Bearers of the Black Staff, a Review+

Hundreds of years after the fall of man, civilization is starting to come of its shell once again. Humans, Elves, Trolls, and others are all forced to survive the in their sequestered valley and surrounding lands. But even in the fledgling stages of rebirth, darkness and evil makes its way into hearts and threatens all.

Like all other Terry Brooks novels, Bearers of the Black Staff is heavy on the characters, this time focusing on three main points of view. The Gray Man is the current bearer of the staff, a man descended from the long lineage of the Knights of the Word. Panterra Qu is a young scout learning the tricks of his trade with his partner Pru. Phryne, an Elven princess, is nosy and annoying and, uh, that's about it. These three each have their own wars to fight, but together there is something that will unite them all. That said, none of these are too terribly deep, but they're still somewhat engaging, if not familiar.

Terry Brooks also tends to have quick, fast-paced chapters, and Bearers is no different. Things are always happening, be it a boring council meeting, a dangerous encounter in the woods, or any number of other activities. There's little down time in the three hundred plus pages, and yet, when I finished reading the book I felt like the focus could have been tighter and some pages omitted.

This book, I think, is just another addition to the Shannara canon. It helps develop certain races more, as well as give insight to why certain things are in the Four Lands, beginning with Sword of Shannara. It furthermore serves to link the Word & Void series to the Four Lands, and while it makes sense, it makes me wonder if this was Brooks' original intent.

Overall, Bearers of the Black Staff gets a passing rating, but only because I've been a Terry Brooks fan for a long time. The tale is uninspired and predictable and has been told in pretty much any other Terry Brooks novel already in print. Unless you're a big Terry Brooks fan, this one's okay to skip.

-----

I feel obligated to say more, as this review probably comes across as a negative review.  (Apologies to those that already know this.)  First off, had it not been for Terry Brooks I very well may not be reading fantasy fiction.  The man's novelization of Star Wars: Episode I was an enjoyable read for me, so I found other books Brooks had written and fell in love.  At the time I didn't care that it was very Tolkienesque, and even now I don't care.  In my heart, Terry Brooks writes fun books, and Bearers of the Black Staff was ultimately fun.

That said, Brooks falls into old patterns, and verily, practically every book from Sword of Shannara onward is largely repetitive.  Stock characters and similar situations, plus a deus ex machina that is predictable from the onset.  (Does that even make it a "god out of the machine?")  So I suppose that really I've grown frustrated that Brooks seemingly doesn't challenge himself in his writing.  He doesn't push boundaries or throw wrenches, but relies on what's worked for thirty years.

Terry Brooks is a very successful author, and his books are gobbled up like crazy.  I've read 29 of his 32 fiction books, and I've enjoyed every one of them, some of them very much so.  I, for one, thought the Heritage of Shannara series was awesome, the Word & Void was amazing, and The Wishsong of Shannara was very cool.  Brooks writes smooth prose that's easy to understand, and this could be one of the reasons why he's so popular.

Still, I'd love to see him push himself more and see what he can do.

-----

I'm also wondering if part of the reason I didn't enjoy this book (nor the Genesis of Shannara series, for that matter) is because my tastes have irrevocably changed.  Brooks writes in the high, epic fantasy field (well, he did until his world of the Four Lands turned into our ruined earth, so now I guess it's low fantasy, but regardless), an immensely popular subgenre of fantasy.  This was the norm pretty much from Tolkien through the end of the 1990s.  People (myself included until 2005ish) were so entrenched in stereotypical fantasy cliches that when the new batch of fantasy authors hit the scene the world was turned on its head.

That's probably why I love Pat Rothfuss so much.  He's the one that opened my eyes and showed me what the genre could be.  The Name of the Wind was fresh and new, and after reading it I knew my genre reading would be forever changed.  Brooks was good, but Rothfuss... oh my.  Rothfuss was like going from soggy oatmeal to a ribeye.  I didn't know what I was missing.  Then someone turned me on to George R.R. Martin, something so different than Tolkien or Brooks, and fantasy came alive.  I devoured Brandon Sanderson, Joe Abercrombie, Peter Brett.  It's what I love reading today, fantasy that's smart and pushing boundaries.

Do I still like reading Brooks and Tolkien?  Absolutely.  Tolkien, in particular, will always be up there, as will Brooks, I suppose, but this type of fantasy is so familiar that it's not very exciting to read anymore.  I've not read The Wheel of Time mostly because of this very reason, that I know how it's going to be and I've just not allowed myself to get into such a long, cliched epic fantasy.  One day, perhaps, but not now.

This has me thinking about the current state of the genre.  One opinion is that modern fantasy is nihilistic and awful in comparison to Tolkien, and plenty agree.  Others, like myself, are excited about the current state of affairs and think modern authors create works of beauty.  I'm definitely not the only one to be frustrated by Brooks' familiar writing style, but, if his next novel read like an Abercrombie book, I daresay many of his legion of fans would be disappointed and shattered.

It's a fickle world.  I'll just keep on reading, I guess.