I QUIT Gardens of the Moon by Steven Erikson 

I love Malazen so much I even enjoy listening to why people don't like Malazan. This is a great review, hopefully it can help someone, there is nothing worse than reading something you don't like.

kThis was interesting to watch. As someone who has read the whole series three times now I obviously disagree with your assessment in a lot of points but some stuck out. You say that these are your personal opinions and that's fair enough but throughout the video you use "we" a lot which makes it a claim for a larger public. Probably not a deliberate decision but I thought I'd mention that that left a bit of a sour taste with me. The term "chosen one" is a bit of an issue that you probably didn't pick up upon because it is very clear throughout these books that there is no single "chosen one" and being chosen by whatever power is not exactly desirable. In fact, you cold call it a subversion of a trope, something that guy from New Mexico supposedly does so well. Another point: What you call objective or writing craft points is still very much subjective. You say that Erikson can't handle that many povs and that seeing a character go through a thought process, working out things the reader has already been shown is bad. But that is still your subjective taste, possibly a lack of patience with the book. As for the claim about characters, well, if you expect character development within the first 60% of a novel of a 10 book series, a part that does not in fact cover that much in-world time, then maybe that once again is down to a lack of patience or a preferance for very fast-paced narratives. And if you can read through the confrontation between Tattersail and Lorn or the conversations between Lorn and Tool and see no character work done, then maybe that is down to very subjective expectations of how characters should be written. You saying that Whiskeyjack was the only time you felt a character well done does support that as he's probably the closest to a stereotypical character of modern fantasy you can get in this book, the gruff, strong, silent type who's always suffering from his own regrets. As a side-note: The movie script did exist but was much shorter than the novel and I agree you can see this legacy in the novel, in particular the Daruhjistan parts. All good for not liking the book, taste is of course subjective but when talking about writing craft and dropping the o-word, a little care would convince me subjectively more.

I was hooked when I read the foreword. (In the store. Yeah, I'm one of those.) It gave me the feeling I had commisioned this book and it was written to fit my taste perfectly. It didn't disappoint and I don't remember ever thinking the ball was dropped, throughout the ten books. That said, the series is LOOOONNNNG!

Reddit is rarely good for recommendations but honestly when I was looking for a book that had amazing world building they suggested Malazan and they were right on. Nearly finished with book 7 and ready to for 8

This book is not for me either. I found that I didn’t care about any of the characters. Before people bash me, I tried my best to like it. I was able to finally finish it by listening to the audio, but I will not continue with the series.

I finished the first book, though on a second try and I just couldn’t make myself continue. I can tell from the writing style that Stephen Erickson is a fantastic author. Just something about this book makes me not care about anything or anyone in it. 😩 and I wanted to love it….

I recently finished Gardens of the Moon and overall I enjoyed it and I'm very much interested to read the next books. I understand your criticisms and they definitely are fair, but I do enjoy the spectacle magic and gods among men. Also the redundancy didn't bother me because, like you said, i did read it from the characters pov, and I liked to see everyone figure things out differently. For the most part I just went along with what the book was doing, and mostly enjoy the moment to moment storyline.

Gardens of the Moon was tough. I used to play AD&D a lot in highschool and remember a lot of odd characters, settings, and half baked plots that, if you roll with the punches and tolerate some lameness, you end up having a great time. This book is like a D&D game with a super smart and creative DM who's just cutting his teeth. If you stick with the campaign and keep showing up, you end up having some very memorable evenings.

Now that this video has more or less blown up (by my channel's standards), I'd like to say thanks to everyone who had contributed to the conversation. Whether you agree with me or not, I appreciate all the perspectives. Keep 'em coming!

One of the things I enjoyed which I think you may not have was the dissemination of the information through the characters. An event would happen and you would see some pov's discuss and theorise with each other. An perhaps what I enjoyed more than that was when a specific character was so focused on their own goals they missed out on this information, and so you could see them acting on "outdated" info. characters didn't just "know" things and actually acted on what they thought they knew even if they where mistaken. And then when I was re-reading with your videos you can really see how all the characters have their own motivations and hidden agendas that are working in the background. Obviously you won't pick up on them as you are just meeting them and you don't have the ten thousand pages of context, but it is crazy how you can read Gardens after the series and it feels like an entirely new book, bear in mind I didn't read it as closely as you were analysing it the first time. Overall its a damb shame that you bounced off the series however I respect that it is a big commitment and that if its not for you its not for you. But even with that being said you have got to at least read Deadhouse Gates come on my dude like it is the best series ever and if you read to DG you will see it I know it to be true hahah. I feel like it is also so hard to accept as there is everything in this series so their will definitely be parts that will blow your mind but evaluating if it is worth getting there is also a consideration to take.

I was so frustrated by this book when I first read it for the same points you brought up, but by the end I was loving it and I'm so glad I carried on for the rest of the series!

Good for you, man. I stuck it out and quit the SERIES at around 60%.. I tried so hard, but I quit.

