I don't like to join trash-talking that often, but I tried hard to get into the Sword of Truth and just couldn't stand how much, for me, it read like a bad TV series from the old WB. If you're at all picky about lovely prose, interesting characters, or attempts at novel twists for the fantasy genre, I don't think Eddings should be on your list. Although I suppose I should admit that I put in my painful reading time at the recommendation of a friend who loves a good table-based RPG but also plays the computer-based attempts at same. And he's a very quick reader. He also gave my mother and me our first copy of Eye of the World.

Which brings me back to the very verbose Robert Jordan and the real question for this thread: just what makes a novel (or series) deserve the adjective "epic?"

For me, the answer might almost be put best in terms I learned for 9th-grade book reports--or maybe by bastardizing those terms a little bit. IMO, if a fantasy story is epic, that means that the *setting* is a major character. You can see small analogs of this in other genres such as TV cop dramas--Baltimore is a major part of The Wire. This emphasis on setting is why Tolkien probably still tops the charts for most folks interested in the genre, and why Robert Jordan is beside or above him for many of those folks. Word count is a secondary issue (and as a Jordan apologist, I have some Pattern-based arguments for why extensive, repetitive talk about doilies and in-group feuds are *not* wasted pages).

P.S. To Eddings fans: Your taste is your taste, and it needs no defense unless you've been rash enough to bring the subject up in a lit class or you get paid to write reviews. I'm very glad to find writers I dislike because that means people are trying different things, which increases the chances of someone writing something I didn't even know that I wanted to read.

The 'great' novel that I just kinda thought was horrid was "Snow Crash" (IIRC) by Neal Stephenson (Oddly, I really enjoyed "In the beginning was the command line"), it just went on and on and on, until my neurons were threatening to commit suicide if I turned another page - {G}.

There seems to by a dichotomy - if you loved Neuromancer, you'll hate Snow Crash and Vice Versa. I've seen so many people whose tastes coincide normally that look at each other like they've lost their minds regarding these two books.

Obviously, like the Necronomican,  there's something in Snow Crash that causes dementia if you read enough of it - Thank God I quit before it was too late! - {G}

Jonnan

Feist's Riftwar Saga is the top of my list.  Tolkein and Jordan are alright, but Riftwar was the best for me.  I like how the various series take on different perspectives and later generations in the same universe.  The 'Empire' series Feist co-wrote with Janny Wurts takes place entirely druing the first 2 (or 1) book of the orignal Riftwar series, but from the other side.

I also have been a big fan of David Drake, mostly sci-fi, but his Lord of the Isles fantasy series is also pretty good.

Wise and Hickman's Deathgate cycle is also quite interesting with a completely different take on the fantasy epic.

William Forstchen's Lost Regiment series is not really traditional 'fantasy', more like historical fiction/sci-fi/fantasy combined, but a very good read if you can find it.  Lots of large scale war that is always desperately won in the 11th hour.  A Union regiment from the civil war gets transported to another world, where they have to fight giant aliens similar to a Mongol Horde that eat humans.

Not so. I loved both Neuromancer and Snow Crash. And the Cryptonomicon (I assume that's the one you mean, since you were talking about Stephenson) was a helluva fun read for me.

I checked the entry "Epic fantasy" in The Encyclopedia of Fantasy, and the definition and comments are very interesting:

"An epic is a long narrative poem which tells large tales, often incorporating a mixture of legend, myth and folk history, and featuring heroes whose acts have significance transcending their own individual happiness or woe. The classic epic tells the story of the founding or triumph of a a folk or nation."

Examples: Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, Beowulf.

More pertinent for this discussion is the question of contemporary prose epic fiction (fantasy). The examples given are: Morris, E.R. Eddison, Tolkien, and Donaldson. (At least I got three on my list! )

The article goes on to state that "any fantasy tale written to a large scale which deals with the founding or definitive and lasting defence of a Land may fairly be called an Epic Fantasy."

"Unfortunately, the term has been increasingly used by publishers to describe Heroic Fantasies that extend over several volumes, and has thus lost its usefulness."  - So, there we go with Robert Jordan again ...! 

Wheel of Time.

Don't like Tolkien's so much... Many reasons but i don't start listing them here as my English skill... uh i lack words. I think.

If we count space fantasy, then Star Wars comes as one of the favorites too.

Does the Cryptonomican cause raving lunacy shading into violent madness too? I had assumed it was just the Necronomican and Snow Crash, but maybe Neal Stephenson just has that effect when he writes fiction - {G}.

Either that or possibly he *is* the mad arab, and actually wrote all three!

Jonnan

Is that some obscure spin-off of The Song of Ice and Fire?

Which is the best epic fantasy I can think of.

Whoa no ones mentioned the elizabeth moon series "Deed of paksenarrion" yet.

While I couldn't care less for "lovely prose", I really don't know what you're getting at with "interesting characters" or "attempts at novel twists"; In both these departments, Eddings is god. At least compared to Tolkien; "This is Frodo. He's a hobbit. He's got a ring. And that guy over there, he's evil, and wants the ring."

All you Tolkienites will burn!

While I couldn't care less for "lovely prose", I really don't know what you're getting at with "interesting characters" or "attempts at novel twists"; In both these departments, Eddings is god. At least compared to Tolkien; "This is Frodo. He's a hobbit. He's got a ring. And that guy over there, he's evil, and wants the ring."

. Did you read Lord of the rings or did you just saw the films?

Wow.  I'm impressed, especially that you enjoy the last one.  I don't know that many Lawhead fans, at least that poke their heads up online.  Kudos! 

I tried. I honestly really tried, but I just couldn't. It was just impossible. I couldn't stand it.

Just for my curiosity .. where did you stop your reading? Because I agree with you that the first part is more than annoying. But once the fellowship reaches the moria.. then it begins to show what this story will be about. I've a book (thick, with lots of little words and without pictures ) that explains what is the inspiration of Tolkien, what kind of symbol is the ring and what the story is about. This saga is really epix because it doesn't really tell about a good guy and a bad guy. It's all about what give meaning to life. And death. When a book is more than just a story then I think we can call it epic (and that's says the definition of epic described some posts above)