philosophy begins in wonder.

Like a lot of men my age, I played "Dungeons & Dragons" and read fantasy-fiction novels when I was in my teens and 20s. Tolkien is rightly considered the king but I also fondly recall time spent with LeGuin, McKillip, Lewis, Howard, Baum, Boyer, Watt-Evans and Bellairs. 

For some decades, however, I largely avoided the genre. The plots became  increasingly absurd, and the characters all acted and reasoned as modern bourgeoisie liberals. Greg Keyes and Steven Erikson were entertaining, but I turned to other genres for escapism. (Perhaps I will devote a future post to Jack McDevitt's "Alex Benedict" space adventures and Lincoln Child's "Jeremy Logan" thrillers.) 

Lately I have begun, with great trepidation, to sample some of the current writers in fantasy. Curiosity and a touch of nostalgia prompted me to seek a worthy heir to the throne of Tolkien. Patrick Carr and John Flanagan both have the moral vision but came up short on the storytelling. The next names on my list are Patrick Rothfuss, J.R. Leach, R.E. Palmer (no relation) and Vox Day. 

Concerning Rothfuss, I am presently 658 pages into The Name of the Wind and regret to inform you that this book is not worth your time. First, the author lacks Tolkien's narrative ability. His tale is long (and disjointed), but neither vivid nor grandly told. Rothfuss also seems to be an overgrown adolescent and wastes a lot of time detailing the amorous thoughts of Kvothe, his young protagonist. Kvothe's pursuit of the mysterious, older Denna is plotted in such a clumsy way that the reader will dread her next appearance. One final complaint: Rothfuss selected the tired school-for-magic setting for a large chunk of his epic.

1/20/25: With a sense of relief, I left Rothfuss behind and turned to Palmer. My expectations were, admittedly, low but I have been impressed with Palmer. He certainly has captured the Tolkien "tone", though I hope he will flesh out his world a little more in the second book. 

Eckhart von Hochheim, O.P., is often characterised as a mystic (including this book), but Professor Flasch contested this a few years back and gave Eckhart his due as a philosopher. Anyone familiar with the later era of Christendom and the major intellectuals of that time--Bl. Henry Suso, Fr. Tauler, Rector Burley, Canon Gerson, Cardinal Cusanus, Prior Savonarola, etc.--will not be surprised by the nature of this discussion. Theirs was a period of transition in western thought. The anti-scholastics were not yet on the scene, but philosophers and theologians were still digesting the works of two Franciscan friars, Bl. John Duns Scotus and William of Ockham, fine-tuning their methods, and exploring new paths of thought.