Brief Reviews

Rane Longfox

Rane Longfox

Red Rane
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
2,651
OK, when you have a book in mind that you think you might want to read, but you're not quite sure about it, what do you do? Well, personally, I come on here and check any comments about the book. However, some of the reviews can be quite lengthy, and I am nothing if not lazy. Thus, here is a thread in which you can request short reviews of books. However, there is a catch. You have to write the review of the previously requested book before you ask one yourself;) The reviews should be no more than 10 lines absolute miximum though, so its not gonna take too long. A deep, in-depth analasis of the book this is not, unless you can fit that into 10 lines, but a quick overview, noting the important points and the reviewers opinion is quite enough:D
So, I need a quick review of Kate Elliot's first book, "King's Dragon".
 
Question: How do you expect to keep up with some of these long-winded fantasy books if you're too lazy to read a slightly lengthy review? :p
 
I haven't read it either, but I think this thread might work better if instead of the 'I ask, you answer and then ask, someone else answers then asks'format, people ask for the review they want, and someone else who has read it posts a review. Free-flowing, if you will. Without such a restricting structure - because, say if I wanted a quick review of 'Flowers for Algernon', I could just ask without having to wait until I have read the book someone else asks for a review of, thus giving me the opportunity to ask foir the said review. Yes, I could open another thread entirely, but I do like the idea of this thread, as I empathise with your laziness.

Just my thoughts. Feel free to ignore and/or ridicule, so long as you do it in a creative manner....
 
Thats a good idea Culhwch. We may as well go that way:)
The danger there is that some requsts just get missed, but its a risk we can take, I'm sure, so the thread gets off the ground:)

Aside, how do you ignore in a creative manner?
 
I should have specified that I wished any ridicule only to be done in a creative manner. Although you could have ignored me whilst doing something creative. An interpretive dance entitled 'I'm not paying your thoughts the least bit of attention' would have done nicely...

As I stated before, I've not read King's Dragon, but there are a few here that have... Where are you, people!?! Take five seconds to jot down a line or two! Do it for Chronicles! Do it for yourselves! Do it for the Gipper!
 
I haven't read this and I too would be interested in seeing a brief review of it.
Gollum, haven't you read this? I've seen it on a number of your recommendations, so I think it's up to you to post a review of it.
 
HMMM....talk about being painted into a corner LOL!...:D

You're correct of course, I have read the entire Crown Of Stars series and eagerly await the final book early next year.

Unfortunately I read King's Dragon around 3 years ago so my memory of the first book is a bit rusty. I plan to ask Alia really nicely if she can possibly post a review of the first book as she's quite an Eliott fan and I know Kelpie could provide useful insight too.

I can tell you in more general terms that if you like EPIC fantasy then you're likely to enjoy this series, it sits in my top dozen EPIC series. Kate is a talented writer although the series itself is not as gritty as say a Martin or Erikson offering. For me there's a mixture of the more black and white style of character and some interesting grey characters, perhaps along the lines of Greg Keyes Kingdom of Thorn and Bone series?

The setting reminds me of a quasi-medieval world with a fairly strong emphasis on the Christain Church, at least that's how it felt to me and I know some criticism has been leveled at it for this reason alone. Having said that, I wasn't bothered about that aspect and enjoyed Kate's worldbuilding albeit nothing overly original there and employment of magic along with a number of interesting twists and mysteries, which entwine the main protagonists throughout the series.

Peronally it's not in the top bracket like Martin, Bakker or Erikson but on a par or just below Keyes and Jones, which for me makes it a worthwile read if that's any sort of a guide for members.

Here's a couple of varying reviews that should give you an idea of the first book:

The first volume of Crown of Stars, another complex fantasy saga of political and magical intrigue, bodes extremely well. The Kingdom of Wendar is beset by civil war between brother and sister for the throne, by two hostile nonhuman races, by ghosts roaming the streets, and by enough other plots and counterplots to fuel the average Balkan war. Key to successfully resolving the overly fraught situation are Alain, a young prophet who needs to learn his parentage before he can act safely, and Liath, a lifelong fugitive sheltered by her father from worldly knowledge that she must acquire before she can act. The saga's world is exceedingly well built (including a working economy, for instance), its pacing is brisk enough to keep the pages fluttering, and its characters are, at this stage, at least archetypes who may develop into more. This certainly could become one of the best multivolume fantasies--fans, take note!

