Not So Famous…

Stephen Lawhead is well-known for his works of Historical Fiction. From Arthur, King of the Britons, to Patrick: Son of Ireland, Lawhead excels when writing about what could have happened in the lives of these heroes. Lawhead is also well-known for writing about the Celts in the most engaging fashion. Specifically, one can tell that he LOVES writing about the Britons, or Welsh as they are known now. I can easily see his love for this land and its people in his writing, and Hood continues this tradition quite excellently.

Characters: I usually heap high praise on books with deep characters, and for good reason. However, I must reserve some praise in the character department for this book. While Lawhead writes compelling characters, I feel that Bran, Iwan, and Friar Aethelfrith suffer here. Bran (Robin Hood) is a roguish young man who is thrust into his rule far before he is able or willing to do so. Iwan (Little John, so named by Friar Tuck) is a fearsome fighter who once served the King. Friar Aethelfrith (named Friar Tuck by Little John) is a jolly priest, whose love for his friends is only matched by his love for ale. (wink.) These are the main characters, and I feel that Lawhead has only begun in his trilogy to flesh these characters out. It seems to me that Lawhead has spent far more time on the villains than he usually does, here. I feel that this is because Lawhead feels that in order to explain why there is a need for Robin Hood, we must understand who threatens the land. The villains are VERY well done, in my opinion. When reading the thoughts of the villains, one can almost see where they are coming from. In fact, when reading one of the villains, I was almost tricked into thinking he was a helpful ally to my protagonist. Alas, his duplicity was made manifest to me soon enough. I think that Lawhead will continue to provide more depth to the protagonists as the trilogy continues.

Writing: This is what I almost always enjoy about Lawhead’s more epic works. Byzantium was a little slow for me, but I can honestly say that in the Pendragon Saga, “slow” doesn’t even enter into it. The writing in Hood reminds me much of the writing of Taliesin, Merlin, Arthur, Pendragon, and Grail. His love for the Celts comes through strongly, as does his dislike for their enemies. One of the coolest elements of any of Lawhead’s Celticized legends is trying to figure out who is who. Because Bran is the main character, you know he’s Robin Hood, but it’s hard to see it in the first half of the book. As I enjoyed figuring out who Gwacmai, Gwalchavad, Llenlleawg, and Gwenhwyvar were in the Arthur books, I really enjoyed trying to pick out who the main characters were in Hood. I don’t think I spoiled it for you, as you find out pretty quickly who the main three are in this book. There are more…keep an eye out for them.

Plot: I feel that Plot is the element that many readers might have a problem with. You see, there are many things that many feel are untouchable in legend. I’ve seen reviews by some people who apparently feel that Robin Hood is English, and cannot be budged from his stronghold in Sherwood Forest. Lawhead, however, has chosen to set his retelling of the Robin Hood legend in the primeval forest of Wales, with Robin Hood himself being a Welsh nobleman. He argues his position admirably in an Afterword at the end of the book, citing the fact that the earliest legends of Robin Hood had no placename attached to them at all. He defends his time (mid-late 1000’s) as well as the place to set Robin Hood quite well. It’s definitely believable as a story. Lawhead researches his novels so thoroughly that when you do your own homework, you can easily see the story he is weaving without being distracted by what you perceive as historical inaccuracies. Robin Hood could easily have been born in what is now known as Wales. Many readers will not like it, as I have said, but it’s a fresh retelling of a legend, performed by a master.

The plot itself is quite believable. Basically, the story is set in the Norman conquest of England. Wales was left well alone by William the Conqueror, and for good reason. The Welsh people were not easy to subdue. William’s son, William the Red, was a greedy tyrant, however, and desired the Welsh people to pay taxes and swear allegiance. Against this backdrop, the legend of Robin Hood is born. Bran, the only son of the former king of one of the cantrefs of Wales, is thrust by events outside his control into a leadership role. The story of this first book is his journey into adulthood; his transformation into a real leader.

Conclusions: Lawhead has hit another one out of the park. While I enjoyed Patrick and Byzantium for what they were, I was sad that they were not the epic historic fantasy that I loved from Lawhead. This first book in the King Raven Trilogy promises an illustrious return of Stephen Lawhead to the realm that he made his own in Taliesin. Fans of his Pendragon series will love the references to Taliesin, Arthur, and Myrddin Emrys. Furthermore, those who have done some more research into the historic characters Lawhead has written may recognize a heavily veiled reference to Taliesin. Bonus points to anyone who can figure out this reference. (wink.) I really did enjoy this novel, and my only sadness is that I must wait for book 2.

