The Sword of Shannara: An Epic Fantasy

The Sword of Shannara was my first ever fantasy book, and the start of my favorite fantasy series ever. I have read it multiple times, over many years, and it always holds up. I've heard all of the criticisms of this book, such as it being a "watered down blatant Tolkien ripoff" (not true!) and while there is some validity to them, such as possible parallels of characters and some events, it is still a wonderful novel. This version is a beautiful hardback edition, with the dust jacket having the image above, with the cover underneath sporting Terry Brooks initals (TB) emblazoned in red. The inside of the book, along with the story, includes many black and white (which are greatly missed in the rest of the series past the first three books) images by the Brothers Hilderbrandt, and a color fold out of some of the characters which can be seen here (possible spoilers of characters???) [...]

All in all, this is a wonderful book and a triumph in fantasy, as well as the start of one of the greatest fantasy worlds of all time.

If you are looking at this review, you have probably already seen accusations that this book is a ripoff of The Lord of the Rings. They are completely true. Even if they were not, however, this book would still be a waste of time. Brooks' writing has been called easy to read, but I found this book arduous enough to slog through that I never actually finished it. You already know what is going to happen, and the setting and characters would not be interesting enough to hold up a 100-page novella, let alone something like this. It reads just like The Lord of the Rings, except that all the magic and originality has been removed. Seeing what happens when an untalented writer tries to write a book like this makes me appreciate all the more what a gifted man Tolkien was.
If you want to read fantasy, read The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. If you have already read them, or were unable to finish them (I don't dispute that they aren't for everyone!) then try Ursula K. LeGuin, Fritz Leiber, Gene Wolfe, Mervyn Peake, George R. R. Martin, China Mieville, Tad Williams, Roger Zelazny, or even Robert Jordan. Just stay far, far away from this book.

The Sword of Shannara
By Terry Brooks
This is one of the most-superb books I've ever read. It is about a young, half-elven elf named Shea Ohmsford, and he lives in Shady Vale. Sadly, all the rest of the world was infested by darkness. He knows little of these troubles, yet he is the only one able to stop it, by using the Sword of Shannara against the power of darkness.
I loved this book because of the superb writing style, and awesome characters. The settings are easily understood and memorable. This book is definitely for a hardcore fantasy reader, and those who understand the English.

I just can’t finish this book. There’s such a good job of building the setting that seems so promising, but you’ll come to find that the actual writing is so bad it becomes distracting. It’s particularly frustrating how you’re never completely within the point of view of one of the characters in a scene, but rather some twisted, first-person omnipresence that switches from person to person when it seems clever to the author. If the storyline was more compelling I could overlook this, but it starts to act more and more like a filler for a lack luster storyline.

Standard formula for EVERY chapter:
80% describing scenery(pointless)
10% plainly stating character thoughts or actions
10% lead to pointless cliffhanger.

The reader trudges through page after page of scenery descriptions and just when things start to get interesting Brooks pulls the rug out from under you with a COMPLETELY pointless cliffhanger. Reading this book was a chore. I wanted to give this book two stars for its few breif moments of creativity but with so much of the plot being directly derived from LOTR it should have been better.

I paid for the trilogy stupidly after reading the sample. So I'm starting the next book praying for an editorial miracle.

This book is maybe ok for a ten year old boy. I'm not saying read it if you're ten--I mean it seems like something a little boy would write. There is not one single female character in it, for one thing, which may give you some idea of its brash ignorance and immaturity. Otherwise, all else I can say is that every bit of plot or story in this book has been shamelessly plundered from other popular sci-fi/fantasy, especially LOTR (and even planet of the apes!!!). If you don't care, and just want some standard junk-food fantasy, then go for it. It seems to provide some suspense once in a while, if you skim through the filler.

An okay book. This book is clearly deriving tons of material from Tolkien. It would be bad if he tried to disguise it, but he doesn't. The quest idea is wonderful and there are times that the action clicks and flows very nicely, somewhat reminiscent of old RPGs like AD&D. Brooks needs to have spent some more time editing, and this book could be about half the length and still spend plenty of time on plot and character development. He is too wordy and at times contradictory in his descriptions.
The world is well thought out and the quest is enjoyable. Some character motivations are never fully brought to light. All in all, this book is worth the time but not the money. We love the library.

I was a bit stunned at the harshness of some of the SOS critiques. I haven't read this tome in a while, but I felt it worthwhile to defend it a bit and try and recall what I could. I'll agree that the other two books in the trilogy don't do much more than take up space on the bookshelf, but I really felt this first one captured much of the power of a good quest fantasy. It's not Lord of the Rings, but what is? The characters were well developed, the dialogue was interesting, often humorous and vibrant, and the plot was well developed and was a viable engine for a good story. I felt the mood was established well, and I had no problem losing myself in this world of men and dwarves and other mythical creatures. He even had a slightly innovative explanation for how the creatures of this Middle Earth came to be. I will confess it has been at least 20 years since I read it, and I can't promise that it has stood the test of time. I can promise that I felt it a very good read, and as long as I avoided the trap of comparing it with LOTR; I found it extremely enjoyable sword and sorcery.

What so many other reviewers are saying about the slavish similarities to--and sometimes outright copying of--Lord of the Rings are right on the mark. True, Brooks dresses his world up differently, and adds few original touches (some of which aren't bad), but in the end this story simply fails to deliver anything new or even anything worth the time it takes to get through the 700+ pages of poorly-wrought prose. As John Gardner once said, it takes an authentic junk mind to write junk fiction, and the poor quality of the sequel bears testimony that Brooks doesn't improve a great deal after his debut novel.

It's a pity, really, because Brooks's conceit of placing his fantastic tales in the far future might have provided a counterpoint to Tolkien's placing his own stories in the distant past. The races of man Brooks invents (apparently "human" is different than "man") have some potential, but they just slip into the silliest stereotypes as soon as they appear on the page. The world his characters inhabit looks large on the map, but apparently it can be traversed without any great difficulty on foot in less than a week. I got the sense that Brooks is the kind of person with a lot of ideas but without the tools to make them work. J.K. Rowling does a much better job juggling her multitudinous creations.

As mentioned earlier, I did go on to read the sequel, "The Elfstones of Shannara," based on the insistence that Brooks gets better as he goes. Maybe that's true 10-15 novels down the line, but "Elfstones" is even weaker than the first novel, probably because he made up the plot himself rather than stealing a better plot from a better writer. Don't bother with either one unless you have low standards and a lot of time to kill.

Much is made of the fact that "The Sword of Shannara" was the first sci-fi book on the NY Times Bestseller list, which is actually just a sad comment on the state of sf in the seventies. This book is still one of the worst I have ever read. How awful is it? Let us count the ways.
1. It's overlong--the only thing that kept me going in many parts was a morbid curiosity to find out how much torture I could endure.
2. It's derivative--Brooks clearly read The Lord of the Rings a couple of times and never got around to imagining something original.
3. The characters are undeveloped sterotypes, and boring stereotypes at that.
I could go on, but I'll spare us. Suffice it to say that this book remains one of the worst examples of why sci-fi and fantasy are looked down upon by literary circles, and that it was one of the worst wastes of money in my life. The fact that Brooks clearly belives he is God's gift to sci-fi, and that he refuses to write anything but more and more derivative versions of this first book (which all become bestsellers), I shall simply pass over in outraged silence. In conclusion, my advice to all would-be readers of this book, or any other Terry Brooks opus, is to go reread Tolkien--why read an imitator when the original is so much better?

Writing Quality: 3/10.
The Sword of Shannara didn't make it onto the bestsellers' list by a display of brilliant prose. It made it onto the list because it was one of the first efforts at an epic magical world for Tolkien lovers to inhabit, even though it wasn't a particularly intelligent or interesting effort. Brooks' prose is full of phrases that any creative writing teacher would mark out and have a student re-do. Here are a few examples: "Its feet emitted a curious scraping sound as it moved across the dark earth." How does a foot "emit" something? Here, the word choice simply shows a weak vocabulary, an awkwardness that typically comes when students want to use a simple word and then look for a more "literary" word, but end up using the word inappropriately. Why not say that his feet "made" a scraping sound? Or, consider this clumsy justification for why Brooks is about to unload an excessive amount of character introspection on us: "Shea considered the alternatives carefully though he had already made up his mind." And be prepared for every character, at one point or another, and perhaps at many points, to best a foe by "mustering every ounce of strength at his command." I could go on, but you get the idea. But, at least it's not as bad as his same-name compatriot, Terry Goodkind.

Depth of Concept: 2/10.
I can't say that the book is without any meaning . . . after all, the battle between good and evil is an important one. The problem is that any depth of meaning is merely borrowed from the groundwork laid by Tolkien and other earlier writers. Brooks is basically just borrowing a theme and sensibility and using less-interesting characters in less-interesting situations to do nothing new. The one idea that I thought might have been interesting would have been to spend more time explaining how the relics of our modern world fit into this new fantasy world . . . but that opportunity is almost entirely botched. We learn that there are 20th-century structures around from an "age-old" time, but Brooks never bothers to explain anything about them or offer any interesting or original ideas about how a modern civilization falls apart or how it rebuilds itself. It lacks what made A Game of Thrones and The Fellowship of the Ring intelligent reads.

Rounded Characters: 4/10.
The characters are not very interesting, but they're not horribly flat. The same problem that Tolkien had with characters like Aragorn are also a problem in Brooks' novel . . . when a character is good, he's really good, and when a character is bad, he's really bad. There are one or two characters who like to have a little fun and get into a little trouble, but nothing much is made of those qualities in terms of moral ambiguity. But beyond that, so many of the characters are ripped blatantly out of The Lord of the Rings, with barely more than a name-change.

Well-Developed World: 4/10.
I would score this lower, but I decided that since this is the beginning of a huge series, I'd give a nod to the larger world that ultimately comes out of it. Nevertheless, descriptions can be a bit muddled, and there's little to distinguish regular people in one part of the map from people in another part of the map. Some happen to be dwarves, some elves, some men, but they all pretty much act the same. And you never get the sense that Brooks really knows how large his world is. Sometimes he says a certain distance should take little more than a day or two to travel, and sometimes weeks. Certainly, the included map is NOT to scale, in any event.

Page Turner: 6/10.
Even though the book scores generally low marks for a lot of reasons, it's not a terrible read. This is mainly, I think, because Brooks includes a lot of action, and does a pretty good job of setting up some exciting scenes, even if they aren't wonderfully written.

Kept Me Thinking: 3/10.
I thought of scoring this lower, but decided that I did end up thinking about the world . . . even if it wasn't through any skill of Brooks'. Really, I ended up thinking a lot about the things that Brooks left out and should have included, to make his story better.
___________________________________________________

Overall Recommendation: 3/10.
I read this as a kid, and it's a fairly innocuous, if mindless, way to pass the time. If you love goblins and dwarves and elves, it hits those notes . . . but it doesn't make them interesting, it only makes them exciting in a few scenes. The Sword of Shannara is like a poorly made, big-budget Hollywood movie -- a lot of work went into it, but it's mostly cashing in on what others have done better. Having said that, I ate this stuff up as a kid, and there's not much in it that would be inappropriate for a 10-year-old.

See my profile web page for an expanded review.

I have to agree there are too many people trying to compare these books to LOTR, but on the other hand they ARE somewhat similiar and you can almost say this character is THIS character in LOTR.
Overall I have to say I love this series. I have read them three times now over the course of 7 years. I remember how much i LOVED them and couldnt read enough the first time, now that I'm older and reading through them yet AGAIN I realize some flaws and the writing wasnt as good as I remember, but still a good story.
As for a previous reader review, I think the defense of Tyrsis was there because it becomes important in later book(s) so its nice to kind of have a bit of history about Tyrsis later down the road, I found myself remember certain places and thinking oh yeah, that was in the other book, its changed a little now.
I did find myself frustrated with Shea's personality. I too wish he was a little less of a pansy. My favorite characters in these books is the Druids though and the Ohmsfords with the magic of the elfstones. But I wont give the rest away...

I just couldn't take it. I don't demand revelatory originality in my escape reading, but this was such an obvious rip-off of LOTR, I couldn't stomach it. Every single element was a blatant substitution for something from Tolkein, and so obvious it was distracting!

Instead, I found The Belgariad, Vol. 1 (Books 1-3): Pawn of Prophecy, Queen of Sorcery, Magician's Gambit and got my fantasy fun. Sure, it's archetypal to the point of cliche, but with its own internal logic and some satisfying psychological insights, so I was able to enjoy it on its own terms, not as a thinly veiled copy of something better.

One of the worst things of its type I've ever tried to read. Predictable, hackneyed, jejune, derivative, stilted. Just awful. Ripped off plot point after ripped off plot point, suffered by derivative and paper-thin characters. Painfully awkward exposition, very little attempt to show who the characters are rather than tell. And tell. And tell.

In 1977 there wasn't much to go on to in the epic fantasy line after Tolkien, but this, this is a complete waste of your time as a reader.

I just blazed through THE SWORD OF SHANNARA in a week and I really enjoyed the book. I bought it because I wanted to read a great fantasy/adventure story with interesting characters that were on a quest. I also wanted something with a Tolkien-esque flavor to it. I researched, and found TSOS, and got all of that and more.

This first book sometimes meanders overly with descriptions, but it is still a page turner. You get to know the characters. You wonder what you would do in their shoes. You see possibilities they don't, and in your mind, you try to get them to see what you can. And these are fictional characters!!! I got sucked in, and really felt they were real. Different types of people are represented, and I realized that I knew these types from real life. It added flavor to the book for me. I couldn't believe the different plot twists and seemingly unsurmountable challenges these characters went through. Just when you think things can't get worse for them, it does in ways you didn't expect!

TSOS is a very visual book. I could SEE everything in my minds eye, and a lot of the scenes played out in my head like a film. I was like an omniscient watcher, looking from different angles (above, below, etc.), and this added to my enjoyment of the book.

Compared to Tolkien, TSOS is faster-paced, both in the story, and the sequences. You don't get appendices for the characters, but you get solid descriptions and information to understand what you need to understand. Things happen fast, and you race along while you read it. You are carried by the story. There are moments where you get to rest, like the characters, but you know inevitably, things will keep happening. TSOS also has a backstory that makes it clear this happens in the future, not the past. This part of the book was very interesting to me, and distinguishes the book from being too much like Tolkien. It has some surface elements from Tolkien, but ultimately, it does have it's own voice.

The ending was very satisfying. No extended CODA like LOTR has, but enough to bring a solid finality (for now).

I enjoyed reading this book. It was fun, and I look forward to reading more by this author. If you like to overanalyze books, and if you are into some serious "hardcore" fantasy, then steer clear. This one is a fun ride that has a great premise, interesting characters, and more if you're willing to look.

If you're interested in this book enough to be here reading reviews, buy it. Don't take any of these "cliche-Tolkein impersonator" reviews seriously. They have no training whatsoever and are critisizing a New York Times bestseller, telling him how it is. Brooks has what, thirteen straight bestsellers? His works have a powerful presence and atmosphere. No one ever accused the writer(s) of the Bible with imitating the Talmud and Torah, did they? For $7, you can make your own decisions. A+.

All right,sure this book is a bit deriverative,but hey,this was his first novel!First King,which is technically the first one is quite better,but still,this one ain't all that bad either.
He does have quite the promising voice in this novel, you can hear that powerful writing style that soon will come out and rule the genre.He has created some new creatures,some pretty good characters and a whole good storyline.
Shea Ohmsford is living a regular life in Shady Vale,until one day the Druid Allanon comes with disturbing news:Brona,the Warlock Lord,has returned.With his army of Rock Trolls and Gnomes,he will conquer the Four Lands.Shea is the last heir of Shannara,the only one who can defeat the Warlock Lord.So he sets out with his not quite brother Flick,Menion Leah,later Durin,Dayel,Balinor,and Hendel,to go and retrieve the Sword.
Sure it is a tad copied off of Tolkien,but it still is a good book.He gets the idea with all of his other books.Buy it.

I love adventure stories. Those stories where the characters are to trek on and on and on. This is one of those novels, and a very good one at that! Full of descriptions and astounding details, but if you like straight-forward books, forget about this one. Me myself I absolutely love books rich in detail.
Some people may tell you that this book is a cliche or copy or whatever they'd like to call it. I've one thing to tell you; setting. Let's see George Lucas come up with an astounding world in which there are not simply random alien creatures, but far more; astounding, realistic, in-depth landscapes, battling cultures with realistic problems, and everything described down to complete exactness.
Here, Terry Brooks has weaved a new sort of book. A book in which you are not meant to pass the time; you are meant to realize its existence. Philosophies and morals inevident until the character makes their climactic appearance. A cliffhanger, and I really need to get the Elfstones of Shannara.

Good Book. I read this before i read The Hoobit so I didn't think that it was a rip-off. Now i kinda do. But maybe not a RIP-OFf. Its more like a more modern remake of the LOTR. And even it is a rip-off, its a rip off of one the the best series ever writen. And its a great rip off. OK, thats the last time i say rip-off. This is like most fantasy books, some country kid goes running off after some magical thing that only they can do. And remember Gandolf? Well now there is a new one...ALLANON. and Allanon could take Gandalf any day! ;) So there's this sword and the sword is the only thing that can kill the main bad-guy and only this one little country kid can use the sword. (familar, it should be) Still a Great Book just the same

OK, I can see stealing some ideas from the Father of Modern Fantasy (after all, plagarism is the greatest form of flattery), but at times this book goes too far. Still, it is a good book although it doesn't live up to "The First King of Shannara" or "The Elfstones of Shannara". I would recommend this book to all fantasy fans, even Tolkien fans, for the simple reason that the other books in the series are too good to pass up and this book is essential to understanding them.

I enjoyed this book. The story has very distinct similarities to Tolkien's LOTR. However, it's interesting and charming enough to hold it's own. If you like the fantasy genre, this one is a great add to your collection. I was very happy with it, but I must reiterate that for those of us that love the Lord of the Rings, get ready to chuckle at how very similar some of the elements of this story are to Tolkien's masterpiece.

