Wizardry and Wild Romance
Feb. 20th, 2011 10:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reviewthatBook: Wizardry and Wild Romance: A Study of Epic Fantasy
By: Michael Moorcock
Pages: 206
Release Date: October 25, 2004 (Revised Edition)
Stars: 2
In this book, Moorcock examines the influences of early writers of epic fantasy writers on the current writers.
I was really hoping that I was going to enjoy this book, but I didn't enjoy it at all. There were two real issues that I had with this book, and which stopped me from enjoying it.
1) There far too many quotes, and the quotes were far too large. Instead of letting his arguments standing on their own feet, he seemed to try to overpower the reader with quotes from other writers. There are quotes that last for over a full page, only to have him put in only a line or two of his own text, add another large blockquote, another line or two of his own text, and another large blockquote. It would have been nice if he had spent more time actually analyzing, and less time giving such large quotes.
2) There was far too much time spent hating JRR Tolkien. I can understand people not enjoying Tolkien's work, or even enjoying the way his work has been so popular, but the way that Moorcock was constantly going back to Tolkien so that he could say something negative got really old.
I would have liked it much more if the book was much more analytical and actually showed the progression of epic fantasy through the years. As it was, I was more happy when I finished the book and was able to put it away.
By: Michael Moorcock
Pages: 206
Release Date: October 25, 2004 (Revised Edition)
Stars: 2
In this book, Moorcock examines the influences of early writers of epic fantasy writers on the current writers.
I was really hoping that I was going to enjoy this book, but I didn't enjoy it at all. There were two real issues that I had with this book, and which stopped me from enjoying it.
1) There far too many quotes, and the quotes were far too large. Instead of letting his arguments standing on their own feet, he seemed to try to overpower the reader with quotes from other writers. There are quotes that last for over a full page, only to have him put in only a line or two of his own text, add another large blockquote, another line or two of his own text, and another large blockquote. It would have been nice if he had spent more time actually analyzing, and less time giving such large quotes.
2) There was far too much time spent hating JRR Tolkien. I can understand people not enjoying Tolkien's work, or even enjoying the way his work has been so popular, but the way that Moorcock was constantly going back to Tolkien so that he could say something negative got really old.
I would have liked it much more if the book was much more analytical and actually showed the progression of epic fantasy through the years. As it was, I was more happy when I finished the book and was able to put it away.
