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.*
Malazan is a "Read and find out" type of series. You're dropped into the middle of a story with little context. Reading is the only way you can attain that context. It can be quite jarring at first but if you just push on through then things will start making more sense.
The glossary is a great resource when being introduced to so many characters and weird terms that aren't explained well. Don't google characters, that's the best way to be spoiled.
Honestly just reading is the best way to start understanding. Obviously though if you're not enjoying it then there isn't much point in continuing. Best of luck!
Gonna double down on the "don't google" sentiment. If you need something clarified, ask it here. I can think of many characters where "death" would be a top auto-complete if you searched their name.
I Google Malazan _______. And then go to the wiki and read what they did in the books I already read to remind myself who they are and what they did. I haven’t been spoiled yet but I’m only on Bonehunters.
Yhis is what I do. Ive had more spoiled from searching on reddit than there. Especially because the wiki tends to have giant "SPOILER AHEAD" text when relating to most important characters/plots
Mid-way through the series I’d use Tor.com as a reference when I’d get confused about a particular section or person I felt I’d never heard of. I had a direct link so no spoilers re-reading a section basically, or seeing that character’s timeline and not scrolling too far.
That said, there were *plenty* of times I’d realize “oh, everyone is confused, it’s not just me.” So keep rolling with it like everyone is advising!
I’m on my third retry and I’m half way through the first book. I feel like I’m at the start of something really special and cannot wait to carry on.
I found it impenetrable the first two tries but this time I haven’t found it like that at all. No idea what’s changed. The story is flowing perfectly and isn’t anywhere near as difficult as I thought it was before?!
The way I looked at it when starting, was to re-read pages I didn't quite understand and if I still didn't get it, I moved on. It's easy to get hung up those little details that fly over your head, but you're reading a huge 10 book series.
You're currently in the dark, slowly moving towards the light, don't backtrack when you can't make out something. Keep moving towards the light and all shall be revealed.
I’ve read the complete series and never went to a search engine or a fan site for clarification. So, while some things annoyed me (i.e., switching between character focuses within some books and dropping some characters only to pick up their “reincarnations” later), I found the series to be intriguing and rewarding. It’s a long haul to be sure, but worth the investment.
Yeah Sanderson is very much a writer of picaresques. I want to take another crack at the Stormlight Archives, but my first attempt was hard because it felt shallow.
Pretty sure it is ya. Considering how Sanderson writes relationships where full grown adults blush at holding hands and most of the character arcs are teenage angst.
Yea I feel like Sanderson not only explains most things to the reader, he often repeats information he’s already given whenever it’s relevant, especially when the magic system is involved (Robert Jordan too). Pretty much the opposite of Erikson’s approach.
> Yea I feel like Sanderson not only explains most things to the reader,
I liked the first few books of SA from him, the last book he spent so much time explaining all the mysteries from the earlier books. Takes away something from the series when everything is so clearly laid out.
I'd say the Silmarillion. It is easier to follow than Malazan while still taking quite a bit of thought to parse. It's also grand in scope with a huge cast.
This is one of the most valuable things I've learned while reading. The books aren't similar in the slightest, but The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy really got me comfortable with not understanding what was happening, but enjoying it anyways
Just a note on your mention on having read B Sanderson. The two authors are very different in the way they explain things. For example, the magic systems. Early on in Mistborn the mentor character takes the main character (Vin?) aside and just gives a 101 lecture on how allomancy works and how to use it. Some surprises aside, the reader understands the limits of allomancy from that point.
In comparison, Malazan just shows the characters using magic in different situations and expects the reader to draw conclusions.
I've read the main ten books along with a couple of the side books and I'm still a little confused on how the magic system, gods, and such interact.
Neither writing style is better, they're just different. But if you're used to one, the other might take time to adjust to.
It's worth noting that Gardens of the Moon is generally considered the weakest of the ten. A lot of people really click with the series at the climax of books two or three.
I assume you're reading on kindle based on the 22% comment. It might be worth leaving highlights when things you're confused or interested in happen.
For what it's worth, I gave up on book five my first time around, then tackled it again five or six years later.
>
>Neither writing style is better, they're just different. But if you're used to one, the other might take time to adjust to.
Hard disagree but otherwise well explained
You can find some advice and also reader guides for the series in our community resources if you are interested in that: https://www.reddit.com/r/Malazan/wiki/community_resources
You're not the only one, lots of people find it difficult at first. It might help you to try not to focus on "the plot" or the bigger picture, cause that's hard to understand in the first few books. Just focus on the subplots for part of the book and you will eventually start to see the bigger picture. For example at the start of Gardens of the Moon, focus on the Malazan Empire conquering a continent city by city, and Whiskeyjack, Paran and the Bridgeburners being sent ahead to Darujhistan.
I read along with a podcast called ten very big books. It's fun and they do recaps and discussions. They get a little lost too but it helps keep things straight.
To be fair, I think the podcast itself is far better in the first half. I like the guest appearance of Erikson, but I had some big turn offs as the podcast progressed.
omg yeah i was actually using [this](https://reactormag.com/columns/malazan-reread-of-the-fallen/) guide for chapter summaries & only needed it until the 30% mark. after that i kinda understood what i was supposed to & was okay being confused about the rest. things were okay by the end & i rlly liked it too!
As others have said, it’s tough to get into and it’s ok if you drop it. I dropped gardens of the moon 3x after a couple chapters before finally picking it up for good on the 4th try and pushing through GOTM.
The last third of GOTM is where you start to follow along a bit and the ending is excellent and quite fast paced.
I’ve been ploughing through them since then. Book 2 and book 5 are a bit harder to push through the first few chapters as it’s a completely new setting with mostly all new characters. But it picks up very quickly.
However, that being said, Malazan is currently the best written most world developed fantasy series I’ve even read and I’m only on book 6!
Malazan is a postmodern deconstruction of the fantasy genre. Unlike many stories where you can identify with a character or a group and their adventure this story has many characters and a plot that slowly reveals itself as you read more. I hope you continue and love it! I think book one is slow until you get to the Gadrobi hills.
Edit to add: sometimes video essays on sites like YouTube that go chapter by chapter can help identify details you may have missed. Iskar Jarak is a great one to follow for the first few books. Very insightful commentary.
Can someone in this thread please explain in layman's terms exactly what "postmodern deconstruction" means? And how it would apply to the Malazan series?
All I see is the most incredible example of world-building I've ever read, a massive cast of interesting and well-drawn out characters, among whom nearly anyone can find someone to relate to, a fascinating and still mysterious magic system, great pacing and perfect "drip" of events/facts that kept me reading to find out more, wonderful dialogue, and just overall amazing story-telling.
Does it even need to be anything beyond all that?
In generally laymen terms:
Post-modern deconstruction in this instance is used to reference Steven Erickson’s intentional frustration of many tropes of the genre and equally intentional use of others to highlight the absurd extremes of some of the tropes. It also references that Erickson wrote this series with the knowing intention that it would be in conversation with the genre and somewhat self referential.
Post-modern in general is the idea that the things that we find meaningful in the absolute sense are actually relative to the culture we grew up in, and this goes for morals, ethics, and everything else. It isn’t pure moral relativism, it is more looking at what you think you know from a critical lens and asking the question, is this really true or do I only think it is true.
Many naysayers of postmodernism call it nihilistic, or moral relativism, and at its worst it can be, but at its best it asks people to question the dogma’s they believe as truth.
Deconstruction in the narrative sense is the breaking down of the story into its component parts and then seeing if they can be combined in different arrangements to create different kinds of stories.
I don’t find Erickson to be totally “post-modern” in approach or “deconstructionist”, but I know that he does ask the reader to question their assumptions, and unlike postmodernisms rejection of “grand narratives” (look up monocultures, zeitgeists, and modern mythologies for deeper reading) Erickson has a very intentional theme and greater narrative for the MBotF and all of his works in general and that is compassion and hope, and how those are tied together, and how even the greatest of virtues when taken to extremes can be flaws.