Couple of things: gods talking with men is easily explained through the concept of ascendance in which formerly mortal characters change in cosmic importance in the history of this world. The superhero comment is really strange to me because there are no clear heroes or good vs evil in this series. Another thing, your characterisation of this novel as plot over character is a misapprehension on your part. This series is theme over plot, not plot over character. All plot developments here are in service of thematic exploration. And Erikson’s approach to character building is different because he doesn’t spell things out but only observes behavior. He lets the reader make their own interpretations of their behavior but Erikson is very consistent in slowly building up great characters over the course of the series, but you have to engage with it as an historical text. This book was playing very different games which you didn’t pick up on.

Lol at least 60% of the reason I'm still powering through is because the author is a fellow Canadian haha. I find I'm not reading the book as much as experiencing it but once I've finished and looked back at the chapter summaries, I feel like it was a positive experience, but it is the most challenging read I've ever done. Somehow, not in a bad way. It's like reading Shakespeare I suppose. I feel like I'm getting something good out of it, but it's hard to understand what's happening moment to moment. Every once in a while I get flashes of understanding, and in those moments the book is super good and according to readers, that happens more and more until it all makes sense, but this story definitely doesn't hold your hand at all. I do particularly like the T'lan Imass though. The best thing I can think to say about this series is that EVERY criticism is fair and/or true, but it's still super good.

As a malaz fanatic it saddens me that it didn't tickle your fancy. May it warm up to you in time 🙂

Favorite Fantasy series but also one I completely understand folks not getting into or even just not enjoying once they've gotten into it. It has so many quirks that you'll either love or have to endure and for that reason it's gonna be divisive as hell.

I think what people mean when they say the series is "confusing" is that the full context and significance of much of what you read in these books is rarely revealed when you first read it. It's not so much that the writing is difficult to understand as it is the author's intent that the reader be in the dark in order to set up a later reveal. It's one of the things that makes the series stand out in comparison to most fantasy series I've read which tend to be fairly linear. But what else should I have expected with source material derived from a tabletop roleplaying campaign? As I recall from my D&D days, every good DM knows how to keep their players in the dark!

Really enjoyed the way you laid out your points. Like you, I am not a fan of magic widely available, not a fan of Gods walking among men, and not a fan of resurrections....so I contended with those things while reading Gardens of the Moon. However, after finishing it and let it sink in my head I felt compelled to read Deadhouse Gates and thought the characters were much better developed on that one. Gardens of the Moon took me like 5 weeks to read, the next 2 books took me 8 days each. Long story short, I am on book 4 and loving the ride. I think there's noticeable improvement in his writing starting on book 2, except for whenever there's any sort of romance happening (subjective ofc) but those are always 0 to 100 in a split second. Anyways, great review, wish it would have worked for you cuz now that I discovered your channel, I think your reviews of the series would have been super interesting!

For whatever it's worth, the balance skews way more towards character in all of the subsequent books (by the start of the next book you can immediately sense the progression). So much so that by Fall of Light you'll be wishing for more plot and shorter scenes :D. GotM is full of great ideas with some less than stellar plot progression. Whenever I've recommended the series to people I describe GotM as the hurdle you just have to get through. In retrospect it plays a lot better, which doesn't make getting into the series any easier. I can understand bailing out now, but you really are missing out on some truly special moments as the series continues. Everyone has their own tastes though and at least you gave it a shot! Edit: I should add that I'm one that tends to prefer "low" to "high" fantasy. Here, the high fantasy is soft enough that the fuzziness of its rules adds to the mystery. A series like ASOIAF relies on its groundedness to establish its sense of place and consequences. Malazan regularly breaks free of what audiences feel is or should be possible, but somehow each of the times it seems to break its own rules, the results feel inevitable. That's a tough balancing act to achieve and I really give Erickson credit for consistently pulling it off.

Super hero? Who’s the hero?

I just finished the book, and I give up. Malazan is not for me.

I have to say, Eriksons character work is outstanding.

Quick points: Not everyone in the Malazan world can use magic. Very few people in Gardens can use magic. There is no chosen one plot in malazan, especially not in gardens, its activley avoided at all costs. Im confused why this was mentioned? Gods don't really just walk around. Shadowthrone and Dancer maybe, but obviously there's an in story reason for that with their wanting to get revenge on the empress for their murder

i am reading this book right now. this book so far has a lot of information for me to digest. a lot of terms and a lot of types of weird people and a lot of strange events are happening. it's very intriguing, so much so that i want to finish this first book. i want to find out more about the strange customs, the strange magic systems....like what the f is happening?

I slogged through the first book. It wasn't "difficult". It's that there was no protagonist. No stakes. No story, character arc, companionship, journey. It was just a bunch of badash clips of flight, teleportation, invisibility, gods, shapechange, resurrection ... with all the magic, how could there be any stakes? I then read reviews that say you have to go in with a spreadsheet and/or reread the series for the first 2 books to make sense. It does read like the first draft of a movie script.

im reading the book right now, im also at around 60% of the books and i agree that the book is not so hard to read actually. The events that take place are shared among many PoVs, but you know that side A has 3 characters, side B has 3 characters and the chapters are unfolding around them, so it's easier to follow. As regards to the redundancy of the PoVs, i didnt really feel that. You get to understand better the character's personality as you see how they process each event. In fact i loved how the book was written it made me feel way more immersed to the actual story and to how mysterious everything is.

