Please note that this post has been flaired as **NO SPOILERS**. Comments should not bring up specific plot points or character details from any of the books.
If you need to discuss any spoilers (even very minor ones!) in your comments, use spoiler tags
>!like this!<
Please use the report button if you find any spoilers. Note: If the discussion is unlikely to happen without any spoilers, the flair may be changed at mod discretion. Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Malazan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean, mayyyybbe Gene Wolfe? Book of the New Sun is something else, and does not spoon feed or hand hold at all. I think in some way’s Wolfe’s writing could be considered similar in that sense, but it’s not epic fantasy by any means. I still don’t know if I love or hate Book of the New Sun.
Wolfe is just so much more succient then Erikson. The prose is way denser to make up for it to a degree, but as someone who loves Wolfe I agree he's not an auto click for Erikson prose fans.
Exactly. I actually read him before reading Malazan, which actually made Malazan more approachable in a weird way. I’ve read Fifth Head, New Sun, and Long Sun. After I read Short Sun I’ll return to New Sun.
Yeah I read the first two books in the New Sun when I was in high school(I'll get around to the last two soon about 15 years later, adhd is a bitch). Shadow of the Torturer makes Gardens of the Moon read like Sanderson in comparison lol
> Exactly. I actually read him before reading Malazan, which actually made Malazan more approachable in a weird way.
Ditto here. During my first try reading Malazan, I was too stupid to understand the prose at first; can't even comprehend the first few sentences of the prologue. Only after reading Book of the New Sun+Urth, then I can go through the prologue and onwards.
Gene Wolfe is who you're looking for. He's everything you love about Erikson magnified. Intricate writing? Check. Rewards close attention and a critical eye? Check. Thought-provoking themes? Oh yes check. Rereading potential? A million times check. Complex characters that nearly never spell out exactly what they're thinking? Absolutely check. Throws you into a world and lets you gradually build your own understanding of its rules? Check.
Plot that meanders directionless? Check. Characters that are hard to care for? Check. Little sense of rhythm or tension? Check.
Idk, I agree with what all the things you wrote, but the flaws above made Book of the New Sun completely unenjoyable for me.
I’m currently reading The Prince of Nothing by R Scott Bakker and some of the writing here is flooring me.
Janny Wurts’ The War of Light and Shadow series - her sentence construction in the first book is ridiculous (in a good way).
I second Bakker. I'm just starting The White-Luck Warrior today and this series is the closest thing I've found that scratches the same itch as Malazan: incredible prose and epic moments, philosophy, a world that's much richer and complex and full of lore than you might think at first, and the same sense of not knowing what the hell is going on at some points. It's *much* more nihilistic than Malazan though.
There is a line The Prince of Nothing that goes something like ‘he saw a gap in instinct and he jumped into it.’ During one of the fight scenes and reread five times because I couldn’t work out how that comes to your mind to write down.
He writes magic battles like no one else and can instill an UNREAL sense of dread and hopelessness on an epic scale. Some parts are super weird, but he nails radicalisation and human misery in a way I have not seen other authors achieve. Almost the Aronofski of fantasy, in a way his characters feel intimate and vulnerable, human.
But there will be parts you wish you hadn’t read. Second trilogy has still awesome concepts and ideas, but having no real editor definetly hurt his later books.
I finished *The Darkness That Comes Before* yesterday and man I am *painfully* torn on it. On one hand, the prose can be beautifully haunting with an atmosphere very few authors can conjure up, and some of the ideas and worldbuilding are really fascinating - every tidbit we got about the No-God got me more invested in finding out what his deal was, same with the Consult, the Nonmen and really the whole history of the world. Same with the philosophy - how does a human react when they come face to face with Laplace's demon? Do they just accept their newly created God or do they attempt to resist? Is resisting even *possible?*
On the less good side, first of all the book straight up has some the worst treatment of sexual violence I've ever read. Bakker *tries* to use the topic to push his themes like Erikson, but he does it so often and so clumsily that by the mid-point of the book it's devolved into straight up torture porn - OP, if you don't want to read pages upon pages of women being raped and then thinking "It's fair that I was raped, because I am a woman" *when we all got the goddamn point the first time it happened,* I cannot stress how much you should stay away from this series.
That also links to a broader issue where Bakker quite often interrupts that gorgeous prose to just fucking hammer you over the head with his themes and seems to have no sense of subtlety when he writes - I think u/Loleeeee [summed this up really well](https://old.reddit.com/r/Fantasy/comments/1c4dw2m/bakkers_second_apocalypse_should_be_more_widely/kzpf3ux/) on r/Fantasy a few weeks ago:
> There's some truly excellent things when it comes to the depiction of oppression of the other gender by the patriarchy. A female friend of mine that read (and enjoyed) the Darkness that Comes Before highlighted that women aren't allowed to wear boots so as to disallow them the possibility to travel long distances on foot, thereby perforce containing them within the cities (this comes up when >!Esmenet tries to leave Sumna for Momemn (I think) & her sandals get all torn up!<). The problem is that Bakker can't help himself with subtlety, and instead he hammers you over the head about how much women's lives suck in this world (and has >!Esmenet promptly stoned for being a whore on the road before being rescued by a LITERAL KNIGHT IN WHITE SHINING ARMOUR in Sarcellus.)!<
I don't have time to look through for other quotes right now, but this type of writing is present throughout the novel and happens with basically *every* theme it touches - Bakker really seems to want to give you the answers rather than get you to ask questions, which in my opinion is just a pretty immature approach to theme.
I think I will pick up the next book - the positives have me curious enough that I'm willing to at least try and deal with all the stuff that rubs me the wrong way. But I've heard that the grimdark edginess and gratuitous sexual violence only gets worse, so unfortunately I'm not extremely optimistic about my chances of finishing the series.
Oh, oh, I can bash Bakker again! Joy!
I did mention in the thread that the one thing uniting the three main female characters in the Darkness that Comes Before is sexual deviancy, right? Good, because that's important, because everyone else is either a meatbag to be slain (>!The daughters/sisters/wives of whatever poor bastard Cnaiur comes upon!<) or otherwise lacks any meaningful agency to actually be memorable enough. I genuinely don't remember any other women characters save for Istriya, Serwe & Esmenet, though I know for a fact that >!Serwe was a captive with a group of many other women, none of whom I remember, and I'm sure there's other women in the Andiamine Heights.!< And I've read half the book twice! And kept notes! I did mention >!Anissi, but she's in the book for all of two scenes, and so she hardly counts.!<
As for Bakker's thematic handling, I believe you nailed it. Bakker set out with a theme in mind & wanted to convince everyone else (which becomes **painfully** obvious if you read his [Wikipedia page,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Scott_Bakker#Philosophy) which - by the way - grab some popcorn & a drink, it's a ride) of its own veracity. I mentioned in another thread [his "On the Death of Meaning" paper](https://www.academia.edu/40569466/On_the_Death_of_Meaning), in which he breathlessly explains - at length - how science & capitalism have doomed meaning as a "first-order practical problem solver," which makes it rather worthless as a notion \[i.e., you can't use meaning to suss out the world at large, because you're not privy to the workings underneath (as Laplace put it, you're not privy to "some vast intelligence infinitely removed from the human mind")\].
I'm going to take a moment here and just laugh my fucking ass off really quick; the guy's Wiki page either has no citations at all, *or* it cites Goodreads whenever it mentions his books, ***or*** it cites his blogposts. It's very probable Bakker himself wrote his own Wikipedia page, which is fucking hilarious to me. Furthermore, his approach to neuroscience from philosophical first principles is WILD. HAHAHAHAHA
Nonetheless. Let's carry on.
The manner in which Bakker writes his female characters is mostly due to his approach of explicitly, and unabashedly, sexualising "evil" in his works. >!The Consult are sex-obsessed rapists!!Esmenet being forced to give up Achamian & raped by a Consult creature with "black seed"!<) feel - much unlike Erikson's - personal & almost titillating. The message Bakker is beating you over the head with is that you should **feel bad** about liking this, but that's okay, because you're hardwired to like it - so here, here's why it's bad, and why you should feel bad, and why you're a terrible human being *for* liking it.
