Top critical review
The first series was really good. It was captivating
on 12 March 2017
I read the first two series a long time ago, at a guess when I was around 17. I read a lot of SF and fantasy in those days.
The first series was really good. It was captivating, even if Covenant gets on your nerves (as I presume he's supposed to). The second series dragged on a bit, although it was nice to be back in that world.
Now I'm older. I seem to have lost patience and am more depressed, cynical, bitter and twisted myself ( :-) ) so I don't find the characters' annoying behaviour as entertaining as perhaps I used to.
Then I'm not really happy with the internal logic of the magic. In the Lord of the Rings Sauron puts a lot of his power into the ring. Then he loses the ring and becomes a puff of smoke. Over time he regains much of his strength and with the ring would become extra powerful. Ok, weird, but at least it's clear that destroying the ring would be bad (for him). And it can only be unmade in the same fire it was made. Ok, I'll trust Gandalf on that.
Spoiler non-alert: none of the following happens.
But what would happen if you were to stir a shard of the Illearth stone in some Earthblood and water from Lake Glimmermere with the Staff of Law? If it were to dissolve and the One Tree were watered with it, and a fruit were to drop from the tree and be consumed by the offspring of a Haruchai and Linden Avery, whilst in Andelain, what would happen to the Worm and the Arch of Time? I don't know—and I don't care.
I'd read a few dozen pages and was thinking to myself, "that's odd! He hasn't used 'crepuscular' yet. And bang! There it was on the next page. So that's the same as always.
In summary, If you liked the second series, I guess you'll like this one too.