Apparently this series is going to get REALLY good later. Just watched a video by Matt's fantasy book Reviews where he asked about 30 booktubers to name their favorite fantasy book and the last book of this Fallen series got the most votes! Personally, I have not heard of Steven Erikson, so I was quite surprised.

I've just finished the book and I enjoyed the review as I felt some of these frustrations. I don't agree with the 'chosen one' trope applying to the book at all though.

I just finished the book. The early parts of the book felt tedious. Then it got interesting and I was hooked in. Then at the end, everything wraps up rather quickly and some what oddly. And the book managed to introduce new confusing elements. I still liked the book even with the issues I had with it.

I quit recommending what I view as the high point in modern literature because nobody can finish it who’s not looking specifically this type of book. With that said, you cannot provide an analysis of this series until the first 3 books are finished(which is really one book).

Malazan is an acquired taste, but I absolutely love it. I love it when pieces start to fall into place and when rereading entire books, after having progressed in the series, you pick up on so many details. The way everything is connected is just beautiful. However I will also say I could not read Malazan the way I read something like Mistborn or Cradle: front to back in one or two days. Malazan takes time. I read it in small pieces over the course of weeks or months per book. If one is a very dedicated reader, who cant put a book away after reading for an hour, I feel like Malazan will burn you out.

For me a fantasy series succeeds if it makes me feel immersed in the world. So far only 5 fantasy book series have done that: A Song of Ice and Fire, The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Wheel of Time, and The Stormlight Archive. Malazan fails because it feels like like an RPG and the characters are just not compelling. As a result, I don’t feel immersed in the world. Similar to the way Sanderson’s Mistborn trilogy didn’t work for me because it felt like I was in a video game. I would have attempted to at least finish the series if it were not for the author himself, Mr Erickson. I don’t think Mr Erickson takes criticism well. Other reviewers have criticised the series for weak characterisation. Mr Erickson read these negative reviews and responded with a rant on Facebook where he essentially questioned the intelligence of readers. When I read his rant on Facebook I decided it was time to give up on the series. If you are an author who writes for public consumption, your work is fair game- you’re going to get negative and positive reviews. Some people will dislike it and some people (maybe most) will love it. You need thick skin. But Mr Erickson doesn’t view his series as simple fantasy to entertain people. He sees it as a masterpiece, which is why during an interview he expressed his desire for academics to study his work and lamented that more people are not reading/ studying his books. He specifically wanted a literary scholar to write an academic paper comparing Gardens of the Moon and Dune. I think the author has an inflated ego or is highly sensitive. Either way his comments really irked me.

I have just started Book 1 in audio form, so looking forward to how I like it (tried it a long time ago, but steered in other directions back then). Do you still stand firm, or are you swaying to try again perhaps?

Plot over character is a tough sell for me as well. Great review of this. Love and agree with the objective/subjective breakdown.

You say it in a nicer way than I can. This book isn't for people interested in human relations and how to find out what can make life better for all. All characters are objects with main purpose to kill or be killed in pointless and boring descriptions of violence. It's like reading about a never ending chess game. It has interesting language and some creative ideas. Otherwise it's on a really low level.

My buddy Raf already said a lot I agree with better than I could, so I’ll just say as a big Malazan fan (on my 2nd read), you’re of course entitled to your opinion - no book’s for everyone, of course - and you haven’t lost this subscriber for it. 😉

I quit the first book years ago, and just picked it up today again, to see if I was missing something. Nope, it's still tedious :(

I like Malazan but it’s definitely not a character driven work. I liked it more for the world building and lore, but I do think the later books have more interesting characters. Have you read Robin Hobb? Character driven work is her thing. My favorite author of all time

I can appreciate the opinion. I am actually someone currently reading book 5 and would say we don't get much more explanation about book one even at this point. That said, I enjoyed some of the things you weren't enjoying in this book that made me interested enough to finish the series. For me, the interplay of gods and mortals despite the power difference was compelling, and the sense of spectacle and amount of things happening, even if they may at times seem superfluous or overwhelming, created its own sense of mystery and awe that made me intrigued to continue. Even then, every book has had sluggish parts, or parts I could understand would turn people away. For me, it wasn't until book four when I finished a book and was very excited about the direction of the series. From what I've read most fans felt that after book three, which was certainly good but I found it waned at the end. The series hasn't revealed anything to me that would make it worth the reputation of its diehard fans, but I'm less than halfway and what I've read so far is certainly quite good. Malazan has a certain appeal, but its more detached and historical in perspective which makes it harder to emotionally invest in. Regardless, its entertaining enough for me to keep reading but I understand others losing steam.

It seems that fans of Malazan get really pissy when someone is critical of the series. And Malazan is overrated, with poor characters and writing, mediacore plot, half-decent superficially original worldbuilding.