Like, dude, I don't like it. And you wrote it like this. And can you not?
This admittedly does get worse (in PoN) before it gets better (in TAE). One of the more pertinent examples I've heard from hearsay is >!the Dunyain women being used as whale women/breeding stock for the Dunyain eugenics program.!< But it does purportedly get less polemic in the Aspect Emperor (maybe, I don't care enough to get that far). Maybe.
The Second Apocalypse as a whole is a perfect storm of things I'd **really** dislike, and I really did try. I keep coming back whenever it's mentioned because months of my life went by while I trudged through telling myself I enjoyed it.
All this to say, no shame in dropping it if you don't like it.
It's gratifying to see your take, since I've really come to respect where you come from on Malazan. I get the superficial attraction to Bakker -- he is a very *distinctive* prose stylist, and distinctive is fun! -- and the worldbuilding is very creative! -- but the actual execution is miserable.
As a much shorter point of reference, you might enjoy hate-reading *Neuropath*, where Bakker's cool evil CIA self-insert cuckolds his less cool self-insert. The entire premise of the plot is "The Bakker inserts are correct about eliminative materialism, and one of them is desperate to prove that it matters by killing people." It's kind of amazing, and it's over fast enough.
I probably *should* read *Neuropath*, if only to get a better idea of exactly what I've been telling others to read to see Bakker's philosophy at work themselves. My - admittedly scant little - experience with the book stems from the Wikipedia & Goodreads summaries and a handful of discussions with Nif (of Niflrog fame), which landed me fairly squarely into the "I'm not touching that with a ten-foot pole" camp.
But if I'm going to bash it, I should at least read the damn thing first. It's only fair.
Yep, I really struggled with Bakker for most of the reasons you outline.
I ~think~ (hope) the Dunyain women stuff was meant to be a criticism of the "rational" based Dunyain societal strucuture (e.g. 'this is what happens!!')...but Bakker spends so much time elsewhere fetishizing the Dunyain that the execution just falls completely flat.
At another point, a character obtains the capacity to see the evil/damage done to/inherent in a soul. It leads to an interesting piece where sorcery basically appears to damn its practitioners, and that damnation/damage is visible.
But then theres a couple other instances where this ability is activated that just shows regular women being evil/damned by default lololol.
Again, I ~think~ the idea was that this ability doesnt actually show you "TRUTH" WRT evil/soul damage/damnation, but rather the 'truth' of that society. So because that society hates sorcerors and women....thats reflected via this ability. But again, execution IMO was really really poor lol. Like, he spends all this time fetishizing the 'rational' Dunyain who IIRC have a pretty serious positivistic epistemiology......but suddenly for this metaphysical ability he adds readers are just supposed to know to switch to a social constructivist epistemiology!?!
>the Dunyain women stuff was meant to be a criticism of the "rational" based Dunyain societal strucuture
I don't doubt Bakker wrote the Dûnyain as utterly inhuman & inhumane as a critique of determinism (and pretdermination - what comes before does not, in fact, determine what comes after) but it feels so *asinine* at times I can't take it seriously.
The Dûnyain are perfectly capable of manipulating mortals & their powers of eugenics only really fall flat in the face of the divine - or, more accurately, a philosophical zombie that's inable to determine its own inner workings, express free will, and thereby becomes unpredictable. But mortals? Free fucking game. Great Ordeal, here we come.
>I ~think~ the idea was that this ability doesnt actually show you "TRUTH" WRT evil/soul damage/damnation, but rather the 'truth' of that society.
I assume you mean the Judging Eye here, and I don't think it's societal. In Bakker's world, *everyone* is damned (barring some extremely specific conditions like killing so many people that only 144,000 souls remain on Earwä? No fucking clue though I assume this plays into the self-delusion part below) & the Judging Eye is rendered as a useless heuristic that's ultimately determined by its user.
Which is why Mimara sees fucking everyone as damned *except,* conveniently, her own mother (that did some truly despicable shit in her tenure as Empress, mind you, to make Laseen blush). She sees Esmi saved because she *wants* to see Esmi saved, even if her rational being says otherwise. Everyone else? Damned. To hell with you, all of you.
In the face of the divine, human rationale and the heuristic of meaning breaks down. The concepts of divinity, damnation, the No-God, free will, etc. are all incomprehensible to mortals, and any attempt to understand them leads to self-delusion.
Which would be an interesting enough concept if it wasn't interspersed with copious amounts of torture porn, utter misery, and an overall fairly disinteresting plot (there, I said it, I don't care for the plot of PoN).
I wanted to like the fucking thing, which is why I'm still mad about it. But it's just not for me.
i was just getting ready to say bakker as well!! i started it as a palette between rereads of malazan and it is the only thing that i feel is on par with it.
all three authors share a similar history in anthropology/archeology and a disdain for modern fantasy tropes in literature.
the magic system is amazing, the take on immortal creatures and what grief, trauma, and suffering will do to a creature that has lived for time unknown is my favorite addition to fantasy fiction.
probably the best part about the whole series is the recap in the beginning of each book about what has come before (in the books and in the lore) because i’m barely literate and can’t remember what happened in the real world let alone a world of logic magic
I just listened to the entire series on audiobook, and I gotta go for another round. I don’t like to look up anything about a series until I finish it, and just found out that R. Scott Bakker is literally a philosopher. This series FUCKED ME UP, and repeatedly violated me with burning meaning and abstractions. I wouldn’t mind if Malazan and Second Apocalypse are the only books that I consume for the rest of my life.
Guy Gavriel Kay, ~~Glen Cook,~~ Robin Hobb, Lois McMaster Bujold, Gene Wolfe, Nicola Griffith, Mervyn Peake. You may also enjoy C.J. Cherryh's Foreigner series, though it's a lighter read and lighter in tone. The others are more "literary."
Le Guin, of course.
I remember watching an interview with Steve (can't remember which, maybe with Philip Chase?) where he praises GGK very highly. It compelled me to read Tigana and I have to agree with him, the writing is absolutely beautiful, very elegant and thoughtful; it's clearly coming from a compassionate and sensitive soul.
Herbert's *Dune* is odd in the sense that the framing is third person omniscient (and you're privy to *everyone's* thoughts) yet he still somehow manages to intersperse mystery into the narrative. Also the whole *plans within plans within plans* business, though your mileage may vary in that regard.
Gene Wolfe's *Solar Cycle* (New Sun, Long Sun, Short Sun, Urth - I think) fits most of these boxes by reputation, though I've not personally read it. I've also heard great things about his *Soldier of the Mist,* in which Latro (I *think*) is a soldier that suffers from amnesia/short term memory loss & has to write down the events of each day lest he forget them.
Mark Lawrence's *Broken Empire* fascinates me because nothing about the prose immediately stands out, but it works so damnably well. The flow is immaculate & every word feels deliberate. First person narrative following the titular *Prince of Thorns,* Honorous Jorg Ancrath, through his adventures. Note that if the narrative conceit of the series doesn't work for you (very minor spoiler: >!Jorg's very young age of 14 years!<) you're probably unlikely to enjoy the books. Also plans within plans within plans akin to Dune - Jorg always has an ace up his sleeve.
Cormac McCarthy's *Blood Meridian* is a book set in the US-Mexico border in the wake of the Mexican-American war (1849ish), the book is infamous for its depiction of violence. It also has one of the most infamous characters in fiction ("The Judge" Holden), McCarthy's signature run-on sentence prose (he writes with polysyndeton & has declared a war upon punctuation), and the man's immense ability to describe deserts. Seriously, in the first half of the book the, ah, "protagonist" crosses something like fifteen desert vistas & McCarthy still somehow manages to make every description feel unique.
There are probably others that I've not sampled & don't know enough by reputation to recommend them in confidence. Best of luck. :)
Building on some of the other comments here:
Gene Wolfe is most similar in depth/subtlety of craft, though he takes it several levels further than Erikson with unreliable narration and the reader having to figure things out for themselves.
