JULY FEATURE #3: The Sword of Shannara by Terry Brooks

[Nadine]

---

Melhay wrote:

---

Nadine wrote:

Part 2

I am going to be moving on to the next section of the book. I don't know if anyone is reading along in sections, but I am going to be reading Page 129 (Paperback edition), Chapter 8, through Page 270, Chapter 14. Not sure if this is a good breaking point or segment. I'm only guessing. If anyone who has read the book has a better idea, please do make a suggestion. 

---

I am reading along, its just I am slightly behind.  I have only made it so far to pg 72.  I will post when I get done with part one and then keep reading forward with you to pg 270.

---

Ah, Melissa, I hadn't realized that anyone else was reading along. I can wait. But you might as well continue through the next section. We only have a minor cliff-hanger here and we really are not deep into the story yet. My next breaking point looks like it has a major cliff-hanger, but who knows. Might as well talk about subjects as they come up for now instead of waiting to finish the section. So far their are no big surprises in the plot.

I did not make many comments on this first part because, again, I didn't think anyone else was reading along, but now I might retace my foot steps and and make a few.

[Nadine]

---

Melhay wrote:

I am only up to pg 72 where Shea and Flick have started their journey.

I really got to see the way of the world, in this book, just between pages 22-40.  This was the whole history lesson from Allanon to Shea.

I really started to see the politics and the way of things before the wars, they how the wars affected everyone and separated all creatures & cultures.  You start to see what has driven the different cultures to their current ways, and what those ways are, by what they had to do to survive to get to where they currently are.  Then you see how each of the different creatures look at each other, almost down their noses to one another.  There really is a division among them all, along with almost a distrust among them also.

There are different views on why they all live the way they do, and I started to see that in this reading section - more on pg 29 with Shea and Allanons argues as to why.  Shea and Allanon give different reasons for how they all should live, united together or apart and alone, with or without a centrual government.  This gets you thinking on if one government does the purpose it should do or does it hurt instead of help...  I think it is all in how it is handled and the people that handle it.

This whole section really starts to set the view of how everyone handles different cultures and the government idea.  You even start to get into some more government ideas when Flick thinks on Menions Kingdom (pg 71).

---

I am glad Brooks has set up the geography, inhabitants, and a bit of history up front. I feel better oriented going into the story rather than wondering where everything is. There is a fairly good map up front as well.

Political theory seems to be an important topic in this book, especially the idea of isolationism and involvement. It apparently continues on as an important topic. I have read the next chapter (chapter 8) beyond our stopping point but I don't think I'm giving away any spoilers here.  This is a major meeting of all the parties at Culhaven. (Essentiallythe LOTR "The Council of Elrond," but not as long or involved as we got a lot of back-story and present situation information already in Chapter 2.) Balinor explains to Shea the dangers of non-involvement (this time not isolationism but complacency):

Page 137-8

"It is the age-old tale of compacency, Shea. . . . We may be standing on the brink of the greatest war in a thousand years, but no one wants to accept the fact. Everyone gets in the same rut -- let a few take care of the gates to the city while the rest forget and go back to their homes. It becomes a habit -- depending on a few to protect the rest. And then one day . . . the few are not enough, and the enemy is within the city right through the gates. . . "

Hendel, the cynical dwarf, earlier on page 137 makes a comment about his visit to enlist the aid of some of the southern cities:

"Typical bungling officials, elected by the disinterested people to juggle the ball until it can be passed on to some other fool..."

So Brooks definitely has some political comments to make in this book. I don't remember if anything significant was happening in the world when this book was published (1977).

I think Brooks is making a valid point that when there is a danger it can't be ignored but must be confronted but I find myself now in a more cynical era -- is the government creating a supposed "crises" just to engage the assistance of people in their own agenda?

Message Edited by Nadine on 07-12-2009 11:12 AM

[Melhay]

---

Nadine wrote:

---

Melhay wrote:

I am only up to pg 72 where Shea and Flick have started their journey.