Great vid, m'man! I haven't been checking out BookTube in quite a while since my head had been buried deep, deep within a sea of code, but this video was a breath of much needed air for me. I must say that our similar flow continues with your focus on character over plot. We both use the example of James Bond as a plot-driven property (at least traditionally). The core issue, though, is about plot driven vs. story driven writing. Plot is simply the sequence of events in a work that ideally have some cohesive flow. Story is all about the changes within the character(s) due to events, internal and/or external. In the case of James Bond, he is the same guy at the end of the story that he was at the beginning. However, any main character in a Pixar movie will undergo some change by the end. That's why their movies tend to resonate. So, I respect and support your decision to quit that novel, unsubscribers be damned. 👍

I ran across this video while about three-fourths of the way through Gardens of the Moon, and I'm going to force myself to finish it, but I'm not enjoying it that much, for reasons that may not be quite the same as yours but at least have some overlap. One of the reasons I read fantasy is to immerse myself in another world and vicariously experience that world through the eyes of the viewpoint character(s). That works a lot better when there's only one or, at most, a very few points of view, and when the reader is allowed to know about as much about the world and about what's going on as the viewpoint character does. This book definitely does not give me that.

I quit this book about halfway through because none of the characters felt engaging or well developed. It relies on the world to be interesting enough on its own to draw you in. It's not. All the standard tropes of magic, being something predetermined by birth, focusing on the importance of bloodlines over talent, effort, or earned skill. Not to mention that the core takeaway from the series is "war is good of actually!" No wonder this series is so popular in the West...

I just finished GOTM last week, and am now 40% through the second book Deadhouse Gates. I had my issues with the first book. It felt like if the A Song of Ice and Fire series started in A Storm of Swords, in the middle of the War of the Five Kings and Dany in Slaver's Bay with her three dragons. There were a lot of characters that at times I had trouble keeping track of. There was a lot of high-level magic that had little in the way of explanation, and likely won't until later in the series, but I looked at the wiki for explanations. It throws a lot at you. Erickson could have made it smoother. It wasn't until around halfway into the book that a plot point came up that had me saying "Ok, now things are getting interesting. I'm hooked." The hook villain felt like it fell a little short in some way with a bit of a deux ex machina. Although, I admit I like some of the fantasy elements like a floating mountain fortress, different parallel worlds, zombies with magic weapons and magic greatswords that imprison souls. I just wished there was more explanation. Erickson does play with tropes, opening with an evil empire Malazan ruled by an evil usurping empress Laseen like in a typical fantasy series, but the protagonists, the Bridgeburners, aren't your typical fantasy heroes fighting against the evil empire (at least at the start), but fighting for it. As others have pointed out, the chosen one is subverted a little with Crokus's case as he doesn't do much and if anything it just gets him a target on his back. It's rough start, but it gets better. The second book had me interested early on with plot points that had me wanting to read more, and it is easier to follow the characters as well as their actions having more significance. There's even a little moment that almost made me chuckle when they were dealing with a shapeshifter at sea.

i actually agree with everything you've said. I myself have finished the book, and did like it, BUT there were a lot of nagging things about it that were in line with everything you said. And keep in mind, unlike you, I actually don't mind the more overt fantasy with gods-among-men, and high magic and things of that nature. However, the thing that shocked me most of all, was that this series seemed always billed as this very deeply layered, complex series, and in fact I was kind of stunned to find it reading fairly shallow and superficial to me. Now keep in mind, I still found it pretty enjoyable, in that comic-book popcorn film sort of way. It had a ton of "entertaining" characters, fun scenes, a ton of action. The pace felt very fast because it's constantly headhopping between an endless assortment of characters which are fairly well written, if albeit shallow. But the book itself did not feel very 'deep', I kept walking away with this nagging feeling of a shallow popcorn flick, like sort of watching a summer blockbuster movie like Transformers 3 or something to that effect. The characters themselves were pretty obviously heavily inspired by videogames and have video-gamey names and personalities (I mean come on, Anomander Rake is basically Sephiroth). All in all I still do plan to continue the series, but just wanted to express that I do agree with pretty much all of your points. edit: Oh, and I forgot to mention. A lot of the plot feels a bit contrived in an overly convoluted/complex way as if the author is simply trying really hard to obscure and make everything as densely opaque and oblique as possible to make it "feel" like there's these endless plans within plans and machinations going on, but after a while it actually starts to become tedious because none of these things are ever resolved adequately and the reader never given any satisfaction in resolutions. Every near-resolution just turns into another endless pit of machinations and I feel this is a bit of a poor management of reader's expectations. To me, for a book to be truly gripping, it has to properly manage the push and pull of giving readers satisfying moments, then pulling with reversals/twists, etc. And this felt to me like an endless barrage of un-resolvable twists and reversals that just keep mounting, and mounting, and mounting, and mounting, until it DOES start to become a little tedious when you realize there is NO true "end" in sight to this storyline and nothing ever seems to feel like it gets closer to resolution, things only get darker, and MORE convoluted and entropic, etc, etc.

I always tell people to read the Path to Ascendancy - trilogy first. Makes Gardens of the Moon a lot easier to grasp.