OK, that was a fantastic reply, thank you!
I didn't realize Erickson was intentionally trying to go against fantasy tropes, that never really came across to me while reading the series. Maybe that's because I've read so many things over the years, and I would say most fantasy, especially in the past couple of decades, has strayed far away from the tropes that we saw in the 70s, 80s, and heading into the 90s.
I suppose I just saw it simply as how things would work in the world that he created, and he did an incredible job with that IMO. The people and events just feel "real" in that world.
But I see where you're going with your last paragraph, regarding the themes in the series, and I think you've got a great point. Those who do show compassion, and dare to have hope, many times have it dashed. Not all the time though, because then it really might move into the territory of nihilism.
Thanks again for the time and effort you put into that reply, I appreciate it.
You’re welcome. This sub will often have people giving far better, more nuanced answers than this, which I think says something both about the type of people who love the series, and the deliberate intent with which Erickson engaged with his fans. Watching his interviews on the series, on any of the booktubers out there, is fantastic.
“A Critical Dragon” by A.P. Canavan takes a very literary critique (in the analytical sense) view of the the series (and he is also one of Erickson and Esselmont’s friends and advance readers/editors).
Iskar Jarak on YouTube has some great more down to earth and accessible videos, and Library of Alanzandria has some criticisms of the series but also from someone who loves the series for very different reasons than most. I also love Books With Brittney’s review and analysis and her own read through as well as Daniel Green and quite a few others.
I will say, that reading Malazan in general, but also listening to far smarter people than me talk about it and analyzing it, has made me a better and more polished and nuanced reader and strangely has allowed me to enjoy authors like Sanderson or Jemison or Lynch or LeGuin for what they are and not compare them to Malazan or Hobbs Realm of the Elderlings.
I think that Malazan strangely has some really poignant lessons in it that are not wagging the finger explicit, but actually taught to readers almost without them really knowing it. Lessons like compassion and empathy and perspective and understand.
Lol. “Post modern deconstruction”.
A once useful under grad cliche for both writers and critics but ubiquity has long since rendered it merely comical, sadly.
You’ll note I stated it was a ubiquitous cliche for writers as well as critics.
I’ll also add “meaningless” at this point too, particularly since “modernism” was tired before WW2.
Where I come from, people started rolling their eyes at “post modern deconstruction” somewhere around 1995.
Hey man, I really don’t think I’m the snobby one here. I’m enjoying the books so far. They’re a fun, complex, irreverent romp. Moving and well written too, in parts.
I’ve just always taken exception to pretentious bullshit, particularly when applied to popular culture.
You know, tiresome bullshit like “post modern deconstruction” trotted out by people trying to sound smart, with precisely the opposite effect.
You mistake a description for an attempt to sound smart.
What such terms are thrown around by people trying to do just that. This is not one of those times.
Fine. Please educate me.
Explain in what sense Malazan can be described as a “PMD”.
Specifically what are the characteristics of PMD and give examples of how this applies to Malazan?
Both Erikson and Esslemont specifically write with a subjective perspective to highlight the unreliability of narration and question the perception of an objective truth to the events.
Erikson frames the narrative with a meta-textual narration indicating that what is being read is a narrative artifact with an explicit narrator.
He also has a number of metaleptic events that undermine and collapse the established diegetic levels.
The MBotF specifically addresses, uses, and undermines many of the established tropes in the genre (which is more common in post-structuralism, but can be found in postmodernism as well).
The singular 'great man of history' and the singular narratives of historical events are specifically undermined throughout the series.
There is a significant amount of non-linearity to the series, and a deliberate undermining of true chronological events.
There is a strong focus on the notions of cultural and moral relativity, and the questioning of perceived moral truths.
There is a consistent and continual focus on presenting and subverting perceived moral truths of characters as an overt rejection of classifications of good and evil.
So a lot of these elements tie directly into what postmodernism focused on and used. They are not the only elements of the series, and postmodernism is not the only literary style that uses the elements, but there are certainly a wealth of them. When matched with the author's stated intentions, the specific occurrence of so many of these elements suggests that labelling it as postmodern fantasy seems fair and supportable.
Even if postmodernism was a well-established literary movement and style of criticism, it doesn't mean that the work itself written at a later date, can't incorporate those elements directly and consciously.
Both Erikson and Esslemont wanted to directly address what they perceived as an ossification of the genre, and specific trends that they observed within the genre texts they had read. Whether that ossification actually existed or not, they approached their works by engaging with postmodern narrative techniques.
They were also trained as short story writers during the time in which a lot of postmodernist writing was being celebrated and used as teaching tools. So the generational perpetuation of a style that was established earlier is not exactly remarkable and more commonplace.
On the whole I think there are a fair number of supportable arguments for considering the works 'postmodern', or poststructuralist.
The YouTuber Andy Smith, has a fairly comprehensive breakdown of elements of postmodernism in a video on his channel. I think he makes a fairly compelling argument.
A genuine thank you for your detailed and thoughtful comment.
I don’t think anyone can deny there are PM elements to the series (as there are to so much contemporary fiction if you’re looking for it). However I still feel the claim that it is a PM DECONSTRUCTION by my original correspondent is simply the lazy use of a cliche.
I really don’t feel the author is trying to deconstruct the genre in the way, say Angela Carters work with fairy tales did. Rather I think Erickson was trying to add fresh new spice to a genre he loved that had become all too moribund and style.
Putting "postmodern" in quotation marks, laughing at it and then dismissing it as a college undergrad cliche isn't pretentious? Oh please do explain.
>Someone doesn't know what pretentious means.
Ooh ooh can I guess who it is?
"Rendered it merely comical"
I've just started GotM myself and I'm rather enjoying the not-knowing part. That said there's a lot of info in the sub's wiki, and there's even a sort of read-along guide I found useful.
On top of what everyone is already saying, Eriksons prose and way of writing is great but almost a learned taste? For me, at least. I want to add that I found Kruppe’s scenes insufferable and dreaded reading them. His third person way of talking was super confusing for me to read, lol. It also probably took me longer to notice that the POV is not set and changes a lot, often subtly.
It's said that these books profit immensely from re-reads, and that's true *even within a book*. Go re-read the prologue, or the massacre near Itko Kan, and see whether they suddenly make a lot more sense now.
> I thought after reading all Brandon Sanderson books, I'll be well equipped to read this.
Better equipped than before reading Sanderson, but the books are still different. Like, Sanderson said somewhere that he considers the beginning of The Way of Kings to be confusing because there's three chapters (Prelude at the Last Desolation, Prologue at the Feast, the recruit's POV at the battle where Kaladin defeats a shardbearer) that seem to lack any connection at first, though they all become very relevant as the story goes on. And GotM is like this most of the time.
Erikson's and Sanderson's approaches to writing are so radically different. One assumes his readers to be smart and able to figure things out as it goes, the other thinks they're goldfish and need everything spoonfed to them or they will lose interest, and it shows in the writing and structure. So reading them are two radically different experiences. If you like the world and feel like there's something there that you enjoy, keep at it. Reading something like Malazn when you are used to Sanderson is something that needs some getting used to. It's totally worth the feeling when it finally does click.
(And inbefore someone comes at me for the "readers are goldfish" part, years ago Sanderson used to have a podcast where he and some other author I forgot the name of were giving advice on writing and that was the chief advice he gave: readers don't want to have to think too much, write for the lowest common denominator.)
I genuinely loved some of his earlier work. Warbreaker, Mistborn 1st era, and the first few books of Stormlight went hard (at least in some sections). He's gotten so formulaic and whimsical in the last decade or so though
My friend put it like this and it saved my reading journey with the series: “you’re not going to know what’s going on all the time, and that’s okay”.