I really got to see the way of the world, in this book, just between pages 22-40.  This was the whole history lesson from Allanon to Shea.

I really started to see the politics and the way of things before the wars, they how the wars affected everyone and separated all creatures & cultures.  You start to see what has driven the different cultures to their current ways, and what those ways are, by what they had to do to survive to get to where they currently are.  Then you see how each of the different creatures look at each other, almost down their noses to one another.  There really is a division among them all, along with almost a distrust among them also.

There are different views on why they all live the way they do, and I started to see that in this reading section - more on pg 29 with Shea and Allanons argues as to why.  Shea and Allanon give different reasons for how they all should live, united together or apart and alone, with or without a centrual government.  This gets you thinking on if one government does the purpose it should do or does it hurt instead of help...  I think it is all in how it is handled and the people that handle it.

This whole section really starts to set the view of how everyone handles different cultures and the government idea.  You even start to get into some more government ideas when Flick thinks on Menions Kingdom (pg 71).

---

I am glad Brooks has set up the geography, inhabitants, and a bit of history up front. I feel better oriented going into the story rather than wondering where everything is. There is a fairly good map up front as well.

Political theory seems to be an important topic in this book, especially the idea of isolationism and involvement. It apparently continues on as an important topic. I have read the next chapter (chapter 8) beyond our stopping point but I don't think I'm giving away any spoilers here.  This is a major meeting of all the parties at Culhaven. (Essentiallythe LOTR "The Council of Elrond," but not as long or involved as we got a lot of back-story and present situation information already in Chapter 2.) Balinor explains to Shea the dangers of non-involvement (this time not isolationism but complacency):

Page 137-8

"It is the age-old tale of compacency, Shea. . . . We may be standing on the brink of the greatest war in a thousand years, but no one wants to accept the fact. Everyone gets in the same rut -- let a few take care of the gates to the city while the rest forget and go back to their homes. It becomes a habit -- depending on a few to protect the rest. And then one day . . . the few are not enough, and the enemy is within the city right through the gates. . . "

Hendel, the cynical dwarf, earlier on page 137 makes a comment about his visit to enlist the aid of some of the southern cities:

"Typical bungling officials, elected by the disinterested people to juggle the ball until it can be passed on to some other fool..."

So Brooks definitely has some political comments to make in this book. I don't remember if anything significant was happening in the world when this book was published (1977).

I think Brooks is making a valid point that when there is a danger it can't be ignored but must be confronted but I find myself now in a more cynical era -- is the government creating a supposed "crises" just to engage the assistance of people in their own agenda?

Message Edited by Nadine on 07-12-2009 11:12 AM

---

Yes I have to agree, I am only on page 72 but there really does seem to be an emphasis on the politics and governing of the land/cultures. 

I myself was wondering last night after I posted and went to bed, what was going on around 1977 when Brooks wrote the book.  Or even when did he start the book, what was going on to influence so greatly the ideas of these governing systems in his book. 

I do have to agree with Brooks also, in that if there is a problem and danger it does need to be tended to and not just stand to watch.  Expecially, if you are going to be affected by the results - work together and figure it out, set aside your minor differences for the greater good.

As for your last question, I wonder if more people are asking that question to them selves or if they have not caught on to it yet.

[Nadine]

"Shippey located "analogues" for Tolkien characters such as Sauron (Brona), Gandalf (Allanon), the Hobbits (Shea and Flick), Aragorn (Menion), Boromir (Balinor), Gimli (Hendel), Legolas (Durin and Dayel), Gollum (Orl Fane), the Barrow-wight (Mist Wraith) and the Nazgûl (Skull Bearers), among others. . . ."

----------------------------

Interesting enough I thought of Balinor as the Strider (mainly at this point)/Aragon analogues character. I thought he fit the profile better. After all Allanon arranged the meeting with him on the first leg of the journey and he was captain of the Border Guards (Rangers). Menion is the irresponsible Prince (Balinor the more responsible Aragon-type). But both Menion and Balinor are princes and destined to become kings in their respective lands, so we already have a dual story here. I kind of thought of Menion as a vague composite of Merry and Peppin at first. So obviously there isn't an easy agreement on where Brooks "copied" from Tolkien.

