Third book in a set that keeps getting progressively worse.
Now, I'm usually an admitted "Brooks apologist": "Shannara" is personal to me like few other works of fiction. Hence, I'd say that I'm quite predisposed to like his work, and I also quite like his newer material. "Defenders", to me, was a delight. - Likewise, I don't see any issues with the fact that his "world-building" is rather simplistic, or that his narratives are notoriously repetitive. To me, that's part of Brooks' signature style; if you don't like it, you have no business being 30 books into this series. I'm also aware that the in-universe logic dictates a few steps Brooks needs to take as a writer to create a conclusion to series. - You didn't think that "Shannara" would "fall" without the Druid council dismantling itself again, or without the Federation going full redneck again, or did you?
--- That all said, the "Fall" set, three books in, has been fairly disappointing:
First, the progress and the pacing: Brooks spends too much time on the - repeating - narrative of both the fall of Paranor, and later, on the - repeating - story of how Drisker escapes an interdimensional prison. Brooks already told us that, in "First King", in "High Druid", and in Talismans". Again, one might argue that this is signature "Shannara", but there is a difference between repeating a motif and retelling a story already told.
Second, the heroes: Drisker, Dar, and (to a lesser degree) Tarsha, the arguable main characters, all need a sharper profile, especially within the extremely repetitive main narrative. As of book three, they have nothing that distinguishes them. "The Druid", "The Leah", and "The Mareth", yes - but those are character stereotypes, not people.
Third, the main conflict, my main reason of discontent: So, the Skaar, "Shannara's" Canadian Dothraki, are the cliché evil-but-good invading force. I hope that Brooks still brings some originality to the Skaar's and to Ajin's story before their respective conclusions. Because as it is, their story is just plain telegraphed and boring. The Four Lands don't need a Daenerys, and they sure don't need a Quickening 2.0.
Fourth, the real conflict: Clizia Porse, the warlock granny, again, is an "over-attended" character, like Ajin. She takes too much of a role in a story that could have been told entirely without her. Like Ajin, and - perhaps like Tarsha and Drisker - she perhaps should have been split into several different characters. But as it is, Clizia is simply an overused plot device: A female fantasy Hyman Roth whose skills and knowledge change precisely as she needs it to give the heroes a hard time.
--- POINTS OF LIGHT:
It's still "Shannara", it's still the love of my life in the fantasy genre. So, of course, I find stuff that I like. The problems of "The Stiehl Assassin" come from the project's execution, not from its author's lack of capability, and that makes this an uneven, but not a terrible experience.
To begin to name some of the better things from the set and from this book, the plot itself DOES work, and DOES make sense - in principle: Fred Saberhagen's "Empire of the East" might have been a distant inspiration, yes, but that doesn't harm the story, by itself. Especially with a few hints on its eventual conclusion already in place, the whole set might still turn into a real treat for fans. MAYBE. If Ajin and Clizia are treated with more care. The base is certainly there to deliver something greater than what we got with this installment.
Then, Shea Ohmsford II. His story, and his scenes, are the reason I keep reading these books, and they are also the reason why "The Stiehl Assassin" in particular gets THREE stars from me, and NOT TWO. In those scenes, Brooks suddenly doesn't seem bored with his own story any more!
OVERALL, the worst book in the entire series. Partly, because the buildup from the two precursor novels was weak, partly because this is really not a novel onto itself but the third part of a novel split into four books. But partly also because we're indeed reaching the limits of the creative potential that the world of Shannara might hold for its author.
WILL I READ THE FOURTH BOOK, AS WELL? - Sure. My parents' old home, in my GPS, is still named after a location from the world of "Shannara". It was because Brooks mentioned him in a interview some time in the 1990s that I first picked up Faulkner. So, I'm going to keep reading his books until the sun melts the moon. - But as things are right now, I'm not expecting to enjoy whatever will come as the fourth book in this set. And that, 30 books into a series, is a shame.
