3 ms·

I'm a big fan of Iain Banks since reading Excession (which still remains my favourite). Also loved Dune, but haven't read any of the sequels yet. I'd also recom

I'm a big fan of Iain Banks since reading Excession (which still remains my favourite). Also loved Dune, but haven't read any of the sequels yet. I'd also recommend Catherine Asaro's saga of the Skolian Empire to anyone that is into physics/maths.

davedx 15y ago
Read the 6 books by Frank Herbert, skip the other spin offs by his son and the other guy - they're terrible in comparison.
- neutronicus 15y ago
  I never though much of Dune 2-5 either, but I guess I'm in the minority on this one.
  - latch 15y ago
    Personally, I thought Teg was a great character..and the transformation of the Bene Gesserit was welcome. The entire Honored Matre sex thing was just out of place and weird though.
  - jon_dahl 15y ago
    It took me two or three tries, but now I put 2-6 up there with the first book. I think the reason people have trouble with 2-6 is that they're ultimately a reversal or deconstruction of the Hero myth. The first book is a fairly typical "Rise of the Superhuman Hero" tale, and that's why it's accessible. Book 2-6 explore the dark side of this myth, which is why they're unique, somewhat inaccessible, and really interesting.
    - neutronicus 15y ago
      I thought they suffered too much from "scope creep". The scope of the first book was nicely limited, but the later books made the story's consequences so far-reaching I couldn't take them seriously. As regards deconstruction, I think Gene Wolfe does it so much better than Herbert that I don't really consider it a selling point that Herbert tries to do it.
- latch 15y ago
  They are absolutely horrible..though they do get better over time. I've read all 16 or so books in the series, and I have two major problems with the (pre|se)quels Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson wrote. First, rather than just telling a masterful story with compelling characters, they over-explain and lean heavily on disturbing scenes. For example, in the originals, Gurney Halleck was simply (or not so depending on how you look at it) a very loyal and honorable person..it was that simple and beautiful. The prequels go out of the way to explain that the loyalty comes from being tortured and having his sister raped by the Harkonnen's. It's like the stupid Midi-chlorians. Secondly, every book comes off as though they are trying to make you buy all their other books. Forget about reading their "conclusion" to the original series (book 7 and 8) without reading their Legends of Dune series. They go out of their way to make references to their other books, even when it isn't necessary. Argg...sorry I got upset there.

davedx 15y ago

Read the 6 books by Frank Herbert, skip the other spin offs by his son and the other guy - they're terrible in comparison.

neutronicus 15y ago
I never though much of Dune 2-5 either, but I guess I'm in the minority on this one.
- latch 15y ago
  Personally, I thought Teg was a great character..and the transformation of the Bene Gesserit was welcome. The entire Honored Matre sex thing was just out of place and weird though.
- jon_dahl 15y ago
  It took me two or three tries, but now I put 2-6 up there with the first book. I think the reason people have trouble with 2-6 is that they're ultimately a reversal or deconstruction of the Hero myth. The first book is a fairly typical "Rise of the Superhuman Hero" tale, and that's why it's accessible. Book 2-6 explore the dark side of this myth, which is why they're unique, somewhat inaccessible, and really interesting.
  - neutronicus 15y ago
    I thought they suffered too much from "scope creep". The scope of the first book was nicely limited, but the later books made the story's consequences so far-reaching I couldn't take them seriously. As regards deconstruction, I think Gene Wolfe does it so much better than Herbert that I don't really consider it a selling point that Herbert tries to do it.
latch 15y ago
They are absolutely horrible..though they do get better over time. I've read all 16 or so books in the series, and I have two major problems with the (pre|se)quels Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson wrote. First, rather than just telling a masterful story with compelling characters, they over-explain and lean heavily on disturbing scenes. For example, in the originals, Gurney Halleck was simply (or not so depending on how you look at it) a very loyal and honorable person..it was that simple and beautiful. The prequels go out of the way to explain that the loyalty comes from being tortured and having his sister raped by the Harkonnen's. It's like the stupid Midi-chlorians. Secondly, every book comes off as though they are trying to make you buy all their other books. Forget about reading their "conclusion" to the original series (book 7 and 8) without reading their Legends of Dune series. They go out of their way to make references to their other books, even when it isn't necessary. Argg...sorry I got upset there.