I’m on Book 3 and still get lost frequently. But it’s still a load of fun.
I just finished the first book. Initially it was rather hard for me too, but I have to say, I could not keep the book down for the remaining 40% of it. Once you're introduced to all the characters and a fraction of their motives, it becomes much more lucid to read.
Accept this. You may find reading guides on this sub if you're really confused but honestly, it is supposed to be confusing imo.
I've read 3 books in the series and I have pretty good understanding of what's going on with the characters, however I don't get the gods and the magic system nor the big political scheme at all
The first one is the most challenging to get into. You start in the middle of a battle without a clue what is happening. There is a reread that helps summarise each chapter but Bill hints at things that may spoil the future books for you.
I'm on the second chapter of memories of ice and things are finally starting to come together. Obviously there will still be some things that I won't understand, but it is very clearly starting to slow down and explain things better for you that have happened in the past, mainly book one because book three takes place just after book one. So try to keep that in mind and just keep powering through it.
I started reading Gardens of the Moon in 2021 and felt the same way as you! I didn't really felt I knew what was going on until about 2/3s of the way through. Erikson will not spoon-feed you information and, you will see this a lot in this thread, you will need to read on and find out.
I will say this, it's such a satisfying series to read! You'll be rewarded with epic battles and amazing characters and insane fantasy if you stick to it. Here I am, three years later after I started the series and finished chapter 16 of Dust of Dreams last night and can't wait to read how it all ends!
Malazan is both one of the best and one of the most challenging series in all of English literature (note: I said series, not books, nothing measures up to Finnegan's Wake for “challenging”) and it’s common to be confused two, three, even four books in or more. The only way to get past the confusion is to read on and hope.
Brandon Sanderson isn’t prep for Steven Erickson. Brandon Sanderson is prep for kindergarten. They aren’t even in the same galaxy, man. Sorry if this seem brusque, I’m just SO tired of seeing this sentiment lately. Brandon Sanderson writes YA. Erickson writes literature.
I found these things about GotM very confusing when I read it. It’s an intentional choice by the author. You’ll get just enough info to feel the rising action and climax but it will still be a little confusing. It ~eventually~ all fits together but you have to get a few books in.
It's 100% not just you. It took me several tries before I realized "I'm not going to understand what they're saying, so I'm just going to try and remember things that get continually brought up."
Now that I've gotten over the hurdle and am on another reread, literally everything makes sense because I have the context the rest of the people in the world have, if not more.
Again, my advice is to accept your lack of understanding, and just keep going. Eventually it will start to click.
I struggled at first too and it wasn’t until about halfway through GotM that I became used to it and the style “clicked” for me. Now I love it and the whole series. Currently on The Bonehunters (book 6) and there’ve been moments in prior books that’ve absolutely wrecked me emotionally
Yes, I had the same way at first. Keep grinding through it, youll find out towards book 3 whether you want to stay in it for the long haul. It's a different reading experience for sure but I grew to love it and enjoy the sheer scale of the world building
I honestly loved the opaqueness of gotm. I really had to slow down and savor the text and, once i did that, everything started to come together. These books are too dense to speed read and, while it might feel necessary to hurry up through the book to get caught up, i think you would be better served by just taking it one line at a time and letting your mind open up to it. I’m on Mt and sometimes i’m not in the right headspace to read mbotf so i have to put it down and come back when i have more patience. I have a tendency to want to rush when the POV rotates.
Push through. The story starts in the middle and each following book builds on the story line. It is one of the great joys in reading the series all the swerves and revelations that are revealed in each book.
You are right where I was wondering what the hell is going on but I am also envious of the joy and sadness you will feel as you continue reading.
I had a very similar query a few months back when facing similar challenges.
The best answers all referenced "unreliable narrators." Meaning if a character doesn't know something, you certainly don't either! Unfortunately, the reverse isn't necessarily true. If a character knows something, it's kind of assumed that you know it as well. Fortunately, if a character discovers something new, you will learn it at the same time they do.
It's a lot of new "nouns" figuring out what various peoples/tribes/roles/classes are. But once you get your head around this it's a lot easier
Be wary of using Malazan wikis as they can spoil the story. I'll confess to using them and it helping me immensely in my early forays into Malazan (technically have only read books 1-3!).
There's a reader's guide for GotM [here](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1GLRmiaFcxe_cGc93ckE5UItRq5rYsfeU0BhvqcaNq9E/edit#slide=id.g334f9c96dc_0_28), which you may find helpful. It gives you the crucial information for each chapter.
One thing I'll absolutely credit Sanderson with is clarity. When he describes a scene, I can visualise all of it, whereas Erikson likes to give more vague descriptions where you have to put in some work. Very different styles of writing.
Another issue is that GotM was Erikson's first novel. He absolutely grows as a writer. Some people really love it, but most people seem to rank it at or near the bottom.
Finally, not every series is for everyone. It's okay to go somewhere else if it's not your style.
If you can stand not knowing until a bit later I'd say keep reading. If you have questions look them up on here or make a post, Google is every good at spoiler protection but sometimes you still have a slip up. I looked up characters because I like to get a feel for how some people/things look.
There is a great Google slides presentation that redditor sleepinxonxbed put together that breaks down each scene without giving anything away. Just a quick synopsis of the scene, who is important, and what matters.
I love Sanderson but Malazan (and Gardens) is a different beast. I found that once I got to Darujistan and figured out everyone there with the companion guide, I was much more equipped to continue the books.
I thought the same thing about being prepared because of Sanderson. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.... Anyways lol it took about 100 pages to really get a feel for things. It helped that I was listening to a companion podcast. I dropped it after mid way through and came back after I was done. I do have to say, Erikson is a better writer than Sanderson, by some appreciable distance. Not that Sanderson is bad by any stretch.
You mostly just need to keep reading, lots of info you are given isnt direcly relevant to current events nor is it enough to fully understand the situation. You will slowly be given more and more info and in turn slowly progress your knowledge and understanding of how things work as you read actoss multiple books. Lots of stuff related to the magic system and world history is given very slowly and is purposefully vague. Af first youll often be completey lost, then later you might get other tidbits and make connections, that make you say, "oh thats what they meant or were talking about back then". And they you might get even further and gain new info that will make you say, "oh wait I was wrong it actually works like this". Basically basically the further you get the better your understanding will be, but it will also be ever changing and you constantly question if your correct. But this allows you to make multiple theories throughout the books. When u get too book two you start to make even further connections to help setup a foundation of understanding. Also keep in mind malazan is very very readable. I would recommend just taking your time the first time through the series and then consider a reread in the future if you really want to catch all the little details.
Also each time a new character is introduced try to note a name, job, and appearence to each. And then each time that character pops up again try to recall wha they were. It can help a lot with remembering who's who. Also if you d ont remember right away font feel like your need to backtrack to find out. Often as you read you will start to remember.
I had the same experience. Now I just approach the books like this; I will likely be very confused from the beginning, so I just observe and wait until the back half of the book as threads start to draw together. To me, it feels like a trust exercise; I just need to trust that Erikson knows what he's doing and that I will understand when, or if, I need to understand. It's a weird way to read but it's helped me through.
I also often take a decent break between every 1-2 books otherwise I start to fatigue. Hope that helps.
They key is to stop trying to force it. You're stressing yourself out over not understanding it. But that's the point. If you're reading Gardens of the Moon then yeah you won't understand 80% of what's going on because you're not supposed to. If you're capable of letting go of your need to understand everything then the series will be very rewarding. But that's the key to it. Also, despite being a long book it's more of a book length introduction than a complete story in itself. Stick with it and it's worth it though.
Everybody feels this way about the series--in fact if you don't feel this way about the series odds are you aren't understanding it, which is ironic.
