Rating: 
Summary: A Lord Of The Rings derivative, but charming nevertheless
Review: I first read "The Sword Of Shannara" in 1980. I was 14 years old and at the pinnacle of my fever for Tolkien and fantasy board and role-playing games and miniatures. Brooks' novel certainly fueled my imagination, as well as reminded me how grateful I was to Tolkien's ground-breaking Middle-earth stories and world, of which Terry Brooks certainly modelled his fantasy world and story after. What increased my enjoyability of this book was the cover and interior artwork by my favourite fantasy artists, The Brothers Hildebrandt.The Sword Of Shannara is really nothing short of, nor more original than the heroic quest given to us by Tolkien in The Lord Of The Rings: the small and physically-weak, but pure and stout of heart protagonist (Shea Ohmsford), who is the only real hope the land has; the faithful companion to the protagonist (Flick Ohmsford); the quest surrounding a powerful magical object (The Sword Of Shannara); the aid of the wise, powerful, and mysterious Druid (Allanon); an organised company of men, elves, and a dwarf to aid and protect the protagonist in his journey; the evil Warlock Lord (Brona); the Warlock Lord's powerful minions who are seeking out the protagonist (Skull Bearers); the Warlock Lord's evil and viscious armies (Gnomes and Trolls); armies of Elves, Men, and Dwarves unified for survival; etc. The characters in "The Sword Of Shannara" mirror in many ways the characters in "The Lord Of The Rings". But despite this, there is a great deal of originality and surprising twists in the story; and Brooks' descriptive writing skills and vivid imagination, aided with The Brothers Hildebrandt's amazing artwork, paint a fantastic journey well worth taking. My only complaint about Brooks' writing is in the dialogue: perhaps too modern? too simple? too American? I'm not exactly sure, but it certainly isn't written in an "archaic" or "other-worldly fashion" like other Mediaeval-fantasy writers normally write in. However, this is a very minor complaint. I'm 35 now and have recently bought an old 1980 PB copy of "The Sword Of Shannara" to read again. I enjoyed the book just as much the second time round many years later as I did when I first read it. However, I highly recommend buying a used copy of the first edition of the book, as the the first edition has the cover art and a wonderful fold-out painting by The Brothers Hildebrandt, whereas most future editions do not--especially the version out now. If you're a fan of mediaeval fantasy and/or of Tolkien's Middle-earth, I highly recommend this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Book
Review: I read this book for the first time in third grade. I thought it was way more addictive than any video game or TV show. I've read it several times after, and it's good every time. I believe this is the best fantasy series ever written. This book, and the rest of the Shannara books, is a must read for fantasty lovers.
Rating: 
Summary: Just awful
Review: I am an avid and usually not-too-picky fantasy/sci-fi reader, but this book was just awful. Terrible writing, mostly. Also terrible characterizations. And when the hero got "saved" from an impossible situation by his magic stone the second time, that was it for me - what, he was just going to pull his stone out every time there was a problem? I could not finish it. Comparing this to Tolkien is just...inexplicable.
Rating:
Summary: Terrific though very much like "Lord of the Rings"
Review: "The Sword of Shannara" begins with Shea and Flick Ohmsford are visited by the mysterious druid Allanon in their home in Shady Vale. Shea, who is half Elvin, discovers he is really of the bloodline of Shannara. Allanon tells him that the evil Warlock Lord is planning to take over the world. And since the Warlock Lord is of the spirit world, there is only way to defeat him... by having the sole heir of Shannara take up the sword of Shannara which is the only weapon which can kill him. And Shea is the last and only heir of Shannara! Together the three of them with the help of Balinor the Prince of Callahorn, Menion Leah the Prince of Leah, Hendel the Dwarf, and the Elves Durin and Dayel, who are the cousins of Elf King Eventine, must travel to the Druid's keep of Paranor to get the Sword of Shannara. But little do they know that the Warlock Lord is already having his army ready for war against the stronghold of Tyrsis and that he has already sent part of his army to take hold of Paranor... also, he has sent his Skull Bearers to destroy Shea... Terrific tale but as I said it is very much like J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy. It's not just the plot but also the characters are very alike. For exampel you can easily think of Allanon as Wizard Gandalf, Shea as Hobbit Frodo, Flick as the faithful Sam, Hendel can relate to Gimli the Dwarf, the Elf brothers are much like Elf Legolas, and many more of the characters. People who love J.R.R. Tolkien might be a little exasperated reading this book, finding the two books so alike, and yet, though I totally think "The Lord of the Rings" is fantastic, I was able to enjoy this book. Though I must warn you that the first 170 pages are pretty boring and I had a hard time to keep on reading. For this reason I gave the book 4 stars. But after reading a lot more, a found I couldn't put the book down! My favorite character is Panamon Creel, the one-handed thief. Though he was very arrogant and proud, he was still a fun and interesting character. Two other characters is Menion Leah and Shirl Ravenlock, both whom fall in love later in the book. Menion Leah is such a faithful friend and Shirl is very devoted to him and stayed with him even though danger was very close. So all-in-all, I strongly recommend the book though please don't be too disappointed in the very slow beginning and how very much alike it is to "The Lord of the Rings".