To say that Terry Brooks was influenced by J.R.R. Tolkien is a massive understatement. Any fan of Tolkien who reads The Sword of Shannara will immediately begin to find and pinpoint the parallels. But it should indeed be noted that Brooks came along many years before other Tolkien 'influenced' authors such as R.A. Salvatore, Robert Jordan, and so on and so forth, and his contribution, in my opinion, is unmistakably more lively and enchanting. Brooks captures a sense of adventure and dread, and his world is rich and fairly complex. His characters, though relatively standard fantasy fodder in more recent years, are quite interesting and the inspiration of many contemporary fantasy heavyweights. And while Brooks shamelessly builds on Tolkien-esque foundations, he does so deftly and keeps things just different enough as to not seem trite even by today's post-TSR standards. Besides, if you love Tolkien (and what true-blooded fantasy freak doesn't! ), then the Four Lands will seem pleasingly familiar with its Elves and Dwarves. I was in 8th grade when I first read this novel, and I was captured almost immediately. It does not compare to the works of J.R.R. Tolkien, but it is arguably one of the next best things the genre has to offer. If you're a Tolkien purist, just be aware of the parallels prior to opening this up and sitting down to it - but don't let it deter you. Soon enough you'll wish you were an Ohmsford and Allanon was knocking on your own front door.

Wish I could get my money back. The narration is AWFUL. The narrator is using (what I assume is) a sound activated microphone- so the first bit of every sentence is cut off.
It is horribly distracting and ruins the whole audio. I could’t listen for more than 3 minutes before I was so utterly disgusted that I had to turn it off.

I read this book at a quite young age, and couldn't put it down. In that, it was brilliant, but anyone in their twenties really has no business reading this stuff to begin with. It's of course not the Lord of the Rings, rather an imitation, but a pretty good and entertaining one. I read a few of the sequels, and understand there are now too many to count, which is rather a shame. But this one is a thrilling read and loaded with enought imagination and adventure to set it apart from its peers.

This book is utterly outstanding. I thought I would never like to read works of Fantasy untill I read this book. The characters are Marvelous, the battels and fighting descriptions will really keep you reading. Also the setting of this novel after the initial fall of our humanity is very original. The only flaw is in that Brooks sometimes goes into a little too much detail in describing scenes or even characters. Overall a great book, I spent three days straight reading it untill I finally reached the end and A very exciting climax !!!
Also recommended: First King of Shannara, Terry Brooks and The Price of Immortality by C.M. Whitlock......!

While Terry Brooks has by the time this review was written shown himself to be a good author, this book just doesn't do it.

His descriptions are excellent, as always, and lend some reality to the whole thing, but they aren't enough to make up for the flaws below.

Brooks' characters are not entirely human and are, quite honestly, very difficult to sympathize or empathize with, always important in any work of fiction. The druid, Allanon, who plays an unfortunately significant part in this book and the remainder of the series, is too much larger than life in too many ways to make his character sustainable. His looming presence has a tendency to make the books drag until Brooks finally wakes up and deals with the problem, though sadly not until the end of the series.

Furthermore, the plotline drags along as you finally make your way to what you think is the final battle. While I can't put my finger on it, there is a cetian something in the plotline that takes it from the wonder it could have been to merely mediocre.

Moreover, if there is one necessity for every work of fiction, it is that the author know the history of the world about which he is writing very well, and either convey that knowledge or make it abundantly clear to the reader that he's got it, as Tolkien did. I know you're probably very tired of hearing about Tolkien this and Tolkien that, but it's true: he really was the greatest fantasy fiction author in the past hundred years, if not ever, and he is the standard to which all others are measured. Brooks clearly does not have a sense of the history of this world, whose name I'm not sure we ever discover, at the time this book is written. This is remedied only to a small extent by the belated prequel, First King of Shannara, which is itself a much better book. (Please read First King of Shannara first, it's really much better that way).

All in all, though this book made it to the NY Times best seller list at some time in the distant past, it, along with the rest of the series, encompassing The Elfstones and The Wishsong, is really only worth reading for background that becomes valuable in the next series, The Heritage of Shannara (begining with The Scions of Shannara).

Oh dear, where do I begin?

After I heard MTV was producing a new TV show based on the Shannara book series (starring awesome people like Manu Bennett and Ivana Baquero), I decided to check out the book. It wasn't until I was well into the first volume in the original trilogy that I learned that the show would be skipping this book and going right to the second book. Well darn, but it's still a classic, right?

Yeah, not really.

The main gimmick of the Shannara series to set it apart from other sword-and-sorcery yarns is the implication that the setting is post-apocalyptic, taking place centuries after the fall of civilization where humanity has regressed into a medieval-type society complete with elves, gnomes, dwarves and wizards (or druids in this case). Our resident druid Allanon lays this out in not one but two lengthy passages, and yet the narrative does very little with this idea, opting for tired old sword-and-sorcery tropes with an extra helping of blandness.

I can't decide what annoyed me most: 1) the highly derivative story that cribs countless plot points from Tolkien, 2) the complete lack of female characters (save for one princess who does jack squat), or 3) The mostly nondescript cast with whose faces all blur together. Let's take them one at a time:

1) We've all seen Star Wars knock-offs and fantasy adventures with obvious echoes of Tolkien. The first Shannara book is definitely one of those. The familiar road-trip structure swaps the quest to destroy a magic ring and kill the big bad in favor of a quest to retrieve a magic sword and kill the big bad. You don't have to look very hard to stumble on analogs of Frodo & Sam (Shae and Flick), Ringwraiths (Skullbearers), Wormtongue (Stenman), Theoden/Denethor (Palance), the Watcher (a tenticle monster, no joke), even Gollum (Orl Fane). There's also a Han and Chewie (Panamon Creel and Keltset) for good measure, although to be fair this book came out the same year as Star Wars. Many of the names of places and characters sound so similar (Allanon, Callahorn, Paranor, Balinor, Panamon, etc.) it's impossible to keep track most of the time.

2) Not only are there next to zero females, each and every one of the dudes here could've been changed to a woman with minimal impact on the plot. Either Flick or Shae would be nice. Maybe one or both of the elven brothers? How about one of the Buckhannas? It would certainly help the characters stand out from one another a little more. Speaking of which:

3) I know that Allanon the druid is a tall, dark, circus-like freak. None of the cast gets anywhere near as much description as that. I've never read a book with this many characters that had no face to me. Flick, Shae, Menion, even Panamon all have the same generic white guy palate in my mind. Balinor might have a beard, Shae probably has pointy ears, and the elves are definitely pale. There's so much missing in terms of appearance, age, physicality, and general temperament to define the cast beyond their roles in the cliche-ridden story.

Seems like the producers at MTV had the right idea with skipping to book 2, because very little here jumped out at me as "the good stuff". If you're curious about the world of Shannara, probably do the same and jump to the second book. Or hell, just wait for the show. Hopefully that'll be cool.

This was one of Brook's early novels and it shows. The writing struggles to engage the reader - you really find it hard to empathise with the main two characters. As others have noted, it really is similar to the Lord of the Rings, plot-wise.

If you've read other Brook's Shannara stories you'll notice right away how much harder a read this is. If you are new to his universe and this is your first time reading any of his books then I'll suggest you stick with it. It IS hard going, but the background is necessary, especially for the two books that immediately follow on from it, which are much better written.

Hard work, but a necessary evil to enjoy the whole of his works without a feeling of missing out.

The Sword of Shannara is one of the many books found in the Shannara series by Terry Brooks. Brooks it takes some of the staples of the fantasy genre and adds his own twist to the tried and true formula. What comes out is a book that seems very similar to The Hobbit, yet somehow is very much different.

The Sword of Shannara documents the journey of Shea Ohmsford, his brother, and many other characters. What you will find is a plot reminiscent of J.R.R Tolkien's The Hobbit. Brooks was clearly very inspired by the work of Tolkien when writing this book and it really shows as the book progresses. If you have ever read The Hobbit, be prepared to see parallels between the characters of the book. Personally, I found this similarity a little off putting. Although Brooks is put his own spin on things, I feel that the book took way too many ideas from The Hobbit.

Regardless, I found that The Sword of Shannara is still a wonderful book. The world of the book is, like many fantasy series of the same scope, huge and full of potential. The characters travel through diverse lands and pass unimaginable obstacles. They meet countless other people and races as they pass through different parts of the world. Many cities and regions populate the world of Shannara and many of them are showcased throughout the book. I really was able to picture each place with the descriptions given by Brooks.

The characters of the book were lacking a little originality, but each were very distinctive from each other. Each character was well presented through the story and acted well within their personalities set for them. Also, you can see the progressive growth of some of the characters as they encounter obstacles or other important events. As stated before, the book borrows a lot of ideas from The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings trilogy. You can clearly see the similarities between in both sets of characters. This truly takes away from the experience of reading this story. Most of the time, I found myself constantly looking for parallels between this book and The Hobbit, rather than enjoying what I was reading.

The Sword of Shannara is another typical fantasy story. It is the very first book in the massive series and it does have some room to expand. The world is rich with possibilities and the story takes a few interesting twists and turns.However, it is way too similar to The Lord of the Rings for it to be truly great. If you love the Lord of the Rings and similar books, then this would be a great series to read.

Shea Ohmsford is just an ordinary valeman when he received a
visit by the mystical Druid Allanon, who informs him that he
the last of the Shannara House. Only he can wield the fabled
Sword of Shannara, to stop the Warlock Lord and his army. The
Only other alternative is a bloody war that there is only a
slim chance of winning. So aided by his brother, he sets of
for Culhaven, to begin a Quest that thousands will depend on.

Do you think "Lord of the Rings" is getting a little boring now, and you feel like you need another fantasy? Well, don't hesitate to grab this book and open to page one! The Sword of Shannara is a complete series of adventure, mystery, and most of all excitment! Powerful forces of good and evil fight to the death with the outcome becoming apparant towards the end of the book with thrilling hand-to-hand combat. I thoroughly enjoyed this book because of its excitment and combat and adventure. At first I had doubts about this book because it was very slow at the beginning. As I got into the book, I uncovered the great excitment hidden within the book. Soon I was hooked like on "Lord of the Rings". Terry Brooks brings to life trolls, elves, dwarves, gnomes, and druids. He also describes well places from peacefull villages to beautiful castles on a bloody battlefield. I found myself comparing "Lord of the Rings" to "The Sword of Shannara". Instead of the evil Lord Sauron, you have the evil sorceror Brona. Tolkein fans may be put off by their similarities, but you really have to read both stories to see what I mean.
Despite the similarities, "The Sword of Shannara" is a worthwhile book. "The Sword of Shannara" has been my first Terry Brooks experience and definately not my last. I recommend this book as a great book.

I began this book with high expectations, I admit. I thought that it might be up to the calibre of Tolkien, or like the enjoyable Dragonlance Sagas. As I commenced reading it, I also began to wonder. The writing style was rather juvenile in the first few pages, reminding me somewhat of some rather terrible fanfiction I have read. I figured, if so many intensely enjoyed this book, it must become more interesting.
I'm at the middle of the book now, and admit I haven't finished it. But by the middle of the book, I expected to be immersed in the story, unable to put it down. Especially when I'm in a climatic situation and my copy is placed in front of me, yet I have no desire to finish it.
First, the names are absolutely horrendous and predictable. Allanon? The name conjures thoughts of Alcoholics Anonymous! Flick is too reminiscent of Flint from Dragonlance. All of the characters are intensely underdeveloped. Shea and Flick don't have personalities of their own, though most of the time the story is told in their points of view. What happened to the dislike between Menion and Flick, anyways? It was incredibly prominent at the beginning, but now they seem to coexist quite happily. The Elven Brothers are simply fillers, I can barely remember their names. One has a sad story about a young wife waiting, but that was stated in a mere paragraph and never hit upon again.
This story is missing such necessary literary elements like suspense, drama, and whatever that mysterious force that pulls you seemingly inside the book is. The characters have a lack of emotion, so when one is lost, there is no dispair spent on them. One remains nonchalant and lackadaisical about it, and just begins to expect that they shall be all united again in a dozen pages anyways.
The language is boring, the conflicts predictable. Speaking of conflicts, Terry Brooks preaches many times about how all of the races despise each other and are secluded. Yet when the Elven brothers, Hendel the Dwarf and the Humans meet each other, they have no reservations. Good books must have some sort of conflict within the characters, or their relationships seem empty. I believe that Shea should feel like some sort of misfit, being one of mixed descent, but there is nothing.
As I above commented, Brooks' language is dull and monotonous. A good writer does not use the same adjective twice in ONE SENTENCE! He relies on descriptive words that grammar school teachers try to shy their students from using. Big, for instance.
Another one of my problems is the lack of women. Though Tolkien did the same, he did include women of power throughout his books: Eowyn, Galadriel, Arwen. If Brooks has mentioned a women more than just the name of a wife yet, I will be surprised.
One last word: Allanon relies on this mysterious "blue fire" that simply shoots out of his fingers on various occasions. Blue Fire must be the biggest cliche in fantasy writing I have ever noticed. Then, whenever possible, he conjures up a shade to tell him the future. His powers are impossible even in the fantasy world, and it is annoying.
The only reason this book even deserves two stars is because of the parts he just about plagiarises from JRR Tolkien. I am grandly disappointed.

I have read better.WAY better. THere are little things used by writers called chariterization and ORIGINALITY.Young, single-outlooked man from questionable background lives in little village that has not been touched in centuries.(Sure, Tolkien and Jordan use this plot, but they do it with style). Allanon comes in (typical Gandalf/Moiraine figure) and makes him go on a journey to vanquish the upermost evil that will destroy the world, blah blah blah.Flick and Shea enbark on a wonderfully dull journey.Gee, original much?I don't care if he copied from Tolkien; if he could do it well, like Jordan, I would commend him.Dwarves,elves, wizards-all stereotypes lacking in any originality what-so-ever.Brooks can not make you care about the characters at all and should take some clases on how to present worldly information without making us fall asleep.He put twelve pages of history into the first 25 pages, before anyone can reasonably develop a connection and caring between world OR characters.Characters themselves

This is the best book that I've read in a long time. It's over 700 pages and I still read it in a little over a week, morning, lunch, night anytime I could spare a moment my face was in this book.

Brooks is an awesome writer, he sets up the story beatifully and it continues at a fun and inthralling pace. There is not a ton of character development partially due to the fact that there are so many characters but the fun story and the quick pace that keeps you on your toes more then makes up for it.

If you want a fun book that is very well written with a great story and plot then give this book a try.

Warning, I think the fact that this book is so similiar (I'm surprised he didn't get sued) to LOTR that I think it turns a lot of people off which is understandable. If you can look past that this book is an awesome story on its own merit and I think a lot easier to read and more enjoyable in a lot of was than LOTR (although LOTR is a better story it's not, in my opinion, written as well). I can't wait to read more from Brooks.

These are the first words that come to mind in trying to describe this book. The pace is incredibly slow, beginning with a single plot line that never quite gets off the ground. There are no fresh ideas here (including several moments of unabashed borrowing from Tolkien), the characters are unexciting and the book never reaches an adult level. I liked "First King" enough to try this book and I was very disappointed. Proceed cautiously if you read this, being warned that you are in for a rather mediocre experience.

I've read the majority of the criticism of this book and its companion novels and see the recurring complaints of the books being "Tolkien ripoffs." It seems to me that these critics must feel that tolkien copyrighted the fantasy "quest to destroy evil" theme. They seem to have had their minds set before even opening the book. Although the novel bears obvious similairities, (as any such novel would with this theme) it is far from being a Tolkien ripoff. That is not to say that I don't like the writings of J.R.R Tolkien myself, but the whining about plaguresm and such has to stop. The novel may have its inadequicies, but they do not stem from unorigionality, reguardless of what the few bitter critics who can't stop jocking Tolkien will tell you. What you will find is an imaginative new world and a quest for an artifact to destroy evil. If you enjoy the fantasy genre, this novel contains entertaining characters and a good amount of suspense. However, if you are a huge Tolkien fan and refuse to give the book a chance or are reading it to prove me or some other fan wrong, spare us your misery and go read The Lord of the Rings again. =(

While quite sometime since I read the first book written by Terry Brooks (almost 10 years ago) I feel a perspective of someone who read it and enjoyed it should be viewed. Terry Brooks weaves a tale with dwarves, elves, trolls, gnomes and other creatures that we all know and heard about but gives them a twist in a direction that is not commonly seen i.e. every elf is an archer or ever Troll is an ugly unthinking brute. No this tale speaks of a time in the place of the four lands in great turmoil for the dreaded Warlock Lord spirit has risen anew and intends to rule the lands forever. The Druid Allanon last surviving member of the once great and often viwed as fearful order of Druids is in search of the last in the bloodline of the family of Shannara. For they alone can weild the single weapon that can destroy the Warlock Lord forever...the sword of Shannara. A weapon forged by the druids in the time of the Warlock Lord first attempt to rule the lands and was stopped. Allanon finds that last member a young boy called Shea Ohmsford a young man whose life will be forever changed when the arrival of a Shadowen searching for him. This novel is truly one for the ages and should be read by everyone. I know in a post J.R.R Tolken where his books were made into movies people seem to be reading this sort of thing now. However when I read it only a select few had and really enjoyed themselves. So if anything take the time to read a series that has over 11 books in an on going series.

I read this book 4 or 5 years ago, and I loved it! I had also read The Lord Of The Rings 1 year previous to that. I must say I loved this book, I could not put it down I would come home from school each day and read until bedtime. Granted it was VERY SIMILAIR to TLoTR Trilogy, but either I didn't notice or didn't care. Now I am older and realise this alot more but this book is still a Thrill Ride nonetheless, and it was not intended to be as grandeur as TLoTR trilogy or he would have written three 500pg+ books in what may have been called "The Sword Of Shannara Trilogy" to tell the story.This is a story I will never forget. And is a great intro into the originality of his stories to come.

Do you think "Lord of the Rings" is getting a little boring now, and you feel like you need another fantasy? Well, don't hesitate to grab this book and open to page one! The Sword of Shannara is a complete series of adventure, mystery, and most of all excitment! Powerful forces of good and evil fight to the death with the outcome becoming apparant towards the end of the book with thrilling hand-to-hand combat. I thoroughly enjoyed this book because of its excitment and combat and adventure. At first I had doubts about this book because it was very slow at the beginning. As I got into the book, I uncovered the great excitment hidden within the book. Soon I was hooked like on "Lord of the Rings". Terry Brooks brings to life trolls, elves, dwarves, gnomes, and druids. He also describes well places from peacefull villages to beautiful castles on a bloody battlefield. I found myself comparing "Lord of the Rings" to "The Sword of Shannara". Instead of the evil Lord Sauron, you have the evil sorceror Brona. Tolkein fans may be put off by their similarities, but you really have to read both stories to see what I mean.
Despite the similarities, "The Sword of Shannara" is a worthwhile book. "The Sword of Shannara" has been my first Terry Brooks experience and definately not my last. I recommend this book as a great book.