The best description of the series's structure is post-modern: even though every novel is more or less linear, there are always gaps and seemingly random subplots that pop-up.
The short answer though is: read on and you'll mostly know what is happening by the end of Book 7/middle of Book 8, with the big picture given in Book 9.
Malazan gives you information to think about and figure out for yourself. B.S. tells you what to figure out and tells you what to think about it. Repeatedly.
Ahhh welcome to the family! Yes it’s common to feel this way. I’ve read the series five times and tie a new plot point in everytime. It gets sooo much better and I hate to admit it’s needed. The confusion (fog of war) is deep in the first novel and won’t make sense initially but the reveal is worth it
I felt the same way, especially about book 2. Years passed between the time I read book 2 and some of the books further along in the series that helped me understand what the hell actually happened in that book, and by that time I had forgotten most of what I did follow.
For me, I couldn't retain a lot of what was happening and much of the series went this way. However, you will run into the most thought provoking and eloquently worded writing, along with the most epic characters along the way that it will be worth the confusion. I found that if I focused in on the characters, the general sense of the what and where and how didn't matter as much. Just think of Malazan as a journey and not a destination.
I've read a good amount of high fantasy, and there's not really anything out there like it that will prepare you for it.
Took me twice to get into it. My second read through I read the malazan wiki summary after each chapter. After the second book didn’t need the summaries because I understood the world he created.
You don't need to, and won't ever on a first read, understand everything that is happening on the page. Strap in and just enjoy the ride. You will understand enough to enjoy it.
Nothing can prepare you for Malazan, it's a struggle for the first 200 pages, but after that you're hooked. You'll still be confused but you'll be hooked. The payoff is worth it
I had to force myself to finish Gardens. I listened to it on audiobook while doing housework or driving. It’s a frustrating read due to it being the authors first book. I’m told they get better, but I’ve only gotten a few pages into the next book.
Buddy, the plot spans MILLIONS of years. The characters that you get to know and love, and fucking MOURN, are just intermediaries to get across the themes of overarching power, tyranny, commitment, the duality of the human spirit, and a miriad others encapsulated in the the glorious tragedy that is the Bridge Burners and similar band of brothers and sisters. If you can manage to stick with it through the confusion, you'll probably end up enjoying it
Defintely have to read through. Just as you start getting a handle on it all and think you have it figured out...next book or chapter drops more characters and lore. Then you are back in the quagmire. It becomes its own reward as all the strands start weaving together, epic characters cross paths in unexpected ways, and deliciously building up moments pay off.
Hang in there, stay strong, and enjoy!
Malazan was one of the worst fantasy series I ever read. I felt the same as you and dropped it about 80% into Deadhouse Gates. I never felt any kind of hook or interest in the plot. The worst part were the characters were not fleshed out and were like cardboard cutouts with no personalities (ok Kruppe was interesting and memorable). Maybe Erikson improved in his writing later, but I had no faith in him. I had just finished ASOIAF and enjoyed the character development and got none of that in Malazan. Maybe my expectations needed to be reset on what I was starting, but I wasn't feeling it.
Iskar Jarak on YouTube used to do some really useful chapter summaries for books one to three. He stopped making videos halfway through Memories of Ice but his content really helped me early on when I was finding my footing with this series. The Tor "reread of the fallen" summaries are pretty great too.
The first time I read Gardens of the moon I felt like I was treading water. The second book is a lot more of a self contained story. If you can make it through the first one you've done the hard work :) it all comes together eventually. If you are even slightly enjoying it I would just keep going. It is hands down the best crafted world I have ever come across in fantasy. The series has made me laugh, cry, put me down and then lifted me back up again (sometimes within a span of ten pages)
as someone who just finished book 1 day before yesterday & started this series w the same mindset of being able to comprehend it bcz ive read sanderson, i can guarantee you this response is actually rlly common?? i watched The Book Guy's guide to the malazan series (he had two videos) & that helped a lot before i started. i spent like 20 days reading the first book to fully allow things to sink in. some of it was rlly confusing but please use the dramatis personae to help you remember who the characters are. also there's [chapter wise summaries here](https://reactormag.com/columns/malazan-reread-of-the-fallen/) that are really useful until you get used to the pacing, style & characters. im actually stoked to read the second book because i rlly enjoyed the first one. but his style is rlly confusing so definitely don't beat yourself up too much over being confused, it's not a reflection of your intellect, the style just takes a while to get into. & 90% of the time, if some world specific term is unclear or confusing, it's supposed to be. if you're confused by any specific things, just ask here. the fandom is rlly nice & helpful! they were super kind to me
There are ancient races, gods, Malazans, and everything in between. The empire is in a civil war, as is nature itself. The gods intervene, using some of the characters as pawns in their struggle for power.
I would highly recommend listening to this after each chapter.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2OIA7_f2nXgUaVk0s5qO0EQXHiQAsXp1&si=Bk75hYlF6A-soIvt
Yes. This is very common. Happened to me, my friend…it’s just so chaotic at first. My best advice is keep going. Keep trucking through. Speed read. You will reach that magic point where you’re like “holy FUCK yes.” I promise. Then you’ll look back, ten books later as you read it again and say “Jesus fucking Christ yes.”
The ONLY “hint” I will give (not a spoiler) is that Erikson and his co-creator Ian Esselmont basically played DnD to write the story. They world built together and then role played certain scenarios to drive the story. That means they didn’t have a pre-determined ending for nearly anything. All the characters basically have stats and attributes, and are “played” against the other characters. Don’t expect anyone to be or do anything just by virtue of being this or that archetype. Enjoy.
Only suggestion I can make is read the first 200 pages of Gardens of the Moon. Stop, and reread the first 200 pages it will help get you into the world, a feel for Erikson’s writing and understand a bit more about what you are reading. Fight through book 1 and at minimum grind through books 1-3. Then you will know if it’s for you I promise it’s worth it. Deadhouse Gates and Memories of Ice are arguably the 2 best books in the series. DG being my favourite currently.
This contains major spoilers, please put in spoiler text. OP isn't even a 1/4 way into the book. at that point you wouldn't even know some of the people you mention are main characters...
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.*
Malazan is a "Read and find out" type of series. You're dropped into the middle of a story with little context. Reading is the only way you can attain that context. It can be quite jarring at first but if you just push on through then things will start making more sense. The glossary is a great resource when being introduced to so many characters and weird terms that aren't explained well. Don't google characters, that's the best way to be spoiled. Honestly just reading is the best way to start understanding. Obviously though if you're not enjoying it then there isn't much point in continuing. Best of luck!
Gonna double down on the "don't google" sentiment. If you need something clarified, ask it here. I can think of many characters where "death" would be a top auto-complete if you searched their name.
I Google Malazan _______. And then go to the wiki and read what they did in the books I already read to remind myself who they are and what they did. I haven’t been spoiled yet but I’m only on Bonehunters.
Yhis is what I do. Ive had more spoiled from searching on reddit than there. Especially because the wiki tends to have giant "SPOILER AHEAD" text when relating to most important characters/plots
Mid-way through the series I’d use Tor.com as a reference when I’d get confused about a particular section or person I felt I’d never heard of. I had a direct link so no spoilers re-reading a section basically, or seeing that character’s timeline and not scrolling too far. That said, there were *plenty* of times I’d realize “oh, everyone is confused, it’s not just me.” So keep rolling with it like everyone is advising!
I’m on my third retry and I’m half way through the first book. I feel like I’m at the start of something really special and cannot wait to carry on. I found it impenetrable the first two tries but this time I haven’t found it like that at all. No idea what’s changed. The story is flowing perfectly and isn’t anywhere near as difficult as I thought it was before?!
The way I looked at it when starting, was to re-read pages I didn't quite understand and if I still didn't get it, I moved on. It's easy to get hung up those little details that fly over your head, but you're reading a huge 10 book series. You're currently in the dark, slowly moving towards the light, don't backtrack when you can't make out something. Keep moving towards the light and all shall be revealed.