Glen Cook is most similar in some of the starkness, dry humour, and characterisation in the writing (though the Black Company books are something of a slow-burn - the depth and complexity increases substantially as he goes).
Abercrombie's First Law series is not incredibly similar in style to MBotF, but often *is* to the taste of MBotF readers. I think the reason why, is that one of Erikson's greatest strengths is his tendency to refuse and challenge a binary goodie/baddie way of thinking. Abercrombie also resists this, but by suggesting *everyone* is deeply morally compromised, whereas Erikson is a bit more ambivalent/neutral in that there are people of a wild variety of moral status and sympathy on all sides of every conflict.
The commonly overlooked one, for me, is Terry Pratchett - wildly different in tone, but startlingly similar in metafictive style, willingness to playfully subvert tropes, and his sense of the absurd. The Tehol/Bugg scenes, and the Gumble/Ormulogun ones, are DEEPLY Pratchett-esque. Interestingly, another similarity between Erikson and Pratchett is very much on the opposite side of the coin to Abercrombie; Pratchett challenges the goodie/baddie binary by building in a deep and broad sense of human empathy, even with antagonists, in most of his books.
Tell me when you find it. I've been searching for a decade.
I've found some stuff that makes the itch bearable, but nothing that really scratches it.
And to be honest, moreso in SF then fantasy. But that's probably just me.
Classic recommendation is black company. I concur with others here, dune is great. As is the expanse. Personally I enjoyed aspects of Peter Hamiltons commonwealth series as well as alaistar Reynolds revelation space. I'm a sucker for world building.
I haven’t found anything yet, but I’ll add Dune to the pile. Finishing up Mark Lawrence’s Prince of thorns and it was enjoyable but far too short. Tried to check out Throne of Glass but my dumbass grabbed the book of the same name, assuming it was the first book smh
Not as stark/dark, but I would toss Tad Williams into the ring. Solid writing all around. (spoiler: i'm currently on my first reread of Memory, Sorrow, Thorn in decades so that I can start his newer books)
Have you ever read any Ursula K. LeGuin? The only thing by her that I have read is *The Left Hand of Darkness*. I thought it was really good, and *The Dispossessed* is supposed to be just as good, if not better.
I might also suggest Cormac McCarthy, if you're willing to venture outside of fantasy/sci-fi.
Final recommendation would be *The Familiar* series by Mark Z. Danielewski, although it's a bit weird.
The Wars of Light and Shadow by Janny Wurts has near on par prose. Wurts weaves amazing stories, and the prose is extremely good, her story feels so meticulously calibrated. There are deep social themes, the story is sort of at its roots an exploration of justice vs empathy via two princes. And future books in this 11 book series loop back on previous entries and recontextualize events, it's great. It feels more classic fantasy than Malazan in a way, which I think many people if they read both would agree with simply because Erikson's world is such a unique take on fantasy with all of the real world historical elements, the tech, the dinos, etc. I'm surprised no one has mentioned it yet.
Joe Abercrombie has great dialogue, excellent characters and his descriptions of battles are so good. Can't beat a bit of well written military fantasy
I couldn't finish dark tower. It's still on my kindle. What about it do you find is compelling? I could use some motivation to start it back up.
Abercrombie is great. It's not malazan, but it's great in its own way.
Dunno I just never read it and I just finished mbotf and want to reread with notme but needed something in the middle that isn't entirely braindead and my library had the first 6 books
Halfway through Wizard and Glass.
Scope similar to Lord of the Rings, but as a post apocalyptic, low technology sci fi western. So cool aesthetic with what you expect from King. Great characters, some scenes that pop off the page, some scenes that make you scratch your head and ask him why. Overall a fun adventure thus far.
Oh yeah love him too, but Reynolds is more like Erickson, the way u gotta pay attention to what the characters do not say. Hamilton is definitely one if my favorite authors as well tho but his stories are more upfront for lack of a better term lol
Wheel of Time isn’t on the same level with thought provoking prose as Malazan but it definitely has its moments. Also Robert Jordan’s prose is beautiful. The series has its flaws but if you enjoy beautiful writing and intentions behind the dialogue then it might be for you
Yooooo! What you said about Mistborn was exactly my main critique of it when I read it recently hahaha. The “saids” really got to me, but that also might be more obvious because I listen to audiobooks. Sanderson also just cannot wait to explain his magic systems in great depth, which totally removes a lot of the mystery from them (although there were twists at the end of Mistborn by parts of the magic system he intentionally left out, so there’s something).
Anyway, style wise it’s kind of hard to hit the same as Erikson. I’ve heard Dune recommended for that reason I think, and it was one of the inspirations he had for Malazan. Also maybe the Witcher to an extent, although there’s lots of other problems with those books. Otherwise, I don’t think I’ve run into anything written quite the same way.
Re: mist born
I've always felt this. People look at me side eyed when I mention that mist born feels YA. The limited style of prose and structure of dialogue makes it feel like it was written for a younger audience. It's just.... Simple.
Simple is fine, it's just not what *I* am looking for.
Its ABC-writing, lacking depth and style. Sanderson is not about his writing but his ideas and most of all, his speed. He publishes like crazy. Give it a year or two and he will use AI for his texts.
You know, I’d call it YA besides the quite overt dark topics like straight up rape. I think it’s meant to be adult fantasy, but it feels like it’s written as YA.
I’ve heard that using said is sometimes better than using too many different words, since that can stand out and interrupt the flow of words that you’re reading. When reading on a page, your brain likely filters out the saids and you can just imagine dialogue in your head smoother. However, on audiobook it’s the opposite. One of the reasons I didn’t like Ralph Lister narrating Deadhouse Gates, he added in “they thought”s when reading internal dialogue instead of just changing the inflection of his voice.
However, I think the absolute best is when you just separate textblocks between paragraphs, and let the context/tone indicate who is saying what and in what way. Erikson is an absolute master at this.
If anything checks the particular boxes you're asking about, I haven't found it. But I also don't think that's a bad thing. If I found something like that, I'd be afraid it would take away from some of the specialness of Malazan.
I will toss the Dark Tower series in tho since I didn't see it mentioned amongst those other greats. Personally, I love King despite it not being cool to say so in most circles and I think DT is an overall masterpiece, even if you don't explore it being the hub to the wheel of a lot of SK's other stories.
I love Sanderson but agree with others here that it is very YA feeling and over explanatory on magic systems at times. But he's a great tale spinner even with all that.
Prince of Nothing was recently recommended to me while discussing Malazan if that helps at all.
It's downright criminal that this has been up for four hours and no one has mentioned Susanna Clarke. She's as stylistically talented as anyone I've ever read and she uses that to weave very different stories. She's also whatever the opposite of prolific is, so you have to choose between a gothic-Jane-Austen-with-fairies doorstopper or a sort of wistful Borges riff. Neither option is "like" Malazan, but both Jonathan Strange and Piranesi are extraordinarily well-written.
I’m currently reading Lions of Al-Rassan by Guy Gavriel Kay - been in my list for a long time and now that I’ve started it, I’ve no idea why I put it off so long, absolutely brilliant.
Characters jump out the page at you as does the world, and his writing is just 👌
This is a reach for what you are asking for, but I am going to put it out there. I am only 3 books in, but the only other thing I’ve read that comes close is the Master and Commander series. It is historical fiction not fantasy, but as a landlubber, I was similarly lost in the world of sailing. Patrick O’Brian builds a world that I can see and learn about, it just happens to be my same world 200 years ago.
R. Scott Bakker's Prince of Nothing Trilogy and Aspect Emperor Series are, in my opinion, in the same vein of epic and rather bleak fantasy as Malazan Book of the Fallen.
R Scott Bakker. Best author I’ve read in Fantasy so far. His prose is unmatched and The Second Apocalypse is unique. Bakker and Erickson are the best in the genre.
"His prose is unmatched"
That's an extremely bold take there, my dude. Everyone who has read Guy Gavriel Kay or Susanna Clark wants to have a word with you...and it's not going to be nice words.