For anyone who struggles with GOTM I would recommend Ian esstlemonts Paths to Ascendency series first; introduces the world, characters and magic system a lot more easily for people who haven’t read epic fantasy series. Personally I cannot agree with anything you’ve said in this review and I believe that if you even just got to the 2nd book ‘Deadhouse Gates’ by the end your entire view will change. ‘The chosen one’ the whole point of the series is that there is no one chosen person who can ‘save the day’ everyone in the series plays a part no matter how small a character they are. Erikson MPOV cannot be touched even by GRRM to have a series with 100s of named characters who are all distinguishable from each other is genius. Honestly if you ever finished this series nothing you will ever read again will come close to it. I think you do yourself a disservice by not atleast trying to finish the first 3 books. If you can get to that point and still have the views you currently have on the series then the greatest fantasy series every written just isn’t for you.

i am actually listening to all ten books and then i will read all ten books. a helpful tool is to use malazan wiki for help with all the different races and warrens and the numerous characters.

I understand the feeling of watching or reading something and allowing my personal prejudices against certain types of plot details or characters to outshine my enjoyment of the material. I'm convinced that my narrow- mindedness interferes with many experiences, such as enjoying certain books. The evidence that one can be overly swept up by their own beliefs and unable to take off their blinders is that people often change their mind about the same material on a later revisiting. I would not have enjoyed Malazan if I attempted to read it 10 years ago, but now am a huge fan.

Idk if I would categorize this as 'superhero fantasy'. I would 100% put The Way of Kings and much of Sanderson's fantasy work into that category, but Malazan feels much different. Yes, magic is more of a job, a skill that can be learned, than some mysterious aspect of this world, as you say, but it's less about the fantastical elements and more about how they are utilized that put something in that category, I think. The 'chosen ones' of these stories don't feel like Neo from the Matrix or Ang from Avatar, stories in which the hero learns how to utilize his powers so that he can save the world and crush the villain underfoot. You see this type of tale told in Sanderson's The Way of Kings, for instance - the main characters are all learning to use their OP abilities in service of beating the bad guys. That isn't Malazan at all. The 'chosen ones' in Malazan are more like victims and pawns than your typical chosen-one hero. They are individuals who are swept up in something they don't understand, and it affects their lives in very detrimental ways. We see this in Sorry's storyline - an innocent girl who is literally possessed by one of these ascendants, which steals much of her memories and takes her far from her home. We see it in Paran, who has no idea what's going on, half the time (his brushes with these 'deities' really starts to affect him in the third book, but the shades of his torment are already present in Gardens). I would say that the chosen-one elements are more of a subversion of that trope than anything else, at least so far as I've read (the first three books). Perhaps that will change in the sequels, but this is a pretty grimdark world, so I doubt that will be the case. All that said, I 100% understand why someone wouldn't finish Gardens of the Moon. It is very plot-driven - I first tried to read it after a reread of ASOIAF, and I had to put it down - I think it might be impossible to go from the rhythm of GRRM to that of Erikson, and enjoy the latter. I ended up reading a few other things, then revisiting it, and I burned through it. The only things I can disagree with you on are the 'superhero fantasy' and the 'chosen one' comments, but the rest is very understandable.

Big like for this video. Everything you said is exactly what bothered me with Erikson. My favourite authors are Bakker, Martin, Wolfe, Donaldson etc so I was so excited to read Malazan. Sadly, I have tried thrice and everytime I quit somewhere between book 3 and 5. The most recent and probably the last was book three. My two main reasons are the ones you mention. The cast is huge and the stories so many. In book three you are still introduced to dozens of them. Even If I like some of them, I have to wait for hundreds of pages I do not care or even whole novels to get there. But, what bothered me mostly is the feeling that everything is highly powerful, magically significant. Every other person is super powerful, is a god, a demigod, an immortal, can be resurrected etc etc. Every place from a shithole to a vast plain is magical. Every other item. There is no balance. It is so abundant that it loses any meaning for me. Whatever is happening I feel no impact at all. I really wish it was otherwise

One of my issues when it comes to reading is I rarely DNF a book. Even if I'm not engrossed/enjoying it, I push through to the end. An compulsion for closure? An unrelenting opitimism? I may never know.

Malazan is a deep dive so i don't really begrudge anyone for putting it down but i feel like you are missing the point on a lot of things you say you don't like about the book. This is especially true if you're not a fan of high fantasy. Its too bad you didn't finish the book because he lines up a lot of the fantasy tropes you're talking about (super hero, chosen one) in an effort to knock them down. You mentioned you could cut the book down by changing the scenes that are explored from 2 PoVs but often the whole point is to explore an event or theme from different perspectives. One could probably argue this is verbose is an already large novel but Erikson is a master of dancing around a theme from all angles. One of the things to love about malazan is that all of the characters on both sides of a conflict are true to themselves and it makes the world feel real and lived in. Anyways, I hope you find some series you like!

Start MBoTF with Memories of Ice. I did that and enjoyed it a lot.

I remember when I first got Gardens of the Moon, it was for Christmas 3 years ago. I started reading it only to stop after a chapter or two like 10 times. I ended up going camping and forgot to bring any other books with me, so I figured it was either read it then or not at all. I finished it and thought to myself “that was okay, but I’m not sure if it’s worth reading the whole series.” As it turns out I had a friend that owned Dead House Gates, I borrowed it from him on a whim and I just have to say the improvement in characters, plot, and even the magic system was so immediate and fantastic that I read the other 8 books in the span of two weeks. I see and relate to your issues with Gardens of the Moon, and I understand not wanting to slog through the bad to get to the good. But if you ever find yourself drawn back to the world of the Malazan empire it does all turn out to be worth it.