Actually, I find Menion a unique and well-defined character in his own right. He is also right up there in front sharing the focus with Shea. In the first book of the Fellowship everything was centered on Frodo. But there is a sharing of focus in Shannara. It is Menion who rescues everyone from the Mist Wraith (Barrow-Wright) and it is Menion who is seriously wounded (instead of Frodo-Shea on Weathertop) and has to be taken to Culhaven (Rivendell) to be made well again. I also see Menion being groomed as a major player here. He has a "quest" to earn his right to be king.

I might add that the old cover might be a giveaway as well. That looks like Menion to me between the elf and the dwarf. Menion is the one known for his skill with a bow so I don't think it is Shea.

Message Edited by Nadine on 07-12-2009 03:50 PM

[DSaff]

Nice post and good questions, Nadine. I read fantasy because I enjoy journeying to other places and times. While other genre does the same thing for me, I find fantasy giving me the "escape pod" from normal life. It is fun to read about dragons, trolls, wizards, and various and sundry other mystical/magical beings. It is fun to step into someone else's imagination and live their worlds for a time.

Mythology is another genre I enjoy reading. It doesn't seem to be one many people I know read anymore, so maybe fantasy is replacing it in some respects. Hopefully both genres will be around forever.

---

Nadine wrote:
Is Fantasy our New Mythology?

Tolkien main purpose in writing fantasy was to create a mythology for England. He firmly disliked the industrialization, the dependency on technology and the depersonalization of the individual that was becoming prevalent in his time. We seem to be steadily losing our mythology. More so since then. So I was wondering if the renewed interest and popularity of fantasy is to fill that gap -- that loss in wonder, individual achievement, and a world where we could define and recognize evil?

I don't think Science Fiction gives this to us. It only shows us a bleak future and a greater dependence on technology. Fantasy takes us back to our mythic roots. It depicts a time when the lowly individual could become a hero, and a time when there were "wise old" men we could trust and friends we could rely on. A time of wonder and magic and when we faced our enemies with a simple weapon and only our wits and sense of right to carry us through.

Is fantasy just a past time recreation or is it become a necessity to fill that gap left by our lost sense of mythology and basic values? Why do you read fantasy?

---

[Ryan_G]

I'm a little further in the book that I think the rest of you are but I wanted to comment on some of what I have read so far.  Now I'm not going to be able to compare this book to the LOTR books for the simple fact I haven't read those in probably 10 years at the latest.

I have always been drawn to this book because of a group of characters that are well thought out and by the end of the book fully fleshed and easy to understand.  At this point in the book my favorite character is Menion.  I think at this point in time he has come along on the quest for friendship and to prove himself as a man, both to himself and to others.

[dulcinea3]

---

Nadine wrote:

---

Melhay wrote:

---

Nadine wrote:

Part 2

I am going to be moving on to the next section of the book. I don't know if anyone is reading along in sections, but I am going to be reading Page 129 (Paperback edition), Chapter 8, through Page 270, Chapter 14. Not sure if this is a good breaking point or segment. I'm only guessing. If anyone who has read the book has a better idea, please do make a suggestion. 

---

I am reading along, its just I am slightly behind.  I have only made it so far to pg 72.  I will post when I get done with part one and then keep reading forward with you to pg 270.

---

Ah, Melissa, I hadn't realized that anyone else was reading along. I can wait. But you might as well continue through the next section. We only have a minor cliff-hanger here and we really are not deep into the story yet. My next breaking point looks like it has a major cliff-hanger, but who knows. Might as well talk about subjects as they come up for now instead of waiting to finish the section. So far their are no big surprises in the plot.

I did not make many comments on this first part because, again, I didn't think anyone else was reading along, but now I might retace my foot steps and and make a few.