I began this book with high expectations, I admit. I thought that it might be up to the calibre of Tolkien, or like the enjoyable Dragonlance Sagas. As I commenced reading it, I also began to wonder. The writing style was rather juvenile in the first few pages, reminding me somewhat of some rather terrible fanfiction I have read. I figured, if so many intensely enjoyed this book, it must become more interesting.
I'm at the middle of the book now, and admit I haven't finished it. But by the middle of the book, I expected to be immersed in the story, unable to put it down. Especially when I'm in a climatic situation and my copy is placed in front of me, yet I have no desire to finish it.
First, the names are absolutely horrendous and predictable. Allanon? The name conjures thoughts of Alcoholics Anonymous! Flick is too reminiscent of Flint from Dragonlance. All of the characters are intensely underdeveloped. Shea and Flick don't have personalities of their own, though most of the time the story is told in their points of view. What happened to the dislike between Menion and Flick, anyways? It was incredibly prominent at the beginning, but now they seem to coexist quite happily. The Elven Brothers are simply fillers, I can barely remember their names. One has a sad story about a young wife waiting, but that was stated in a mere paragraph and never hit upon again.
This story is missing such necessary literary elements like suspense, drama, and whatever that mysterious force that pulls you seemingly inside the book is. The characters have a lack of emotion, so when one is lost, there is no dispair spent on them. One remains nonchalant and lackadaisical about it, and just begins to expect that they shall be all united again in a dozen pages anyways.
The language is boring, the conflicts predictable. Speaking of conflicts, Terry Brooks preaches many times about how all of the races despise each other and are secluded. Yet when the Elven brothers, Hendel the Dwarf and the Humans meet each other, they have no reservations. Good books must have some sort of conflict within the characters, or their relationships seem empty. I believe that Shea should feel like some sort of misfit, being one of mixed descent, but there is nothing.
As I above commented, Brooks' language is dull and monotonous. A good writer does not use the same adjective twice in ONE SENTENCE! He relies on descriptive words that grammar school teachers try to shy their students from using. Big, for instance.
Another one of my problems is the lack of women. Though Tolkien did the same, he did include women of power throughout his books: Eowyn, Galadriel, Arwen. If Brooks has mentioned a women more than just the name of a wife yet, I will be surprised.
One last word: Allanon relies on this mysterious "blue fire" that simply shoots out of his fingers on various occasions. Blue Fire must be the biggest cliche in fantasy writing I have ever noticed. Then, whenever possible, he conjures up a shade to tell him the future. His powers are impossible even in the fantasy world, and it is annoying.
The only reason this book even deserves two stars is because of the parts he just about plagiarises from JRR Tolkien. I am grandly disappointed.

I have read better.WAY better. THere are little things used by writers called chariterization and ORIGINALITY.Young, single-outlooked man from questionable background lives in little village that has not been touched in centuries.(Sure, Tolkien and Jordan use this plot, but they do it with style). Allanon comes in (typical Gandalf/Moiraine figure) and makes him go on a journey to vanquish the upermost evil that will destroy the world, blah blah blah.Flick and Shea enbark on a wonderfully dull journey.Gee, original much?I don't care if he copied from Tolkien; if he could do it well, like Jordan, I would commend him.Dwarves,elves, wizards-all stereotypes lacking in any originality what-so-ever.Brooks can not make you care about the characters at all and should take some clases on how to present worldly information without making us fall asleep.He put twelve pages of history into the first 25 pages, before anyone can reasonably develop a connection and caring between world OR characters.Characters themselves

This is the best book that I've read in a long time. It's over 700 pages and I still read it in a little over a week, morning, lunch, night anytime I could spare a moment my face was in this book.

Brooks is an awesome writer, he sets up the story beatifully and it continues at a fun and inthralling pace. There is not a ton of character development partially due to the fact that there are so many characters but the fun story and the quick pace that keeps you on your toes more then makes up for it.

If you want a fun book that is very well written with a great story and plot then give this book a try.

Warning, I think the fact that this book is so similiar (I'm surprised he didn't get sued) to LOTR that I think it turns a lot of people off which is understandable. If you can look past that this book is an awesome story on its own merit and I think a lot easier to read and more enjoyable in a lot of was than LOTR (although LOTR is a better story it's not, in my opinion, written as well). I can't wait to read more from Brooks.

These are the first words that come to mind in trying to describe this book. The pace is incredibly slow, beginning with a single plot line that never quite gets off the ground. There are no fresh ideas here (including several moments of unabashed borrowing from Tolkien), the characters are unexciting and the book never reaches an adult level. I liked "First King" enough to try this book and I was very disappointed. Proceed cautiously if you read this, being warned that you are in for a rather mediocre experience.

I've read the majority of the criticism of this book and its companion novels and see the recurring complaints of the books being "Tolkien ripoffs." It seems to me that these critics must feel that tolkien copyrighted the fantasy "quest to destroy evil" theme. They seem to have had their minds set before even opening the book. Although the novel bears obvious similairities, (as any such novel would with this theme) it is far from being a Tolkien ripoff. That is not to say that I don't like the writings of J.R.R Tolkien myself, but the whining about plaguresm and such has to stop. The novel may have its inadequicies, but they do not stem from unorigionality, reguardless of what the few bitter critics who can't stop jocking Tolkien will tell you. What you will find is an imaginative new world and a quest for an artifact to destroy evil. If you enjoy the fantasy genre, this novel contains entertaining characters and a good amount of suspense. However, if you are a huge Tolkien fan and refuse to give the book a chance or are reading it to prove me or some other fan wrong, spare us your misery and go read The Lord of the Rings again. =(

While quite sometime since I read the first book written by Terry Brooks (almost 10 years ago) I feel a perspective of someone who read it and enjoyed it should be viewed. Terry Brooks weaves a tale with dwarves, elves, trolls, gnomes and other creatures that we all know and heard about but gives them a twist in a direction that is not commonly seen i.e. every elf is an archer or ever Troll is an ugly unthinking brute. No this tale speaks of a time in the place of the four lands in great turmoil for the dreaded Warlock Lord spirit has risen anew and intends to rule the lands forever. The Druid Allanon last surviving member of the once great and often viwed as fearful order of Druids is in search of the last in the bloodline of the family of Shannara. For they alone can weild the single weapon that can destroy the Warlock Lord forever...the sword of Shannara. A weapon forged by the druids in the time of the Warlock Lord first attempt to rule the lands and was stopped. Allanon finds that last member a young boy called Shea Ohmsford a young man whose life will be forever changed when the arrival of a Shadowen searching for him. This novel is truly one for the ages and should be read by everyone. I know in a post J.R.R Tolken where his books were made into movies people seem to be reading this sort of thing now. However when I read it only a select few had and really enjoyed themselves. So if anything take the time to read a series that has over 11 books in an on going series.

I read this book 4 or 5 years ago, and I loved it! I had also read The Lord Of The Rings 1 year previous to that. I must say I loved this book, I could not put it down I would come home from school each day and read until bedtime. Granted it was VERY SIMILAIR to TLoTR Trilogy, but either I didn't notice or didn't care. Now I am older and realise this alot more but this book is still a Thrill Ride nonetheless, and it was not intended to be as grandeur as TLoTR trilogy or he would have written three 500pg+ books in what may have been called "The Sword Of Shannara Trilogy" to tell the story.This is a story I will never forget. And is a great intro into the originality of his stories to come.

I read "The Sword of Shannara" when it was first published in 1977. I remember finding it as I was combing through the Science Fiction & Fantasy shelves. What caught my attention was the cover painting by Gregg Hildebrandt, What held me spellbound for 2 days as I read it was the story of Shea and the magical sword he was destined to weild. I admitt the first half of the book took a while to get into, but once the second part of the book came I had all I could do to hang on and enjoy the ride. I still remember how I felt when Shea had to face the truth about himself in order to defeat the Warlock Lord, then wondering if I would have had the same humbleness to admit who and want I was. I have read and re-read this book and the others that followed along with it. I have even passed the books along to others, knowing that they too will find themselves caught up in the magic of the Sword and the band that travels with it. It is a trip that is enriched with each journey through the world of Shannara.

After hearing much praise of the Shannara series at my school, I picked up this book with high expectations. Unfrotunately, I was let down, not because of the way the book was written but the story itself. If you have read LOTR you have pretty much have read this book. You have Frodo(Shea), Sam(Flick), Borimir(Balinor), and Gandalf(Allonon). Then you have a problem common in most Shannara books, the Ohmsfords. Flat, boring, goody goodies, and have as much depth as a shoe, I found almost no difference between them all. Wren(in Elf Queen) is more interesting than Wil, Shea, Flick, Coll, etc.. However, what saves this book is Brooks' highly entertaining style of writing. The seige of Tysris, the fight against the Warlock Lord, and the trials the characters have are all great to read. So read this book so you can understand the next books which have far more originality than this one. Somewhat recommended.

I normally don't review something that is reviewed a bunch of times where I have nothing really new to say, but I'll say it anyway. Total rip off of the Lord of the Rings. A writer trying to find his voice, but failing. Hints that it could have been really good, but it's not. Characters escaping everywhere by sheer dumb luck, rather than their brains and courage. Didn't finish it. Not planning on going back.

This book is great! I had heard a lot of good things about this book series and I couldnt put down "First King" so I figured this one would be just as good. Sure enough, it was better! The plot line is so riviting from the begining when Flick meets Allanon and sees the Skull Bearer to when Shea fights the Warlock King. The characters are so well devloped and thought out. The plot twists and turns all over the place and you never know what is going to happen next. Its a great book! By the way, see my reviews for the other books in the series here on the store.com. :) Thanks for writing such good stories Mr. Brooks. Keep spinning these wonderful yarns.

The Sword of Shannara is an epic fantasy novel by Terry Brooks. Contrary to what many people have said, this book is a wonderfully compelling tale of a quest to save the world from total destruction. It is NOT another Lord of the Rings, nor does it try to be in any way. My suggestion to those who jumped the gun and gave it a bad score so as to improve LotR's image is this: read the book before you try and accuse it of anything.

If you've read the book, you'd know that there is no reason to rate it a 1 out of 5. There's a major difference in subject matter here as opposed to LotR, and again, you would know that if you had taken the time to actually read it. Shea Ohmsford must journey to Paranor and retrieve the Sword of Shannara, the only weapon capable of defeating the Warlock Lord and preventing the doom of everyone.

The only problem I had with reading it (and it is more of a personal thing than a problem with the book itself) was that characters died a lot towards the end, which is to be expected, except that I felt their deaths didn't get enough attention. It was almost as if the other characters were indifferent to their friends dying, and they pretended as if nothing happened.

Nonetheless, a fantastic novel is waiting for you. I am more than anxious to dive into The Elfstones of Shannara to find out what happens next.

This book looks like a very long book to read at first. It is long, but this is one of the books that once you start it you can't put it down. You read it so fast it seems like it is only a 200 page book. The only thing that I didn't like is that at one point in the story they were telling five different adventures and it was easy to get lost. Although each one was interesting. If you like the book Eragon, this book will be great for you. It is filled with magic and lots of fantasy considering the races. I thought the idea of the way that the different races were formed was very interesting. It is thought that everyone was once man. After the First Great Wars, they split. Depending on what kind of terrain they lived on is the way they morphed. This book has a lot of long talks about the history of this story. They kind of bored me. But later on in the book every new chapter is something good or something bad. There is always a surprise in the next few pages. It keeps you going and wanting to read. It starts out a complete surprise to just a simple villager in the south who is expected to believe that he is the only one that can save everyone in the lands. The first part of the story is him learning about the history and traveling to the Sword of Shannara, the most important piece that he needs. I suggest this book to anyone that wants a good fantasy book.

Having heard so many good things about the author Terry Brooks i was extemely eager and excited to read the Sword of Shannara. But then i did, and was completely dissapointed.And here is why:
His introduction of most of his characters is decent, and i do point out,MOST of them.And only the intoduction is decent. All throughout the book, Brooks does not allow the reader to get to know his characters,he does not speak of them much(personalities, backrounds...information)or includes many conversations between them.
Also, his story moves quickly, too quickly for the reader to keep up, and enjoy a good read.His writing style is very technical and cold,he prefers to be Terry Brooks telling the story, rather than having his characters telling and living it.
As to the copycat mention, i spotted many similarities to lord of the rings, but that is something quite common in many science fiction writers i suppose.Similarities in both the plot and in the characters.

When Flick Ohmsford encounters a stranger on the way home to his small village of Shady Vale, little does he realize the horrors which are about to be unleashed. His adopted brother Shea is the missing heir to the elven kingdom and the dark Druid Brona, wants him dead! Thus begins an Odyssey which takes Shea and the faithful Flick half way across the world to recover a mysterious sword which is to be their salvation.
I listened to the unabridged audio version of this book, and all I can say is WOW! The narrator does a masterful job of giving voice to valiant Shea, the mistrustful Flick, and the highlander prince of Leah.
The story was as great as I remembered when I read it as a teen. Sure, this work is somewhat derivative of Lord of the Rings, but strangely enough I actually preferred Sword of Shannara. (Perhaps it is the lack of hobbits! LOL) My favorite characters were Dale, Duran, Shea and Flick. I also liked how the world Brooks creates is a post apocalyptic earth, and how the races are descended from mutated humans. Also, I think the depth of love and concern shown by the characters for their siblings was heart warming.
Peeves? I'm disappointed the distributer has not released the sequels to this novel in unabridged format, the abridged versions aren't worth the effort.

I have been listening to this in Audio book and I don't think I can finish it. I'm on chapter 3 right now. If I needed to torture someone, I would make them read/listen to this. It is like a 15 year old LORT fanboy wrote it. But, plot and characterization aside, it is just REALLY poorly written. Reading/listening to it feels a lot like walking through thick mud, but I think what annoys me the most is the horrible, horrible dialogue. Its so bad that sometimes I would just have to step away from it, and go back to it, and I'm only 3 chapters in...

I'm an aspiring writer and I'm not saying I'm a great writer, but if I ever need inspiration to get off my arse and finish my novel, I'll pick this up, because it is a huge inspiration to try and write better and produce something better.

I love the fantasy genre, and for anyone else interested in its history and evolution, this series is significant if for no other reason than the fact that Brooks helped codify the conventions of fantasy. Granted, Tolkein invented the genre, and most fantasy novels today owe something to his genius; The Sword of Shannara series is certainly no exception. However, to dismiss Brooks' fiction as merely derivative is to miss the underlying message Brooks tries to communicate with his allegory. The first novel explores the racial tensions in Brooks' fictional world, showing that prejudice is usually the product of ignorance, not inherent malice. There is something useful and provocative in Brooks' thesis.

Nevertheless, the novel is overwritten, and the plot hinges on coincidence more frequently than a seasoned reader will tolerate. I can only suggest that you try to see beyond the mechanical flaws of the novel to the wisdom of the story.

Brooks definitely occupies an important space in the history of fantasy fiction. Even though his early work is derivative, one should mine the story for its creative and entertaining insights.

I first enjoyed this decades ago, and came back to it as I work through my old books. In some cases this is a great pleasure- either being reminded of some of the reasons I enjoyed it originally, or enjoying `new' ones as an older, different reader. Some books, however, it turns out are best left to nostalgia.

To be fair, I loved it at the time. Like so many Tolkien devotees desperate for more fantasy, I remember my sisters and I devouring this back in the 70s (a nephew of mine even bears the middle name `Shea'). We could not put it down. But twenty years on ... the complete opposite: after a few chapters it was a chore to pick up, and I couldn't force myself more than half way. The style is just plain clumsy: very early on, for example, I was stunned by the way that Alenon dumps a few pages of exposition on us, with not even an attempt to explain why this aloof mystic is suddenly taking on the role of human prologue.

But what was overwhelming, and doubtless has been pointed out a hundred times before, is that this is so obviously a cover version of Lord of the Rings. No, it's not `in the style of', it's unashamedly sticking to a template. It's like Brooks was, understandably, learning his art by using the model of a master, but the copy is so close as to be a (long) writing exercise. Alenon is Gandalf. Shea and Flick are Bilbo and Frodo. Whatever it is I've forgotten now are the Ringwraiths. The dwarf is Gimli. Moreover the structure, the pacing of the book is a slavish copy. Here we are fleeing the shire. Now we're gathering the fellowship. I didn't get that far this time, but I'm sure I recall a desperate trip through underground caves that might just call to mind Moriah.

SoS makes me think of a garage band playing a song you love very badly.

It is hard to do anything original or fresh in this overcrowded cannibalistic genre, but SoS is not even an attempt. Maybe Brooks would have been better off openly writing fan fiction- like Poul and Karen Anderson's excellent `Faith' (from `After the King: Stories in Honour of J.R.R. Tolkien') At heart so much fantasy is a mirage, drawing us in with the promised pleasure of the elves, wizards and heroes we so loved in LOTR, but ultimately leaving us unsatisfied. These mythical figures weren't great in Tolkien merely because he named them, it's because he invested them with dignity, potency and history. In recalling these images, even as a façade, derivatives do give the pleasure of reflection, but little more.

That being said, the genre can still occasionally offer something more satisfying. I don't quite know how Gemmell gets away with it, but he manages somehow to produce moments of purity from stock standard fantasy settings. In `The Knight' Wolfe soars apart from the squawking pack, ignoring mandatory plot conventions in celebrating the surreal and moral context of many an Arthurian tale: he, thankfully, is well aware (as Tolkien was) that Tolkien hardly invented elves, wizards or heroes!

