I remembered liking them when I was a kid, but I just tried reading A Wizard of Earthsea again and it was just "Ged went here" "Ged learned that" "These people didn't like Ged" etc. Does it get better later?
This right after mixing up Anne McCaffrey and Ursula K Le Guin and finding out that the Pern series was just fetish dragon smut.
She said she purposefully wrote in a simplistic style to mimic the traditional epics she was familiar with, like Beowulf. The books were supposed to have a wide appeal, and evoke that sense of the archetypal struggle between good and evil.
I personally love the style, even as an adult - it's a very easy read, but the world of earthsea, true names, and it's daoist philosophy is very appealing to me. It was the first of its kind, and really established the idea of "balance" in the fantasy genre.
The books definitely do get more sophisticated, though, both thematically and stylistically. But ultimately it's going to be a purely subjective experience, as these things always are.
I didn't realize it was intentional! Though, I think Beowulf is notable to a significant degree for its historic context...
I think the mention of daoist philosophy is interesting. Those works are very direct too, but I think (from a Western perspective) there's a huge amount "between the lines", both due to missing cultural context and refinement over generations of tradition, which means that while the writing is simple the meaning and implications are vast and complex.
Aside from the name thing though, I'm not sure I got that from the first book. Especially since most of the actions listed in it are very concrete.
Ursula was one book wonder, methinks.
And so was Gardner Dozois, whose "Strangers" was eerily similar to "Left Hand of Darkness".
She is one of the great American novelists. She’s won 8 Hugo’s. There’s the Dispossessed, a great novel.
For a person whose oeuvre includes _A Wizard of Earthsea_, _The Left Hand of Darkness_, and _The Lathe of Heaven_, I would gainsay that.