---

I was at my parents' yesterday, so I picked up the books and started reading last night.  I don't know about the page numbers, which are probably not the same as yours.  I have read through chapter 4 - Shea and Flick are approaching Leah.  I think it's about 75 pages.

About the artwork - in addition to the cover by the Hildebrandt brothers, my (1977 book club) edition also has a full-color 2-page spread in the center, and full-page black-and-white illustrations throughout.  And I agree that I think that it is Menion on the cover.

On whether we will get to all the Lands in this volume - I wonder if it is a hint that, in addition to the basic map provided in the first volume, there is also a map of the Westland in the second, and a map of the Eastland in the third (or vice versa).  Maybe that is an indication of where the central story will be set in each volume.  But obviously they are heading for the East right now, and their quest will almost certainly take them North as well.

I had another thought on the correspondence of characters here with Tolkien's characters.  Obviously, Shea is the "Frodo" character who appears to be destined to be central to the quest.  But I also see him with a characteristic of Aragorn - he is the descendent of kings.  At the moment, I can't imagine that he will have the desire to try to rule the Elves, but who know what could happen?

When Shea and Flick were saved by the coming of the dawn and the abrupt departure of the Skull Bearer, I started to wonder - if you are being pursued by a creature that apparently can only hunt you at night, are you better off travelling by night or day?  If you are moving at night, you might be more easily caught.  However, if you were to travel during the day and hide during the night, you would not be as aware of what is going on, and might be caught in your sleep.

[Nadine]

---

dulcinea3 wrote:

---

---

I was at my parents' yesterday, so I picked up the books and started reading last night.  I don't know about the page numbers, which are probably not the same as yours.  I have read through chapter 4 - Shea and Flick are approaching Leah.  I think it's about 75 pages.

About the artwork - in addition to the cover by the Hildebrandt brothers, my (1977 book club) edition also has a full-color 2-page spread in the center, and full-page black-and-white illustrations throughout.  And I agree that I think that it is Menion on the cover.

On whether we will get to all the Lands in this volume - I wonder if it is a hint that, in addition to the basic map provided in the first volume, there is also a map of the Westland in the second, and a map of the Eastland in the third (or vice versa).  Maybe that is an indication of where the central story will be set in each volume.  But obviously they are heading for the East right now, and their quest will almost certainly take them North as well.

I had another thought on the correspondence of characters here with Tolkien's characters.  Obviously, Shea is the "Frodo" character who appears to be destined to be central to the quest.  But I also see him with a characteristic of Aragorn - he is the descendent of kings.  At the moment, I can't imagine that he will have the desire to try to rule the Elves, but who know what could happen?

When Shea and Flick were saved by the coming of the dawn and the abrupt departure of the Skull Bearer, I started to wonder - if you are being pursued by a creature that apparently can only hunt you at night, are you better off travelling by night or day?  If you are moving at night, you might be more easily caught.  However, if you were to travel during the day and hide during the night, you would not be as aware of what is going on, and might be caught in your sleep.

---

But I also see him with a characteristic of Aragorn - he is the descendent of kings.

Good point! We actually have three members of the group with royal blood. Menion, Balinor and now Shea. Traditionally, these stories are about the prince who earns his right to be king, so this indicates that we may have three story going on. Each of our three princes are very different characters. This is definitely evolving into something different than LOTR.

I started to wonder - if you are being pursued by a creature that apparently can only hunt you at night, are you better off travelling by night or day?

You know I started wondering about the same thing since the Skull creatures are never seen by day and seem to disappear at sunrise.

I guess several people are reading along so I will wait for you all. As far as I can tell so far, there are no big cliff hangers yet. This seems to be mainly a character and plot setting section and getting everyone going where they are supposed to be going. So I think we can all just comment as we go along and then pause at page 270 - chapter 14 (which does look like a significant cliff-hanger and maybe change of direction) to evaluate our reading schedule.