I know some people will think me crazy, but I gave this book a five star rating. I loved the whole story, and if you ask me, it is a much more easier, more understandable version of "The Lord of the Rings", and it is very hard to tell which version I like better. But I believe Terry Brooks is as talented of an author as JR Tolkien, only he needs some more individuality. I loved JR Tolkien's Lord of the Rings Trilogy, I loved this masterpiece of a story. It really is a good book, and I enjoyed reading it greatly. Who knows? Maybe you will too. Just try to not mind the fact of the similarity between the Lord of the Rings.

I'm one of the seven people who didn't like the Lord of the Rings, but I have to say, it's very clear to me why people who did would be unhappy with this sorry imitation. I won't even go into all the blindingly obvious parallels between the this and Tolkien's work. Read the first fifty pages and you'll find plenty of them yourself. And seven hundred pages! God, even Tolkien wasn't THAT long-winded. I'd stay away from this one....

average.
Brooks gets a C for style, a C for plot, a C for storytelling ability, an A for effort, and an A for lacking in originality.
No, it's not plagiarism, just as something that has feathers, that waddles, and quacks isn't a duck.
Mind you, originality in this genre is hard to come by. (I can't really grant it the grandiloquent "oeuvre" title. Principally because I'm not sure how to spell it, and my Chambers dictionary isn't within reach.)
Brokks has written a couple of decent books: I enjoyed Running With Demons (? - I may have the title slightly wrong)but if you like good fantasy, leave this one alone. It will enrage you.

I have read and reread this book as well as the rest of the series. By far my favorites of all books I have read. Terry Brooks introduced me to Epic Fantasy. Everyone I have talked to about these books share the same opinion. He is creative, imaginative, and captivating as he weaves intricate spellbounding stories. I recommend this book and the remaining 7 he has published in the Shannara series as MUST READS!

I slogged through all seven books. It's all very formulaic fantasy. In the last chapter everything goes "poof!" and the world is back to normal again.
Skip the rest and only read "The Druid of Shannara". It takes place mostly outside the plot of the rest of the books, and manages to avoid most of the usual fantasy cliches. It has some very original characters, and bit of tragedy mixed in.

I have read many fantasy novels, most of them the epic style consisting of 3 or more books to a series. Knowing that the Sword of Shannara series was one of the first and supposedly somewhat of a classic I figured I had better read all three books. To that I say YIKES!! Extremely dissapointing. This whole series is the worst I have ever read. First off, the three books have nothing to do with each other besides the fact that the main heroes in all three are from the same family, and the incredibly annoying, boring presence of the druid Allannon who guides them through there journey. He is perhaps the most unlikeable good guy ever dreamt up. There is absolutely no character developement, and I never cared wether any of the main characters lived or died. There wasnt a singe person in the story that was interesting. Totally predictable and anticlimatic. Maybe it was great back in its day, but it doesnt hold up to anything written in the last 15 years. If you must read this loathsome trilogy (if you can call it that) than do yourself a favor and skip right to the last book 'the Wishsong of Shannara' it was the best of the three and as I said totally unconnected with the other 2 except for the Druid Allannon who will ramble on and fill you in on all you missed (or didnt) in the first 2 books.

When I first started reading this book I thought it was a complete take on Lord of the Rings. There was enough difference here (like the world being in the future instead of the past, gnomes instead of Orcs) that it was somewhat different. But the Elves (a pair this time), dwarves and wizards are still there. Brooks made a successful franchise of this treatment, and it was a very good story in its own right. Still highly recommended in that it is an original story with great characters well worth a read.

I agree with other reviewers that this is a way too obvious knock off of Lord of the Rings and the prose is often awkward. If I wasn't already familiar with LOtR then I would say that it's a 'fun' plot and that the only thing that made me set this book down and stop reading so often was the writing.

While the story was enjoyable, it was very predictable. It was very similar to The Lord of the Rings by Tolkien but not written nearly as masterfully. I did enjoy the story and may read others in the series but wouldn't consider it a "great" book.

I had attempted to read this book back in High School when it first came out. (Yeah, that dates me!) I had remembered not liking it and losing interest in it very quickly. Then I saw the recent TV series based on it which I liked a lot. I thought, I'd try reading it again. I was quickly reminded of why I didn't like it. And now that I know a lot more about what good writing is, I recognize why. As one writing teacher told me, every word in a story should carry you forward to the story's purpose. Extraneous words and paragraphs do nothing but bore the reader. And wow does this book do that! I got 40% of the way through and just gave up. The first part is basically a very dry history lesson on the ongoing wars and politics of the various races living in this world, man, elves, dwarfs, gnomes etc. Then it's an endless slog through drab, dreary wastelands which goes on and on and on... I found myself skimming pages and realizing I wasn't missing much. If the novel was edited, it was poorly done. The grammar and spelling are fine, but the story itself needs to be tightened up. From what I read, 2/3 of it could easily have been cut out without losing anything in the actual story itself. The TV show only took the very best parts of the story and ran with it. This is one case where the show is much better than the book.

Maybe the best proof of how much I liked this book is the fact that i read it about 6 times( this was maybe too much because now I can't read one single line from it again). Nevertheless, I found it astonishing. I read some of the reviews of the book on this site and found myself pretty angry at those who dared to compare the book with the " The Lord of the rings"(elves weren't invented by Tolkien, you know, and he was just lucky enough to be the first one with a group of people journeying together in his book). The only thing I didn't like about "The Sword" was the fact that I found a mistake in the book - somewhere at the beginning - Balinor has hazelnut brown eyes and at the end they turn out to be blue. However, since I read the book in my mother tongue this may be a mistake in translation. The characters are fantastic, especially prince of Leah. I'm sorry he wasn't the main character of the book.

I must say that I have been spoiled by Tolkien and Rowling. I just finished Sword of Shannara and found it VERY long winded. The style of writing is like James Fennimore Cooper (very wordy) with characters that are so two dimensional, that they border on one dimension. I had no idea why Shea would suddenly develop a spine, why Menion Leah was even likeable or that Balinor was any more than a blonde Ken doll with a sword. I am going to read book 2 to see if Terry Brooks has grown as an author. I hope so

I give this two stars, only because I know there are others that find redeeming qualities in this book.
Similarities to Tolkien aside, page 284 is where the groaners finally got to me. One was where an old man used a "small metallic cylinder that emitted a strange light" to draw a Ringwratih-like critter away from the heroes. Flashlight? Isn't this supposed to be a midieval-ish story?
I struggled through rotten narrative, thousands of useless, needless, overused adjectives, countless run-on sentences and mixed perspectives until page 284, when the following took place: "Allanon placed a strange whistle to his lips and blew softly. A sound so high pitched as to be indistinguishable to the men was emitted and the snarling wolves scattered...."
WHAT? A DOG WHISTLE? It was bad enough that Brooks made out his world to be something that emerged post-nuclear holocaust, but a DOG WHISTLE? Also bad enough was the fact that the wolves reminded me of the Wargs from Lord of the Rings. Not to mention the fact that you can find a hundred parallels to that great epic long before page 284.
Let me again say how bad the prose is. I am a novelist myself, and well-practiced in narrative. I want to read something that inspires me to write better, but the man uses so many freaking adjectives, and sentences that go on for miles, that I can feel myself getting dumber!
And the perspective shifts? COUNTLESS. It is common for him to change perspective from paragraph to paragraph, talking about each character's feelings and perspectives on the matter, rather than carefully crafting concrete perspective shifts with balance. We don't need to get into the heads of EVERYONE.
Please, folks. If you want GOOD fantasy, I mean the excellent stuff, read George R.R. Martin, or Robert Jordan. Don't waste your time with this stuff. It's excruciating.

This books is most likely one of the best books i've ever read. It had very well developed plot and characters. It was entertaining and fun to read. it kept me on my toes the whole time. For those who feel the need to say that brooks is copying tolkein: you are wrong. The only thing that they have alike is 1. they both have elves and 2. Gandalf a Allanon both have the same # of a's in their name. Don't get me wrong tolkein is a good writer too.

Well, its not quite 'The Lord of the Rings', and despite the obvious influence of Tolkien, to the point where some points of the plot seem almost directly ripped off from Tolkien's classic, this book does eventually stand on its own merits as a very enjoyable and engrossing read. Some gripes- despite its seven hundred-odd pages, the characters don't quite all seem fully revealed to the reader by the end, and the end itself comes rather abruptly and could possibly have explained a little more about the fates of the various lines of the story. However, I have to admit that I enjoyed the book more and more as it progressed, and by the latter stages was getting quite desperate to know what happened next. Certainly this book is worth a look for anybody who has enjoyed 'The Hobbit' and 'The Lord of the Rings' and while it doesn't quite seem as real, or measure up to their standard, it is still a good story and the best fantasy novel I have read outside of Professor Tolkien's genre-defining works.

I've read most of Terry Brooks' books, and have found his shannara books to be very easy reads and captivating. But they are extremely formulaic and this novel in particular truly does steal many specific plot points directly. As a teenager I made a list of like 50 and quit there. Nonetheless, this book is an excellent introduction book to fantasy. It is by no means a "deep" or "complex character driven" story. It is an action story in the vein of "star wars". Brooks does an excellent job of bringing the reader into the story, something that my favorite authors in the genre (Tolkien and Jordan) seem to occasionally have difficulty with. I think that brooks is a talented wordsmith that made the mistake of sticking too close to his outline of the lord of the rings when he wrote this novel. (Regarding my rating, I can't possibly give many books a 5 rating because you have to scale it according to the best books ever written in any genre. Whomever gives TSOS a five star rating is minimizing the works of dickens, hemmingway and the other truly original and talented masters of their craft)

I first read this book when I was in fourth grade. I enjoyed it very much then; and, despite the fact that the author borrowed the story from Lord of the Rings, I still enjoy it.
The similarities between Shannara and LOTR are obvious: Allanon/Gandalf, Shea/Frodo, Flick/Sam, Balinor/Aragorn, Hendel/Gimli, Warlock Lord/Sauron, Palance/Theoden, Stenmin/Wormtongue & Saruman, Tyrsis/Minas Tirith & Helm's Deep, Storlock/Lothlorien, Culhaven/Rivendell, Skull Bearers/Nazgul, the Shady Vale/the Shire, the Hall of Kings/the Mines of Moria, and many others.
The story begins in the Shady Vale, where men have dwelt in peace and prosperity for generations. When a mysterious stranger suddenly arrives, that peace is shattered for Shea and his brother Flick. For Shea discovers that he is the last of a line of kings and only he has the power to wield the ancient weapon that can destroy a great evil seeking to conquer the land.
Despite the carbon copy plot, this novel is very well written. The story does not lag, and there is no profanity. Character development is excellent, and characters unforgetable. Battles are easy to follow and not too bloody. I recommend this book for adults and children alike. The length of the book may be intimidating (726 pages), but it is worth the time to read it.

The book The Sword of Shannara is wonderful. It is a great epic adventure. Fans of Lord of the Rings will love it. It is the tale of a young man who discovers he is of royal blood and is the heir to a magic sword that will allow him to defeat an evil Warlock Lord. It has adventure, comedy, and romance and everything a great novel should have. It is very long at around 700 pages, but is great to read.
That is the good. Now the bad.
1. Vvvvveeeeeerrrrrry Ssssslllllooooooww[...] Slower than The Fellowship of the Ring if you can believe it. (Meaning no disrespect to Tolkien)
2. Illustrations. They are black as night and indistinguishable. Total waste of space. Horrid. Cannot describe how bad it is.
All in all I give it a Should Read rating.

If one to compare Sword of Shannara to a wine, one would find it to be light, drinkable wine; easy on the palate but a wine grossly devoid of any texture, detail or extravangce. Sword of Shannara fits into the regular "Unassuming village boy who has a hidden power to save the world from destruction" theme.

I found Brooks' start to the book very disconserting as I found the parallels to The Lord of the Rings frighteningly similiar, but once the book sets into motion Brooks starts to find his own voice. Brooks' writing is very easy to read, you would find that even Harry Potter has more complex prose. This trend unfortunately extends further into Brooks' writing in fact he doesn't give enough detail to his world and even more so to his characters. None of the characters leave any lasting impression on you and you feel quite detached from them. The plot is straight forward enough, Brooks tries to add a few twists and turns but these seem somewhat forced.

Brooks has excellent ideas in the book, I found the history of the Druids and the Sword of Shannara's true power engaging ideas, which could have been developed more. The ending is the weakest part of the book as it is too rushed. One can't savour it as the plot just ends abruptly and many threads of the plot are left untied or too quickly tied.

All in all Sword of Shannara is an easy, light read but is unexciting, detached and dry. It will ultimately leave your thirst unquenched.

What a wonderful story about having a positive attitude, something often times missing in people today. The inspiring tales about Pollyanna's life as an orphan were heartbreaking and at the same time hilarious. Reading this story helped me to understand more about missionaries, (The Ladie's Aiders), and the sacrifices that their families make. Pollyanna's effect on her Aunt Polly was encouraging, what a change a positive attitude can make in ourselves and those around us.

In this first installment of the celebrated series of Shannara, Terry Brooks brings a new edge to fantasy. I never thought that Shannara would be any good. Was I wrong!

I am especially intrigued with the character of Allanon. He's tall, dark, and exceptionally moody. That's quite different from what Gandalf was (besides being tall). And his power is something awesome, a thing that makes him more mysterious. I love being bombarded with mysterious figures, they're so fun to figure out. What a great character!

I am looking forward to the next book. Terry Brooks has definitely caught my attention.

I just finished the sword of shannara for the second time, many years since I read it the first time. And though I saw many of its flaws, being an early work, I enjoyed it once again. The story is well told with characters that I have grown fond of. I reccomended this book to anyone who likes a good fantasy.

I purchased this book because of several good things I've heard about it and reading some of the reviews on here. I understand "ripping off Tolkien" is pretty much impossible not to do in fantasy, so it didn't bother me when I heard that it was similar.
Unfortunately, I wasted a good eight dollars. There is such as thing as ripping off Tolkien (which nearly every fantasy author has done, at some point) and just repeating the same exact story with different names for the characters and places. The epic quest to destroy/save a magical object is actually something I enjoy reading about from different authors. But having everything the same -- even to the order of *when* it happens -- from Tolkien, the distraction becomes hard to overlook.
It was overly lengthy, had completely unnecessary descriptions of things like rocks and tables and dirt, and it was sloppily written. I read 400 pages and I had to force myself to read that much. It's like reading a summary of The Lord of the Rings that was written by a fourth grader who has no idea how to use a thesaurus. Poorly poorly written.
I rate this two out of five. Don't waste your money, and if you don't like it after the first one hundred pages don't waste your time.

The Sword of Shannara was my introduction to the world of fantasy. Until the day that my dad recommended this 726-page behemoth, I had never read a book longer than 200 pages, and I NEVER read for fun. By the time I had finished the first chapter, though, I was thoroughly engrossed in the fabulous world of Terry Brooks. I eagerly went on to read every book he ever wrote.
For those who have never read any fantasy (or are limited to Harry Potter), then this is an EXCELLENT introduction. The more sophisticated reader will find it lacking, however. The characterizations are weak, and the plot is extremely straight-forward. Terry Brooks got much more than a little inspiration from Lord of the Rings. The Sword of Shannara is basically Lord of the Rings with more action. But those who like tons of action in their novels will enjoy Sword of Shannara much more than Lord of the Rings.
The question really comes down to this: how sophisticated do you like your novels? If you prefer Robert Jordan, George R.R. Martin, and Robin Hobb novels, then you will find Sword of Shannara lacking. But if you prefer David Eddings, Terry Goodkind, or J.K. Rowling, then you will find The Sword of Shannara to be an excellent read.

I am amazed that this book has recieved rave reviews from some readers. I can only assume that most people who don't enjoy a book tend not to review it. SoS is so obviously rehashing Tolkien that I can't help but feel embarresed for it's author. Almost every character is simply a Frodo/Sam/Gandalf/Sauron in disguise, with a sword substituted for a ring. Someone who has read LotR in any depth will find that many individual scenes in SoS have echoes in Tolkien. After I noticed the first parralels, I found myself analysing the book as I trudged through it rather than simply reading it. It is possible to use a framework established by another author in a fresh and creative manner, but this is not the case here. Added to the inept ripping-off of Tolkien, there is also the frequently corny and trite dialogue. One cannot help but cringe! It is possible that Brooks' later work shows some skill or originality, but I don't have the disposable income or the time to bother to find out.

The sword of shannara is the first book in a 3 (expanded to 7) book series. The entire series is extraordinary. As I read each book, it just kept getting better and better. With that said, this first book was a difficult one to get through. The main characters do a great deal of travelling from place to place in order to accomplish their primary task (find the sword of shannara). The sword has magical qualities (undefined at the time of the search) that are essential for the crisis at hand. Terry Brooks spends a great deal of time describing each location. He has an elaborate attention to detail. However, while i did not appreciate this at first, I got used to his writing style and in future books, I wanted him to go on forever. This book is a "MUST", as are all of the books in this series. You will be greatly rewarded (in the enjoyment you will get) for the time you spend reading it. As I said before, each subsequent book gets better and better. You will stay awake at night, trying to read for as long as you can.

I though this book was great! It had me reading all the time. But there were a few things I didn't like that might help you... - too wordy - characters traveled across the map too quickly, was almost unrealistic - the ending came within 50 pages and was distastefully terrible I liked the book all except for the ending. I do recomend you read it because you might appreaciate it more than I did.

I read this book many years ago and have never forgotten it. Brooks masterfully spins a tale in which he will pull the reader in. I found myself attached to the characters and when the book was over, it was like leaving a group of good friends. I'm no great critic of books, but I know what I like; and in my opinion, Brooks couldn't have written a better book!

I may be one of the few people on the planet that was bored to tears with the "Lord Of The Rings" trilogy. Having said that I can recognize its originality, it is the blueprint of fantasy. Everybody borrows or copies elements from these books; Harry Potter, anyone.

But Brooks just blatantly copies LOTR, people, places, plot are just carbon copies of Tolkien's books. And he has written about twenty on the series! I can't believe Tolkien's family is not suing this guy for all the money he has earned with this rip-off.

If there is really another life I hope Tolkien is waiting for Brooks to give him grief for the rest of Eternity.

