I started reading the first book, but stopped about 20% of the way in (may have been less, it’s been a while since then), because I found it stupefyingly boring. Does that trilogy get any better later on ?
If you find it boring it’s probably not for you. I enjoy the language, the descriptions and so on. It’s the same as my recommendation for LOTR. I liked it a lot but I don’t think everyone should. I find both pleasant to read even when nothing is really happening in the story.
Oddly enough I really like LOTR as well as The Silmarillion… So maybe I should give this Gormenghast thing another shot, I don’t know.
I think the difference between LOTR/Simlarillion and Gormenghast is that Tolkien’s books contain well-crafted language and descriptions of scenery that are punctuated by moments of sheer epicoverload; whereas Gormenghast contains the former but not the latter.
But again, I haven’t made it that far into it, so I could be wrong.
I started reading the first book, but stopped about 20% of the way in (may have been less, it’s been a while since then), because I found it stupefyingly boring. Does that trilogy get any better later on ?
If you find it boring it’s probably not for you. I enjoy the language, the descriptions and so on. It’s the same as my recommendation for LOTR. I liked it a lot but I don’t think everyone should. I find both pleasant to read even when nothing is really happening in the story.
Oddly enough I really like LOTR as well as The Silmarillion… So maybe I should give this Gormenghast thing another shot, I don’t know.
I think the difference between LOTR/Simlarillion and Gormenghast is that Tolkien’s books contain well-crafted language and descriptions of scenery that are punctuated by moments of sheer epic overload; whereas Gormenghast contains the former but not the latter.
But again, I haven’t made it that far into it, so I could be wrong.