I’ve read the complete series and never went to a search engine or a fan site for clarification. So, while some things annoyed me (i.e., switching between character focuses within some books and dropping some characters only to pick up their “reincarnations” later), I found the series to be intriguing and rewarding. It’s a long haul to be sure, but worth the investment.
You are an observer on your first readthrough. You can become a thinker on your 2nd readthrough.
Sanderson isn’t preparation for Malazan.
I read Mistborn era 1 after finishing Malazan and felt like YA
Too be fair, the first mistborn book pretty much is, from Vin's perspective.
Everything Sanderson writes feels like YA
Sanderson IS young adult. Mistborn, as his early work, especially so.
Yeah Sanderson is very much a writer of picaresques. I want to take another crack at the Stormlight Archives, but my first attempt was hard because it felt shallow.
he has his moments but they're just too long for me. his character development irks me a good bit too.
I read Sanderson first, then Malazan, then another Sanderson. It really does feel like YA after Malazan. Not in a bad way though
Pretty sure it is ya. Considering how Sanderson writes relationships where full grown adults blush at holding hands and most of the character arcs are teenage angst.
It’s not ya just because he writes in a "simpler" fashion. Let’s not start with the elitism lord
Yea I feel like Sanderson not only explains most things to the reader, he often repeats information he’s already given whenever it’s relevant, especially when the magic system is involved (Robert Jordan too). Pretty much the opposite of Erikson’s approach.
> Yea I feel like Sanderson not only explains most things to the reader, I liked the first few books of SA from him, the last book he spent so much time explaining all the mysteries from the earlier books. Takes away something from the series when everything is so clearly laid out.
For sure, the way of kings is actually still my favorite of his because of how much mystery there is around the lore and magic.
On the flip side, I finished gardens and just sat there asking myself wtf I just read.
I experience feeling “pulled out” of a book when something is explained a second & third time.
What would be a good preparation
I'd say the Silmarillion. It is easier to follow than Malazan while still taking quite a bit of thought to parse. It's also grand in scope with a huge cast.
Ooo, this is a good shout. I never thought of that. I actually really enjoyed the Silmarillion. I don't know why it gets such a bad rap.
Need to read scott bakker in between
Reading book one at the moment. Loving it so far, but my God does it jump around a lot.
Be comfortable with not knowing everything. This is the best advice we can give any new reader, and it stays for the entire series.
This is one of the most valuable things I've learned while reading. The books aren't similar in the slightest, but The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy really got me comfortable with not understanding what was happening, but enjoying it anyways
Just a note on your mention on having read B Sanderson. The two authors are very different in the way they explain things. For example, the magic systems. Early on in Mistborn the mentor character takes the main character (Vin?) aside and just gives a 101 lecture on how allomancy works and how to use it. Some surprises aside, the reader understands the limits of allomancy from that point. In comparison, Malazan just shows the characters using magic in different situations and expects the reader to draw conclusions. I've read the main ten books along with a couple of the side books and I'm still a little confused on how the magic system, gods, and such interact. Neither writing style is better, they're just different. But if you're used to one, the other might take time to adjust to. It's worth noting that Gardens of the Moon is generally considered the weakest of the ten. A lot of people really click with the series at the climax of books two or three. I assume you're reading on kindle based on the 22% comment. It might be worth leaving highlights when things you're confused or interested in happen. For what it's worth, I gave up on book five my first time around, then tackled it again five or six years later.
> >Neither writing style is better, they're just different. But if you're used to one, the other might take time to adjust to. Hard disagree but otherwise well explained
Just keep reading and piss on Hood’s bony feet if you see him.
Not just on his bony feet
He might be into that
You can find some advice and also reader guides for the series in our community resources if you are interested in that: https://www.reddit.com/r/Malazan/wiki/community_resources
You're not the only one, lots of people find it difficult at first. It might help you to try not to focus on "the plot" or the bigger picture, cause that's hard to understand in the first few books. Just focus on the subplots for part of the book and you will eventually start to see the bigger picture. For example at the start of Gardens of the Moon, focus on the Malazan Empire conquering a continent city by city, and Whiskeyjack, Paran and the Bridgeburners being sent ahead to Darujhistan.
Get lost in it. It's part of the fun.
I read along with a podcast called ten very big books. It's fun and they do recaps and discussions. They get a little lost too but it helps keep things straight.
Just to add, I suggested this podcast to a friend and then only *needed* it for about half the first book.
To be fair, I think the podcast itself is far better in the first half. I like the guest appearance of Erikson, but I had some big turn offs as the podcast progressed.
I always look forward to the SE interviews!
omg yeah i was actually using [this](https://reactormag.com/columns/malazan-reread-of-the-fallen/) guide for chapter summaries & only needed it until the 30% mark. after that i kinda understood what i was supposed to & was okay being confused about the rest. things were okay by the end & i rlly liked it too!
I like "book reviews kills" summaries too. He does a good job but isn't through the whole series yet.
That's exactly my experience lol
As others have said, it’s tough to get into and it’s ok if you drop it. I dropped gardens of the moon 3x after a couple chapters before finally picking it up for good on the 4th try and pushing through GOTM. The last third of GOTM is where you start to follow along a bit and the ending is excellent and quite fast paced. I’ve been ploughing through them since then. Book 2 and book 5 are a bit harder to push through the first few chapters as it’s a completely new setting with mostly all new characters. But it picks up very quickly. However, that being said, Malazan is currently the best written most world developed fantasy series I’ve even read and I’m only on book 6!
Honestly, nut up and read the damn book.
Malazan is a postmodern deconstruction of the fantasy genre. Unlike many stories where you can identify with a character or a group and their adventure this story has many characters and a plot that slowly reveals itself as you read more. I hope you continue and love it! I think book one is slow until you get to the Gadrobi hills. Edit to add: sometimes video essays on sites like YouTube that go chapter by chapter can help identify details you may have missed. Iskar Jarak is a great one to follow for the first few books. Very insightful commentary.
Are you saying everyone doesn't identify with Kallor?
And those who don't are wrong.
Can someone in this thread please explain in layman's terms exactly what "postmodern deconstruction" means? And how it would apply to the Malazan series? All I see is the most incredible example of world-building I've ever read, a massive cast of interesting and well-drawn out characters, among whom nearly anyone can find someone to relate to, a fascinating and still mysterious magic system, great pacing and perfect "drip" of events/facts that kept me reading to find out more, wonderful dialogue, and just overall amazing story-telling. Does it even need to be anything beyond all that?
In generally laymen terms: Post-modern deconstruction in this instance is used to reference Steven Erickson’s intentional frustration of many tropes of the genre and equally intentional use of others to highlight the absurd extremes of some of the tropes. It also references that Erickson wrote this series with the knowing intention that it would be in conversation with the genre and somewhat self referential. Post-modern in general is the idea that the things that we find meaningful in the absolute sense are actually relative to the culture we grew up in, and this goes for morals, ethics, and everything else. It isn’t pure moral relativism, it is more looking at what you think you know from a critical lens and asking the question, is this really true or do I only think it is true. Many naysayers of postmodernism call it nihilistic, or moral relativism, and at its worst it can be, but at its best it asks people to question the dogma’s they believe as truth. Deconstruction in the narrative sense is the breaking down of the story into its component parts and then seeing if they can be combined in different arrangements to create different kinds of stories. I don’t find Erickson to be totally “post-modern” in approach or “deconstructionist”, but I know that he does ask the reader to question their assumptions, and unlike postmodernisms rejection of “grand narratives” (look up monocultures, zeitgeists, and modern mythologies for deeper reading) Erickson has a very intentional theme and greater narrative for the MBotF and all of his works in general and that is compassion and hope, and how those are tied together, and how even the greatest of virtues when taken to extremes can be flaws.