Shea, the small halfling from a small town didn't live a very exiting life. His neighbors and adoptive family were the only people he knew, and he really didn't mind at all. That is, up untill one day when a tall dark stranger comes to him, claiming that young Shea was heir to a powerful sword that could save the world of a Dark Evil. And that Shea needed to use the sword to save the world.
I read this book when I was thirteen years old and I have never found another fantasy book this compelling, nor could I relate to any of the characters in any other book as well. In this fantastic read, you'll find such a prism of personalities, you'd want to travel with them because at least one of the party would remind you of your best friend!
What amazes me the most was that The Sword was Brooks' first novel! Since reading this book, I have read 4 others by him and I have found them just as compelling.

Ok, so, first things first. If you are a die hard Tolkien fan, you watch LOTR's every night before going to bed, and spend your time wishing you were at the shire, you should probably go ahead and skip "The Sword Of Shannara". You should still read the books that come after in the series, but more than likely you wont be able to not get upset at the similarities between The Sword and the LOTR.

Other big fans of LOTR but are a little more open minded, should bare in mind that A. This was Brooks first novel. B. He was 23 when he started writing it, and it took him seven years to do because he was in law school. and C. He stated that LOTR is what inspired and influenced him to write the book, along with various other materials. Hopefully, you can keep these things in mind, along with the fact that Tolkien laid the foundation for fantasy novels. You would be hard pressed to find many fantasy stories that dont have some kind of basis or inspiration stemming from the Tolkien world.

I do admit however, you probably wont find to many fantasy novels that resemeble LOTR quite as closely as The Sword.

For just plain fantasy fans, this is a must read, if for no other reason than to help set the backgrounds for the later books that follow.

I read The Sword of Shannara back in high school, and I loved it. I had already read Tolkiens works, and while I was a fan, I wasnt as mesmorized by the series as many others were. The Sword of Shannara, had a much darker and menacing tone to it, compared to what I thought in LOTR was more of a depressing atmosphere when the epic battles and key story points werent taking place. I felt Brooks did a very good job of setting the characters in much...I guess the best word I am looking for here is "scarier" back drop.

While the characters were definitley similiar to those in LOTR in the roles that they played. The mind sets and attitudes were definitley not. I dont want to go into every character here, you can get plenty of comparisons from other peoples reviews, but the one I want to mention is Allanon...

Allanon is compared to Gandalf in most critics reviews, however, where Gandalf was a caring and gentle man, and only rousted to real anger when confronted with the enemy. Allanon was brutal and vicous. He protected Shea and Flick thats for sure, but he always had this menacing air about him, and the potential to do violence upon anyone. Thats the feeling I got off of him anyway. A man who was willing to do whatever it took to stop Brona.

There are enough subtle changes in the characters and plot line for this book that venture away from LOTR for it to stand by itself.

Do yourself a favor, read it with an open mind, and dont go into it looking to nit pick the similarities between the two. Many great authors condemn and praise this book, and it was on the new york times bestseller list. But you should definitley get it under your belt so you have a proper back drop for the novels that follow...wait till you get to Garet Jax(BA!)

I guess this wasnt so much a review as more of advice for Tolkien readers before picking it up. Hope you enjoy it.

I read this when I was about ten or eleven. For years it remained the thickest book I had ever read. For some reason, I am still proud of this feat, viewing it as precocious.

As an adult, however, I understand that "The Sword of Shannara" owes more than is seemly to "The Lord of the Rings." Fine. But two points:

1. Terry Brooks has certainly gone on to do things that were original in their own right: his reputation does not rest on this alone. And this was the springboard for most of his later stuff.

2. As a kid, I loved it. The language of Tolkien was way over my supposedly precocious head, so I could hardly have repaired to that. This was, for me, a delightful way of getting into fantasy without having to negotiate the forbidding diction or convoluted plot of "The Lord of the Rings." I found it richly rewarding at the time.

So I say God bless it.

I enjoyed the book but it really seems that Terry Brooks takes the story line of the Lord of the Rings and just replaces those characters with his own. There is not much new here, but I agree with another reader that this book is written in the future.
If you like epic fantasy then this book is for you, if you didn't like Lord of the Rings, then don't pick this one up.

The reason Brooks is better than Tolkien is because Brooks uses way more magic . In SWORD OF SHANNARA ,for instance ,there are the Elfstones ,the Sword ,the Mist Wraith ,and more .But ,you probably want to here the book in more detail ,so here is the plot:When the mysterious Druid Allanon comes to Half Elven Shea Ohmsford ,Shea is told that he is the last heir of Shannara ;he is the only one who can wield the Sword and defeat the Warlock Lord .The Warlock Lord is invading the Four Lands once more .Shea must embark on a quest to recover the Sword of Shannara ,so the Warlock Lord may be destroyed once and for all.

I don't know what you people are talking about. I've read all of Brooks works and never once related it to Tolkiens. These set of books are the best I've ever read (including Lord of the Rings). The Sword of Shannara is the best written book there is. This book grabs you from the beguinning and won't let go. I have read all of his books and I loved every one of them.

This book is about a half-elfin named Shea Omsford. He lives happily, until a Druid named, Allanon,tells him he is last of the bloodline able to destroy the WARLOCK LORD. Then he and his brother, Flick, with the power of the elfstones, travel to Paranor, ancient dwelling of the Druids. Then Shea and his allies must destroy the Warlock Lord. I would give this a Caldecott medal if I could. I think it's good because there is fighting, adventure, and great details that would explain a book. This book should be for ages 10 +.

When I started this book, I wasn't thrilled. I thought it was going to be another Tolkien, and am not a fan of his. But it wasn't, and I am a major Terry Brooks fan now. I don't care how a writer writes, as long as he can tell a good story, and Terry Brooks is one of the best storytellers ever. After half-way thru, I was gone...."left the building" so to speak...I didn't eat, couldn't sleep, couldn't even think about work...I HAD to finish the book.....it was totally addicting...You are so caught in it, the world around you disappears..you are with Shea...you are trying to help get to the sword!!! If you have never read fantasy, then you need to start with this one. I don't know about the future or past thing....I think I had an inkling that is was way past.... I recommend this book to anyone who can pick it up!!

Shea, the small halfling from a small town didn't live a very exiting life. His neighbors and adoptive family were the only people he knew, and he really didn't mind at all. That is, up untill one day when a tall dark stranger comes to him, claiming that young Shea was heir to a powerful sword that could save the world of a Dark Evil. And that Shea needed to use the sword to save the world.
I read this book when I was thirteen years old and I have never found another fantasy book this compelling, nor could I relate to any of the characters in any other book as well. In this fantastic read, you'll find such a prism of personalities, you'd want to travel with them because at least one of the party would remind you of your best friend!
What amazes me the most was that The Sword was Brooks' first novel! Since reading this book, I have read 4 others by him and I have found them just as compelling.

Ok, so, first things first. If you are a die hard Tolkien fan, you watch LOTR's every night before going to bed, and spend your time wishing you were at the shire, you should probably go ahead and skip "The Sword Of Shannara". You should still read the books that come after in the series, but more than likely you wont be able to not get upset at the similarities between The Sword and the LOTR.

Other big fans of LOTR but are a little more open minded, should bare in mind that A. This was Brooks first novel. B. He was 23 when he started writing it, and it took him seven years to do because he was in law school. and C. He stated that LOTR is what inspired and influenced him to write the book, along with various other materials. Hopefully, you can keep these things in mind, along with the fact that Tolkien laid the foundation for fantasy novels. You would be hard pressed to find many fantasy stories that dont have some kind of basis or inspiration stemming from the Tolkien world.

I do admit however, you probably wont find to many fantasy novels that resemeble LOTR quite as closely as The Sword.

For just plain fantasy fans, this is a must read, if for no other reason than to help set the backgrounds for the later books that follow.

I read The Sword of Shannara back in high school, and I loved it. I had already read Tolkiens works, and while I was a fan, I wasnt as mesmorized by the series as many others were. The Sword of Shannara, had a much darker and menacing tone to it, compared to what I thought in LOTR was more of a depressing atmosphere when the epic battles and key story points werent taking place. I felt Brooks did a very good job of setting the characters in much...I guess the best word I am looking for here is "scarier" back drop.

While the characters were definitley similiar to those in LOTR in the roles that they played. The mind sets and attitudes were definitley not. I dont want to go into every character here, you can get plenty of comparisons from other peoples reviews, but the one I want to mention is Allanon...

Allanon is compared to Gandalf in most critics reviews, however, where Gandalf was a caring and gentle man, and only rousted to real anger when confronted with the enemy. Allanon was brutal and vicous. He protected Shea and Flick thats for sure, but he always had this menacing air about him, and the potential to do violence upon anyone. Thats the feeling I got off of him anyway. A man who was willing to do whatever it took to stop Brona.

There are enough subtle changes in the characters and plot line for this book that venture away from LOTR for it to stand by itself.

Do yourself a favor, read it with an open mind, and dont go into it looking to nit pick the similarities between the two. Many great authors condemn and praise this book, and it was on the new york times bestseller list. But you should definitley get it under your belt so you have a proper back drop for the novels that follow...wait till you get to Garet Jax(BA!)

I guess this wasnt so much a review as more of advice for Tolkien readers before picking it up. Hope you enjoy it.

I read this when I was about ten or eleven. For years it remained the thickest book I had ever read. For some reason, I am still proud of this feat, viewing it as precocious.

As an adult, however, I understand that "The Sword of Shannara" owes more than is seemly to "The Lord of the Rings." Fine. But two points:

1. Terry Brooks has certainly gone on to do things that were original in their own right: his reputation does not rest on this alone. And this was the springboard for most of his later stuff.

2. As a kid, I loved it. The language of Tolkien was way over my supposedly precocious head, so I could hardly have repaired to that. This was, for me, a delightful way of getting into fantasy without having to negotiate the forbidding diction or convoluted plot of "The Lord of the Rings." I found it richly rewarding at the time.

So I say God bless it.

I enjoyed the book but it really seems that Terry Brooks takes the story line of the Lord of the Rings and just replaces those characters with his own. There is not much new here, but I agree with another reader that this book is written in the future.
If you like epic fantasy then this book is for you, if you didn't like Lord of the Rings, then don't pick this one up.

The reason Brooks is better than Tolkien is because Brooks uses way more magic . In SWORD OF SHANNARA ,for instance ,there are the Elfstones ,the Sword ,the Mist Wraith ,and more .But ,you probably want to here the book in more detail ,so here is the plot:When the mysterious Druid Allanon comes to Half Elven Shea Ohmsford ,Shea is told that he is the last heir of Shannara ;he is the only one who can wield the Sword and defeat the Warlock Lord .The Warlock Lord is invading the Four Lands once more .Shea must embark on a quest to recover the Sword of Shannara ,so the Warlock Lord may be destroyed once and for all.

I don't know what you people are talking about. I've read all of Brooks works and never once related it to Tolkiens. These set of books are the best I've ever read (including Lord of the Rings). The Sword of Shannara is the best written book there is. This book grabs you from the beguinning and won't let go. I have read all of his books and I loved every one of them.

This book is about a half-elfin named Shea Omsford. He lives happily, until a Druid named, Allanon,tells him he is last of the bloodline able to destroy the WARLOCK LORD. Then he and his brother, Flick, with the power of the elfstones, travel to Paranor, ancient dwelling of the Druids. Then Shea and his allies must destroy the Warlock Lord. I would give this a Caldecott medal if I could. I think it's good because there is fighting, adventure, and great details that would explain a book. This book should be for ages 10 +.

When I started this book, I wasn't thrilled. I thought it was going to be another Tolkien, and am not a fan of his. But it wasn't, and I am a major Terry Brooks fan now. I don't care how a writer writes, as long as he can tell a good story, and Terry Brooks is one of the best storytellers ever. After half-way thru, I was gone...."left the building" so to speak...I didn't eat, couldn't sleep, couldn't even think about work...I HAD to finish the book.....it was totally addicting...You are so caught in it, the world around you disappears..you are with Shea...you are trying to help get to the sword!!! If you have never read fantasy, then you need to start with this one. I don't know about the future or past thing....I think I had an inkling that is was way past.... I recommend this book to anyone who can pick it up!!

A lot of the story feels like filler. When the main characters are journeying the same things happen just slightly different. More than a dozen times I thought I had a book with duplicate pages mixed in accidentally.

SEMI-SPOILER** There is a council meeting in a city the main characters had to flee towards from dark wraith monsters. In the council you have elves, dwarfs, small men, bigger men, and a mysterious druid who wanders the land. They decide that 7 or 8 of them must go on a mission to save their races. Doesn't this sound familiar?!

I am quite surprised to see the number of negative reviews of this book. Sure there are similarities to Lord of the Rings. The book should be appreciated as a separate work perhaps in praise of Tolkien. Furthermore, as a physician in training, I don't have time to read a huge trilogy like LOTR. It took me 3 weeks to read SOS and I loved every bit of it.

I have to say, this book is a waste of time. Just spend your time reading (or re-reading) the Lord of the Rings. That series was more interesting and better written.

Which brings me to my first point. It's basically a LoTR retelling. Why bother? If you're going to retell a classic epic, make it radically different, like set it in space, or on another planet, etc. Here we have the same basic plot-line: a couple of innocent country bumpkins are recruited by a mysterious mystical-type stranger who sends them off on a dangerous quest through the wilderness, all the while being pursued by inhuman creatures. Their quest involves sneaking into the heartland of the enemy, who is headed up by an immortal creature called the "Warlock-Lord" (Sauron) who at one time was a well-intentioned human mystic. However, instead of RETURNING an all-powerful magical talisman which alone can defeat the enemy and save the world, the heroes are RETRIEVING an all-powerful magical talisman which alone can defeat the enemy and save the world. Wow! What a radical difference from the first story!

Guess what? Like the LoTR, there are also dwarves, elves, and trolls, but Brooks goes the extra mile and introduces a new race: gnomes! Yayyy!!

I need to talk a little bit about Gandalf's counterpart, the character "Allanon the Historian." Allanon is the one who shows up on the protagonist's doorstep and coerces him into the quest. He is a tall man, a big man, a physically powerful man, but his claim to fame is that he's an historian and road-scholar. His profession was once known as a "druid." Halfway through the book, they start to allude to his mystical powers, but you don't really see him do much until later on in the book, with the exception of handing the hero powerful magical items called "the elfstones."

Now, here's what bugs me about Allanon: first of all, Brooks seems to try to convince the reader that Allanon should be feared and respected because he's physically big, (almost 7-feet), and physically powerful. He constantly refers to the character as "the tall historian," or the "big mysterious wanderer," etc. Allanon is often scowling, chiding, with a "dark face" and chastising the other characters into subservience like an abusive parent. When the characters show their fear or mistrust, he grins at them with huge white teeth "like a wolf." He even goes so far as to physically grab and mildly injure one of the main characters, Flick, a mild-mannered and peaceful bumpkin from the valley, just because Flick is startled when Allanon confronts him in a forest at night. What's up with that? Flick often remembers the feel of those "large, powerful hands" wrapped around his wrists, and cow-tows to the "tall historian's" every whim. Brooks seems to want to impress the reader with how strong and powerful this historian guy is, and that's supposed to make us like the guy the way we liked Gandalf.

Now, Gandalf was also tall and imposing, and he could kick some major butt in physical combat. But he never physically harmed any of the hobbits or the dwarves, and rarely scolded his teammates except under dire circumstances, such as when Pippin stumbled and gave away their presence in the Mines of Moria. Also, we get to see several instances of Gandalf's power when he gets medieval with the goblin-cleaver and his staff. With this Allanon character, I feel like the reason I have to respect him is because he knows a lot of stuff, and because he's "big." The first time you see him use any mystical powers is over halfway through the book when he shoots some goofy magic blue flame from his finger tips.

Big deal.

I guess my point with Allanon is, Brooks makes the assumption that we're going to like, respect and admire this character simply because he's tall, dark and mean. I found it quite the opposite; I disliked Allanon from the moment I met him, when he manhandles the poor unsuspecting Flick and bruises him with little apparent reason.

The other thing about Brooks' writing that really bothers me is the overuse of "narrative tags." By this, I mean anytime the author interjects a visual descriptor for the character. Most writers would refer to a character by their name or a pronoun. With Brooks, he picks two or three pet-names for each character and tries to alternate between their real name, the third person pronoun, and the two or three pet-names so that neither one appears consecutively. It's as if he set a rule for himself that he follows religiously.

Brooks never lets you forget about HIS interpretation of each character's physical attributes, such as Menion's leanness, Allanon's height, Flick's stockiness and broad-face, etc. Come on, I got it! You don't have remind me every friggin' chapter that Menion is a skinny guy!

For example, I shall attempt to illustrate:

"I don't trust that Allanon guy," said Menion Leah.

"Why not?" said Flick.

"Well, for one thing, he doesn't seem to cast any spells," said the lean hunter.

"Really? No spells?" said the stocky valeman.

"Nope. Not a one," replied the broad-backed warrior. "In fact, I almost got crushed by falling rocks back in the caves, and Allanon just ran away."

"Wow," the sandy-haired, broad-faced innkeeper's son looked off into the horizon, deep in thought.

"Yes," continued the tall, soft-shoed prince of Blathermore. "It is as I have said..."

So you see, using these creative little physical descriptors just gets in the way, for me. It makes the text bog down and that much slower. After reading 200 pages, I've been brainwashed into seeing Menion Leah as a lean, broad-backed, hunter-prince with soft leather shoes on.

Half the fun of reading is creating the pictures in my head on my own. I don't need the author programming me with all these narrative tags. That's why God created an imagination and pronouns.

Many of the LoTR characters have other counterparts in the Sword of Shannara. For Boromir and Aragorn, there's a warrior-prince called "Balinor," and the hunter/woodsman-type Menion Leah. There's one dwarf named Hendel, who is also surly and irascible like Gimli. There are two elves instead of just Tolkein's one. And yes, they use a bow. However, I have yet to see a wonderfully complicated character like Tolkien's Gollum enter the picture. Perhaps in the second half of the story...

In Brooks' defense, I did happen to read the "Elfstones of Shannara" several years ago, and found it entertaining. So, perhaps SoS was such an abortion because it was one of Brooks' first attempts at a full-length novel.

Whatever.

In closing, I might not make it to the end of this book (I'm 2/3 of the way through), because I've seen this plot-line a few times before, and done by better authors. Mr. Brooks' style and prose is not good enough to warrant reading another thinly disguised LoTR.