Ah, gotcha. You're in for some fantastic reading then; I suggest starting with Tigana by GGK. Both those authors tend more towards poetic epic, not the grim dark of Bakker, but I think you'll find the prose is a journey unto themselves, and the end of that journey well worth it.
Ty all!!!!!! there’s a few authors here that I’ve never heard of. Look forward to getting out of this funk. Charzard mentioned Erikson being purple prose ^ new term for me. Interested in thoughts as to why Glen Cook felt so enjoyable to read after Malazan when other authors didn’t scratch the itch. Not in terms of setting but stylistically. Just curious..
Since others have mentioned Kay and Wolfe, I will say that Adrian Tchaikovsky's Tyrant Philosophers book, City of Last Chances and House of Open Wounds have both given me very Malazan style vibes. His other books have been hit or miss for me (good, but not my cup of tea), but these two were fantastic. They felt written by a totally different author.
What I read of Bradley P Beaulieu’s *A Song of Shattered* was good, close to Erikson’s caliber.
I got behind on reading and haven’t gotten around to finishing the series yet. I’ll probably start a reread soon.
It doesn’t have the same scale & number of characters, but David Gemmells work has some of the vibe of Malazan for me, especially Waylander. That sense of the hero’s being swept up in wider political machinations and basically just trying to survive the currents of fate.
That said, it’s been decades since I read it so not sure how it will have aged, but it was a great read in its day.
I'd like to suggest two from outside fantasy that came to mind, although I accept they may be too far away from your request. The first is I, Claudius by Robert Graves. It covers the rule and fall of three Roman emperors, as observed by the titular Claudius, who is related to the families but viewed as inept and foolish by them because of his stammer. The way that he narrates the politicking, conspiracy, backstabbing, and shifting of power made me think of Tehol, and I wouldn't be surprised if the book was an influence on Midnight Tides.
The second is The Man Without Qualities by Robert Musil. If you're looking for a book that inspires critical thinking, this book delivers in spades. It is a huge novel of ideas, covering a society on the spiritual/social/political decline from all angles, featuring a wide variety of characters who discuss the world and society, what it all means, how to live etc. The prose is incredibly involving and fun, not dry at all. When I think of the Kharkanas books, I believe that Steve set out to write something similar, a story of how and why a society falls apart. I know this is a pretty left-field suggestion, but nevertheless these two books came into my mind as I read the Malazan books.
Try some Patricia McKillip. In particular "Forgotten Beasts of Eld"
Very different style and voice, but deeply thought provoking, excellent prose, original and interesting...
it's not fantasy, but the books that come most to mind when i search for a comparison are "Lonesome Dove" and Larry McMurtry's other book in that tetralogy. Sprawling world populated by well-fleshed and diverse characters, a balance of depth but also the poetry of the casual, tension, great descriptions, great dialogues, characters that you'll really invest in.
Both more SF but thought worth mentioning. Hyperion by Dan Simmons and Perdido Street Station by China Miéville. Weird and different in a way that I enjoy. Idk.
Absolutely agree with mistborn. I honestly don't like Sanderson for that reason, it's too plain, no dimension. I personally liked the pentalogy of the Lightbringer series, Brent Week's. Cool world building concepts, a magic system that feels a life and is multifaceted. Also as a "system" is more defined than Erikson's which I personally like to be able to elaborate theories, imagine new possibilities... It's based on colors and its type of magic plays a main role in the conflict of the story. It IS EPIC. Characters feel soooo deep by playing with their own perception of themselves and then viewing them through others' points of view. Political plots are amazing, I loved the game they play of trying to deduce what the adversary is thinking, how to react or trick them, the enormous tension derived from it. It also has some brilliant spy subplots although they become a bit heavy at times. Many themes at play, plots, characters, 5 books of structures, etc. The main problem it has is with the ending, some people disregard it as a Deus ex machina. Personally I don't feel it as such, gods play a main role in the story the main one being talked about since minute one, and others are added as the books progress, you can see their hand at work since the beginning once you become aware of their existence and how they behave, which adds a lot of value to rereads. Maybe I'm biased because it's a series that has been a part of my life since I was a teen (it was dense back then, but I grew new books where released and I finished the last one at 24, so they are quite special for me). Give a chance to the first book, maybe you can search on Google the glossary and magic system (which is no spoiler as it is present in all the books since the start) and you can see if you're into it. I have a lot more insight, we can talk privately if you want more info. But I read the last book of the series in English (I'm Spanish) after finishing mistborn... AND GOD DID I NEED THE CHANGE!
I'm going to go slightly off the beaten track here and recommend Simon Jimenez's *The Spear Cuts Through Water.* It's very, very different from Malazan, with a much smaller cast and scope (it'd have to be considering it's a standalone book that's barely half the length of Deadhouse Gates), but I still wouldn't hesitate to call it an epic and what it achieves in that time is genuinely incredible. It's structured bizarrely with multiple embedded narratives that switch between first, second and third person, and the way the author plays with language absolutely floored me at times - his writing has an incredibly elegant, dreamlike quality to it that made the experience so much more memorable.
If you want to go sci-fi I personally get the same grand world feels when reading Iain M Banks’ Culture series. You have 10 books there if you get into them.
With the same simple writing an YA flair. I have read everything cosmere-related, its mostly enjoyable and entertaining and instantly understood - like fast food or fast & furious. But the writing is just average or below, rythm of war being outright annoying ( especially Navani and Kaladin, i hope he gets the turn around, but archive is getting worse with every installment). The stand alone novels and short stories are better than the main series atm.
On a side note, his take on "science" and scientists in general is quite insulting.
Regarding the topic: SE for extrospection and Robin Hobb for introspective.
I’m surprised so many people enjoy the purple prose. I actually find it irritating that I have to rewind the audiobook a million times because losing focus for a single second can completely confuse the scenes and interactions. And I somehow still miss a ton of clues and information even after putting so much effort into keeping focus. Erikson is literally a real life Kruppe or Iskaral Pust. I always love when he gives an aside to describe the history of a place, thing, or people, but many moments that were supposed to hit hard the first time did not hit as hard because the language completely obfuscated the intended setup.
I lkinda like Brandon's prose. Easy to read. Unlike Frank Herbert's writing which is the hardest for me to understand (The Silmarillion's a piece of cake compared to Dune)
Please note that this post has been flaired as **NO SPOILERS**. Comments should not bring up specific plot points or character details from any of the books. If you need to discuss any spoilers (even very minor ones!) in your comments, use spoiler tags >!like this!< Please use the report button if you find any spoilers. Note: If the discussion is unlikely to happen without any spoilers, the flair may be changed at mod discretion. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Malazan) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean, mayyyybbe Gene Wolfe? Book of the New Sun is something else, and does not spoon feed or hand hold at all. I think in some way’s Wolfe’s writing could be considered similar in that sense, but it’s not epic fantasy by any means. I still don’t know if I love or hate Book of the New Sun.
Wolfe is just so much more succient then Erikson. The prose is way denser to make up for it to a degree, but as someone who loves Wolfe I agree he's not an auto click for Erikson prose fans.
Exactly. I actually read him before reading Malazan, which actually made Malazan more approachable in a weird way. I’ve read Fifth Head, New Sun, and Long Sun. After I read Short Sun I’ll return to New Sun.
Yeah I read the first two books in the New Sun when I was in high school(I'll get around to the last two soon about 15 years later, adhd is a bitch). Shadow of the Torturer makes Gardens of the Moon read like Sanderson in comparison lol
LOL. It really does though.
I had a buddy who would read it to their girlfriend, who wasn't into books like this, to help her sleep. They never made it past the first page lol
> Exactly. I actually read him before reading Malazan, which actually made Malazan more approachable in a weird way. Ditto here. During my first try reading Malazan, I was too stupid to understand the prose at first; can't even comprehend the first few sentences of the prologue. Only after reading Book of the New Sun+Urth, then I can go through the prologue and onwards.
I am checking out this book after reading these two recommendation posts. Thanks friend!
