The DU Lounge
Related: Culture Forums, Support ForumsWho read Terry Brook's Sword of Shannara?
It's a trilogy but only two of the books have been able to make it to television. They're shopping around for someone to take on the third book, but the longer it takes, the more unlikely it will happen.
So, in short, was the third book worth reading to learn what happens?
Silver Gaia
(4,544 posts)I would say yes. The books are MUCH better than the TV series, too. (I tried to watch it, but just couldn't do it.) There are many more books, too. The third one in the original trilogy ends this PART of the Shannara stories, but Brooks doesn't stop there. I hope that helps!
Baitball Blogger
(46,715 posts)Which, I suspect, is due to the fact that magic genres have several things in common. Similar gimmicks, but different story lines.
Silver Gaia
(4,544 posts)to be written following in the tradition of J.R.R. Tolkien. That's what Terry Brooks was aiming for. I still have a copy of the first Sword of Shannara paperback. The copyright date is 1977. So, it predates the Potter books (low fantasy) by 20 years, and is more closely related to Tolkien's work (both high fantasy), which predates it by 23 years.
As I said, the books are better than the TV show in that they are deeper, and more complex and sprawling. Which book did the series begin with? It isn't Sword, but further in. Right? I had forgotten that about the show. So, I don't know for sure which book or books you'd need to read. I'm just saying that if you enjoyed the show, you'd probably enjoy the book or books you'd need to read to finish the story.
TexasProgresive
(12,157 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,715 posts)winding down for the night.
WheelWalker
(8,955 posts)My daughter says third book was the best. But what do I know, LOL.
akraven
(1,975 posts)Hope they do it.
Ron Obvious
(6,261 posts)Poor man's Lord of the Rings, followed by a poor man's Hobbit, I what I think I thought of it at the time.