Message Edited by Nadine on 07-13-2009 11:54 AM

[Melhay]

Dulcinea3 wrote 

When Shea and Flick were saved by the coming of the dawn and the abrupt departure of the Skull Bearer, I started to wonder - if you are being pursued by a creature that apparently can only hunt you at night, are you better off travelling by night or day?  If you are moving at night, you might be more easily caught.  However, if you were to travel during the day and hide during the night, you would not be as aware of what is going on, and might be caught in your sleep.

_____________________

I am so glad to see someone else thinks on these things also.  I was wondering the same thing as I was reading these parts on the creature hunting them and then in the nick of time of dawn has to leave.  I was thinking the same things as you.  I did finally conclude to myself that if you want to sleep you would have to do it at daytime.  You will still be worried of someone coming and finding you, but you will be a little more at peace.

Part of me keeps thinking they don't remember they where told of the creature hunting at night, and to cross open spaces in day so it will not see them since it is a creature of night.  This I think is best shown in the book when they were leaving Shady Vale.  I know they needed to get out quickly and could not wait, but I just keep feeling as they are not thinking of the tip they were given on the daylight thing.  Maybe they are and I am just over worried for them.

[Nadine]

Sometimes the Magic Works

Brandon Sanderson mentioned this book by Terry Brooks in answer to a question in that thread. Since we have several budding writers in this group, I thought they might be interested in reading this along with the Shannara trilogy to get some ideas of the writing process while they are reading the book.

Sometimes the Magic Works 

There is an excerpt from the book and a video interview with Terry Brooks at the B&N link above.

From Publishers Weekly
"If you don't think there is magic in writing, you probably won't write anything magical," Brooks asserts in this succinct and warmhearted autobiographical meditation on the writing life. He views his success as a miracle and credits editor Lester del Rey ("What he had given me was the kind of education young writers can only dream about") for his discovery and Tolkien for the inspiration that drove him to choose fantasy adventure as his medium. Brooks, who practiced law before becoming a full-time author, stills finds himself amazed that his The Sword of Shannara "sold in record numbers and changed the face of publishing," becoming the first fiction title to land on the New York Times trade paperback bestseller list. He still marvels that del Rey chose his first novel to prove that post-Tolkien epic fantasy could sell in vast numbers and that it launched a new generation of fantasy authors. Brooks often refers to his old mentor's sage advice ("Thinking about a book before you wrote it was as important as the writing itself") and promotes outlines ("You can either do the hard work up front or do it at the end"). He also discusses the disappointments encountered in a 30-plus-year career that has seen struggles with a novelization (Hook) and less than stellar sales for some works not connected to the Shannara empire; yet he keeps a positive attitude about the writer's never-ending quest, which requires "determination, instinct, and passion."

[Melhay]

MelHay wrote: 

Part of me keeps thinking they don't remember they where told of the creature hunting at night, and to cross open spaces in day so it will not see them since it is a creature of night.  This I think is best shown in the book when they were leaving Shady Vale.  I know they needed to get out quickly and could not wait, but I just keep feeling as they are not thinking of the tip they were given on the daylight thing.  Maybe they are and I am just over worried for them.

________________

Well, I found on pg 113 that I may have just been over worried.  It seems they did remember about the creatures.  I was afraid it would have been the classic mistake of not remembering what you were told.  I am glad that one didn't stick, thank you.

pg 113 -  "Even the short journey of that afternoon had tired them out, and they preferred not to reisk moving about in the dark in this open country."

[Rachykaych]

I'm rereading this book for the nth time so approaching the burgeoning characters and who they might relate to in the LOTR as Shippey illustrated is a bit hard for me as I know how they develop over all.

One thing I find markedly different between the 2 books is the utter solitary nature of Allanon and his secrecy. In contrast Gandalf reveals more to Frodo and relies more on other counsel and has peers (despite betrayal). Allanon on the other hand has no one of equal or similar staure to himself.

There is also discussion about the various princes or princely heritage and who corresponds to Aragorn and Boromir. The fact that there are three, one of them our "Frodo analogue", makes this book more interesting I think as to how the quest (or quests) will test and develop Menion, Balinor and Shea.