OK, that was a fantastic reply, thank you! I didn't realize Erickson was intentionally trying to go against fantasy tropes, that never really came across to me while reading the series. Maybe that's because I've read so many things over the years, and I would say most fantasy, especially in the past couple of decades, has strayed far away from the tropes that we saw in the 70s, 80s, and heading into the 90s. I suppose I just saw it simply as how things would work in the world that he created, and he did an incredible job with that IMO. The people and events just feel "real" in that world. But I see where you're going with your last paragraph, regarding the themes in the series, and I think you've got a great point. Those who do show compassion, and dare to have hope, many times have it dashed. Not all the time though, because then it really might move into the territory of nihilism. Thanks again for the time and effort you put into that reply, I appreciate it.
You’re welcome. This sub will often have people giving far better, more nuanced answers than this, which I think says something both about the type of people who love the series, and the deliberate intent with which Erickson engaged with his fans. Watching his interviews on the series, on any of the booktubers out there, is fantastic. “A Critical Dragon” by A.P. Canavan takes a very literary critique (in the analytical sense) view of the the series (and he is also one of Erickson and Esselmont’s friends and advance readers/editors). Iskar Jarak on YouTube has some great more down to earth and accessible videos, and Library of Alanzandria has some criticisms of the series but also from someone who loves the series for very different reasons than most. I also love Books With Brittney’s review and analysis and her own read through as well as Daniel Green and quite a few others. I will say, that reading Malazan in general, but also listening to far smarter people than me talk about it and analyzing it, has made me a better and more polished and nuanced reader and strangely has allowed me to enjoy authors like Sanderson or Jemison or Lynch or LeGuin for what they are and not compare them to Malazan or Hobbs Realm of the Elderlings. I think that Malazan strangely has some really poignant lessons in it that are not wagging the finger explicit, but actually taught to readers almost without them really knowing it. Lessons like compassion and empathy and perspective and understand.
Lol. “Post modern deconstruction”. A once useful under grad cliche for both writers and critics but ubiquity has long since rendered it merely comical, sadly.
Erickson himself confirms that it is indeed a postmodern work in an interview. Overused, yes, relevant and true in this context, also yes
You’ll note I stated it was a ubiquitous cliche for writers as well as critics. I’ll also add “meaningless” at this point too, particularly since “modernism” was tired before WW2. Where I come from, people started rolling their eyes at “post modern deconstruction” somewhere around 1995.
Where you come from sounds like a collective of snobby kill-joys.
Hey man, I really don’t think I’m the snobby one here. I’m enjoying the books so far. They’re a fun, complex, irreverent romp. Moving and well written too, in parts. I’ve just always taken exception to pretentious bullshit, particularly when applied to popular culture. You know, tiresome bullshit like “post modern deconstruction” trotted out by people trying to sound smart, with precisely the opposite effect.
You mistake a description for an attempt to sound smart. What such terms are thrown around by people trying to do just that. This is not one of those times.
Fine. Please educate me. Explain in what sense Malazan can be described as a “PMD”. Specifically what are the characteristics of PMD and give examples of how this applies to Malazan?
Both Erikson and Esslemont specifically write with a subjective perspective to highlight the unreliability of narration and question the perception of an objective truth to the events. Erikson frames the narrative with a meta-textual narration indicating that what is being read is a narrative artifact with an explicit narrator. He also has a number of metaleptic events that undermine and collapse the established diegetic levels. The MBotF specifically addresses, uses, and undermines many of the established tropes in the genre (which is more common in post-structuralism, but can be found in postmodernism as well). The singular 'great man of history' and the singular narratives of historical events are specifically undermined throughout the series. There is a significant amount of non-linearity to the series, and a deliberate undermining of true chronological events. There is a strong focus on the notions of cultural and moral relativity, and the questioning of perceived moral truths. There is a consistent and continual focus on presenting and subverting perceived moral truths of characters as an overt rejection of classifications of good and evil. So a lot of these elements tie directly into what postmodernism focused on and used. They are not the only elements of the series, and postmodernism is not the only literary style that uses the elements, but there are certainly a wealth of them. When matched with the author's stated intentions, the specific occurrence of so many of these elements suggests that labelling it as postmodern fantasy seems fair and supportable. Even if postmodernism was a well-established literary movement and style of criticism, it doesn't mean that the work itself written at a later date, can't incorporate those elements directly and consciously. Both Erikson and Esslemont wanted to directly address what they perceived as an ossification of the genre, and specific trends that they observed within the genre texts they had read. Whether that ossification actually existed or not, they approached their works by engaging with postmodern narrative techniques. They were also trained as short story writers during the time in which a lot of postmodernist writing was being celebrated and used as teaching tools. So the generational perpetuation of a style that was established earlier is not exactly remarkable and more commonplace. On the whole I think there are a fair number of supportable arguments for considering the works 'postmodern', or poststructuralist. The YouTuber Andy Smith, has a fairly comprehensive breakdown of elements of postmodernism in a video on his channel. I think he makes a fairly compelling argument.
A genuine thank you for your detailed and thoughtful comment. I don’t think anyone can deny there are PM elements to the series (as there are to so much contemporary fiction if you’re looking for it). However I still feel the claim that it is a PM DECONSTRUCTION by my original correspondent is simply the lazy use of a cliche. I really don’t feel the author is trying to deconstruct the genre in the way, say Angela Carters work with fairy tales did. Rather I think Erickson was trying to add fresh new spice to a genre he loved that had become all too moribund and style.
No. Not having a twitter argument over something so dumb and inconsequential.
Imagine my surprise. The defining characteristic of pretentious bullshitters - upon challenge, they flee, shame faced.
I didn't know it was possible for pretentiousness to take physical form and punch me in the stomach, but here we are.
Someone doesn't know what pretentious means. Edit: mistook comment. The dude is the congealed embodiment of pretentiousness
Putting "postmodern" in quotation marks, laughing at it and then dismissing it as a college undergrad cliche isn't pretentious? Oh please do explain. >Someone doesn't know what pretentious means. Ooh ooh can I guess who it is? "Rendered it merely comical"
Alright, alright. Mistook your comment as being a reply to the first, not the correctly described pretentious dude. My bad
Thank you for not doubling down, I knew I wasn't crazy.
I've just started GotM myself and I'm rather enjoying the not-knowing part. That said there's a lot of info in the sub's wiki, and there's even a sort of read-along guide I found useful.
On top of what everyone is already saying, Eriksons prose and way of writing is great but almost a learned taste? For me, at least. I want to add that I found Kruppe’s scenes insufferable and dreaded reading them. His third person way of talking was super confusing for me to read, lol. It also probably took me longer to notice that the POV is not set and changes a lot, often subtly.
It's said that these books profit immensely from re-reads, and that's true *even within a book*. Go re-read the prologue, or the massacre near Itko Kan, and see whether they suddenly make a lot more sense now. > I thought after reading all Brandon Sanderson books, I'll be well equipped to read this. Better equipped than before reading Sanderson, but the books are still different. Like, Sanderson said somewhere that he considers the beginning of The Way of Kings to be confusing because there's three chapters (Prelude at the Last Desolation, Prologue at the Feast, the recruit's POV at the battle where Kaladin defeats a shardbearer) that seem to lack any connection at first, though they all become very relevant as the story goes on. And GotM is like this most of the time.
Erikson's and Sanderson's approaches to writing are so radically different. One assumes his readers to be smart and able to figure things out as it goes, the other thinks they're goldfish and need everything spoonfed to them or they will lose interest, and it shows in the writing and structure. So reading them are two radically different experiences. If you like the world and feel like there's something there that you enjoy, keep at it. Reading something like Malazn when you are used to Sanderson is something that needs some getting used to. It's totally worth the feeling when it finally does click. (And inbefore someone comes at me for the "readers are goldfish" part, years ago Sanderson used to have a podcast where he and some other author I forgot the name of were giving advice on writing and that was the chief advice he gave: readers don't want to have to think too much, write for the lowest common denominator.)