To all the Shannara buffs out there, who is the elf on the left hand side of the cover? Is that Durin or Dayel? Could someone please email me with an answer. Also, where are the other members of the group? Balinor and either Durin or Dayel are missing from the cover. There were five characters who climbed the tower and found the phantom sowrd of shannara. Were they left out of the cover illustration for convenience or some other reason? Any inside information on these mysteries would be greatly appreciated.
Oh, yeah. I thought the book was good. Yes, all of the Brooks fans know it is a blatant copy of Tolkein but I think we all still enjoy his works in light of this. All those anti-Brooks fanatics complain about how there is no character development. I beg to differ! The characters were very well developed and came across as very lifelike. These people should delve deeper into the story and criticize the faults that are there and not make up ones for their own "professional" review.
Pink Floyd rules!

This is the first book of Terry Brooks that I have read. I really enjoyed it and found the plot addicting. The battle of Good and Evil, or should I say the battle that each person has within themselves makes this book hit home. I did not turn on my TV set for a week (if nothing else..that makes it worthwile)! I highly recommend this book to anyone who would like to go on a mythical journey with charecters that will bring a smile to your face and have you on the edge of your seat while you anxiously ready your finger to flip to the next page! I look forward to reading the rest of the series and other books that Terry writes.

This book is one one my favorites! However, im shocked to see that noone else has corrected the the store Summary.. this novel does NOT take place in the past!! Anyway. Terry Brooks is definatly one of the greatest fantasy authors ever! His characters come alive, i cannot put this book down once i start reading it, even though ive read it many times

I picked this book up in e-reader format for my kindle a few years ago and was very excited to start a new fantasy series after finishing the Wheel of Time. Two chapters in and I closed the book out to read something else. The writing and use of language in this book is simply atrocious. Everything from the descriptions of events to the use of poor grammar from paragraph to paragraph was like nails on a chalkboard to my brain. I want to witness the story unfold, not have it spoon-fed to me! I'm sure a 12 year old would love it but as a mature, college educated, experienced reader of fantasy this just didn't measure up to the caliber of book I was looking to read. I understand that this was one of Mr. Brooks first published works in the 70's but come on... How did the publisher even let this go to print without some serious editing? If I could give it zero stars I would. I can't comment on the plot obviously because I barely went a few chapters in but if it's as poorly constructed as his early use of language then I assume I saved myself a good few hours to put into more worthwhile endeavors.

Would I read this again / finish it?
No

Would I recommend it to another adult?
No

Who's this series for?
Children or the literate based on the horrible writing

If you are anything like me where poor writing can completely ruin a story for you I highly suggest skipping this book.

All of the Shannara tales were books that reached out and grabbed my attention, and held it. I only wish I knew how to collect the hardback editions now that they are mostly out of print. For anyone who enjoys great fantasy writing, the Shannara books are a must read!! I also highly recommend the Wheel of Time series by Jordan.

This was one of the first fantasy books I read when growing up and its still my favorite. Brooks just has a knack for creating interesting characters and settings. I love the way he can divide up a storyline and then bring it all back together at the end of the book. Brooks also does a great job of describing battles. He makes you feel like part of the battle. A great example of a good vs evil story.

I had this book recommended to me by my Mom, and I polished it off in three days. I HATED to put it down! I read this book a long time ago, but I still remember how much I liked it. I have all the books in the Shannara series and I've read them all except for the last two. I have a feeling I'm going to read them again very soon.

Brooks creates an wonderfuly textured world in which the characters really come alive.At first gance, the 700+ page novel might seem a bit daunting.The reader quickly realizes, however, that the pages fly by.The book takes you on an absorbing journey through wonderful lands and situations. Its only drawback may be the lack of unique characters.The protagonists are all so egar to be friendly with each other, and to do the right thing, that at times it becomes tedious when they all argue over who will risk thier lives and proceed first into a dangerous swamp.For a lesser author this would have meant a terrible read, Brooks, however, does not let us dwell on that.He keeps the pace moving with a tight narritive and plenty of action. The end result is an incedible book that will have readers begging for more.

From first reading this book I was struck by its similarities to Tolkien's LOTR. The Warlock Lord is very similar to Sauron and many of the locations are similar. However, do not let that fool you into thinking that this book is not worth reading. It has very likeable characters, especially the unpredictable Pannamon Creel and it is fast paced and exciting. (Unlike the Lord of the Rings where large sections of the book were slow, boring and repetetive and the characters are largely uninteresting).
The story is basically that the naive half-elf Shea Ohmsford is told by the mysterious druid Allanon that only he can wield the Sword of Shannara and destroy the evil Warlock Lord. He therefore sets out to find the sword and save the world.
An interesting point about this book is that it is set in post apolyptic Earth. All of the various races (apart from elves) are genetic mutations of humans which I thought was a highly original idea.
In short this is an amazing book, far superior to any other fantasy books that I have read. The only thing missing is acomic character but you cannot have it all.

This is what all the fuss was about?
For readers not in the know, The Sword of Shannara is a fantasy tale told a hundred time before, by better authors each time. Virtually every post-Tolkien fantasy cliche is taken out and waved around, as if in an attempt to mesmerize readers who are easily influenced by trickery and slight of hand. (it worked, people love this book)
At best, it's 350 pages too long...at worst, it's shameless, derivative refuse that manages to line the pockets of Mr. Brooks, and little more.

My report is on the book called The Sword of Shannara. This story took place in an imaginary location after the second "War of the Races". It is divided up into four regions: the Northland, the Southland, the Eastland, and the Westland. Humans inhabit the Southland. The Elves reside in the Westland. The Eastland is home to Dwarves and Gnomes, and to the North lies the Trolls and the fearsome Skull Kingdom. The Skull Kingdom is the domain of Warlock Lord.

The Warlock Lord is the main antagonist in thins book. He was a Gnome Druid (the Druids are a group of educated people that govern the lands in this world) named Brona that studied the magic of the Elves that they possessed before the Forbidding (when the Elves locked away the Demons of this land). He became absorbed in his studies and, with a group of renegade Druids, broke apart from the other Druids and the Druid keep, Paranor. After five hundred years of studying this evil magic, he became more than a mortal individual, he became the illusion, the Warlock Lord. He also lost his physical body. The only object that could damage him was the legendary talisman, the Sword of Shannara.

The Sword of Shannara was given this name because only descendents of the Elven King Jerle Shannara can wield it. The Warlock Lord didn't want anything to stand in his way, so he killed all the known descendents of the Elven King. The only one left was the half-Elf, Shea Ohmsford, who was adopted by a human named Curzad Ohmsford. The Warlock Lord also slaughtered all the Druids in Paranor, except the mysterious sorcerer/historian, Allanon. Allanon learned of the Warlock Lords plot, and went out to seek the last descendent of Jerle. When he found Shea, he explained the situation to him. He also gave him three mystical Elfstones, which he was supposed to use to protect him. Throughout the book, he uses these stones of immense magical powers to reduce demons to dust and clear pathes with the stones' blinding lights.

They first went to Culhaven to meet a small band of warriors to aid then in their quest. These people included Ballinor, Prince of Callahorn; Menion, Prince of Leah; two Elven brothers named Durin and Dayel, who were relatives of the current Elven King (Eventine Essendil); and a Dwarf named Hendel. This group, lead by Allanon, went throughout the four lands in their search for the Sword. They also met a few other characters along the way, including the two thieves, Panamon Creel and Keltset, the enormous Rock Troll, who's voice and family were taken by the Warlock Lord's minions. Together, this group of people found the Sword of Shannara, destroyed the Warlock Lord and his minions, and brought peace to the world... for now.

This book reminded me a lot of the Lord of the Rings series. First of all, there are Trolls, Elves, Dwarves, etc. in each book. There is also an all-powerful being that is trying to take over the world. In each books, there is a mystic who seems to know exactly what to do in every situation (Allanon and Gandalf). Also, in each story, there is a small group of people who are searching for the one way to destroy the evil entity. This would make sense, seeing as the author (Terry Brooks) mentions in the foreword that the Lord of the Rings series was the thing that inspired him to write a great trilogy. However, he doesn't continue this in his sequels.

Anyone who enjoys reading fantasy books will probably enjoy this one as well. In fact, I chose to do a report on this book for that exact reason (and because it's a thick book, so it would last a while). It'll probably help to have an expanded vocabulary, though, or else the story might be difficult to understand.

The Sword of Shannara is a wonderful epic of action, adventure and of course fantasy. It has an extreme line drawn between the amount of trust some characters have for each other. (like in all other Shannara books everyone has know learned you can never fully trust a druid ^_^) I will admit that in the beginning of the book I some urges to put down the book. But, I was 11 years old and in 6th grade at the time. After I got past the part when they went to Leah I was completly enthralled and my teacher started having to tell me to put down the book because i didn't pay attention in class.
The Shannara world of Human, Dwarves, Gnomes, Trolls, and my favorites the Elves and the Druids is a great display of imagination and is a great family book. My whole family as read at least First King and Sword. My mother and i have read all the way up to Morgawr and I finished it before her. My sister has read the whole Landover series. We are a great fan of his writing. I do not feel the same pull as i did with LOTR. I guess some of the cause was that i had seen the movie but in a way it was very confusing. At the end it all came together but i prefer Shannara. That's just my opinion.

I picked up the Sword of Shannara in history class in ninth grade...that was seven years ago, and i still can't get enough. This book is for everyone. It's got AWESOME battles between good and evil set on giant fields that turn red with blood where magic and weapons flare. It's got ROMANTIC stories that unfold between characters throughout the story. It's got characters that we can all relate to. Some search for truth, some characters search for love and some are just along for the ride. This is a book that i wasn't able to put down for a second. I read it between classes...at lunch...when i got home...and then when i finished this book, after i did my "wow's" and my "oh my word's," i couldn't wait to get into the next book...So if you like fantasy, or you're not sure if you like fantasy...read this book. It will truly change the way you look at life.

Okay, so if you're even glancing at one star reviews, you probably know that this book is a complete rip off of LOTR. Now, on the one hand I can't really blame Brooks. As I understand it, he did pretty much write the book while he was still in high school and was, no doubt, deeply under the spell of the master of the genre, Tolkien. On the other hand, it has all been done before, and done better. If you have the misfortune to encounter this book before reading LOTR, then you will probably find Lord of the Rings eerily familiar. Perhaps even predictable. But remember that's because this book is based on LOTR, not the other way around.

If you are reading this review and haven't yet read LOTR, do yourself a favor and read that book first.

If you loved LOTR and are thinking of buying this book, do yourself a favor and reread LOTR. Or try a different author such as George R.R. Martin or Modesitt's Recluce series or David Eddings or just about any other writer in the fantasy genre.

If you hated LOTR, run from this book.

I still can't believe that people give this book over 2 stars. I read all the positive reviews again and thought maybe I'd wipe the dust off the book again after a few years and try to NOT compare it to Tolkien. The book seems even worse. The writing style that Brooks uses is something you'd expect from a high school student who just didnt know when to quit. The characters are so devoid of personality and Shea doesn't even do anything throughout the book except carry around the elf stones which play more of a role than he does. The dialogue is almost hilarious and the situations that they run into (like the gnome encounter) illicits no kind of excitement or interest at all. I was tempted to skip at least 120 pages in this book and thats the SECOND time around after reading it. I realize this is his first book so hopefully he's gotten better. After this one I never read another one of his novels so I won't say to stay away from them completely but I recommend to stay away from this book and the other carbon-copy sounding shannara books.

Well, Terry should be thankful that Tolkien published that famous trilogy. Ironically, I think when 'The Sword of Shannara' came out so did the animated movie of 'Lord of the Rings'. Basically, many people wished Tolkien had made his book a lot bigger and I think Terry capitalized on that.
I was just hoping that this book would be unique and not a copy.
Flick and Shea - Frodo and Sam...Skull Creature - Ringwraiths...
That's just the tip of the iceburg[...]. It seemed like it was written by some 20 year old who read 'Lord of the Rings' a dozen times. However, I did like his character Creed who was a thief. That made me read on.
Anyways, I hope the rest of his books are better.
[...]. The book could have been 500 pages instead of 700 plus.

The Sward of Shannara is a sort of hard sort of easy book with creative charictors and explosive fighting scenes. The monsters in this book are imaginitive and ahead of our time.
This auther is not a pro, but he is good. I would recomend you read this book to people who like to stay up late reading and wake up in the morning and read some more. by read it, reading it, read it.

This is the best book that I have read. It has a great plot and an interesting character composition. You can't go wrong if you read this book because Terry Brooks involves each character with his or her own personality. After you have read this one you might not be able to stop reading the series.

Brooks has conjured a world of vivid description, but no originality. Almost a copy of tolkien's masterpiece of a world. Shea or Frodo embarks on a quest to find an artefact of great power. Shea a sword and Frodo a ring. The wise one Allanon is a copy of Gandalf. Character development was poor, so i give one star. Storyline was amazing so two stars. Writing i would give a one. all up a four. As soon as i read the second installment, i will make a review to see if brooks has improved.

Bookworm reviews

Some years ago I heard mention of SWORD OF SHANNARA and that it was very similar to LORD OF THE RINGS. That prompted me not to read it, since it sounded like a rip-off. Then I realized that being similar to LOTR means it's a great read, so I gave it a shot.

I'm glad i did--SWORD OF SHANNARA *is* a great book. It was like rereading the great LOTR while reading something new; all the rest of the books in the series are original. And also great.

(Note: SHANNARA is pronounced SHAN-uh-ruh.)

Sometimes characters in different books seem very similar, but, to me, they fit just fine into the storyline (after all, in how many *different* ways can someone be proficient with a knife or a sword?). And ELFSTONES OF SHANNARA and STRAKEN have endings that blew me away.

Some readers have commented on the times that Brooks repeats previous storylines. These are just one paragraph long and occur only when a new character is encountered and is being brought up to speed on previous events. Also, I think a couple of times the recap refers to events that happened several books earlier, so the refresher is even helpful to the reader.

I'll just put in my two cents' worth as to the reading order, which is neither chronological nor date published.

The books should be read as follows (no spoilers):

the original trilogy:
SWORD OF SHANNARA (first book written and definitely the kick-off point for the series)
ELFSTONES OF SHANNARA
WISHSONG OF SHANNARA

FIRST KING OF SHANNARA book (prequel to SWORD)

HERITAGE OF SHANNARA quadrology

VOYAGE OF THE JERLE SHANNARA trilogy

HIGH DRUID OF SHANNARA trilogy

WORD AND VOID trilogy (these books are all urban thrillers)

GENESIS OF SHANNARA (these books are post-apocalyptic stories; a new book in this series has just come out, and another one is due out next year)

This is the order where, I think, the overall Shannara storyline(s) flow most logically and without interruption.

Some comments on WORD AND VOID. Each of the books builds to a climax that is both incredibly amazing and amazingly incredible. However, the bulk of each book was mostly uninteresting filler and just dragged on. I think these three could have had the filler removed and combined into one long book that would have been great. Also, as noted above, these are urban thrillers, so they don't take place in epic fantasy's customary medieval setting.

I gladly give five stars to the Shannara series proper.

I read this book many years ago and enjoyed it, then bought several of the sequels and enjoyed them up to a point. I have just taken it up again this month, and am really astonished at how stilted the writing seems and the lack of depth in the construction of the world and the characters. Having said that, there is some good creativity and a lot of adventure - a constant exchange of one episode for the next in rapid fashion. It's an enjoyable book, but not as good as I remembered.

If you like magic, action , adventure, and questing this book is for you. It has everything a fantasy book should have and more. It is beutifully written and tells a great story of a half- elf who is given the task to find a mythical sword and save the four lands from destruction by the evil Warlock Lord.

The popularity of this title seems to have waned considerably since the last time I looked it up on the store.com. Terry Brooks' Sword of Shannara is arguably the novel most obviously derivative of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings in terms of both characters and events in the plot, but come on, guys. Three and a half stars? While I can't justify Brooks extending this series to the length it has eventually grown to (I had to stop reading after the beleaguering original seven) The Sword of Shannara is still a classic of the genre, and it deserves an appreciative nod from fantasy fans. After all, without mindless knock-offs of Tolkien, where would the mass-market world of seven-hundred-page sword-and-sorcery novels be today? Not in the hearts and minds of all of us, that's for sure. In that sense, Brooks should be seen as a bold pioneer.

All joking aside, I have fond memories of staying up late to finish this book, even though at fifteen I could easily spot the parallels between this novel and The Lord of the Rings. Two stars for originality. Five stars for entertainment value. But five stars overall because this classic does not deserve to be languishing at a caustic three and a half stars! Come on people, help me out!!!

This book is very important for me. I started it in the last days of 1996: I was 13 then and I hadn't seriously read a book for more than a year. Then I found this and my whole life changed- I became a full-time reader. I liked every moment of it. The Sword of Shannara is a long novel, but you'll read it in no more than four days if you really like it. Many people compare it to Tolkien's Lord of the Rings but, although the plots and characters may be similar, the first book of Shannara is not a mere copy of LotR. Tolkien's book is far too long and very boring after The Fellowship of the Ring, too ambitious, too different from reality, with its cold, noble, inhuman characters and its disappointing ending. The Sword takes you to a smaller but still unforgettable world. Allanon, Shea, Flick, Menion and the others are men like me and you, with their doubts, their inner troubles, their weaknesses- this makes them much more fascinating than Gandalf, Frodo and Aragorn, not to mention the fact that Brook's novel may be a little slow at some points, but NEVER boring. Although I prefer The Elfstones of Shannara, this is not a book you can miss. They say The Lord of the Rings is the book of the century, but in my opinion it's been greatly overrated. Don't be fooled by Tolkien's fame and buy your copy of The Sword of Shannara as soon as possible.

Okay, so if you're even glancing at one star reviews, you probably know that this book is a complete rip off of LOTR. Now, on the one hand I can't really blame Brooks. As I understand it, he did pretty much write the book while he was still in high school and was, no doubt, deeply under the spell of the master of the genre, Tolkien. On the other hand, it has all been done before, and done better. If you have the misfortune to encounter this book before reading LOTR, then you will probably find Lord of the Rings eerily familiar. Perhaps even predictable. But remember that's because this book is based on LOTR, not the other way around.

If you are reading this review and haven't yet read LOTR, do yourself a favor and read that book first.