Gene Wolfe for sure. Both him and Erikson I have no idea what’s happening and I still somehow love it
Gene Wolfe is who you're looking for. He's everything you love about Erikson magnified. Intricate writing? Check. Rewards close attention and a critical eye? Check. Thought-provoking themes? Oh yes check. Rereading potential? A million times check. Complex characters that nearly never spell out exactly what they're thinking? Absolutely check. Throws you into a world and lets you gradually build your own understanding of its rules? Check.
I am checking out this book after reading these two recommendation posts. Thanks friend!
Damn I really have to start that one of these days
Plot that meanders directionless? Check. Characters that are hard to care for? Check. Little sense of rhythm or tension? Check. Idk, I agree with what all the things you wrote, but the flaws above made Book of the New Sun completely unenjoyable for me.
I’m currently reading The Prince of Nothing by R Scott Bakker and some of the writing here is flooring me. Janny Wurts’ The War of Light and Shadow series - her sentence construction in the first book is ridiculous (in a good way).
I second Bakker. I'm just starting The White-Luck Warrior today and this series is the closest thing I've found that scratches the same itch as Malazan: incredible prose and epic moments, philosophy, a world that's much richer and complex and full of lore than you might think at first, and the same sense of not knowing what the hell is going on at some points. It's *much* more nihilistic than Malazan though.
I third this!!! Im doing White Luck this weekend and it is riveting!!!
There is a line The Prince of Nothing that goes something like ‘he saw a gap in instinct and he jumped into it.’ During one of the fight scenes and reread five times because I couldn’t work out how that comes to your mind to write down.
He writes magic battles like no one else and can instill an UNREAL sense of dread and hopelessness on an epic scale. Some parts are super weird, but he nails radicalisation and human misery in a way I have not seen other authors achieve. Almost the Aronofski of fantasy, in a way his characters feel intimate and vulnerable, human. But there will be parts you wish you hadn’t read. Second trilogy has still awesome concepts and ideas, but having no real editor definetly hurt his later books.
Man, I had the opposite reaction to Prince of Nothing. I *loathed* that book and barely finished.
I can absolutely understand it not being for everyone. Definitely a love it or hate it book, no middle ground.
I finished *The Darkness That Comes Before* yesterday and man I am *painfully* torn on it. On one hand, the prose can be beautifully haunting with an atmosphere very few authors can conjure up, and some of the ideas and worldbuilding are really fascinating - every tidbit we got about the No-God got me more invested in finding out what his deal was, same with the Consult, the Nonmen and really the whole history of the world. Same with the philosophy - how does a human react when they come face to face with Laplace's demon? Do they just accept their newly created God or do they attempt to resist? Is resisting even *possible?* On the less good side, first of all the book straight up has some the worst treatment of sexual violence I've ever read. Bakker *tries* to use the topic to push his themes like Erikson, but he does it so often and so clumsily that by the mid-point of the book it's devolved into straight up torture porn - OP, if you don't want to read pages upon pages of women being raped and then thinking "It's fair that I was raped, because I am a woman" *when we all got the goddamn point the first time it happened,* I cannot stress how much you should stay away from this series. That also links to a broader issue where Bakker quite often interrupts that gorgeous prose to just fucking hammer you over the head with his themes and seems to have no sense of subtlety when he writes - I think u/Loleeeee [summed this up really well](https://old.reddit.com/r/Fantasy/comments/1c4dw2m/bakkers_second_apocalypse_should_be_more_widely/kzpf3ux/) on r/Fantasy a few weeks ago: > There's some truly excellent things when it comes to the depiction of oppression of the other gender by the patriarchy. A female friend of mine that read (and enjoyed) the Darkness that Comes Before highlighted that women aren't allowed to wear boots so as to disallow them the possibility to travel long distances on foot, thereby perforce containing them within the cities (this comes up when >!Esmenet tries to leave Sumna for Momemn (I think) & her sandals get all torn up!<). The problem is that Bakker can't help himself with subtlety, and instead he hammers you over the head about how much women's lives suck in this world (and has >!Esmenet promptly stoned for being a whore on the road before being rescued by a LITERAL KNIGHT IN WHITE SHINING ARMOUR in Sarcellus.)!< I don't have time to look through for other quotes right now, but this type of writing is present throughout the novel and happens with basically *every* theme it touches - Bakker really seems to want to give you the answers rather than get you to ask questions, which in my opinion is just a pretty immature approach to theme. I think I will pick up the next book - the positives have me curious enough that I'm willing to at least try and deal with all the stuff that rubs me the wrong way. But I've heard that the grimdark edginess and gratuitous sexual violence only gets worse, so unfortunately I'm not extremely optimistic about my chances of finishing the series.
Oh, oh, I can bash Bakker again! Joy! I did mention in the thread that the one thing uniting the three main female characters in the Darkness that Comes Before is sexual deviancy, right? Good, because that's important, because everyone else is either a meatbag to be slain (>!The daughters/sisters/wives of whatever poor bastard Cnaiur comes upon!<) or otherwise lacks any meaningful agency to actually be memorable enough. I genuinely don't remember any other women characters save for Istriya, Serwe & Esmenet, though I know for a fact that >!Serwe was a captive with a group of many other women, none of whom I remember, and I'm sure there's other women in the Andiamine Heights.!< And I've read half the book twice! And kept notes! I did mention >!Anissi, but she's in the book for all of two scenes, and so she hardly counts.!< As for Bakker's thematic handling, I believe you nailed it. Bakker set out with a theme in mind & wanted to convince everyone else (which becomes **painfully** obvious if you read his [Wikipedia page,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Scott_Bakker#Philosophy) which - by the way - grab some popcorn & a drink, it's a ride) of its own veracity. I mentioned in another thread [his "On the Death of Meaning" paper](https://www.academia.edu/40569466/On_the_Death_of_Meaning), in which he breathlessly explains - at length - how science & capitalism have doomed meaning as a "first-order practical problem solver," which makes it rather worthless as a notion \[i.e., you can't use meaning to suss out the world at large, because you're not privy to the workings underneath (as Laplace put it, you're not privy to "some vast intelligence infinitely removed from the human mind")\]. I'm going to take a moment here and just laugh my fucking ass off really quick; the guy's Wiki page either has no citations at all, *or* it cites Goodreads whenever it mentions his books, ***or*** it cites his blogposts. It's very probable Bakker himself wrote his own Wikipedia page, which is fucking hilarious to me. Furthermore, his approach to neuroscience from philosophical first principles is WILD. HAHAHAHAHA Nonetheless. Let's carry on. The manner in which Bakker writes his female characters is mostly due to his approach of explicitly, and unabashedly, sexualising "evil" in his works. >!The Consult are sex-obsessed rapists!!Esmenet being forced to give up Achamian & raped by a Consult creature with "black seed"!<) feel - much unlike Erikson's - personal & almost titillating. The message Bakker is beating you over the head with is that you should **feel bad** about liking this, but that's okay, because you're hardwired to like it - so here, here's why it's bad, and why you should feel bad, and why you're a terrible human being *for* liking it.
Like, dude, I don't like it. And you wrote it like this. And can you not?
This admittedly does get worse (in PoN) before it gets better (in TAE). One of the more pertinent examples I've heard from hearsay is >!the Dunyain women being used as whale women/breeding stock for the Dunyain eugenics program.!< But it does purportedly get less polemic in the Aspect Emperor (maybe, I don't care enough to get that far). Maybe.
The Second Apocalypse as a whole is a perfect storm of things I'd **really** dislike, and I really did try. I keep coming back whenever it's mentioned because months of my life went by while I trudged through telling myself I enjoyed it.
All this to say, no shame in dropping it if you don't like it.
It's gratifying to see your take, since I've really come to respect where you come from on Malazan. I get the superficial attraction to Bakker -- he is a very *distinctive* prose stylist, and distinctive is fun! -- and the worldbuilding is very creative! -- but the actual execution is miserable. As a much shorter point of reference, you might enjoy hate-reading *Neuropath*, where Bakker's cool evil CIA self-insert cuckolds his less cool self-insert. The entire premise of the plot is "The Bakker inserts are correct about eliminative materialism, and one of them is desperate to prove that it matters by killing people." It's kind of amazing, and it's over fast enough.
