RR and Hobb

[Clownwalkin]

I have been all through the forums for Robin Hobb and i have seen alot of people talking about George R R Martin and how Hobb writes somewhat like him or something like that. I am not sure how alike these 2 authors are but i love Robin Hobbs books so I think I might try some George R R Martin. Where should I start with his books?

 

[Rohan]

You should start with 'A Game of Thrones' (book one in A Song of Ice and Fire). If you've not read any of his work yet you are in for some good times.

 

[Koopa]

Depends if you want to read a stand-amone book, or if you want to start reading an unfinished series.

 

[Clownwalkin]

I think for a nice change from Hobb I could use a good stand alone novel.

 

[Centurion]

hmm, yes i'd agree they both have a knack for good plots & court intrigue. But compared to Hobb's, Martin's novels are like a rollercoast ride i'd say. Things aren't focused around a single character, but around a dozen or more and the violence comes thick and fast.

 

[Werthead]

I think for a nice change from Hobb I could use a good stand alone novel.

Hmm.GRRM's solo works aren't epic fantasy, but you could try Fevre Dream for a good example of his writing style. It's a horror novel set on the Mississippi River in the post-Civil War period. It is excellent.

Otherwise your best bet would be to track down the stand-alone Song of Ice and Fire novella The Hedge Knight, which is set in the same world 90 years before the main series. It is very good and is a good example of Martin's style.

 

[devilsgrin]

i don't see many similarities between Hobb and Martin. There are some content similarities - intrigue, unusual happenings to major characters, sad endings. But overall i find her, compared to George, somewhat less polished. Theres a roughness to her style that can be good, but can also lack depth, and whilst George's characters make the story, Hobb's story makes her characters.

 

[Koopa]

Hw about the co-made book Windhaven? I think it may be a good start.

 

[Clownwalkin]

I think i will purchase A Game of Thrones and Windhaven and see how i like them. I just hope that i am as drawn to them as I was to Robin Hobb's Farseer and Tawny Man books.

 

[Rohan]

Well, I liked Hobb's work too (except for the Soldier's Son trilogy, which I despised), and I love Martin's work - so I think you'll be pleased with your choices. Happy reading!

 

[Ragnar]

Hobb's good but Martin's better. I'm a relatively recent convert to both & I'd have to say that George definitely has the edge.

 

[Overread]

they both take things slightly differently - Hobb is much more of a single character base for her stories (excluding Liveship Traders) and in all cases likes to get behind the mind of her characters and it is here that her strength really lies.
Martins greatest strength is in his wide and deep understanding of the age he is writing in and this brings to life the world he has made. As for characters, we get less mind chatter, but what we do get is refined to key points which expand the charcter (and in the case of one vertically challenged character managed to destroy all concept of good and bad characterization to leave us with real!)

To say that Hobb is good and Martin is better is a little simple in that they write with noticable differences and focus on different areas, but it is very hard to top Martin (a collaberation between the two -- or Martin and Erikson = now that would be interesting!)

 

[eligh]

i read GRRM and then tried hobb. Hobb doesnt compare. I've only read the first 2 books in her farseer series...but wow, they're just horrible. I suppose people draw a parallel between GRRM and hobb because they dont write stereotypical fantasy, both pretty dark, but with hobb her protagonist is beyond stupid, emotionally fragile, annoying, whines all the time, and when **** goes bad all he does is complain. With GRRM, bad **** happens because badass/smart people makes that **** happen, even if the ppl you're voting for do everything in their power to turn the course of the book in their favor.

i believe everyone in this forum cant recommend it enough. I try to get everyone i know to read the books. Not a lot of people i know enjoy reading. But every single person i've gotten to read the first book, which is about 15, have all become diehard fans and believe they are fantastic books. Start with a game of thrones and it'll lead to by far the best series you've ever read, especially if you did like hobb, this will only be a giant leap ahead.

 

[the smiling weirwood]

or Martin and Erikson = now that would be interesting!)

An Erikson fan? Really? I found his work to be very poorly characterized. He makes a great job of assembling cliches and stereotypes into text copy, but I've found deeper characters and better storylines in video games. Actually, Deadhouse Gates etc. read very much like some action-adventure hack-and-slash game.

 

[Overread]

well if your going to bring Baldur's Gate into the mix then many books have a hard time beating those characters
Action adventure is certainly the type of story that Erikson is leaning towards, but with a more Epic feel to it - brought about by the long history, different continents and wide selection of characters. As for the depth of the characters, Erikson is certainly not delving deep into them as Hobb does (but few authors want to dig that deep) and in comparison to Martin I would say that Martin does get a little deeper behind his characters = but I don't think that Erikson's are as bad as you make out

 

[djellibeybi]

An Erikson fan? Really? I found his work to be very poorly characterized. He makes a great job of assembling cliches and stereotypes into text copy, but I've found deeper characters and better storylines in video games. Actually, Deadhouse Gates etc. read very much like some action-adventure hack-and-slash game.

When I read fantasy, I want action, adventure, derring-do. If I wanted characterization, I'd go read A Passage to India. And yes, I'm an Erikson/GRRM/David Gemmel die-hard fan.

 

[the smiling weirwood]

To each his own. It's just that I found a lot of his character interactions to be completely unrealistic.

 

[TK-421]

To each their own indeed and as an Erikson fan, I would rather keep my own than have yours.

But I would agree that he does not top GRRM.

 

[Tansy]

I should start reading the threads from the first page as this really threw me as I was wondering what Erikson had to do with Hobb and GRRM, I'm easily confussled

I've not read any Eriksson, but I have read Hobb and GRRM. I do enjoy Hobb's books but they are more the all tied up in a nice little bundle and good prevails against evil in the end, whereas, with GRRM I'm not sure we are going to get a nice, neat happy ever after.

As prevous posters have said, Hobb is more from the POV of one main protagonist (except Liveship Trader trilogy) and her characters are well written and you get to know them well, even to the point of annoyance, which I like as people are annoying, even heroes.

Martin's book are more on the epic side of things, his worlds seem more real, and more deadly, characters aren't always either good or evil they are just human with all the shades of grey that comes with that.

Try them both and see which you prefer. I think I'd read Hobb first as you might be disappointed if you read and love Martin and then read Hobb, his work just seems a bit grander to me, more filling

 

[the smiling weirwood]

I feel as if I have struck a nerve; any personal offense was not intentional, I was simply making a critique of an author's work.