This is Neil Gaiman, world renown writer. Which of his literary works do you like best?

This is Neil Gaiman, world renown writer. Which of his literary works do you like best?

Attached: 1552869101539.jpg (727x1092, 139K)

Unironically Sandman. All his other works are either >muh silly British humour or wanking over various parables for the Triple Goddess (also true for Sandman but at least it revitalized comics and saved it from rampant cape fagging).

Pardon the serious response.

Actually, your response was what I wanted, because I wanted to do an experiment. You don't know how thankful I am

I liked when he were a falafel on blues clues

>The British John Green
Which of his literary works do I like best? That's like asking which disease do I like best? Much like stage IV pancreatic cancer, I would not want to suffer through reading say American Gods. Except diseases of themselves may be interesting, a subject for further studies, unlike his books, whose only utility lies in their combustibility. Pages ablaze. Burn every last one.

Seconding this.
Definitely Sandman.

True, he is a comic book writer, who thinks that just because he did one good comic book, he is automatically a good novelist

Here you go.

Attached: Neil Gaiman.gif (500x263, 489K)

Gaiman has a formula and you'll see it in every book with his name on it. I really don't know why people like him so much, he's the Dan Bronw (plotwise) of fantasy.

you could at least have spelt it humor to trigger the britbongs

I've only read Neverwhere, Anansi Boys and Good Omens. It's aight if you're in the mood for genre fiction.

What's actually wrong with Anansi Boys, Coraline, Norse Legends, Good Omens, Stardust and American Gods? None of you have actually stated the issues with them as books.

>magical girl
>there is magical world inside that pit/behind that wall/in a pond/whatever
>conveniently, the protagonist was a magical whatever during the whole time
>she/he's dead but not really

The Doctor's Wife episode of Doctor Who

First criticism is irrelevant. The second criticism seems like an issue with the genre as a whole because hidden worlds are as old as the story of Tir na nOg. The second last criticism seems to only appeal to American Gods and Stardust and even then, ignores the fact that this is a classic fairytale trope and the last criticism is so general it could be applied to anything.

What's actually wrong with his style of writing? Do you not like his pacing? Do you not like his characterisation? Is there something about his usage of sentence structure you don't enjoy?

I don't want to be that guy pretending to be all grow up who likes adult books for adult readers like myself, but Gaiman's audience is younger (like 13 or 16 yo). When you start to read good books, there is no reason to go back to Rownling, Gaiman or King.
You have a problem when most the things I said appear in every single book he wrote. It's a formula and that is a big problem.
>Do you not like his characterisation?
Sometimes, plus the structure of the story.
>ignores the fact that this is a classic fairytale trope
Please, let's not compare fairytales to what Gaiman wrote. It's dishonest.

He has written no literary works.

>Gaiman has a formula

like almost 100% writers who wrote more than 5 books

I like his short stories.

>I don't want to be that guy pretending to be all grow up who likes adult books for adult readers

That's exactly what you did here.

I don't like to separate books into "literature for sophisticated adults" and "literature for little childrens". There's more value in children's books than an elitist fag can ever recognize.

>implying anyone here reads

I personally didn't really care for the Coraline book either.

Sandman, but I haven't read too much of him, he is not my cup of tea.

>There's more value in children's books than an elitist fag can ever recognize.
I agree, but you won't find a scent of the greatness of brothers Grimm or Saint-Exupéry in the work of Gaiman.
Gaiman can be amazing when you're young, but as you grow up and you start to read good books (include the good fairytales), you'll see how he's irrelevant.

Ocean at the end of the lane

The one he did with yoshitaka amano. The rest are cute YA mashups. He's like a hornier Terry Pratchet.

>when most of the things I said appeared in each of his books
I disputed that claim and gave my reasoning though. A lot of what you are calling 'his' style I merely tropes of the genre and not referring to his voice or his ability to present fiction.
>lets not compare fairytales to what Gaiman wrote
But that is exactly what he says he is going for, time and again, and given some of the criticisms he's received in this thread it's clear he's hitting int he mark, especially in how Anasisi Boys and Stardust hit the mark in regards to being fairytales.

I'm still not sure why you dislike what parts of his work you're saying you dislike. It's like this user here. I understand that you both do not like his work but I'm asking why. Is it the topic or the style? The what of his work or the how? Is it his themes about stories, books and imagination in general? Of being careful of what you wish for?

>he's like a hornier Pratchet
What does this even mean?

Why? What is the great gap between The Brave Little Tailor and Coraline that Gaiman can't ever cross?

gayman lol

>understand that you both do not like his work but I'm asking why.
It [Coraline] tried too hard to be different, in my opinion. It's been years since I read it but I felt as though it just felt a bit soulless and dull. I'm not sure how to describe it. I liked the movie a lot and I own the OST of the film but the book was just a bit, I don't know. I just remember being pissed off about the part with the gymnasts and her getting the magical rock or whatever it was, eyes, or something? I don't know. I felt nothing for the character. There's better books out there.

The Ocean at the End of the Lane or the first two volumes of Sandman. Coraline didn’t really stick with me and American Gods was boring.

>Anasasi Boys

A solid read. Suffers from most of Gaiman's issues with dragging middles and hey-let's-get-a-bit-edgy-to-see-what-happens passages, but okay. Fat Charlie was a good protagonist for the whole setup.

>Coraline

I enjoyed this when I was younger but I think I enjoyed it only because I felt like I related to Coraline herself and not because I cared about her situation or the replacement parents or the atmosphere. Haven't seen the movie, either.

>Norse Mythology

Frankly, should've been an audiobook only. There's almost word-for-word retellings and translations you could go and get anywhere else, along with additional translations in both the prose and poetic Edda. I think this was more of a curiosity project for him because those myths have influenced him so much.

>Good Omens

Didn't care for it. Pratchett's fine on his own and Gaiman's fine on his own but together I felt like they were fighting each other for who gets to write what (spoiler: Pratchett won a lot of the time).

>Stardust

Never read.

>American Gods

Heavy drag and I think you could've sliced it in half with a good editor and it would've made for a tighter story. I also didn't care much about Shadow or Laura except in the first hundred pages when things were revving up - maybe the various gods were more interesting? I'm still surprised it won the Hugo and the Nebula.

Smoke and Mirrors un-ironically his best excluding Sandman.

Attached: Beksinski_13.jpg (553x650, 88K)

I just read Sandman and Coraline.
Both were pretty fly.

>Is it the topic or the style?
Both.
The problem is what he's talking about and how he's talking about it.
Honestly, it's difficult to care about Gaiman new cooky-cutter story after One Hundred Years of Solitude, Ficciones or One Thousand and One Nights.

The Sandman Is unironically among the best things ive read.

American gods was p. Bad for me desu

The djiin taxi driver is great tho

I've only read Sandman recently enough to judge, but it was meh. Alan Moore wannabee.

i unironically liked his book on norse mythology

I really like some of his short stories. His novels don't do much for me.

He writes comic books without pictures now.