Scan barcode
shaymarie's review
adventurous
challenging
informative
relaxing
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
scotchneat's review
3.0
Ackroyd retells Mallory's version of events which spawned a plethora of mythology and stories. I haven't read Mallory in ages, and it was with some surprise I recalled how different this Arthur is from the latest offering on Space channel.
Mallory's texts come from continental romances and oral accounts of the age of chivalry. The knights are more revengeful and stupid, for one. Arthur is not as noble as you think (killing all boy children of a certain age a la Pharaoh to avoid Merlin's prophesy that one will be his killer--Mordred), and generally battling a lot.
Even Lancelot and Gawain and Tristram are a lot more bloody and given to the vagaries of lust and deception, even if its in the name of love.
Ackroyd's prose is pretty accessible and offers a good modern reading of the classic text. Sometimes it's good to go back to sources.
Mallory's texts come from continental romances and oral accounts of the age of chivalry. The knights are more revengeful and stupid, for one. Arthur is not as noble as you think (killing all boy children of a certain age a la Pharaoh to avoid Merlin's prophesy that one will be his killer--Mordred), and generally battling a lot.
Even Lancelot and Gawain and Tristram are a lot more bloody and given to the vagaries of lust and deception, even if its in the name of love.
Ackroyd's prose is pretty accessible and offers a good modern reading of the classic text. Sometimes it's good to go back to sources.
librarianonparade's review
2.0
Does the world need a new retelling of the Arthurian saga? Particularly one that, and forgive me for this, feels so dumbed-down?
I have read many of Ackroyd's non-fiction books and I have always been very impressed with him as a writer, but I couldn't help but be disappointed with this. It smacks of those 'modern' revisions of the Bible, where it may be more 'accessible' (and how I hate that word in connection with literature) but much of the beauty and majesty of the language is lost. This book left me cold, alas.
This is marketed as a new translation of Malory, but if Ackroyd has changed so much of the language to make it 'accessible' and eliminated much that he feels is extraneous, is it really Malory at all? Isn't it just Ackroyd's own take on the legend?
I might give this to a child to read, but it's not for adults, in my mind, and if I'm honest, if I was recommending an Arthurian tale to a child I'd usher them in the direction of T.H. White.
I have read many of Ackroyd's non-fiction books and I have always been very impressed with him as a writer, but I couldn't help but be disappointed with this. It smacks of those 'modern' revisions of the Bible, where it may be more 'accessible' (and how I hate that word in connection with literature) but much of the beauty and majesty of the language is lost. This book left me cold, alas.
This is marketed as a new translation of Malory, but if Ackroyd has changed so much of the language to make it 'accessible' and eliminated much that he feels is extraneous, is it really Malory at all? Isn't it just Ackroyd's own take on the legend?
I might give this to a child to read, but it's not for adults, in my mind, and if I'm honest, if I was recommending an Arthurian tale to a child I'd usher them in the direction of T.H. White.
More...