I too am reading on, I think someone suggested to Chapter 14.

[Melhay]

Great to have more to the party!!  Yes, I think it was through ch 14 we are reading, but we just keep posting as we go also.

I am not able to compare to LOTR.  I am slightly ashamed to admit, I have never read the books.   I may have to pick those also up in the future to check them out.  I have loved the movies though.  I could watch them over and over again.

[Nadine]

---

Rachykaych wrote:

I'm rereading this book for the nth time so approaching the burgeoning characters and who they might relate to in the LOTR as Shippey illustrated is a bit hard for me as I know how they develop over all.

One thing I find markedly different between the 2 books is the utter solitarynature of Allanon and his secrecy. In contrast Gandalf reveals more to Frodo and relies more on other counsel and has peers (despite betrayal). Allanon on the other hand has no one of equal or similar staure to himself.

There is also discussion about the various princes or princely heritage and who corresponds to Aragorn and Boromir. The fact that there are three, one of them our "Frodo analogue", makes this book more interesting I think as to how the quest (or quests) will test and develop Menion, Balinor and Shea.

I too am reading on, I think someone suggested to Chapter 14.

---

As I get deeper into the books, I can see that Brooks might have started with the same Archetypes as Tolkien but has developed them in different and more complex ways. The comparison of Brooks with Tolkien are really very superficial. The quick reader sees them as LOTR rip-offs but they are actually an improvement in that Brook's characters are far better defined and better developed. Allanon is not the friendly wizard Gandalf. though he represents the "wise old man" he is mysterious and frightening. We actually, at this point, don't know where he is coming from or what his intentions are. He is obviously hiding much and I think we are in for a few surprises here. This is a very complex person.

Menion, Balinor and Shea are definitely evolving away from the Tolkien idea and become very individualized and unique in their own right. I think I might have quoted this before but this really explains Brook's intentions in his own words:

"I would set my adventure story in an imaginary world, a vast, sprawling, mythical world like that of Tolkien, filled with magic that had replaced science and races that had evolved from Man. But I was not Tolkien and did not share his background in academia or his interest in cultural study. So I would eliminate the poetry and songs, the digressions on the ways and habits of types of characters, and the appendices of language and backstory that characterized and informed Tolkien's work. I would write the sort of straightforward adventure story that barreled ahead, picking up speed as it went, compelling a turning of pages until there were no more pages to be turned."

I am finding it deeper and more complex than just an adventure story, especially since Brooks does address more serious issues. I think Brooks is also going to move ahead with surprises as the story develops, much in the same pattern we have been seeing in Sanderson's books. It is slow going at first with a lot of back-story and character development but only enough action to keep the reader engaged. As it moves along, I think it will become more comples, and full of surprising turns, and a few cliff hangers.

Message Edited by Nadine on 07-14-2009 11:18 AM

[Nadine]

---

Melhay wrote:

Great to have more to the party!!  Yes, I think it was through ch 14 we are reading, but we just keep posting as we go also.

I am not able to compare to LOTR.  I am slightly ashamed to admit, I have never read the books.   I may have to pick those also up in the future to check them out.  I have loved the movies though.  I could watch them over and over again.

---

No, that is good. You are reading and judging the Shannara books without prejudice. In fact, you might want to ignore what we are saying and give your own fresh evaluations. I have been specifically addressing Paul's first question and the similarities are strong at the beginning, though I feel they will be far less as we move into the story.

[Nadine]

Map of the Four Lands

I found this really nice color map of the Tour Lands. Very clear and easy to follow. It also prints out very nicely at 115% in landscape mode. Very readable.

Map of the Four Lands

[Rachykaych]

I too was addressing Paul's question about many comparisons people make between TSOS and LOTR but I think the books share a heritage and debt to the heroic form/quest/ Mediaeval Romance as do most epic fantasies to one degree or another.