I can totally get how the first book can be hard. I have read the main 10 and then did a reread. What I can say is that you can’t actually appreciate the first book on the same level if you haven’t gotten through the series. Another thing I would like to mention about the characters- there is no main/chosen one. For the different POV which are presented I myself find them interesting because they show opposite sides on an argument and in some cases you are not given a finale result, you have to figure it out on your own. And lastly I would like to share my view on some Mages talking with certain gods, the more you get involved in the world you will realise how right you are about gods not being talked to as equal, however, the arrogance of some characters is bigger then most of the gods😂😂😂 PS: I hope you give The Malazan another chance 😀

Gardens of the Moon was interesting to me and Deadhouse Gates was so beautifully written, but Memories of Ice is where it all came together for me. I appreciate seeing the "I just didn't like it" perspective as opposed to the usual "too complicated/confusing". If you're in for character driven story I do honestly believe you are missing a colossal amount in the series that starts even in the very next book. Characters and their growth through various hardship and trauma is a core theme of the series as a whole

I’m about 75% through and while I don’t necessarily disagree with your arguments, I am finding myself really enjoying the book so far. It’s absolutely bonkers and I’m finding that pretty entertaining.

Ahh I knew I shouldn't have watched this after seeing it pop up just now (probably cos I've checked out some other Malazan reactions recently), cos I knew I'd disagree 🙊 but appreciate the reasons given and I myself am usually pretty quick to drop a book that I just cant get into. Didn't realise how marmite this series was till well after I'd completed the series! I'm just sad that you couldn't live through the epic tales from this series and find some characters to truly get behind.

Superhero fantasy??? Not in the least. You missed the boat entirely.

So LOTR will be a No then?

Aww this book really picks up at like 70% haha. I think most of the books in this series do that. But the ending is so great. You said already you don't love many of the plot choices, magic, etc so maybe you won't like it, but i don't think you really got the whole flavor unless you finish book one. It's like ordering a meal and eating just the sides and saying you didn't like it.

Given what you've said you like, I have to recommend Daniel Abraham, anything he's written. Very character focused, magic is rare and mysterious, and his worlds are... alive , is the best descriptor I can think of.

Agree completely about a book series having to work from page one, not book five. Life is only so long....

Great review. We have very similar taste in fantasy, but I do like Malzan. I am surprised I do like it given the heavy magic use, but something about the way its written interreges me that I ponder on some things expressed. Ericskon sometimes plays on your own biases, then subverts them later. Your review why you did not like it though is spot on, given your taste.

I agree with the majority of your assessment, too damn many characters too soon, it's akin to modern action scenes where so much is happening it's hard to know what did happen so you wait for the action to stop to see what the hell resulted. There are limited plot lines, Shakespeare pretty much covered that so it becomes formulaic so whats necessary is character development which is near impossible when scenes are in snippets.

I made a small critique in another video once about Malazan and the Malazan fans didn't leave me alone for months. Anyway, I like this review. Kudos.

i had the same expectations going into reading gardens of the moon and also quit halfway though. wayyy too much too fast and not enough character for me

I read about the first half of this book and hated it. It’s not even that confusing it’s just not that good.

First, I haven’t read Malazan. Second, I think your points are very valid and clearly stated. Third, this seems to be a series which teaches the reader what they find they enjoy and the tropes or aspects of fantasy fiction which they do not enjoy. I’ve watched dozens of booktube videos re:Malazan. But other than “OMG ITS SOOOO GOOD!” All the other “explanations” just leave me feeling like “ugh, no thanks”. If 95% of reviews regard the first book as “just get thru it” than I’m sorry. Eff right off. IMO if you can’t get me in at least the first book? Why would I sludge through the rest? Time is more valuable than a much shorter “ahh that was cool” experience. I work enough. I read more. I’m not interested in combining the two at all. Of course, it won’t stop me from trying out the first 6 chapters. If idc by then I’m good to go.

I read this series back-to-back. I enjoyed it, but it was very confusing. I think if the author wasn't so confusing this would easily be in Martin and Jordan territory. There is a ton of character building here. And world building. It is definitely high fantasy; in later novels the gods are on earth. But I'm fine with that. Good series except that it was too confusing to fully enjoy. I stopped reading Erikson after this series for that reason.

Bro wanted it to be game of thrones so bad

Gardens of the Moon bypasses exposition and gradually fills in the blanks through dialogue. Bludgeoning the reader early with a grocery list of names, undeveloped, uninteresting characters involved in cacophonous, military jargon laced pov in medias res conversations. This slog gets compounded by Erikson's Malazan cosmos, insufficiently fleshed out to feel compelling or for one to care or become truly invested in. Apart from a narrational consensus formed around events such as Kellanved's assassination? Surly/Laseen of the Claw assuming control of Malazan Imperial expansion in Pale and Darujhistan and Anomander Rake floating on Moon's Spawn fighting in a Mage led conflagration in Pale. All the other plots of the novel sink under the weight of multilayered Machiavellian intrigue at the hands of unseen gods, ascendants, guilds, military operations, spies, assassins, witches, demons etc... Malazan is also a universe where a pervasive and distracting Tarot-Shamanistic-Voodoo divination-magic system of "Warrens" envelops everything, making the believable aspects of this world feel oppressive, ugly and claustrophobic. Ultimately, GOTM reads like a knock off Thucydides with smatterings of 19th century Archaeological and Anthropological travel writings from Africa, Middle East and Indonesia.