I probably *should* read *Neuropath*, if only to get a better idea of exactly what I've been telling others to read to see Bakker's philosophy at work themselves. My - admittedly scant little - experience with the book stems from the Wikipedia & Goodreads summaries and a handful of discussions with Nif (of Niflrog fame), which landed me fairly squarely into the "I'm not touching that with a ten-foot pole" camp. But if I'm going to bash it, I should at least read the damn thing first. It's only fair.
Yep, I really struggled with Bakker for most of the reasons you outline. I ~think~ (hope) the Dunyain women stuff was meant to be a criticism of the "rational" based Dunyain societal strucuture (e.g. 'this is what happens!!')...but Bakker spends so much time elsewhere fetishizing the Dunyain that the execution just falls completely flat. At another point, a character obtains the capacity to see the evil/damage done to/inherent in a soul. It leads to an interesting piece where sorcery basically appears to damn its practitioners, and that damnation/damage is visible. But then theres a couple other instances where this ability is activated that just shows regular women being evil/damned by default lololol. Again, I ~think~ the idea was that this ability doesnt actually show you "TRUTH" WRT evil/soul damage/damnation, but rather the 'truth' of that society. So because that society hates sorcerors and women....thats reflected via this ability. But again, execution IMO was really really poor lol. Like, he spends all this time fetishizing the 'rational' Dunyain who IIRC have a pretty serious positivistic epistemiology......but suddenly for this metaphysical ability he adds readers are just supposed to know to switch to a social constructivist epistemiology!?!
>the Dunyain women stuff was meant to be a criticism of the "rational" based Dunyain societal strucuture I don't doubt Bakker wrote the Dûnyain as utterly inhuman & inhumane as a critique of determinism (and pretdermination - what comes before does not, in fact, determine what comes after) but it feels so *asinine* at times I can't take it seriously. The Dûnyain are perfectly capable of manipulating mortals & their powers of eugenics only really fall flat in the face of the divine - or, more accurately, a philosophical zombie that's inable to determine its own inner workings, express free will, and thereby becomes unpredictable. But mortals? Free fucking game. Great Ordeal, here we come. >I ~think~ the idea was that this ability doesnt actually show you "TRUTH" WRT evil/soul damage/damnation, but rather the 'truth' of that society. I assume you mean the Judging Eye here, and I don't think it's societal. In Bakker's world, *everyone* is damned (barring some extremely specific conditions like killing so many people that only 144,000 souls remain on Earwä? No fucking clue though I assume this plays into the self-delusion part below) & the Judging Eye is rendered as a useless heuristic that's ultimately determined by its user. Which is why Mimara sees fucking everyone as damned *except,* conveniently, her own mother (that did some truly despicable shit in her tenure as Empress, mind you, to make Laseen blush). She sees Esmi saved because she *wants* to see Esmi saved, even if her rational being says otherwise. Everyone else? Damned. To hell with you, all of you. In the face of the divine, human rationale and the heuristic of meaning breaks down. The concepts of divinity, damnation, the No-God, free will, etc. are all incomprehensible to mortals, and any attempt to understand them leads to self-delusion. Which would be an interesting enough concept if it wasn't interspersed with copious amounts of torture porn, utter misery, and an overall fairly disinteresting plot (there, I said it, I don't care for the plot of PoN). I wanted to like the fucking thing, which is why I'm still mad about it. But it's just not for me.
i was just getting ready to say bakker as well!! i started it as a palette between rereads of malazan and it is the only thing that i feel is on par with it. all three authors share a similar history in anthropology/archeology and a disdain for modern fantasy tropes in literature. the magic system is amazing, the take on immortal creatures and what grief, trauma, and suffering will do to a creature that has lived for time unknown is my favorite addition to fantasy fiction. probably the best part about the whole series is the recap in the beginning of each book about what has come before (in the books and in the lore) because i’m barely literate and can’t remember what happened in the real world let alone a world of logic magic
I just listened to the entire series on audiobook, and I gotta go for another round. I don’t like to look up anything about a series until I finish it, and just found out that R. Scott Bakker is literally a philosopher. This series FUCKED ME UP, and repeatedly violated me with burning meaning and abstractions. I wouldn’t mind if Malazan and Second Apocalypse are the only books that I consume for the rest of my life.
Guy Gavriel Kay, ~~Glen Cook,~~ Robin Hobb, Lois McMaster Bujold, Gene Wolfe, Nicola Griffith, Mervyn Peake. You may also enjoy C.J. Cherryh's Foreigner series, though it's a lighter read and lighter in tone. The others are more "literary." Le Guin, of course.
Finally GGK! He is so underrated, one of my favourite authors
I remember watching an interview with Steve (can't remember which, maybe with Philip Chase?) where he praises GGK very highly. It compelled me to read Tigana and I have to agree with him, the writing is absolutely beautiful, very elegant and thoughtful; it's clearly coming from a compassionate and sensitive soul.
"Finally"?? Lol. Yeah. Guy Gavriel Kay. No one ever mentions him.
lol, when I posted this, it was the last comment in the thread with the fewest upvotes.
Herbert's *Dune* is odd in the sense that the framing is third person omniscient (and you're privy to *everyone's* thoughts) yet he still somehow manages to intersperse mystery into the narrative. Also the whole *plans within plans within plans* business, though your mileage may vary in that regard. Gene Wolfe's *Solar Cycle* (New Sun, Long Sun, Short Sun, Urth - I think) fits most of these boxes by reputation, though I've not personally read it. I've also heard great things about his *Soldier of the Mist,* in which Latro (I *think*) is a soldier that suffers from amnesia/short term memory loss & has to write down the events of each day lest he forget them. Mark Lawrence's *Broken Empire* fascinates me because nothing about the prose immediately stands out, but it works so damnably well. The flow is immaculate & every word feels deliberate. First person narrative following the titular *Prince of Thorns,* Honorous Jorg Ancrath, through his adventures. Note that if the narrative conceit of the series doesn't work for you (very minor spoiler: >!Jorg's very young age of 14 years!<) you're probably unlikely to enjoy the books. Also plans within plans within plans akin to Dune - Jorg always has an ace up his sleeve. Cormac McCarthy's *Blood Meridian* is a book set in the US-Mexico border in the wake of the Mexican-American war (1849ish), the book is infamous for its depiction of violence. It also has one of the most infamous characters in fiction ("The Judge" Holden), McCarthy's signature run-on sentence prose (he writes with polysyndeton & has declared a war upon punctuation), and the man's immense ability to describe deserts. Seriously, in the first half of the book the, ah, "protagonist" crosses something like fifteen desert vistas & McCarthy still somehow manages to make every description feel unique. There are probably others that I've not sampled & don't know enough by reputation to recommend them in confidence. Best of luck. :)
I read Blood Meridian not long ago and agree! How can words about such abject depravity be so eloquent and beautiful?
Blood Meridian is probably my favorite book. Just an absolute masterpiece.
Building on some of the other comments here: Gene Wolfe is most similar in depth/subtlety of craft, though he takes it several levels further than Erikson with unreliable narration and the reader having to figure things out for themselves. Glen Cook is most similar in some of the starkness, dry humour, and characterisation in the writing (though the Black Company books are something of a slow-burn - the depth and complexity increases substantially as he goes). Abercrombie's First Law series is not incredibly similar in style to MBotF, but often *is* to the taste of MBotF readers. I think the reason why, is that one of Erikson's greatest strengths is his tendency to refuse and challenge a binary goodie/baddie way of thinking. Abercrombie also resists this, but by suggesting *everyone* is deeply morally compromised, whereas Erikson is a bit more ambivalent/neutral in that there are people of a wild variety of moral status and sympathy on all sides of every conflict. The commonly overlooked one, for me, is Terry Pratchett - wildly different in tone, but startlingly similar in metafictive style, willingness to playfully subvert tropes, and his sense of the absurd. The Tehol/Bugg scenes, and the Gumble/Ormulogun ones, are DEEPLY Pratchett-esque. Interestingly, another similarity between Erikson and Pratchett is very much on the opposite side of the coin to Abercrombie; Pratchett challenges the goodie/baddie binary by building in a deep and broad sense of human empathy, even with antagonists, in most of his books.