Rating:
Summary: (Reading Brooks And Tolkin)
Review: I have been reading Brooks and Tolkin for awile, and I see no diffrence in the too. I see Tolkin setting an image in peoples minds and watching what comes out of it.
Brooks uses what I call a "fantasy Epic" way of writing.Brooks dosent elaborate on one point in the story, he keeps his readers wanting to know whats going to happen. He tells the story though the eyes of the characters and not as a comintator. Tolkin is the complete opposit of that. He'll sit and write about a small thing that has no use in the story exsept that it's there, and will right as someone who is telling a story around a fire place.
I think Brooks has taken a world and added alittle extra in to it, so that people can get action drama and suspence all in one.
Rating: 
Summary: The SoS is highly reccommended if you're a teenager
Review: Back in the late 70's when this book was written, it had a certain audience in mind: 13 year-old boys. As such, it more than pleases its audience and caters to their interests. It is much more accessible than Tolkien's LOTR for someone in that age group (Tolkien's lengthy poems/songs are incredibly difficult to get through when you're 12-I know).
If you read through some of these reviews, you'll notice that most say something to this effect: I loved it when I was a kid. So now you're an adult and you don't like it as much anymore--congratulations, you have grown up! Wow, I am so impressed by your newfound eye for criticism. You see parallels between the SoS and the LOTR now that you have "matured" and have finally gotten around to plodding through the LOTR inspite of Tolkien's sometimes dry prose (some of his descriptive passages are plot killers).
Don't get me wrong, I love the LOTR and I also think it is one of the greatest books ever written for its intended audience--adults (by the way, the LOTR is just one book split into three volumes--you might want to keep that straight when you are trying to impress your friends with your newly aquired cultured tastes in literature). But, Tolkien was not the first to write fantasy nor will he obviously be the last. What he did was write something so powerful that it defined the genre--and that even took years after his death as it sat gathering dust on library shelves until it was "discovered" in America.
I personally think that nothing in mainstream fantasy has been original since Tolkien which is why I highly recommend Orson Scott Card's Alvin Maker series if you are incensed by Brook's "blatant rip-off" of Tolkien and are looking for something fantastical that is also fresh and original.
My point is: because of Tolkien, Brooks, and others, I love to read and I have to move on to other authors if I am going to continue doing so since I am not the kind of reader who can reread the same books over and over again. If I am going to continue reading fantasy, I am going to have to put up with a little retreading of the same material and plot devices found in other books like the LOTR. What is original is the author's own unique viewpoint and worldview that is his alone and which colors everything he/she writes and Mr. Brooks is no exception. His Shannara stuff has evolved into something all his own.
This is why I don't get the antagonism some readers who have "arrived" now feel towards the SoS. So what if its not as great as you remembered it when you were younger--it still stands out as one of the best books written for its intended audience, flaws and all. Superman just doesn't do it for me anymore now either but I got over that too (and hey, I don't hate him either).
Reccommend it to your younger siblings or kids (or to someone who wants to be a kid again, if only for a little while) instead and move on with your life. Maybe you'll do some good and get someone to start reading more instead of immersing his mind in a vacuum for hours on end watching what passes for television these days. Would that be all that bad?
Rating:
Summary: Pure Trash!