What if you were like in anouther realm lowerer then you thought unaware and the ones the. (Gods 😅look down on have a secret 1 much higher then all and suddenly a sword pierces your realm and your dropped onto the lower realms fallen you find yourself with the cherecter your jate most (the rock) and he starts going crazy ape shit cutting down evrything and everone painting streets red blood of the bastards ??

The repetition in this book kinda reminds me of playing a video game with weird mechanics- it takes a bit of getting used to and even once you do, it might still bother you. That said, I think objectivity is one of those touchy topics a lot of people don't wanna acknowledge, but I think it's critical to growth as an artist. I just quit Royal Assassin from The Farseer trilogy and I wish only wish I had done so sooner. And my issues for not liking it were all on the objective side- characters that were previously very active and competent suddenly becoming passive and incompetent. Characters who were incredibly clever and aware suddenly becoming utterly oblivious and dull, and a major plot-hole from the first book getting glossed over with an "We'll just never know why he did that."

So, I finished GOTM. Overall, it was just OKAY. Looking back at the novel, it felt like it took forever to read. I had to refer to the TOR read along articles several times to get all the hidden meaning. While the overall sequence of events was enjoyable, I didn't enjoy the prose and tempo due to the constant character shifts. It felt like someone trying to be too clever. At the end, it felt like work and I kept looking at my kindle hoping for the story to be done. I'm intrigued at some of the elements but I'm not sure if I'll carry on. I might try because I bought all of these on the kindle. But not sure. Other, more easily accessible stories are waiting.

I dropped it 6 chapters in. Being unceremoniously dropped into a story where it seems like each chapter is a prologue was just too uncomfortable to me. I only got 6 chapters, but in most books I like, that's enough to get a feel for the story, but I felt like I was standing on quicksand the entire time, trying to understand what was going on in any capacity. There didn't seem to be any glue holding the story together. That was years and years ago though, and I've thought about revisiting it several times, but now I'm thinking it might be a waste of time.

Hi Jason So glad i heard your review before starting the book as i have a similar taste in grim dark. A taste that prefers the game of thrones and the last word series over others. Can you recommend similar book series?

I just finished and found the final 20% good. But I was close to quitting on many occasions. It took me a year I think to finish Gardens. There is no bing reading incentive till very late.

I finished reading it because as someone who likes multiple POVs I wanted it to all make sense and fit together in the end. But I ended up being disappointed. By the end the things that were happening were no less ambigious and seemingly coming out of nowhere than in the beginning and none of it made sense or felt organic. There was no big payoff to the story for me, just more of the same. It felt like the book was asking so much of me and not giving anything in return. I couldn't even tell you what the title of the book means after finishing it.

Gardens of the Moon is pretty bad, but it does set up some of the lore for the series. I really love the series as a whole, and would recommend powering through. It's up to the individual to spend time or not, delving into this expansive, gritty and fairly humerous world.

I’m in the, “I absolutely loved it from the beginning!” group and it remains one of my favourites of the series…but we are all different and it would be pretty boring if we all liked the same thing.🤷🏻‍♀️

