Scan barcode
huwage's review
1.0
A confusing and disappointing read.
I was intrigued by the concept of the book, but swiftly put off by the inconsistent and wayward description, and lack of any coherent narrative. The book jumps from one character to the next without ever contextualising where they are and their relationships with the previous characters. There is no proper description of the setting, nor of the apparent villains of the story and their roles. By the end of the book I managed to gather that the 'bad guys' are both local gang leaders, but which gang, what the gang did, and indeed any further information was missing entirely. Flashbacks appear at random, killing off characters who then proceed to continue unscathed through the rest of the narrative.
The book purports to follow the fortunes of 'King', the Arthur analogue. However King barely features in the book at all. When he does, it is seemingly at random, with no clear goal or motivation. New details about his life are dropped in willy-nilly with not context, and his actual character is utterly bland with no proper characterisation.
Furthermore the language and tone of the narration is very difficult to follow. So thick is the street slang used that there is little chance of understanding what is going on.
The fantasy aspects of the book are also inconsistent. The Green Man clearly has supernatural powers, which appear approximately twice and raise no comment from bystanders. Cannibalistic trolls and zombies appear from nowhere, elicit no horrified reaction, and are never fully dealt with. Dozens of apparent hints are dropped to fantastical events, but few are ever followed up.
In short, the book's narrative is incomprehensible and seemingly non-existent. The characters are one-dimensional, the setting is poor, the fantasy elements are inconsistent, and what few gems of description there are (and there are few) are lost in mountains of unintelligible drivel.
Broaddus fails to do the very basic task of clearly establishing his setting, characters, and plot at the beginning of the book. In failing to do so, his novel is a complete mess. Not worth the read by any means.
I was intrigued by the concept of the book, but swiftly put off by the inconsistent and wayward description, and lack of any coherent narrative. The book jumps from one character to the next without ever contextualising where they are and their relationships with the previous characters. There is no proper description of the setting, nor of the apparent villains of the story and their roles. By the end of the book I managed to gather that the 'bad guys' are both local gang leaders, but which gang, what the gang did, and indeed any further information was missing entirely. Flashbacks appear at random, killing off characters who then proceed to continue unscathed through the rest of the narrative.
The book purports to follow the fortunes of 'King', the Arthur analogue. However King barely features in the book at all. When he does, it is seemingly at random, with no clear goal or motivation. New details about his life are dropped in willy-nilly with not context, and his actual character is utterly bland with no proper characterisation.
Furthermore the language and tone of the narration is very difficult to follow. So thick is the street slang used that there is little chance of understanding what is going on.
The fantasy aspects of the book are also inconsistent. The Green Man clearly has supernatural powers, which appear approximately twice and raise no comment from bystanders. Cannibalistic trolls and zombies appear from nowhere, elicit no horrified reaction, and are never fully dealt with. Dozens of apparent hints are dropped to fantastical events, but few are ever followed up.
In short, the book's narrative is incomprehensible and seemingly non-existent. The characters are one-dimensional, the setting is poor, the fantasy elements are inconsistent, and what few gems of description there are (and there are few) are lost in mountains of unintelligible drivel.
Broaddus fails to do the very basic task of clearly establishing his setting, characters, and plot at the beginning of the book. In failing to do so, his novel is a complete mess. Not worth the read by any means.
lilyghost's review
3.0
I love to read variations on the King Arthur story and I liked Broaddus' take very modern and interesting. I would have given it more stars but I felt the book had too much character development and not enough action. I really like character development but it was a little too much. I would like to read some more of his books though.
lsneal's review
2.0
I'm a total sucker for Arthurian legend stories in general, and Arthurian re-interpretations in particular, so I really wanted to love this series about the Arthurian legend playing itself out again among street gangs in Indianapolis. Unfortunately, the execution didn't live up to the promise of the concept. The writing itself was decent, but the plotting was entirely disjointed, and the characterization was pretty weak. There were elements of magic and fantasy, but they didn't really fit in with the rest of the story. For the most part, the setting seemed pretty firmly in the "real world" of a neighborhood of Indianapolis, but then, occasionally, a random troll or immortal fey lord shows up and does something clearly magical, and...no one really comments on it. You would think there would be some sort of "WTF why is there a troll ripping people up" reaction, or an "ah, as was foretold in legend, the trolls have returned" reaction, but instead, there's just...a troll, and no one remarks about it at all.
It didn't grab me, and I gave up partway through.
It didn't grab me, and I gave up partway through.
eloiseinparis's review
2.0
King Maker
the introduction to the story was good. We learn a bit about Luther (this version’s Uther), the neighborhood, and the changes and adjustments from the traditional Arthurian Legend. As the story starts, you may find it a bit slow, but I was still on board. Until the author used each new chapter to introduce new character’s. It got ridiculous. It was hard to keep track of who was who, what gang they belonged to (if any at all). If they believed in magic, if they were magical, or if they thought other folks were just weird. We get it, life sucks in Brenton Court and everyone has a sad story. There was no need to actually tell everyone’s story. Especially those who you killed a page after you finished telling their sad tale. The focus on King (Arthur) doesn’t come until the end of the book. Along with the magic and the battle of good versus evil. By then I was still zoned out, barely cared about any of the character’s, and hoping the second book would be better.
King’s Justice
The same issues that plagued the first book continued on here, to many character’s. Way to many new people were introduced, it was once again hard to keep track of who is who, and what is what. The only thing that is clear, once again, is that life sucks for everybody. The magic was definitely an after thought, and for an Athurian Legend it seemed King (Arthur) was forgotten about.
King’s War
The story is wrapped up nice and neat. It is a true trilogy, the tale ends here. There is no big twist. Although there have been variations of the Authurian Legend they all end pretty much the same way, and this story is no exception.
They best way I can sum up this series is if I was pitching it to Hollywood I would say its the Wire meets King Arthur set in modern day Indianapolis. The problem is it lacks the drama and excitement of The Wire and the magic and mysticism of Camelot. It was a failed attempt, but a great idea.
the introduction to the story was good. We learn a bit about Luther (this version’s Uther), the neighborhood, and the changes and adjustments from the traditional Arthurian Legend. As the story starts, you may find it a bit slow, but I was still on board. Until the author used each new chapter to introduce new character’s. It got ridiculous. It was hard to keep track of who was who, what gang they belonged to (if any at all). If they believed in magic, if they were magical, or if they thought other folks were just weird. We get it, life sucks in Brenton Court and everyone has a sad story. There was no need to actually tell everyone’s story. Especially those who you killed a page after you finished telling their sad tale. The focus on King (Arthur) doesn’t come until the end of the book. Along with the magic and the battle of good versus evil. By then I was still zoned out, barely cared about any of the character’s, and hoping the second book would be better.
King’s Justice
The same issues that plagued the first book continued on here, to many character’s. Way to many new people were introduced, it was once again hard to keep track of who is who, and what is what. The only thing that is clear, once again, is that life sucks for everybody. The magic was definitely an after thought, and for an Athurian Legend it seemed King (Arthur) was forgotten about.
King’s War
The story is wrapped up nice and neat. It is a true trilogy, the tale ends here. There is no big twist. Although there have been variations of the Authurian Legend they all end pretty much the same way, and this story is no exception.
They best way I can sum up this series is if I was pitching it to Hollywood I would say its the Wire meets King Arthur set in modern day Indianapolis. The problem is it lacks the drama and excitement of The Wire and the magic and mysticism of Camelot. It was a failed attempt, but a great idea.
More...