From the author of The Golden Key (with Melanie Rawn and Jennifer Roberson), the first entry in a projected fantasy series. In a Europe-flavored fantasy world, King Henry of Wendar is beset by two powerful enemies: the invading nonhuman Eika and their huge, terrible dogs; and by his half-sister Sabella of Varre, who denies Henry's right to name as his heir his ******* son Sanglant. Young, parentless Alain, seemingly destined for the church, is granted a vision of the Lady of Battles and eventually attaches himself to Count Lavastine--who also keeps large, vicious dogs that, other than the Count himself, only Alain can control. At this point, however, Lavastine, a neutral in the struggle for power, is ensorcelled by Sabella's allies and marches to war against Henry. Meanwhile, Liath, having spent most of her young life with her beloved Da fleeing unknown enemies, is enslaved by churchman Hugh when Da is murdered, leaving Liath unable to pay his debuts. Hugh hopes to grab the book of magic that Da left Liath, but just in time she's recruited by Wolfhere of the King's Eagles. Wolfhere knew Da and suspects Liath has magic abilities; both Alain and Liath will play important parts in the showdown between Sabella and Henry. A creditably self-contained and appealing, modestly engrossing opener, though without much originality or bite.

Hope this helps a little..:)
 
GOLLUM said:
Kate is a talented writer although the series itself is not as gritty as say a Martin or Erikson offering. For me there's a mixture of the more black and white style of character and some interesting grey characters, perhaps along the lines of Greg Keyes Kingdom of Thorn and Bone series?
Click to expand...

Now this puzzles me, because while I haven't read Erickson I can't for the life of me figure out how CROWN OF STARS is any less "gritty" than the Martin series.

However, rather than wrench this thread off topic, I'm going to start a new thread and ask you (and everyone else) just what you mean by that term.
 
EDIT: I've just seen you've posted another thread on this whole issue so I reposted the definition there.

Well Kelpie COS is still a pretty gritty read especially, w/o wanting to give away too much of a spolier, with its potrayal of Hugh's treatment towards one of the main characters in the story, the military battles and Sanglant's treatment at the hands of his captors in Book 2 to name just a few incidents. I also wish to state that I don't tend to imply if I did that "girtty" is necessarily the be all or end all ingredient to a good fantasy novel.

Now to get back to the term itself I admit it's a little vague and as such everyone probably has a slighly diffrerent angle to what they have in mind as a definition here. For me it automatically invokes images of blood and guts often of a military nature but not always, rough or hardened characters who tend to be fairly callous in nature, possibly the use of strong language, a potentially tough and unocmprimisng storyline that doesn't often give the reader much respite, a heatlhy does of grey or ambigiuos characters and endings that often don't always potray the "hero" always winning. I think it also implies a certain level of harsh reality in relation to our own society eventhoguh its genereally set within a fantasy style realm.

Given this crietia I just personally found Martin and Erikson's work to be a bit more gritty than Kates but for of course all 3 are excellent writers IMO.
 
Last edited:
Well, that's interesting. Admittedly, I only read the one Martin book and so my ability to make comparisons is limited, but as far as it goes, that is comparing King's Dragon to Game of Thrones, I would say COS has more of all those things you mentioned.

But maybe I attach more weight to certain kinds of violence than you do, and vice versa.
 
Kelpie said:
But maybe I attach more weight to certain kinds of violence than you do, and vice versa.
Click to expand...
Now that is interesting and perhaps it also depends upon the way that violence is described by each author, how strongly or graphically that violence is potrayed and how each reader interperets it. As you imply, fairly subjective stuff really. I look forward to seeing what variation in response you get on that other thread though.

Back To Topic: So Kelpie are you able to indicate to members which other author (either modern or in previous generations) if any Kate's COS series and her writing style best compares to??
 
