Reviews

The Death of King Arthur: The Immortal Legend by Thomas Malory, Peter Ackroyd

sashahawkins's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous informative fast-paced

3.0

megs_k's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

Do you know where I might find an adventure? ~ Sir Thomas Malory / Peter Ackroyd

lisawreading's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

It's hard to know how to rate this book. On the one hand, I'm sure this really is a "masterful" retelling of Sir Thomas Mallory's Le Morte d'Arthur, as the blurb on the cover claims. However, never having read any earlier translations or retellings, I don't have much of a basis for comparison.

Therefore, rather than rate the quality of the retelling, I can only rate this book as I would any other, whether contemporary or classic, and that would be based on my enjoyment of the reading experience. In that regard, I can only rate The Death of King Arthur as "so-so". It was fine, but quickly became quite repetitive (which I'm sure is true of the original as well). Ultimately, I was bored. Perhaps this says more about me as a reader than about the book itself, but there you have it.

My review: lukewarm, at best. I suppose this just proves that I like my Arthurian legends dressed up in the guise of modern fiction. Give me "The Mists of Avalon" any day!

ashsando's review against another edition

Go to review page

2.0

It was alright, took me a while to get through it because at times it did feel like I had to force myself to keep reading. In the first half especially it was very much “this happened then this happened then this happened” without going into much depth on anything and was a little hard to follow. It did get a lot better from the quest for the holy grail chapter onwards, and I liked the ending.

wendywbooksareawesome's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

burntout_bookworm's review against another edition

Go to review page

medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

The knights are idiots

heritage's review against another edition

Go to review page

2.0

Essentially a collection of a hundred or so vignettes (I didn't bother to count), this book seems incredibly mis-titled because Arthur's death is only the last section. Even calling it The Life of King Arthur would've been incorrect, as his story really only bookends the collection. Not even bookending it, actually, as it starts with Merlin and finishes with both Guinevere and Lancelot. So if stories of Merlin, Guinevere, and Lancelot are the bread of this sandwich, Arthur's account is the butter--how he went from peasant boy to literature's most regal cuckold...and accumulated the service of 150 knights along the way. It is really their exploits that make up the bulk of the book.

And let me tell you how frustrating their exploits are. It is basically just story after story of non-graphic sex and violence, where supposedly honorable knights fight each other over insults or else follow some mysterious woman on an unknown adventure. The most important thing to these knights is their pride and their name. These are the most noble men in the land--except when they are not.

I imagine these stories were supposed to encourage people to act more chivalrously, but following the examples laid out here seems to be the cause of major blundering--even on down to today's politics. The narrative is extremely spare, probably owing to the cost of paper and copying, as well as the high illiteracy of the time (think reading The Bible). Each story is about a page or two long and probably worked better as a tale told by the fire than read collectively in an armchair.

At best, this is a one-star read. My only reason for giving it two stars is the insights it gives to the time period it was written and understanding how it impacts Western culture. It's somewhat interesting to see how far we have come--and, ironically, how far we actually haven't--but this is a book I can only recommend to completists of the Arthurian legend.

steveinfact's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

A modern re-telling that fell somewhat between two stools and left me feeling I should have headed straight to Malory. And there's only so much joust-swordfight-death I can read without getting a tiny bit bored.

emdowd's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

I don't know who the hell Ackroyd thinks he is, but if anybody can "modernize" (that's questionable) Malory, I guess it's him. He is a total badass, after all. I don't think I should have found this as hilarious as I did, but that's my relationship to the Arthurian legend for you.

jammasterjamie's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

A very smooth and readable retelling of the Arthurian mythology, well-paced, and easily accessible.