The characters are well drawn and I enjoy Brooks' use of dialogue. Sometimes we have none for pages at a time or conversations can be reported as opposed to transcribed with quotes and we also have direct dialogue which doesn't feel "heroic" or staged, it reads very naturally. I also enjoy that we get the inner view of a variety of characters, even Allanon albeit briefly, and often within the same scene so it's not mono view for too long a time.

[Bradinator1]

Also addressing the similarities between Lotr and "Sword". I remember when I first read this. It was the first fantasy I read after Lotr and while the beginning template ws similar, the style Brooks uses is vastly different. It becomes more evident later on but he switches and cliffhangs sub-groups of characters. Made the book VERY hard to put down! You'd get "cliffhung" on a group and then plunge into the next chapter cuase you wanted to see what happened to these folks. Then the next group gets "cliffhung" and the cycle started over again for me. Characters introduced later in the story (one in particular) had a lot more "flash and flair" than Tolkien rather sedate characters.

Brad

[dulcinea3]

---

Bradinator1 wrote:

Also addressing the similarities between Lotr and "Sword". I remember when I first read this. It was the first fantasy I read after Lotr and while the beginning template ws similar, the style Brooks uses is vastly different. It becomes more evident later on but he switches and cliffhangs sub-groups of characters. Made the book VERY hard to put down! You'd get "cliffhung" on a group and then plunge into the next chapter cuase you wanted to see what happened to these folks. Then the next group gets "cliffhung" and the cycle started over again for me. Characters introduced later in the story (one in particular) had a lot more "flash and flair" than Tolkien rather sedate characters.

Brad

---

Actually, I think that Tolkien also does this.  The Fellowship does get separated and we take turns following their various storylines.  Frodo and Sam are off to destroy the Ring (with Gollum), Merry and Pippin are seized and carried off, etc.

[Nadine]

---

dulcinea3 wrote:

---

Bradinator1 wrote:

Also addressing the similarities between Lotr and "Sword". I remember when I first read this. It was the first fantasy I read after Lotr and while the beginning template ws similar, the style Brooks uses is vastly different. It becomes more evident later on but he switches and cliffhangs sub-groups of characters. Made the book VERY hard to put down! You'd get "cliffhung" on a group and then plunge into the next chapter cuase you wanted to see what happened to these folks. Then the next group gets "cliffhung" and the cycle started over again for me. Characters introduced later in the story (one in particular) had a lot more "flash and flair" than Tolkien rather sedate characters.

Brad

---

Actually, I think that Tolkien also does this.  The Fellowship does get separated and we take turns following their various storylines.  Frodo and Sam are off to destroy the Ring (with Gollum), Merry and Pippin are seized and carried off, etc.

---

Tolkien does this in a different way. He puts each storyline in a different book. Book 3 follows Merry, Pippin and Aragon & company and we have no idea of what has become of Frodo's group. Then Book 4 switches to Frodo and back tracks in time and tells what happen to him leaving us with a cliff-hanger. Book 5 has nothing on Frodo's story but is back to Pippin, Merry, and Aragon and all their associates.Then Book 6 switches back just Frodo through the first part, while the second part brings them all together. And then the ending chapters tell a coda story.

I have just started to get into the action section of Shannara but I can see the pattern that Brad is referring to. Once we get the group going, things begin to happen a lot faster than in Book 2 of LOTR. On the second day out our "fellowship" band is in very serious trouble (three times!) but still together. But we do have one brief separation that lets me see Brad's pattern. Allanon leaves the group to scout forward on his own and we briefly leave the group and follow him. Then Brooks returns back to the group and picks up what is happening there. This makes for much better pacing and action. I can see these switches will be taking place quite rapidly with successive cliff-hangers. And you will have to wait while Brooks switches us to another story, with its own cliff-hanger. And then it is back to another character where we finally find out what happened to them. Much better and I think an improvement on the Tolkien model.

I might add that the movie preferred the Brooks pattern and the plot sequences are switched back and forth between Frodo's story and the rest of the gang in similar, smaller time-frames.

Message Edited by Nadine on 07-15-2009 11:48 AM