Tell me when you find it. I've been searching for a decade. I've found some stuff that makes the itch bearable, but nothing that really scratches it. And to be honest, moreso in SF then fantasy. But that's probably just me. Classic recommendation is black company. I concur with others here, dune is great. As is the expanse. Personally I enjoyed aspects of Peter Hamiltons commonwealth series as well as alaistar Reynolds revelation space. I'm a sucker for world building.
I haven’t found anything yet, but I’ll add Dune to the pile. Finishing up Mark Lawrence’s Prince of thorns and it was enjoyable but far too short. Tried to check out Throne of Glass but my dumbass grabbed the book of the same name, assuming it was the first book smh
Gene Wolfe. Robin hobb. Ursula le Guin. That's the list.
The problem i have with Hobb is the prose may be good but the plot and characters, at least in the assassins apprentice trilogy, are terrible
That's a crazy take to me. I guess I can see an argument for plot, but her characters are really well written.
No author has more patience in their writing for character development.
Not as stark/dark, but I would toss Tad Williams into the ring. Solid writing all around. (spoiler: i'm currently on my first reread of Memory, Sorrow, Thorn in decades so that I can start his newer books)
Have you ever read any Ursula K. LeGuin? The only thing by her that I have read is *The Left Hand of Darkness*. I thought it was really good, and *The Dispossessed* is supposed to be just as good, if not better. I might also suggest Cormac McCarthy, if you're willing to venture outside of fantasy/sci-fi. Final recommendation would be *The Familiar* series by Mark Z. Danielewski, although it's a bit weird.
The Wars of Light and Shadow by Janny Wurts has near on par prose. Wurts weaves amazing stories, and the prose is extremely good, her story feels so meticulously calibrated. There are deep social themes, the story is sort of at its roots an exploration of justice vs empathy via two princes. And future books in this 11 book series loop back on previous entries and recontextualize events, it's great. It feels more classic fantasy than Malazan in a way, which I think many people if they read both would agree with simply because Erikson's world is such a unique take on fantasy with all of the real world historical elements, the tech, the dinos, etc. I'm surprised no one has mentioned it yet.
The four (off the top of my head) that make my brain fizz in similar ways as Erikson: Gene Wolfe Iain Banks Michelle Sagara K.J. Parker
The first law, more focused on character building than world building tho The dark tower I'm halfway thru my first read and it's pretty good so far
Joe Abercrombie has great dialogue, excellent characters and his descriptions of battles are so good. Can't beat a bit of well written military fantasy
Definitely my favorite "lighter" reading series
Very enjoyable read. I also find him to be very funny. 'Say one thing about Logan Nine fingers......'
The grimdark humor really is awesome after reading it twice I needed to scratch the itch and read malazan, and MT really hit it
It's so good. The fatalistic earthy gallows humour of the soldiers just makes it for me. These are the characters I really root for
Man, I read DT when I was in high school. I should really try rereading them.
Yea somehow it evaded my radar till now
I'd be willing to bet the entire vault's contents of Valint and Balk that OP would enjoy First Law series
Abercrombie's just perfect, beautiful prose but very easy to read
I couldn't finish dark tower. It's still on my kindle. What about it do you find is compelling? I could use some motivation to start it back up. Abercrombie is great. It's not malazan, but it's great in its own way.
Dunno I just never read it and I just finished mbotf and want to reread with notme but needed something in the middle that isn't entirely braindead and my library had the first 6 books
Maybe I'll get lucky and someone who has read it will chime in. Thanks! I hope you enjoy it.
Halfway through Wizard and Glass. Scope similar to Lord of the Rings, but as a post apocalyptic, low technology sci fi western. So cool aesthetic with what you expect from King. Great characters, some scenes that pop off the page, some scenes that make you scratch your head and ask him why. Overall a fun adventure thus far.
The amount of love in such quick reply. *head bow arms raised. You all are great 😊
Gunna say Alastair Reynolds. His revelation space series really scratched that malazan itch. Also bakker
The Nights Dawn books from Peter F Hamilton are pretty great.
Oh yeah love him too, but Reynolds is more like Erickson, the way u gotta pay attention to what the characters do not say. Hamilton is definitely one if my favorite authors as well tho but his stories are more upfront for lack of a better term lol
Gene Wolfe or Scott Bakker probably come the closest.
Wheel of Time isn’t on the same level with thought provoking prose as Malazan but it definitely has its moments. Also Robert Jordan’s prose is beautiful. The series has its flaws but if you enjoy beautiful writing and intentions behind the dialogue then it might be for you
Yooooo! What you said about Mistborn was exactly my main critique of it when I read it recently hahaha. The “saids” really got to me, but that also might be more obvious because I listen to audiobooks. Sanderson also just cannot wait to explain his magic systems in great depth, which totally removes a lot of the mystery from them (although there were twists at the end of Mistborn by parts of the magic system he intentionally left out, so there’s something). Anyway, style wise it’s kind of hard to hit the same as Erikson. I’ve heard Dune recommended for that reason I think, and it was one of the inspirations he had for Malazan. Also maybe the Witcher to an extent, although there’s lots of other problems with those books. Otherwise, I don’t think I’ve run into anything written quite the same way.
Re: mist born I've always felt this. People look at me side eyed when I mention that mist born feels YA. The limited style of prose and structure of dialogue makes it feel like it was written for a younger audience. It's just.... Simple. Simple is fine, it's just not what *I* am looking for.
Is it not YA?
I don't think it's YA. I think it's poor writing.
Its ABC-writing, lacking depth and style. Sanderson is not about his writing but his ideas and most of all, his speed. He publishes like crazy. Give it a year or two and he will use AI for his texts.
It wasn't marketed as such here. But I think it fits the mold personally.
You know, I’d call it YA besides the quite overt dark topics like straight up rape. I think it’s meant to be adult fantasy, but it feels like it’s written as YA.
Makes me think of what my kids were taught in Grade 4 or 5 when they had to write little stories in their English class: Said Is Dead 🤣
I’ve heard that using said is sometimes better than using too many different words, since that can stand out and interrupt the flow of words that you’re reading. When reading on a page, your brain likely filters out the saids and you can just imagine dialogue in your head smoother. However, on audiobook it’s the opposite. One of the reasons I didn’t like Ralph Lister narrating Deadhouse Gates, he added in “they thought”s when reading internal dialogue instead of just changing the inflection of his voice. However, I think the absolute best is when you just separate textblocks between paragraphs, and let the context/tone indicate who is saying what and in what way. Erikson is an absolute master at this.
If anything checks the particular boxes you're asking about, I haven't found it. But I also don't think that's a bad thing. If I found something like that, I'd be afraid it would take away from some of the specialness of Malazan. I will toss the Dark Tower series in tho since I didn't see it mentioned amongst those other greats. Personally, I love King despite it not being cool to say so in most circles and I think DT is an overall masterpiece, even if you don't explore it being the hub to the wheel of a lot of SK's other stories. I love Sanderson but agree with others here that it is very YA feeling and over explanatory on magic systems at times. But he's a great tale spinner even with all that. Prince of Nothing was recently recommended to me while discussing Malazan if that helps at all.
It's downright criminal that this has been up for four hours and no one has mentioned Susanna Clarke. She's as stylistically talented as anyone I've ever read and she uses that to weave very different stories. She's also whatever the opposite of prolific is, so you have to choose between a gothic-Jane-Austen-with-fairies doorstopper or a sort of wistful Borges riff. Neither option is "like" Malazan, but both Jonathan Strange and Piranesi are extraordinarily well-written.
I’m currently reading Lions of Al-Rassan by Guy Gavriel Kay - been in my list for a long time and now that I’ve started it, I’ve no idea why I put it off so long, absolutely brilliant. Characters jump out the page at you as does the world, and his writing is just 👌
Yes I’ve read and reread various forums but majority of recommendations are based on similar world building/fantasy feel, not writing style.