I think your assessment of this series is all wrong. Its fine to feel how you feel of course, dont get me wrong, but I noticed that you made a lot of assumptions based on what you read, and those assumptions are WAY off the mark given how the series progresses even just in book 2. Admittedly, though I love the first book, its BY FAR the weakest, so I think your criticisms only really make sense for book 1 and arent reflective of how you'd enjoy going forward. I genuinely think you'd really like this series given some of your other videos I watched before I saw this one. Also "superhero fantasy" threw me for a loop lol that was crazy. I still subscribed though. I see that youre an R Scott Bakker fan, so I legit think you should skip the rest of Gardens of the Moon, but go ahead and try Deadhouse Gates. If you like Bakker, youll like that too. Deadhouse Gates is a way more character driven story, its genuinely heartbreaking at so many points, the writing is way better, the characterization is phenomenal, the plot feels a lot more intentionally crafted, the miltary strategy is really great, THE THEMES, and the ending BLEW my fucking mind and it's what made me realize I had found a very special series unlike anything else. I really think its worth your time and worth trying with a blank slate. Idk how much you know about the structure of Malazan, but the series jumps around to various continents with (nearly) entirely separate casts of characters. The book is pretty much entirely separate from GotM, with the exception of Fiddler, Kalam and Crokus escorting Sorry (now Apsalar) home. The story is about the growing Whirlwind rebellion rising up against the Malazan empire on a different continent. I think Deadhouse Gates is inspired by putting an anticolonial twist on the Trail of Tears. There are 3 main plotlines. 1) Paran's little sister Felisin is caught up in the Empress's purge of nobles, and despite her older sister Tavore being the new Adjunct, she is sent to the penal mines in Seven Cities, and has to find a way to survive and hopefully escape. 2) Escorting Sorry through Seven Cities to get her home, meanwhile Kalam has a side quest delivering this holy book to the prophetess that will lead the uprising, 3) The Chain of Dogs, aka the main story: Coltaine of the Crow Clan, High Fist of the local Malazan forces leads a desperate retreat to safety, escorting 60K Malazan civilian refugees across the continent to Aren (the distance of Montreal to Miami) with Whirlwind soldiers dogging their heels the whole time. I have a Coltaine tattoo. GotM was written as a screenplay, over a decade before DG, and then was adapted into a book. Eriksons writting ability improved DRASTICALLY in those 10yrs and thats why GotM is the weakest book in the series. I think if you pick up Deadhouse Gates, youll probably really really enjoy it, and then it may be worth going back to finish the last book of GotM and then jump into Book 3 Memories of Ice which you'll also likely enjoy. If you read DG and dont like it, then fair enough, you tried and the series jusf isnt for you. But I have a feeling that Deadhouse Gates will surprise you and youll end up a Malazan fan after all. I mean, many of my favorite books have taken me 3, 4, 5 tries to finally get into after multiple DNFs, so I think itll be worth it for you to just jump straight into Deadhouse Gates and treat it like a brand new series. I have a suspicion youll thank me lol. As for structure: ●Genabackis: Book 1, 3, 4.1, 8 are set in Genabackis. (4.1 means the first 200pgs of book 4, which Erikson wrote as a single POV exploring/subverting the noble savage trope in response to a critic saying Erikson couldnt write a single pov story to save his life. He knocks it out of the park.) ●Seven Cities: Book 2, 4, 6 are set in Seven Cities dealing with the whole Whirlwind arc. ●Lether Books 5, 7, 9, 10 are all set on the far away isolationist continent of Lether than has been trapped stagnant in development for ages. Book 5 is chronologically first in the entire series, taking place like at least a decade before GotM, and it details the whole backstory of the continent Trull, the character from book 4, comes from prior to his imprisonment. Its also a brilliant critique of late stage capitalism, since the Letherii people basically view money as their god lol. Then Book 7 finally combines all three plotlines from Genabackis, Seven Cities and Lether into one, and sets us up for the end game in the final two books. Hence why you can jump straight into book 2 without an issue. I really do hope youll try it. I bet you 50$ you'll like Deadhouse Gates lol. If you finish it and I'm wrong, send me your paypal.

The world building is not good. Some of the ideas and concepts are just too cheezy

Its very interesting that some of the things you didnt like are things I loved the most when reading through the book for the first time this alst days. Just as an example: The different points of views often showing the same events where incredibly interesting to me, I love how Erikson uses perspectives of different people to build his world. Maby that works so well for me because I am a psychology mayor who loves characters being characterized by how they perceive the world around them?

I quit about 200 pages into the 2nd in the series. Just could not get into the story, did not hold my interest.

Your approach to Objectivism vs Subjectivism is appropriate.

I felt the same. There is no char development. Erikson's writing style is wonderful as he introduces chars and plots but they turn out to be like GQ photoshoot poses. They look good from the surface but both chars and plots are shallow and nonsensical with very few consequences (like too many resurrections). He is a postmodern writer.

The next two books, Deadhouse Gates and Memories of Ice, are the best in the series.

You should read Prince of Nothing by R Scott Bakker, it's much more character focused and low magic with very similar politicking to ASOIAF.

Took me 3 try.. but at my 3 rd try love the book gave it a 4 star for me

Same here. I gave up somewhere at the middle of the book. I was just not hooked by the plot and the characters. Seems like this book series is just not for me.

Have you read the Dresden Files?

One thing I remember when I 1st read this book 20 years ago. The 1st book is extremely confusing. Yes he did do too much too soon. However some of the later books are the opposite. It is pure character driven. Also all the confusing characters are fleshed out a bit too much. They are too slow. So I see where you are coming from. However I would say it's like working out in the gym. At 1st you are like this sucks. Then later you see the results.

Some just do not like the books, oh well, this is one of my favorites and I am reading the series a 4th time right now

I could go on and on as Malazan-lover about my disagreements, but I won't. But what I will say is that anyone who is super militant about Malazan and gives you crap about this is missing a central theme of Malazan: the danger of certainty, the strength of questioning everything, and seeings things from multiple perspectives.

Haven't finished the video, but so far my biggest shock is that someone stopped at book 4.

Just started book 1 and I am really on the fence here. Could be either way. Not sure if this is for me either. But I have only read 15%

I mean, it sounds like your criticism is mainly "I didn't like the plot and didn't gel with the characters" which is fine.

I am a huge fan of High fantasy and enjoy the epic scapes and huge scenes. I watched this video because I am struggling with this book and was looking for reasons why. I have the audio books and have fallen asleep every time I have had a listening session, this isn't a good sign. So far I haven't found any characters I like because I still have very little idea of what is going on. I don't think I am helping myself by falling asleep. I am going to try to finish it and take it from there.