I was in fifth grade -- I adored those books. I love the characters and the plot even though I realize now that the plot isn't the most original thing out there. And Eddings isn't Salvatore to be sure but the Belgariad is still probably my favorite fantasy series just as Silk is still my favorite character ever -- even above Drizzt and Jarlaxle. It just has the all the perfect elements for someone just getting introduced to fantasy worlds and it's one of those books that still cracks you up even after reading it thirty-two times.

On a less positive note, I do have to agree that about midway through the Malloean it almost seems that he runs out of ideas and just drags out the chase for Belgarion's son longer than it needed to be. If you ask me though, Silk more than makes up for it. Bust I also really liked Guardians of the West (the first book) it seemed a little seperate from the others and much more action-packed -- anyone else agree with that?

And although I read and liked Belgarath the Sorcerer (it seemed a little tedious in some points though) I found Polgara the Sorceress a bit too tedious and was only ever able to read it once all the way through and gave up attempting to re-read it again.

I did like Redemption of Althalus though (I seem to be one of the only people with that sentiment here) I mean it's definitely not one of my favorite ten books out there but I thought it was pretty good all in all.

 

Ive read and re-read those books more times than i can count and still love them. I think that Silk Barak Hettar and Mandorallen make up for it with their little chats before battles and stuff.
Silk RULES!

 

Agreed, Silk is THE best.

Reminds me of a one time long past when I, at the spur of the moment, went to a chat with the nick "Kheldar"... There were aslready people using nicks "Aldur" "Liselle" and "Garion" there, if not others... we had fun screwing around in a RP-sort of way. (I still remember "Mount Aldur"... *sigh