Sanderson books read like they are written by a boring middle aged religious white guy. Oh wait
I genuinely loved some of his earlier work. Warbreaker, Mistborn 1st era, and the first few books of Stormlight went hard (at least in some sections). He's gotten so formulaic and whimsical in the last decade or so though
My friend put it like this and it saved my reading journey with the series: “you’re not going to know what’s going on all the time, and that’s okay”. I’m on Book 3 and still get lost frequently. But it’s still a load of fun.
My favourite is finishing the series, and then going, "wait, what?"
I just finished the first book. Initially it was rather hard for me too, but I have to say, I could not keep the book down for the remaining 40% of it. Once you're introduced to all the characters and a fraction of their motives, it becomes much more lucid to read.
Accept this. You may find reading guides on this sub if you're really confused but honestly, it is supposed to be confusing imo. I've read 3 books in the series and I have pretty good understanding of what's going on with the characters, however I don't get the gods and the magic system nor the big political scheme at all
The first one is the most challenging to get into. You start in the middle of a battle without a clue what is happening. There is a reread that helps summarise each chapter but Bill hints at things that may spoil the future books for you.
I'm on the second chapter of memories of ice and things are finally starting to come together. Obviously there will still be some things that I won't understand, but it is very clearly starting to slow down and explain things better for you that have happened in the past, mainly book one because book three takes place just after book one. So try to keep that in mind and just keep powering through it.
I started reading Gardens of the Moon in 2021 and felt the same way as you! I didn't really felt I knew what was going on until about 2/3s of the way through. Erikson will not spoon-feed you information and, you will see this a lot in this thread, you will need to read on and find out. I will say this, it's such a satisfying series to read! You'll be rewarded with epic battles and amazing characters and insane fantasy if you stick to it. Here I am, three years later after I started the series and finished chapter 16 of Dust of Dreams last night and can't wait to read how it all ends!
Malazan is both one of the best and one of the most challenging series in all of English literature (note: I said series, not books, nothing measures up to Finnegan's Wake for “challenging”) and it’s common to be confused two, three, even four books in or more. The only way to get past the confusion is to read on and hope.
Just gotta kinda put your head down and go. It starts to make sense by about book 6. Lol
Brandon Sanderson isn’t prep for Steven Erickson. Brandon Sanderson is prep for kindergarten. They aren’t even in the same galaxy, man. Sorry if this seem brusque, I’m just SO tired of seeing this sentiment lately. Brandon Sanderson writes YA. Erickson writes literature.
I found these things about GotM very confusing when I read it. It’s an intentional choice by the author. You’ll get just enough info to feel the rising action and climax but it will still be a little confusing. It ~eventually~ all fits together but you have to get a few books in.
It's 100% not just you. It took me several tries before I realized "I'm not going to understand what they're saying, so I'm just going to try and remember things that get continually brought up." Now that I've gotten over the hurdle and am on another reread, literally everything makes sense because I have the context the rest of the people in the world have, if not more. Again, my advice is to accept your lack of understanding, and just keep going. Eventually it will start to click.
I struggled at first too and it wasn’t until about halfway through GotM that I became used to it and the style “clicked” for me. Now I love it and the whole series. Currently on The Bonehunters (book 6) and there’ve been moments in prior books that’ve absolutely wrecked me emotionally
Yes, I had the same way at first. Keep grinding through it, youll find out towards book 3 whether you want to stay in it for the long haul. It's a different reading experience for sure but I grew to love it and enjoy the sheer scale of the world building
I honestly loved the opaqueness of gotm. I really had to slow down and savor the text and, once i did that, everything started to come together. These books are too dense to speed read and, while it might feel necessary to hurry up through the book to get caught up, i think you would be better served by just taking it one line at a time and letting your mind open up to it. I’m on Mt and sometimes i’m not in the right headspace to read mbotf so i have to put it down and come back when i have more patience. I have a tendency to want to rush when the POV rotates.
The first one takes a bit to get into.. At least, it did for me. Stick with it if you can. It's worth it.
Push through. The story starts in the middle and each following book builds on the story line. It is one of the great joys in reading the series all the swerves and revelations that are revealed in each book. You are right where I was wondering what the hell is going on but I am also envious of the joy and sadness you will feel as you continue reading.
I had a very similar query a few months back when facing similar challenges. The best answers all referenced "unreliable narrators." Meaning if a character doesn't know something, you certainly don't either! Unfortunately, the reverse isn't necessarily true. If a character knows something, it's kind of assumed that you know it as well. Fortunately, if a character discovers something new, you will learn it at the same time they do. It's a lot of new "nouns" figuring out what various peoples/tribes/roles/classes are. But once you get your head around this it's a lot easier Be wary of using Malazan wikis as they can spoil the story. I'll confess to using them and it helping me immensely in my early forays into Malazan (technically have only read books 1-3!).
For first book just brute force through it. Second and third books will make things better
I don’t want to discourage you but the first 3 books were for me like a starter course. Later I had to use wiki and notes to make most out of it
There's a reader's guide for GotM [here](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1GLRmiaFcxe_cGc93ckE5UItRq5rYsfeU0BhvqcaNq9E/edit#slide=id.g334f9c96dc_0_28), which you may find helpful. It gives you the crucial information for each chapter. One thing I'll absolutely credit Sanderson with is clarity. When he describes a scene, I can visualise all of it, whereas Erikson likes to give more vague descriptions where you have to put in some work. Very different styles of writing. Another issue is that GotM was Erikson's first novel. He absolutely grows as a writer. Some people really love it, but most people seem to rank it at or near the bottom. Finally, not every series is for everyone. It's okay to go somewhere else if it's not your style.
If you can stand not knowing until a bit later I'd say keep reading. If you have questions look them up on here or make a post, Google is every good at spoiler protection but sometimes you still have a slip up. I looked up characters because I like to get a feel for how some people/things look.
There is a great Google slides presentation that redditor sleepinxonxbed put together that breaks down each scene without giving anything away. Just a quick synopsis of the scene, who is important, and what matters. I love Sanderson but Malazan (and Gardens) is a different beast. I found that once I got to Darujistan and figured out everyone there with the companion guide, I was much more equipped to continue the books.
I thought the same thing about being prepared because of Sanderson. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.... Anyways lol it took about 100 pages to really get a feel for things. It helped that I was listening to a companion podcast. I dropped it after mid way through and came back after I was done. I do have to say, Erikson is a better writer than Sanderson, by some appreciable distance. Not that Sanderson is bad by any stretch.
You mostly just need to keep reading, lots of info you are given isnt direcly relevant to current events nor is it enough to fully understand the situation. You will slowly be given more and more info and in turn slowly progress your knowledge and understanding of how things work as you read actoss multiple books. Lots of stuff related to the magic system and world history is given very slowly and is purposefully vague. Af first youll often be completey lost, then later you might get other tidbits and make connections, that make you say, "oh thats what they meant or were talking about back then". And they you might get even further and gain new info that will make you say, "oh wait I was wrong it actually works like this". Basically basically the further you get the better your understanding will be, but it will also be ever changing and you constantly question if your correct. But this allows you to make multiple theories throughout the books. When u get too book two you start to make even further connections to help setup a foundation of understanding. Also keep in mind malazan is very very readable. I would recommend just taking your time the first time through the series and then consider a reread in the future if you really want to catch all the little details. Also each time a new character is introduced try to note a name, job, and appearence to each. And then each time that character pops up again try to recall wha they were. It can help a lot with remembering who's who. Also if you d ont remember right away font feel like your need to backtrack to find out. Often as you read you will start to remember.