I think that Kate's strengths and weaknesses are, though certainly not unique, distinctive enough that I would have a hard time finding anyone whose style was "comparable."

The only writer I can think of who treats the whole of the human condition as vividly as Kate is Tad Williams, but her style is more lucid and the pacing much quicker. In terms of history and culture, she's right up there with C. J. Cherryh. Her stories are more intense and violent than I, as a matter of personal taste, prefer, but never gratuitously so.

I think, on the whole, she is one of the very best writers writing at this time -- but you could hardly call me an unbiased and disinterested judge, since she is a friend of mine.
 
Yes I knew Kate was a personal friend of yours and I thank you for your post. I agree that for me she reminds me a little of Tad. I'd describe her writing style as mix between Tad and JV Jones (current series) actually.

I too regard her as a very good writer and certainly worth a look for anyone interested in an EPIC with quality.

Hopefully our current discussion has given everyone a pointer towards what Kate's work is like.
 
Kelpie said:
I think that Kate's strengths and weaknesses are, though certainly not unique, distinctive enough that I would have a hard time finding anyone whose style was "comparable."

The only writer I can think of who treats the whole of the human condition as vividly as Kate is Tad Williams, but her style is more lucid and the pacing much quicker. In terms of history and culture, she's right up there with C. J. Cherryh. Her stories are more intense and violent than I, as a matter of personal taste, prefer, but never gratuitously so.

I think, on the whole, she is one of the very best writers writing at this time -- but you could hardly call me an unbiased and disinterested judge, since she is a friend of mine.
Click to expand...
I don't think your bias at all, Kelpie. Friend or not, Kate does have her own style of writing. Her books as you and Gollum have mentioned, aren't the traditional hero always wins type of story... intense and violent, yet realistic too. Set in an era of time when horses and wagons were the only means of travel, (medieval time) Kate brings her world to life.

I remember in the King's Dragon that Liath stepped on a rotten piece of fruit (a peach or apple I think) and Kate described the smell... it was a extremely minor part of the story and maybe a few words long, yet she brought the scene to life with just a few minor situations. She didn't forget to add the little extras that the reader needs to create a vivid picture in their mind.

When I first read Kate's book I skipped over a lot (mostly the religious stuff and the poems)... AND HERE'S MY WARNING TO ALL WHO HAVEN'T READ KATE'S BOOKS YET.... It's all important!!! As your reading this story, Kate is bring to life a past (the Daryian Empire) and magic. There is a mystery... several of them in fact, that makes you wonder who people are... I mean really are.
There's Liath... who is magical in herself.
Alain... the biggest mystery of all... and everyone loves Alain
Sanglant... ah... I love Sanglant, he's one of my favorite characters besides Alain. He has a charsma about him that people love and follow him. He's the ******* son of King Henry.

There seems to be a battle in every book, except for the last one... And there's tons of intrigue!!! Tons of it. I found that Kate would skip from character to character and their situations, which makes one wonder how they are all going to meet up, if they do meet up at all. Often times I found myself skipping forward in the book trying to find out if a character would be okay or what happen next because Kate would leave you intrigued on what was going to happen to that character and then she would switch characters on her readers. Now don't get me wrong... you want to read about everyone and your interested on what happens to them, but a situation would get intense and you would just have to make sure that it worked out... or even how it worked out.

In my humble opinion, I think the books are worth the time to read. The characters are intriguing, and Kate seems to do a find job keeping them true to who she has designed them to be. The story flow is great, it moves around, but Kate always ties up lose ends. The story line is what keeps me reading (for the life of me I can't figure out who Alain is.) *sighs* Moving on... I agree with Kelpie, and I'm not a personal friend of Kate's (she doesn't even know I exist) she could very well be one of the best writers at this time. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Extollager Hawking's Brief History of Time 1990 -- still worth reading? Book Discussion 3
O Writing Group Brief. Writing Discussion 4
K A few brief High Fantasy Dialogue Lines... Writing Discussion 19
Lafayette A Brief History of Mad Magazine History 4
Toby Frost A brief question about minions Writing Discussion 10

Similar threads


Back
Top