Review: Despite beauty being in the eye of the beholder, I'm astounded at the positive reviews this book has received.
The book's first noticable weakness is the writing itself: This guy makes Tom Clancy look like Charles Dickens (and Clancy can at least tell a story). His prose is horribly devoid of style, conjuring images of what a tenth grade student could create if asked to emulate the stylings of his favorite author.
Secondly, Brooks has no imagination whatsoever; as other reviewers have pointed out, in character and storyline, "Sword" is just a cheap imitation of "Lord of the Rings". It's laughable to be introduced to a character and be able to say "Oh, that's supposed to be so-and-so from Lord of the Rings".
And what's with the scene where "Dwarf Doctors" help heal one of the characters. What's a "Dwarf Doctor"; Do the dwarves have an ICU set up in the stinkin forest? ugghh! I can't take it anymore. If you want good story and writing, try Tolkien, Leiber, Wolfe, or Le Guin, but don't try Brooks; the guy is a hack.
Rating:
Summary: Inept, trite, poorly-written Tolkien clone
Review: I am amazed that this book has recieved rave reviews from some readers. I can only assume that most people who don't enjoy a book tend not to review it. SoS is so obviously rehashing Tolkien that I can't help but feel embarresed for it's author. Almost every character is simply a Frodo/Sam/Gandalf/Sauron in disguise, with a sword substituted for a ring. Someone who has read LotR in any depth will find that many individual scenes in SoS have echoes in Tolkien. After I noticed the first parralels, I found myself analysing the book as I trudged through it rather than simply reading it. It is possible to use a framework established by another author in a fresh and creative manner, but this is not the case here. Added to the inept ripping-off of Tolkien, there is also the frequently corny and trite dialogue. One cannot help but cringe! It is possible that Brooks' later work shows some skill or originality, but I don't have the disposable income or the time to bother to find out.
Rating:
Summary: Great Book
Review: great book, maybe my favorite of all terry brook's. i love terry brook's books.
Rating:
Summary: The best of Shannara Series
Review: It is one of the most appealing books I've ever read. When I read it for the first time (fourteen years ago), it left me thrilled and fearful because the monstrous flying creatures were so frightening and so spendidly described that you could almost hear their rasping breath! I was scared to the bone! True, I was thirteen and impressionable, it was a cold evening and I was alone in my room with a small light... but how often does a book make you feel the same sensations, even when you are so young? The world where the story takes place is well characterized: as a consequence of terrible Racial Wars the ancient world was destroyed and its aspect was completely changed, the races were dispersed and annihilated, and new races had appeared (Goblins, Dwarves, Elves and Trolls). This world is now scarcely populated, the cities are only big villages and the humans, fearful and weak, follow an isolation policy. But an evil danger threatens the pacific races that have to cooperate in order to discomfit it. The story is quite predictable (the quest for a magic talisman, the main character's secret identity, the strong warrior, the powerful druid...), but in the same time it is very enjoyable.
This tale where the good guys are really good and the bad guys are always bad (and usually hideous) is not very sophisticated, and this is a positive point, because it creates an epic atmosphere, where "medieval" people naturally act as people scarcely cultured and intricate. The magic too isn't very complex: the druid has got strong but simple powers, the sword is very powerful but its action area is limited. This book seems almost an ancient tale, where the duelling good and evil aren't some gods or spirits, but human beings: the hero against the druid (phisically) corrupted by the hunger for power and immortality, incarnation of evil.
The characters' struggles and fears are palpable, as well as you can almost feel the cold wind, the strong stony walls of Paranor, the mad cries of Ade's Lake, the paralysing terror that grasps Shea whenever he meets a monstrous Skull Messenger...
The characters' analysis doesn't reach Jordan's depth, but some greenness only helps achieving the goal: this story doesn't want to be the most realistic, instead it is a LEGEND, a myth with bad guys but without any cruelty! Read it! It can stand alone and you don't need to read the whole series (but you will, if you read the first!). Note:
1-The first and the last chapters are fantastic!
2-The book is not SO similar to Lord of Rings: LofR's world is "infested" by magic, fairies and witches, and even if the central plot idea and the characters' roles are the same, everything in SofS is developed in a different way (and the following books in the series demonstrate the difference).
|