If you loved LOTR and are thinking of buying this book, do yourself a favor and reread LOTR. Or try a different author such as George R.R. Martin or Modesitt's Recluce series or David Eddings or just about any other writer in the fantasy genre.

If you hated LOTR, run from this book.

I still can't believe that people give this book over 2 stars. I read all the positive reviews again and thought maybe I'd wipe the dust off the book again after a few years and try to NOT compare it to Tolkien. The book seems even worse. The writing style that Brooks uses is something you'd expect from a high school student who just didnt know when to quit. The characters are so devoid of personality and Shea doesn't even do anything throughout the book except carry around the elf stones which play more of a role than he does. The dialogue is almost hilarious and the situations that they run into (like the gnome encounter) illicits no kind of excitement or interest at all. I was tempted to skip at least 120 pages in this book and thats the SECOND time around after reading it. I realize this is his first book so hopefully he's gotten better. After this one I never read another one of his novels so I won't say to stay away from them completely but I recommend to stay away from this book and the other carbon-copy sounding shannara books.

Well, Terry should be thankful that Tolkien published that famous trilogy. Ironically, I think when 'The Sword of Shannara' came out so did the animated movie of 'Lord of the Rings'. Basically, many people wished Tolkien had made his book a lot bigger and I think Terry capitalized on that.
I was just hoping that this book would be unique and not a copy.
Flick and Shea - Frodo and Sam...Skull Creature - Ringwraiths...
That's just the tip of the iceburg[...]. It seemed like it was written by some 20 year old who read 'Lord of the Rings' a dozen times. However, I did like his character Creed who was a thief. That made me read on.
Anyways, I hope the rest of his books are better.
[...]. The book could have been 500 pages instead of 700 plus.

The Sward of Shannara is a sort of hard sort of easy book with creative charictors and explosive fighting scenes. The monsters in this book are imaginitive and ahead of our time.
This auther is not a pro, but he is good. I would recomend you read this book to people who like to stay up late reading and wake up in the morning and read some more. by read it, reading it, read it.

This is the best book that I have read. It has a great plot and an interesting character composition. You can't go wrong if you read this book because Terry Brooks involves each character with his or her own personality. After you have read this one you might not be able to stop reading the series.

Brooks has conjured a world of vivid description, but no originality. Almost a copy of tolkien's masterpiece of a world. Shea or Frodo embarks on a quest to find an artefact of great power. Shea a sword and Frodo a ring. The wise one Allanon is a copy of Gandalf. Character development was poor, so i give one star. Storyline was amazing so two stars. Writing i would give a one. all up a four. As soon as i read the second installment, i will make a review to see if brooks has improved.

Bookworm reviews

Some years ago I heard mention of SWORD OF SHANNARA and that it was very similar to LORD OF THE RINGS. That prompted me not to read it, since it sounded like a rip-off. Then I realized that being similar to LOTR means it's a great read, so I gave it a shot.

I'm glad i did--SWORD OF SHANNARA *is* a great book. It was like rereading the great LOTR while reading something new; all the rest of the books in the series are original. And also great.

(Note: SHANNARA is pronounced SHAN-uh-ruh.)

Sometimes characters in different books seem very similar, but, to me, they fit just fine into the storyline (after all, in how many *different* ways can someone be proficient with a knife or a sword?). And ELFSTONES OF SHANNARA and STRAKEN have endings that blew me away.

Some readers have commented on the times that Brooks repeats previous storylines. These are just one paragraph long and occur only when a new character is encountered and is being brought up to speed on previous events. Also, I think a couple of times the recap refers to events that happened several books earlier, so the refresher is even helpful to the reader.

I'll just put in my two cents' worth as to the reading order, which is neither chronological nor date published.

The books should be read as follows (no spoilers):

the original trilogy:
SWORD OF SHANNARA (first book written and definitely the kick-off point for the series)
ELFSTONES OF SHANNARA
WISHSONG OF SHANNARA

FIRST KING OF SHANNARA book (prequel to SWORD)

HERITAGE OF SHANNARA quadrology

VOYAGE OF THE JERLE SHANNARA trilogy

HIGH DRUID OF SHANNARA trilogy

WORD AND VOID trilogy (these books are all urban thrillers)

GENESIS OF SHANNARA (these books are post-apocalyptic stories; a new book in this series has just come out, and another one is due out next year)

This is the order where, I think, the overall Shannara storyline(s) flow most logically and without interruption.

Some comments on WORD AND VOID. Each of the books builds to a climax that is both incredibly amazing and amazingly incredible. However, the bulk of each book was mostly uninteresting filler and just dragged on. I think these three could have had the filler removed and combined into one long book that would have been great. Also, as noted above, these are urban thrillers, so they don't take place in epic fantasy's customary medieval setting.

I gladly give five stars to the Shannara series proper.

I read this book many years ago and enjoyed it, then bought several of the sequels and enjoyed them up to a point. I have just taken it up again this month, and am really astonished at how stilted the writing seems and the lack of depth in the construction of the world and the characters. Having said that, there is some good creativity and a lot of adventure - a constant exchange of one episode for the next in rapid fashion. It's an enjoyable book, but not as good as I remembered.

If you like magic, action , adventure, and questing this book is for you. It has everything a fantasy book should have and more. It is beutifully written and tells a great story of a half- elf who is given the task to find a mythical sword and save the four lands from destruction by the evil Warlock Lord.

The popularity of this title seems to have waned considerably since the last time I looked it up on the store.com. Terry Brooks' Sword of Shannara is arguably the novel most obviously derivative of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings in terms of both characters and events in the plot, but come on, guys. Three and a half stars? While I can't justify Brooks extending this series to the length it has eventually grown to (I had to stop reading after the beleaguering original seven) The Sword of Shannara is still a classic of the genre, and it deserves an appreciative nod from fantasy fans. After all, without mindless knock-offs of Tolkien, where would the mass-market world of seven-hundred-page sword-and-sorcery novels be today? Not in the hearts and minds of all of us, that's for sure. In that sense, Brooks should be seen as a bold pioneer.

All joking aside, I have fond memories of staying up late to finish this book, even though at fifteen I could easily spot the parallels between this novel and The Lord of the Rings. Two stars for originality. Five stars for entertainment value. But five stars overall because this classic does not deserve to be languishing at a caustic three and a half stars! Come on people, help me out!!!

This book is very important for me. I started it in the last days of 1996: I was 13 then and I hadn't seriously read a book for more than a year. Then I found this and my whole life changed- I became a full-time reader. I liked every moment of it. The Sword of Shannara is a long novel, but you'll read it in no more than four days if you really like it. Many people compare it to Tolkien's Lord of the Rings but, although the plots and characters may be similar, the first book of Shannara is not a mere copy of LotR. Tolkien's book is far too long and very boring after The Fellowship of the Ring, too ambitious, too different from reality, with its cold, noble, inhuman characters and its disappointing ending. The Sword takes you to a smaller but still unforgettable world. Allanon, Shea, Flick, Menion and the others are men like me and you, with their doubts, their inner troubles, their weaknesses- this makes them much more fascinating than Gandalf, Frodo and Aragorn, not to mention the fact that Brook's novel may be a little slow at some points, but NEVER boring. Although I prefer The Elfstones of Shannara, this is not a book you can miss. They say The Lord of the Rings is the book of the century, but in my opinion it's been greatly overrated. Don't be fooled by Tolkien's fame and buy your copy of The Sword of Shannara as soon as possible.

If you liked Tolkien, you'll like Terry Brooks. You'll definitively like "The Sword of Shannara" for all the same reasons "The Lord of the Rings" tickled your fancy. Enjoy rich fantasy worlds, with an author who dreamed up a timeline lasting thousands of years before or after the book you're reading? Like the reassuringly familiar structure of high fantasy, the straightforwardness of Good versus Evil in Black Cloaks? Have a crush on elves? Good, you should read this when you have some free time. If you've already read LotR and you don't want to read it again, stay away from this.

I read this book at 16 and I LOVED it. OK - it is definitely a shameless and direct ripoff of The Lord of the Rings - hence the three stars. However, it is much easier to read and follow so I recommend it to younger readers. I reread it as an adult at 30 and still thought it good, as were the Elfstones and Wishsong. The later Shannara books however are egregious and should be avoided at all costs!!!!

Epic fantasy is a much maligned genre. There are truly great authors out there writing GOOD epic fantasy with developed characters, interesting settings and good world-building (See: Tad Williams, Robin Hobb etc.). That is one of the reasons why you should read them and not waste your time with this.

Many fantasy authors take aspects of Lord of the Rings, such as the norse and celtic mythology it is based upon, or it's races and used them in their fiction. Terry Brooks simply stole the entire plot and characters and replaced some of the nouns. Oh he also simplified it for idiots who don't like well developed characters or detailed worlds.

The world it takes place in is divided conveniently into four lands, the originally titled northland, southland, eastland and westland. We see the same dwarf we've seen a hundred times before, the same elf we've seen a hundred times before and the same backwater village starting point we've seen a hundred times before. This book, honest to God, made me vomit up my own liver in disgust. That's not to mention the elfstones which glow and transport the characters from danger every time Brooks worries he might have to do some good writing to resolve a situation.

But wait Liam, I hear you say, surely there are some redeeming aspects to this work? No, no there are not. Terry Brooks is an oxygen thief.

Without Terry Brooks there could very well be no modern day fantasy books. Perhaps no one other than Tolkien has had as much impact on the books we read. At almost 40 years after it was first written we can look back and acknowledge some of it's weaknesses, but the truth is it's a enjoyable classic.

As other reviewers have noted, this is not a stellar work of original fiction. Even when I read it way back in 6th or 7th grade I could tell that it was a Tolkien knock-off, but I loved it all the same. It's a fun read, with some really good sections that justify pushing through the more awkward entries. What makes it worth picking up would be the books in the rest of the series. Elfstones is an excellent sequel, and it's there and in Wishsong that Brooks really distinguishes himself as a storyteller and delves into more original territory.

If you are browsing reviews on this book, you will see a lot of reviewers comparing it to Tolkein. With this book, and this book only, that is true.

Remember, this was his first book in a loooong series. When I first read this novel, I immediately condemned it as a knock off of Lord of the Rings. A long time later, I read further into the series.

Brooks takes this book and ends up going straight sideways from anything resembling Tolkein! This story has been done, both before and after, but it makes the rest of the series a much easier read.

Just know when you read this book that it will seem familiar at times. Brooks' character development isn't the best here, but it does get much better as the series progresses.

This is a jumping off point for a storyline spanning over a dozen books. Once I realized that, I forgave a lot of the things that turned me off years ago. I even went back and read it again after I finished the first trilogy. I liked it much better this time. I think the average fantasy fan will like this book if they have the right mind set going into it.

I highly recommend all the books in this storyline and this one sets up the rest.

"I just want this ripoff book's star rating to go down so that it accurately reflects how terrible this book is." - original 'review,' Sept. 2005

Even Worse on the Second Try
...I wrote the above a year and a half ago, and then a friend came to me the other day gushing about how wonderful this book is and that I should try it because I like fantasy. I felt like weeping, but I thought maybe I would give it another shot. Bad idea. I got to page 10 and remembered why it was so terrible. Hackneyed prose, ludicrous dialogue, inept plot, and let's not even begin to talk about a lack of original ideas. If I could give it 0 stars, I would.

If you have ever read a book by George RR Martin, Robin Hobb, Guy Gavriel Kay, R. Scott Bakker, or even Robert Jordan... avoid this book and this entire series like the Plague. Your brain will start bleeding at around page 20.

How is this book still rated 4/5 stars on the store??? It makes me a die a little inside and worry about the state of fantasy readership.

I don't see what these Tolkien fanatics have against Terry Brooks. Sure he uses the same ideas, but imagine all the Stephen King rip offs there are. The charecters are far more interesting than Tolkiens everyone is happy and wants to help out style. I love Tolkien, but not nearly as much as Brooks.

OK I HAVE REALLY JUST STARTED THIS BOOK. BUT I AM ENJOYING IT. NOT UP TO THE SPEED OF JORDAN GOODKIND OR WILLIAMS BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT IS THIS TOLKIEN GUY. WHO IS HE. I MEAN HE WROTE HIS BOOKS SO LONG AGO MOST OF THE PEOPLE I KNOW WERNT EVEN ALIVE YET, SO WHY IS EVERYTHING ABOUT FANTASY COMPARIED TO HIM. I READ ONE OF HIS BOOKS AND IT WAS SO BAD I THREW IT AWAY. I HATED EVERY WORD OF IT. ON A BAD DAY JORDAN COULD OUT WRITE THIS GUY. UGH. STOP TALKING ABOUT TOLKEIN AS IF HE IS GOD OR SOMETHING. SO HE WAS THE FIRST TO WRITE ON FANTASY. SO WHAT. SOMEONE ELSE WOULD HAVE COME ALONG. SO STOP WITH THE TOLKIEN. OH THE SWORD WAS A GREAT BOOK, BUT I RECOMMEND WoT OR THE SWORD OF TRUTH SERIES. AND TAD WILLIAMS.. IS JUSTAS GOOD

This book isn't bad, but I have to agree with the opionion that it is a LOTR rewrite, but that doesn't make it trash. A good book for those LOTR fanboys who were not brainwashed into thinking there can not be anything else good out there

Endnote: What made LOTR great was that Tolkien spent his entire life creating a world, something a normal author doesn't have time to do

As a fan of Lord of the Rings, this book utterly disgusts me. The writing style is awful compared to Tolkien, and the author simply cannot create a new plot twist. I admit that until Allanon (Gandolf) mentioned traveling through the tomb of the kings, I was simply forcing myself to read this book due to being trapped on an airplane with nothing better to do. Once I realized how much this book is an awful remake of LOTR, I simply couldn't read it any more. Not only are the characters simply LOTR characters, the plot is simply LOTR. Can't the author come up with an original plot? Don't waste your money on this book, buy LOTR. This book doesn't deserve to be in the presence of LOTR, let alone mirror it.

If you are looking for some charming, well-written fantasy reads, this book is not for you. Frankly, it's pretty much a poorly-written version of Lord of the Rings with different character names and a sword instead of a ring. True, most fantasy is based somewhat on Tolkien, but Terry Brooks has stayed so true to the Feloowship that it's a bit hard to swallow. From a company consisting of all different (and magical) races, to the grey-bearded wizard who makes sporadic appearances, to the ill-disguised ring wraiths, this is a blatant rip off of superior books. If I were you, I'd buy a copy of Lord of the Rings and not waste my time on Terry Brooks.

I simply can't believe that this book is so popular. It is LORD OF THE RINGS "LIGHT" people! The world isn't half as interesting, the characters are stiff and poorly written, and the plot is a cookie-cutter copy of LOTR. It's for people that can't get enough of Tolkien but have run out of his work to read, which apparently seems to be a significant portion of the population. But honestly, I would rather read the classic than a classical rip-off. All of you desiring more LOTR, check out "Bored of the Rings". It's hilarious, and you'll enjoy yourself much more than you will after having read "Sword of Shannara".

This book is an excellent read. It was the first fantasy book that I ever read, and it is responsible for my love of the genre. There's a reason why his books are on the best-seller list, and it all relates back to this book.

I really think everyone needs to relax with the bashing of this book based upon its comparisons to LOTR. First, you can't plagiarize fiction unless you literally copy something word for word from another work...that isn't happening in the Shannara series. Terry Brooks is a good author, and his novels are highly entertaining. I recommend them to everyone.

When Terry Brooks was first published, back in 1976, the only books out there in terms of fantasy where Tolkiens', with a few other works out there as well, I'm sure. Anyone who writes will know that when you first begin writing, you emulate what you read. Brooks read fantasy, he wrote fantasy, and the only fantasy out there for the most part was Tolkien, so if you see some similar themes, that is why. And let's take a moment to be honest about Lord of the Rings: it is not as if Tolkien broke new ground on any themes himself. It's not as if he is the inventor of the Epic Quest himself. I don't see anyone on here calling for Tolkien's head because he took ideas from Beowulf, Song of Roland, Chretian de Troyes, Mallory, or anyone of the like.

Besides, the beauty of Brooks' work (collective) is not so much his plot themes (though many of them are very original and intriguing) but the way in which his characters develop and interact with each other.

And for all of you Brooks Bashers...Terry Brooks can write a female character, Tolkien never did.

This was the first book I have ever read by Terry Brooks. I found it to be a rather boring read as his descriptions of places and things are quite long and unnecessarily involved. I liked the first quarter of the book but then it became so boring that I truly don't remember anything after about page 150. I am planing to read the 2nd book in this trilogy just to give this author another chance, but honestly, I am not expecting much.

I loved this book, course I loved all the Shannara series and the Heretage of Shannara. I like the Elfs and the other races. They just interest me. Some may not like gnomes or dwarfs, but I do. I thought the plot and the story line were very well done.

Brooks improves with some of his later books, but the Shannara series as a whole is still an embarrassment to fantasy. Poorly-written, an utter rip-off of Tolkien (to jump on that bandwagon) on absolutely every level (literally: from plot to characters to Brooks' attempts at world-building, the key word here being ATTEMPTS).

Do yourself a favor and read some "real" fantasy. Personally, I would recommend Terry Goodkind, Jacqueline Carey, Brandon Sanderson, George R. R. Martin and Elizabeth Haydon.

