Scan barcode
fairytalearista's review
3.0
This retelling disappointed me.
I didn't realize that this was Arthurian Legend when I picked it up. Sure, names like "Art" and "Gwen" should have given it away, but the setting was so radically different than you typically associate with the tale, it wasn't until Myrddin's name was mentioned that I realized that it was. And that wasn't the disappointing part. I loved this radically different, jungly, tribal setting for the tale. I love how everything was rearranged and new and different. It was an awesome retelling quite unlike any other Arthur retelling that I'd ever read.
But it was trapped in stilted writing. Conversations were stiff and wooden. I never felt like I knew any of the characters. I was told things about them, but I never felt that I was shown them. There were an overabundance of Capitalized Words. Sure, I could understand a few of them but ... don't overdo on Capitalisation for Emphasis.
There were a few plot threads that I felt dangled - I would have liked to have known a bit more about Art's origin. Also, the ending kinda confused me, as the trek through the Underworld was clearly of Greek origin, but then there was a Bible. Just ... which theology was the author trying to promote????
I want to like this book so badly, because its concept is brilliant. The use of Arthurian themes was awesomely done (I'm usually annoyed when books combine Excalibur and the Sword in the Stone, but this book managed it brilliantly). I just wish the writing had been less sloggy to read through.
I didn't realize that this was Arthurian Legend when I picked it up. Sure, names like "Art" and "Gwen" should have given it away, but the setting was so radically different than you typically associate with the tale, it wasn't until Myrddin's name was mentioned that I realized that it was. And that wasn't the disappointing part. I loved this radically different, jungly, tribal setting for the tale. I love how everything was rearranged and new and different. It was an awesome retelling quite unlike any other Arthur retelling that I'd ever read.
But it was trapped in stilted writing. Conversations were stiff and wooden. I never felt like I knew any of the characters. I was told things about them, but I never felt that I was shown them. There were an overabundance of Capitalized Words. Sure, I could understand a few of them but ... don't overdo on Capitalisation for Emphasis.
There were a few plot threads that I felt dangled - I would have liked to have known a bit more about Art's origin. Also, the ending kinda confused me, as the trek through the Underworld was clearly of Greek origin, but then there was a Bible. Just ... which theology was the author trying to promote????
I want to like this book so badly, because its concept is brilliant. The use of Arthurian themes was awesomely done (I'm usually annoyed when books combine Excalibur and the Sword in the Stone, but this book managed it brilliantly). I just wish the writing had been less sloggy to read through.
More...