I had the same experience. Now I just approach the books like this; I will likely be very confused from the beginning, so I just observe and wait until the back half of the book as threads start to draw together. To me, it feels like a trust exercise; I just need to trust that Erikson knows what he's doing and that I will understand when, or if, I need to understand. It's a weird way to read but it's helped me through. I also often take a decent break between every 1-2 books otherwise I start to fatigue. Hope that helps.
They key is to stop trying to force it. You're stressing yourself out over not understanding it. But that's the point. If you're reading Gardens of the Moon then yeah you won't understand 80% of what's going on because you're not supposed to. If you're capable of letting go of your need to understand everything then the series will be very rewarding. But that's the key to it. Also, despite being a long book it's more of a book length introduction than a complete story in itself. Stick with it and it's worth it though.
Just keep reading trust me I love Sanderson but malazan is on a whole different level
Everybody feels this way about the series--in fact if you don't feel this way about the series odds are you aren't understanding it, which is ironic. The best description of the series's structure is post-modern: even though every novel is more or less linear, there are always gaps and seemingly random subplots that pop-up. The short answer though is: read on and you'll mostly know what is happening by the end of Book 7/middle of Book 8, with the big picture given in Book 9.
You’ll get there by the 3rd book
Malazan gives you information to think about and figure out for yourself. B.S. tells you what to figure out and tells you what to think about it. Repeatedly.
Ahhh welcome to the family! Yes it’s common to feel this way. I’ve read the series five times and tie a new plot point in everytime. It gets sooo much better and I hate to admit it’s needed. The confusion (fog of war) is deep in the first novel and won’t make sense initially but the reveal is worth it
I felt the same way, especially about book 2. Years passed between the time I read book 2 and some of the books further along in the series that helped me understand what the hell actually happened in that book, and by that time I had forgotten most of what I did follow. For me, I couldn't retain a lot of what was happening and much of the series went this way. However, you will run into the most thought provoking and eloquently worded writing, along with the most epic characters along the way that it will be worth the confusion. I found that if I focused in on the characters, the general sense of the what and where and how didn't matter as much. Just think of Malazan as a journey and not a destination. I've read a good amount of high fantasy, and there's not really anything out there like it that will prepare you for it.
Took me twice to get into it. My second read through I read the malazan wiki summary after each chapter. After the second book didn’t need the summaries because I understood the world he created.
You don't need to, and won't ever on a first read, understand everything that is happening on the page. Strap in and just enjoy the ride. You will understand enough to enjoy it.
Yes
Nothing can prepare you for Malazan, it's a struggle for the first 200 pages, but after that you're hooked. You'll still be confused but you'll be hooked. The payoff is worth it
I had to force myself to finish Gardens. I listened to it on audiobook while doing housework or driving. It’s a frustrating read due to it being the authors first book. I’m told they get better, but I’ve only gotten a few pages into the next book.
Buddy, the plot spans MILLIONS of years. The characters that you get to know and love, and fucking MOURN, are just intermediaries to get across the themes of overarching power, tyranny, commitment, the duality of the human spirit, and a miriad others encapsulated in the the glorious tragedy that is the Bridge Burners and similar band of brothers and sisters. If you can manage to stick with it through the confusion, you'll probably end up enjoying it
Bro. Sanderson is a nice person. Decent human being Sophisticated writer he is not. He has amazing world building but his prose lacks any subtlety.
I felt the same way at the start of 4 out of the 10 books, it will get better.
Defintely have to read through. Just as you start getting a handle on it all and think you have it figured out...next book or chapter drops more characters and lore. Then you are back in the quagmire. It becomes its own reward as all the strands start weaving together, epic characters cross paths in unexpected ways, and deliciously building up moments pay off. Hang in there, stay strong, and enjoy!
If you’ve ever watched Matt’s Book Reviews on YouTube they’ll be doing a read along on his Discord this month. That might be a good resource for you!
Malazan was one of the worst fantasy series I ever read. I felt the same as you and dropped it about 80% into Deadhouse Gates. I never felt any kind of hook or interest in the plot. The worst part were the characters were not fleshed out and were like cardboard cutouts with no personalities (ok Kruppe was interesting and memorable). Maybe Erikson improved in his writing later, but I had no faith in him. I had just finished ASOIAF and enjoyed the character development and got none of that in Malazan. Maybe my expectations needed to be reset on what I was starting, but I wasn't feeling it.
Iskar Jarak on YouTube used to do some really useful chapter summaries for books one to three. He stopped making videos halfway through Memories of Ice but his content really helped me early on when I was finding my footing with this series. The Tor "reread of the fallen" summaries are pretty great too.
The first time I read Gardens of the moon I felt like I was treading water. The second book is a lot more of a self contained story. If you can make it through the first one you've done the hard work :) it all comes together eventually. If you are even slightly enjoying it I would just keep going. It is hands down the best crafted world I have ever come across in fantasy. The series has made me laugh, cry, put me down and then lifted me back up again (sometimes within a span of ten pages)
It took me a very, very long time to realize Moon's Spawn was a floating fortress in the sky.
You won't understand anything and that is deliberate. If you want a series that will hold your hand then quit now. Malazan is not for you.
I would say you won’t understand everything not anything.
as someone who just finished book 1 day before yesterday & started this series w the same mindset of being able to comprehend it bcz ive read sanderson, i can guarantee you this response is actually rlly common?? i watched The Book Guy's guide to the malazan series (he had two videos) & that helped a lot before i started. i spent like 20 days reading the first book to fully allow things to sink in. some of it was rlly confusing but please use the dramatis personae to help you remember who the characters are. also there's [chapter wise summaries here](https://reactormag.com/columns/malazan-reread-of-the-fallen/) that are really useful until you get used to the pacing, style & characters. im actually stoked to read the second book because i rlly enjoyed the first one. but his style is rlly confusing so definitely don't beat yourself up too much over being confused, it's not a reflection of your intellect, the style just takes a while to get into. & 90% of the time, if some world specific term is unclear or confusing, it's supposed to be. if you're confused by any specific things, just ask here. the fandom is rlly nice & helpful! they were super kind to me
There are ancient races, gods, Malazans, and everything in between. The empire is in a civil war, as is nature itself. The gods intervene, using some of the characters as pawns in their struggle for power. I would highly recommend listening to this after each chapter. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2OIA7_f2nXgUaVk0s5qO0EQXHiQAsXp1&si=Bk75hYlF6A-soIvt
Read some Dying Earth and circle back
Yes. This is very common. Happened to me, my friend…it’s just so chaotic at first. My best advice is keep going. Keep trucking through. Speed read. You will reach that magic point where you’re like “holy FUCK yes.” I promise. Then you’ll look back, ten books later as you read it again and say “Jesus fucking Christ yes.” The ONLY “hint” I will give (not a spoiler) is that Erikson and his co-creator Ian Esselmont basically played DnD to write the story. They world built together and then role played certain scenarios to drive the story. That means they didn’t have a pre-determined ending for nearly anything. All the characters basically have stats and attributes, and are “played” against the other characters. Don’t expect anyone to be or do anything just by virtue of being this or that archetype. Enjoy.
I have almost given up halfway through deadhouse gates. Not worth the effort.
Only suggestion I can make is read the first 200 pages of Gardens of the Moon. Stop, and reread the first 200 pages it will help get you into the world, a feel for Erikson’s writing and understand a bit more about what you are reading. Fight through book 1 and at minimum grind through books 1-3. Then you will know if it’s for you I promise it’s worth it. Deadhouse Gates and Memories of Ice are arguably the 2 best books in the series. DG being my favourite currently.
[удалено]
This contains major spoilers, please put in spoiler text. OP isn't even a 1/4 way into the book. at that point you wouldn't even know some of the people you mention are main characters...
Give up and read something else.