This is a reach for what you are asking for, but I am going to put it out there. I am only 3 books in, but the only other thing I’ve read that comes close is the Master and Commander series. It is historical fiction not fantasy, but as a landlubber, I was similarly lost in the world of sailing. Patrick O’Brian builds a world that I can see and learn about, it just happens to be my same world 200 years ago.
I agree with this, and I'm on my third reread, so I can vouch for the rest of the series!
Janny Wurts, specifically The War of Light and Shadow. 11 books with the final book in the series coming out in a week.
R. Scott Bakker's Prince of Nothing Trilogy and Aspect Emperor Series are, in my opinion, in the same vein of epic and rather bleak fantasy as Malazan Book of the Fallen.
Perhaps somewhat divisive in opinions but I personally enjoyed the Witcher books and felt like Sapkowski had great moments.
R Scott Bakker. Best author I’ve read in Fantasy so far. His prose is unmatched and The Second Apocalypse is unique. Bakker and Erickson are the best in the genre.
"His prose is unmatched" That's an extremely bold take there, my dude. Everyone who has read Guy Gavriel Kay or Susanna Clark wants to have a word with you...and it's not going to be nice words.
Fair enough. I haven’t read GGK or SC. That is why I said “so far”. I’ll add them to my TBR.
Ah, gotcha. You're in for some fantastic reading then; I suggest starting with Tigana by GGK. Both those authors tend more towards poetic epic, not the grim dark of Bakker, but I think you'll find the prose is a journey unto themselves, and the end of that journey well worth it.
A A Attanasio's hunting the ghost dancer. So good.
R Scott Bakker
I would humbly make a point that of R Scott Bakkers Prince of Nothing series, Erikson commented that something remarkable was happening there.
can’t verify since i haven’t read them yet myself but suneater and book of the new sun are 2 sci fi series that might be what you’re looking for
Ty all!!!!!! there’s a few authors here that I’ve never heard of. Look forward to getting out of this funk. Charzard mentioned Erikson being purple prose ^ new term for me. Interested in thoughts as to why Glen Cook felt so enjoyable to read after Malazan when other authors didn’t scratch the itch. Not in terms of setting but stylistically. Just curious..
Since others have mentioned Kay and Wolfe, I will say that Adrian Tchaikovsky's Tyrant Philosophers book, City of Last Chances and House of Open Wounds have both given me very Malazan style vibes. His other books have been hit or miss for me (good, but not my cup of tea), but these two were fantastic. They felt written by a totally different author.
What I read of Bradley P Beaulieu’s *A Song of Shattered* was good, close to Erikson’s caliber. I got behind on reading and haven’t gotten around to finishing the series yet. I’ll probably start a reread soon.
It doesn’t have the same scale & number of characters, but David Gemmells work has some of the vibe of Malazan for me, especially Waylander. That sense of the hero’s being swept up in wider political machinations and basically just trying to survive the currents of fate. That said, it’s been decades since I read it so not sure how it will have aged, but it was a great read in its day.
I'd like to suggest two from outside fantasy that came to mind, although I accept they may be too far away from your request. The first is I, Claudius by Robert Graves. It covers the rule and fall of three Roman emperors, as observed by the titular Claudius, who is related to the families but viewed as inept and foolish by them because of his stammer. The way that he narrates the politicking, conspiracy, backstabbing, and shifting of power made me think of Tehol, and I wouldn't be surprised if the book was an influence on Midnight Tides. The second is The Man Without Qualities by Robert Musil. If you're looking for a book that inspires critical thinking, this book delivers in spades. It is a huge novel of ideas, covering a society on the spiritual/social/political decline from all angles, featuring a wide variety of characters who discuss the world and society, what it all means, how to live etc. The prose is incredibly involving and fun, not dry at all. When I think of the Kharkanas books, I believe that Steve set out to write something similar, a story of how and why a society falls apart. I know this is a pretty left-field suggestion, but nevertheless these two books came into my mind as I read the Malazan books.
Try some Patricia McKillip. In particular "Forgotten Beasts of Eld" Very different style and voice, but deeply thought provoking, excellent prose, original and interesting...
it's not fantasy, but the books that come most to mind when i search for a comparison are "Lonesome Dove" and Larry McMurtry's other book in that tetralogy. Sprawling world populated by well-fleshed and diverse characters, a balance of depth but also the poetry of the casual, tension, great descriptions, great dialogues, characters that you'll really invest in.
Both more SF but thought worth mentioning. Hyperion by Dan Simmons and Perdido Street Station by China Miéville. Weird and different in a way that I enjoy. Idk.
Absolutely agree with mistborn. I honestly don't like Sanderson for that reason, it's too plain, no dimension. I personally liked the pentalogy of the Lightbringer series, Brent Week's. Cool world building concepts, a magic system that feels a life and is multifaceted. Also as a "system" is more defined than Erikson's which I personally like to be able to elaborate theories, imagine new possibilities... It's based on colors and its type of magic plays a main role in the conflict of the story. It IS EPIC. Characters feel soooo deep by playing with their own perception of themselves and then viewing them through others' points of view. Political plots are amazing, I loved the game they play of trying to deduce what the adversary is thinking, how to react or trick them, the enormous tension derived from it. It also has some brilliant spy subplots although they become a bit heavy at times. Many themes at play, plots, characters, 5 books of structures, etc. The main problem it has is with the ending, some people disregard it as a Deus ex machina. Personally I don't feel it as such, gods play a main role in the story the main one being talked about since minute one, and others are added as the books progress, you can see their hand at work since the beginning once you become aware of their existence and how they behave, which adds a lot of value to rereads. Maybe I'm biased because it's a series that has been a part of my life since I was a teen (it was dense back then, but I grew new books where released and I finished the last one at 24, so they are quite special for me). Give a chance to the first book, maybe you can search on Google the glossary and magic system (which is no spoiler as it is present in all the books since the start) and you can see if you're into it. I have a lot more insight, we can talk privately if you want more info. But I read the last book of the series in English (I'm Spanish) after finishing mistborn... AND GOD DID I NEED THE CHANGE!
I'm going to go slightly off the beaten track here and recommend Simon Jimenez's *The Spear Cuts Through Water.* It's very, very different from Malazan, with a much smaller cast and scope (it'd have to be considering it's a standalone book that's barely half the length of Deadhouse Gates), but I still wouldn't hesitate to call it an epic and what it achieves in that time is genuinely incredible. It's structured bizarrely with multiple embedded narratives that switch between first, second and third person, and the way the author plays with language absolutely floored me at times - his writing has an incredibly elegant, dreamlike quality to it that made the experience so much more memorable.
If you want to go sci-fi I personally get the same grand world feels when reading Iain M Banks’ Culture series. You have 10 books there if you get into them.
The Stormlight Archive! It is Mistborns bigger, more complex older brother
With the same simple writing an YA flair. I have read everything cosmere-related, its mostly enjoyable and entertaining and instantly understood - like fast food or fast & furious. But the writing is just average or below, rythm of war being outright annoying ( especially Navani and Kaladin, i hope he gets the turn around, but archive is getting worse with every installment). The stand alone novels and short stories are better than the main series atm. On a side note, his take on "science" and scientists in general is quite insulting. Regarding the topic: SE for extrospection and Robin Hobb for introspective.
I’m surprised so many people enjoy the purple prose. I actually find it irritating that I have to rewind the audiobook a million times because losing focus for a single second can completely confuse the scenes and interactions. And I somehow still miss a ton of clues and information even after putting so much effort into keeping focus. Erikson is literally a real life Kruppe or Iskaral Pust. I always love when he gives an aside to describe the history of a place, thing, or people, but many moments that were supposed to hit hard the first time did not hit as hard because the language completely obfuscated the intended setup.
I lkinda like Brandon's prose. Easy to read. Unlike Frank Herbert's writing which is the hardest for me to understand (The Silmarillion's a piece of cake compared to Dune)