After reading one of the later Shannara books several years ago, and after recently reading Brooks's stale rendering of the new Star Wars movie, I was not expecting to warm up to his first novel. Boy, was I surprised. I couldn't put it down, for all 726 pages. The book is just one adventure after another, all involving the search for a special sword needed to defeat the evil Warlock Lord who seeks to rule the world. The only man capable of using the sword must embark on a quest to find it, with only a few magic stones as protection against the dreaded Skull Bearers who are after him. If you think this doesn't very original, you're right. But there's one interesting twist: this story takes place in the future.
At least that's what I understood. My friend, who read the book years ago, disagrees. Sure, it appears to be the standard quasi-medieval setting with its kings, its dungeons, and its primitive technology. But one character describes a time in the distant past when humans mastered "a science of machines and power" but ended up unleashing technology in a series of wars that altered the planet and destroyed most of the life on it. Doesn't this sound an awful lot like nuclear holocaust? Society was in ruins, but humans eventually reeemerged along with other "races" they dubbed as gnomes, trolls, dwarves, elves, and the like, all adapted to different lifestyles. They also discovered magic by harnessing the power of the dead.
Other than this curious rationale for a world populated by mythical kinds of creatures, the book rarely strays from the conventions of the genre. Usually when I'm reading fantasy, I expect a story either to have some connection with history, like the King Arthur tales, or to invent something entirely new, like Tolkien's hobbits. Brooks does neither, but I did enjoy the vividness of the world he created. When we first encounter a troll, the creature is described as having bark-like skin like that of a tree. It's that keen attention to detail that brings this world to life. Even though it's not original in a broad sense, Brooks is a resourceful storyteller. About midway through the book, I found one plot twist so surprising, I laughed out loud.
What this novel lacks, besides the slightest trace of humor, is strong characterization. The book has a lot of characters, and I would have liked to see their personalities distinguished more. My favorite characters are a pair of thieves who reminded me a bit of Han Solo and Chewbacca. But Brooks has an unfortunate habit of stating things instead of showing them, which makes it far less interesting. For example, he describes the character of Menion as having strong morality, but I didn't find this trait as noticeable through his actions.
There don't seem to be any women in the story until about two-thirds into it, when one of the characters stumbles upon what else? A beautiful princess. And that's all we ever learn about her. Brooks's portrayal of women is one of the things which made me dislike some of his other books. By now, I'm starting to forgive him for these flaws. What's more, I'm slowly becoming a convert to his verbose, cliché-ridden, dead-serious, and highly enjoyable fantasy epics.

When i was reading this book, i can't escape the feeling that i've already read it - but that time it was many times better - it was "Lord of Rings". All characters, places and situations from "Sword of Shannara" were stolen from Tolkien. Allannon is the copy of Gandalf, Shea is the copy of Frodo, Shady Vale is the copy of Shire... This list goes on and on and on and will never see the end. Thus the book contains nothing original - and that is why it is so boring. It's the shame for Brooks.

Terry brooks is the best fantacy writer. This book is origanal and has you on the edge of your seat. In some places it may slow but it picks back up to speed in minutes. It tells of several journeys and many different races. You have to read this book.

All this talk about how Brooks ripped off Tolkien is really getting tired. I read this book in my early teens and loved it, just as much as I loved the Elfstones and Wishsong of Shannara. I read them over and over, and to this date I'm fairly certain that I've read the this book more times than any other book with the exception of the Druid of Shannara. I hadn't heard of Tolkien at the time until my older brother gave me the song and dance about how it was a copy of Lord of the Rings. So I gave that a try.

MY GOD was it boring! And silly! I couldn't connect with the characters because they were absolutely rediculous. I quickly discarded the name Tolkien from my mind and moved on to the Heritage of Shannara series, which was even better than the original trilogy. I didn't even think about Tolkien again until the movies came out and it was suddenly a big deal. By this time I had quit reading fantasy (and fiction in general for the most part) in favor of non-fiction. Only recently have I started reading fiction again, and only a week ago I came across my old battered copy of The Sword of Shannara from Middle School and felt nostalgic enough to decide to reread the series, and it's just as much fun to read now as it was when I was a kid.

I watched the first movie simply because my sister bought me the ticket and it was a chance to spend time with her after she moved out of the house. I wasn't impressed. The other movies I saw simply because a friend or a family member was watching it.

My point being, if Terry Brooks simply copied Tolkien, than he did it better and took up less space doing it. I don't mean to go on a Tolkien bashing rant here; my point is simply that just because the guy set the mold doesn't mean that he perfected it.

I will admit that there are some glaring similarities (you know what, pick up Joseph Campbell and realize that some similarities are going to be necessary). But that doesn't mean that The Sword of Shannara can't be appreciated in it's own right. Here are a few primary differences (improvements?) that I have seen. Remember, I'm basing this off of my viewing of the movies (which, to be fair, wasn't recent), because honestly I don't feel like reading The Lord of the Rings just to prove a point:

Allanon vs. Gandalf - I didn't really see much magic coming from Gandalf. To me he seemed little more that a goofy old guy with a glowy rod. Allanon on the other hand is dangerous both with magic and in physical battle. He knows what he's doing and will do anything to do it. He is Saturnian whereas Gandalf is Jovial. I'm sorry but when in battle, the person I want at my side is not Santa Claus.

Warlock Lord vs. Sauron and The Sword vs. the One Ring - At least there was a backstory to the Warlock Lord. And the method of defeating him was sound. Okay, Sauron is this big mystical creature that makes a bunch of rings for reasons that I do not understand and one ring for himself that gives him some kind of special power that is never really explained as far as I can tell except that it turns normal people invisible when the put it on. But when they manage to destroy this ring that automatically destroys Sauron as well. Um, WHY?! And don't give me a line like, "That's how magic works." If Sauron was powerful before he made the ring, he'd be powerful after it was destroyed too. The Warlock Lord, on the other hand, actually makes sense that he would be a powerful sorceror who got consumed by his own magic into something unrecognizable. His destruction is equally believable for the same reason (Spoiler Alert) because the Swords function is to expose the fact that there is nothing of the man who made the magic left.

Hendel vs. Gimli - Gimli seemed to me to serve as comic relief where it was unneccesary and irritating. And he wasn't exactly three dimensional either. Seemed to me like the Dwarfs in the Lord of the Rings aren't much more than wannabe elves without the speed, skill, good looks, or the spooky language. Hendel on the other hand was as much a hero as anyone else. More so in many occasions. And his skill on the battlefield was equal to any elf!

I'm sure this review will piss a lot of people off, but I think it needed to be said.

Don't let the bad reviews fool you. These are people who obviously don't know their fantasy. Brooks published SoS in 1977, the same year as Tolkien's posthumous Silmarillion. Tolkien's Return of the King, which completed the LOTR cycle, was published just 20 years before. Brooks has been accused of ripping off LOTR, and there is merit in this. But so what? He admits it. Brooks is still a very good descriptive writer in his own right. And what he did with SoS was basically revive the epic fantasy, satisfying those who had been hungry for it since LOTR. So when you go into the bookstore and peruse the fantasy aisle, filled with hundred of titles, remember that Brooks started it all.

I can't believe the high rating for this book. I read this book when I first started reading thinking that this was a great book. since Brooks is quite a popular author of fantasy. Guess what, its dull as hell and took me quite a long time to finish it.

A year later I read Lord of the Rings. and after reading it, immediately thought of Swords of Shannara. This book is a blatant rip-off of Lord of the Rings. not only is it a rip-off, its actually a more inferior version of the Lord of the Rings, I can't understand it, the author copied Lord of the Rings, its characters and plot but writes an inferior one, and worst of all he actually sold and earned a lot of money through it.

Anyway, maybe the author has improved himself over the years, but judging from Swords of Shannara and Elves of Shannara (which is another trip to boredom and more of the same) I won't be buying anymore of his books. There are a lot of other authors worth reading such as George R.R. Martin, Robin Hobb, David Gemmell, Tolkien, and others.

2 stars at most

The book is pretty good, the only thing was that it sounded so much like the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, right down to seven original members in the group. They've got elves, dwarves, a mysterious mage, and two scared but determined young men on which the fate of the races rests upon. They eventually end up separated, some of them go to face the approaching war while the other goes to deliver the ring, or recover the sword in this case, while the mage comes and goes as he wishes, revealing what he wishes of the whole picture. Aside from the echoes of other books in it, it was not a bad book, i liked the second one better, though.

This is a great book about a young boy named Shea Ohmstord
and this older step brother Flik. Shea is the half elf desendent of king Shannara and the only one who is able to weld the the sword of Shannara to defeat the eval warlock lord.

like tolkien's lord of the rings, this book would make a great movie from a great read! characters are fleshed out and made whole by the author. by the end of the story, i felt these characters were friends, foes and family!

I've never been much of a fantasy reader but after reading Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" I was on a fantasy high looking for the next series to dig into. Terry Brooks is one of the most famous and bestselling fantasy authors of all time and I'd heard of "Sword of Shannara" before so I decided to check it out. I was, of course, greatly disappointed. I suppose I could've lived with the fact that this is a blatant ripoff of "Lord of the Rings" if it weren't so poorly written. The book is practically headache inducing. I actually didn't finish it (but I bet I can tell you how it ends).

That said, I should add that this would probably be a really good book for teenagers, especially those who might have some trouble wading through Tolkien - the younger, the better. I just have a feeling that anyone who's read "Lord of the Rings" (or is into good writing) will have a lot of problems with this book.

Oh my gosh!!! this book is 724 pages of complete boredom!!! it took this "terry brooks" an entire TWO PAGES to basically say that there was a guy named Flick walking down a path. and he does that for like, the entire book!! a lot of people would say "well, it helps you picture the story better." the heck with that!!! you can barely follow the story just becuase there is sooo much detail. it is completely hard to read. i am at one of the highest reading levels at my school and i had the HARDEST time following this book. DONT READ IT!!!! ITS PURE TORTURE!!!

I was given this book by my old English teacher, accompanied by high, exhaustive praise. But upon reading the first paragraph, I could tell this wouldn't be what I had set my hopes on. It truly is possible to get a generalized sense of what you're getting into with that first introduction, and what I found on that first page of Shanarra was an over-drawn, clumsily written length of description.

It honestly did not get better as the book went on. Pacing was a foreign concept to Brooks, apparently - hugely important moments happened within a few pages, sometimes even a few paragraphs, while you could spend double that following characters as they walked along. Transitions were sloppy, sometimes even using the word 'then' for lack of anything better, and I found that I was anticipating most of the plot 'twists' when they were first being hinted at. Deus ex machina should have been the catchphrase of the novel, and I will not flog a dead horse by going into how many things were ripped directly from Tolkien.

Shanarra is for those who found Lord of the Rings tiresome and tedious. For the rest of us, let's turn to other masters.

Okay, I know that this book is reminiscent of the LOTR trilogy, but the fact remains that this is in itself an original story, no matter the likenesses to LOTR here and there. At the time this book came out, which was in 1977, there weren't that many fantasy books out. And also this was Terry Brooks' first book. He might have taken from LOTR without realizing he was doing so, but in the end the story was brilliant and nearly just as epic as the aforementioned. This book is a great read for people of all ages, and should not be underestimated; it is a piece of art. Yes, it has a few concepts reminiscent of other novels, but, hey, so does the Inheritance Cycle by Christopher Paolini, and, in my opinion, this is a bit better than that. So just buy the book, and try not to look at it through the eyes of a critic who has read every other book out there. Just read it for what it is: a book designed to entertain and bring enjoyment to otherwise dull afternoons. Thank you.

I have read most the reviews of this book and have had enough. I believe all of you people who have given this a bad review need a wake-up call. The Sword of Shannara has much in common with LOTR, believe me I can see it. But what fantasy series doesn't owe it's concepts to Tolkien and LOTR. If you know some tell me. If it is about a quest against evil it is a book borrowing Tolkien's concepts.

Some of you may not know this (or may not care and blindly review this book before knowing the whole story) but Terry Brooks didn't set out to write fantasy. It was just what the end product came to be. He wanted to write a story about a family (the Ohmsfords) and their trials. So he merged Tolkien's concepts with his own family story concepts and came back with The Sword of Shannara. The whole series is about this family. Yes, it is set in a world peopled with Tolkienesque races but doesn't anyone care to look at the bigger picture.

As many of the "real" fans may know The Four Lands is our world. It is our world after a great holocaust, a great apocalypse (read Word & Void for a big clue and The Druid of Shannara has many refrences to our world). That's right, in essence the Shannara books are post apocalyptic tales. But maybe all of you have missed that, hmm. You want a big clue, when you read Antrax (The Voyage of Jerle Shannara, Book Two), there is the biggest clue of technology. Even in this book there is a part when Shea and his group fight a creature and they are surrounded by metal structures. If this was a dark ages type setting there would be no metal structures. They wouldn't have the techonology to build with metal. But maybe you overlooked that. All this will become even more apparent next year when the first in a new trilogy begins to fill the gaps between Word & Void and Shannara. Was LOTR a post apocalyptic story (I don't think so).

Another thing, Tolkien was not original. His races and all of his concepts were borrowed from different cultures. Elf is a German legend. Dwarves are Viking lore. And LOTR wasn't even the story he wanted to write. He started writing The Silmarillion first. LOTR was a story he wrote so that England would have their own legends, their own lore. And the books went unnoticed for decades until some hippie in the sixties picked up the book. Tolkien is the grandfather of modern fantasy but he is not God.

Now, on to the subject of parallels. Some have compared Shea and Flick to Frodo and Sam. Wrong. For one thing Shea isn't even a Ohmsford and he is a halfling (part elf). Flick is human even though his stature may say otherwise. Allanon is nothing like Gandalf. If he gets killed he isn't coming back. Also he isn't as all powerful as Gandalf. Magic actually has consequences in this world. And he isn't old looking, he is quite young looking given his age. Menion is as little like Aragorn as apples are to oranges. For one thing he isn't that brave. Hendel is like Gimli, you guys get that one. But what Dwarf isn't, they are all the same. The Skull Bearers are not really like anything in my opinion. They fly and there are a lot of them. The Warlock Lord is very different then Sauron because he is not just a presense, he is very, very real. One reviewer made some comment as to say that he needs the sword to become whole again. Obviously you didn't read the book that well. He wants the sword so he can destroy it, knowing it is the only thing that can destroy him. In LOTR the One Ring gives Sauron his power and he wants it so he can be whole. Completely different, or maybe you missed that.

Lastly, Terry Brooks' writing is not sloppy and a lot better than some authors. He isn't long winded and gets to the point. If I want essays I'll read Shakepeare or I'll read Dickens. No, I want a story. Not a preachy soapbox (Sword of Truth series) and not a long dragged out series that never ends (The Wheel of Time series). Each new book is a new adventure and not the same as everything before. So there I have said my peace and am done with it. You people can go on reading this book as a Tolkien rip off or read as its own book and on its own merit.

Great. I really liked this book alot. It puts you right there trying to guess what will happen next. Every time the book swiches to the other struggling party you wounder what will happen to the other. The descriptions are amazing. The only bad thing was I was reading it and was counting to see how many more pages till the end of the chapter and there was a picture, ...the pictures are a little faulty but other than that it's one of the best books, NO! it is the best book I have ever read!

This book was GREAT! Once I started I couldn't put it down!!! After I finished I got the Wish Song of Shannara and the Elf Stones of Shannara, then all the Herittage of Shannara! Once you start reading his books you can't stop!

This was mediocre writing at best - it is a debut novel, so I am confident that this could get better, but the tension is lacking, the character development is lacking, and having read as much Fantasy as I have by now, the originality is lacking -

This is a novel best saved for those getting into the genre and not already years vested, because everything that is said and done on these pages has been done before (or after, depending on the timeline of your reading experience) -

Shannara started a new generation of writing, and this is still and simply the straight form of farm boy hero with a destiny, however, I feel that I have moved well beyond this, and I could not take this novel seriously anymore.

This is great if you are getting your children into the Fantasy genre, and I will most likely have my young boys read this when they get a bit older, but I for one could not continue the interesting sounding world of Shannara that had no real value for the learned and aged like myself.

The Sword of Shannara was the first fantasy book that I read. I was 13 at the time, and I enjoyed it immensly. Just resently, I re-read it, and the magic that was present during the fisrt reading was not gone. Terry Brooks is one of the best author out there. I have read all of his books (minus Hook and The Phantom Menace), and each of them is creative and unique. He allows the reader to be drawn into the plot, and to take part in the adventures of the characters. I reccomend this book to anyone who loves a good novel. You will love it!

One Sword, One Man, One Destiny

In the century after the Great War of the Races, the evil Warlock Lord, who was thought to be dead, was massing his armies for another assault against the good races of the World. In this world Shea Ohmsford would step up and face his destiny.

In this action-packed novel, full of danger and adventure, a handful of beings will have to face the near impossible. The Mystic Allanon, the Elfish brothers Dayel and Durin, the Dwarf Hendel, the Prince Balinor, and Shea's adopted brother Flick join Shea on this suspenseful journey to find the only weapon that can destroy the wicked Warlock Lord. They come face-to-face with the terrifying past, evil, twisted beings from other worlds, and things so ancient that history has no record of them. Even with little hope of success the wandering group still attempts to save the World from another War of the Races.

This fantasy, by Terry Brooks, is full of action, mystery, and suspense. If you enjoy any of these then this book is right for you.

I've been reading fantasy for nigh on a decade now, and never never never have i read a book this horrible! i'm not just talking bad - i actively disliked this book.
I'm serious. Lack of originality is only my first complaint: it is the LoTR story as rewritten by Brooks - but without any true character development, setting, etc. His writing style is bland and un-evocative. even with LoTR as his story basis, Brooks still manages to make the plot line scramble and twist in so many unfeasible ways, that the final mess is unintelligable.
if you're a masochist and enjoy torturing your imagination, then please do read this book, it will be perfect for you.

I always wondered about the first book. I saw it for years in the book stores and finally broke down and read it. I like his love for the genre, and he wrote better later. But this is almost unreadable. The angry conversations felt very forced and the luck at times was way too much.

This is a wonderful book! It is filled with action and adventure that won't let you put it down. Terry Brooks has an amazing way of letting you get to know the backround of the races in little bits and pieces that keeps you guessing until the end, and thinking about it for months afterward. It has been a year since I read this book, and I'm still pondering over it. This is the start of a great series, and I highly recomend it to anyone of any age.

WHAT a boring book - or should I say, the first few chapters I have managed to force myself through. As previous comments have noted, the storyline is trite and over-used. My biggest gripe, however, is the total lack of characterization. Several chapters into the book and we still know hardly a thing about the main characters. A good writer lets you into their head and heart - it appears Brooks does not know this, or doesn't know how to do it. His writing is also unbelievably immature - his lengthy descriptions are not only boring, but inappropriate and childish. I realize now (after buying the trilogy - big mistake!) that this was his first novel - well, the publishers should take it out of print immediately as an insult to good writing. TO compare him to Tolkien (as done on the cover of my copy) is ludicrous and MISLEADING. I will never buy his work again and advise anyone not to waste their money on this author. Try Terry Goodkind instead - a mature, intelligent and vastly superior read.