Several of you may recognize the author of Byzantium as the same author of the Pendragon Saga, and you would be most correct. I’ve liked pretty much everything Stephen Lawhead has ever written. When I started this book, however, I was wondering if this would be the first one I didn’t like. Allow me to explain:

Characters: I have always loved Stephen Lawhead’s characters for a couple reasons. First, Lawhead writes each of his characters with different motivations and personalities. As the hallmark of a good author, Lawhead’s characters are recognizable by the words they use, the phrases they utter, and the thoughts and motivations they have. Motivations are never simple in Arthur’s stories, and while the Kingdom of Summer is what Arthur strives for, his journeys are not always easy. The other reason I like Lawhead’s characters is that his characters offer you a glimpse into Lawhead’s mind as well. For example, Arthur hates cities. In the books he journeys to Londinium, and hates every moment of it. Aidan, Gunnar, the amir…all of the characters in Byzantium are very real. The point of the entire book, you might say, is the character development of Aidan and those he meets in his pilgrimage to Byzantium. As usual, Lawhead gives us an excellent glimpse into the mind of a Celt and the early Celtic Christian church, the Céle Dé. His development of the characters he writes are excellent, and my favorite is Gunnar, by far!

Writing: This is the part that sort of made me afraid that I might not like this book. In the beginning of Aidan’s journey, I found it difficult to continue on. It’s entirely possible that I read Byzantium much too close to Patrick to really enjoy Lawhead’s writing again. Whatever it was, the book seemed to crawl in the early quarter of the book. However, I must say that it definitely picked up the pace immediately after that. Where before I had to force myself to read to get to the good parts, thereafter I found myself reading when I had the opportunity, which is my experience with most Stephen Lawhead books before this one. I must say that his writing in the narrative style became quite addictive. Knowing what Aidan thinks and feels was crucial to understand his character’s change from devoted monk to…well, read and find out.

Plot: Aidan’s journey is a sad one in many aspects. One can’t see Aidan being brutalized by his circumstances, see the way it shakes his faith a little more each time, and not wince. As I said before, the entire book is an excuse to show the development of Aidan as a character, and the last half of the book is one more problem after another for Aidan. Not a “my computer is slow” kind of problem. More like an, “I was in slavery for 2 years” kind of problem. At first, I was amazed at how much Aidan’s faith was being tested and shaken, but then I began thinking about what little I have had to endure. Now, some of my readers may here wonder if a Christian can truly lose his faith, and how that squares with the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints. Of course a Christian cannot lose his or her faith. Those who are the elect of God will not be lost. But that doesn’t mean that one can’t slip now and again. Furthermore, if someone does slip like that, and they are the elect, they are not really in dangers of the fires of hell. If the Christian slips, and he is truly a Christian, then he will return to the fold. Have no fear. The question then is, “Are they truly saved?” Good question. When I was 19 and went through the partying/drunkenness phase, was I truly saved? Yes, but you couldn’t tell by looking at me. I did come out of it, as the Lord promised I would. With the Christian, there is sin, but there is always growth, and while that was a low period of my life, I returned. Most of my friends can look to a section of their lives and point to that as a very low time when they were not living their faith as they ought. But they returned to the fold. Is there a danger of us losing our faith? No…but we do need to “work out [our] salvation with fear and trembling.” On the last day, there will be people who ask Christ, “Didn’t I preach/perform miracles/etc. in Your Name?” And Christ will say, “I never knew you.” We are not given to know beyond a shadow of a doubt who is in what group, but if there are people who thought they were saved and weren’t, which group are you in? Which group is Aidan in? It’s easy to see the uncertainty one can have when they realize that the sinner’s prayer really isn’t worth much. People can pray it, mean it, and fall away. They prove which group they are in by their lives. Scary, really. So while this presents a theological quandary, I don’t know that it’s actually a “problem”.

Conclusions: Byzantium starts off slow, but persevere, gentle reader. The ending will vindicate all the time you spend poring through the first section. And to be honest, many of you may not even experience what I did in terms of being exceedingly bored at first. Aidan’s story is a compelling one, sure. But keep an eye on that Gunnar. He’s definitely not what he initially appears to be. For the Christian, this book is filled with those redemptive moments we expect from such Christian works. They never fail to make me happy.

Coming soon, a review on Ted Dekker’s Saint. An excellent novel, so far!

edit: I can’t believe I forgot one of the most important aspects of my review.  I include it below as sort of an addendum.  Please don’t neglect to read it, as I feel it’s very important:

Theology: In addition to the question of whether or not one can lose one’s salvation, another major theological question is brought to my mind in this novel, and I feel any potential readers should be forewarned against this.  First off, Lawhead’s theology isn’t very orthodox, as I believe I pointed out in my review of Patrick: Son of Ireland. This is highly noticeable as Aidan comes into contact with the Saracens, who are definitely Muslim. Lawhead’s view of the Muslim religion is that Allah and the Lord Yahweh are the same God.  On his website, he points out that the Muslims descended from Ishmael, son of Abraham.  However, I should point out that while Abraham was the father of many nations, Ishmael is not the person through whom the Christ was to come, and therefore most, if not all, of the promises made to what the bible terms the seed of Abraham were not for Ishmael. Furthermore, while they may believe in an omnipotent God of creation, the God of the Bible is NOT the same as the God of the Que’ran (I apologize for the spelling of that…I didn’t have time to research the proper spelling.)  Lawhead promotes a very liberal theology in his books, and readers of his work should know to expect that. I don’t know that Lawhead ever said in Byzantium that Muslims are saved…I don’t know that he actually believes that.  However, while the belief in a single God may have descended from their common ancestor, the beliefs on who exactly that God is these days differs, and it should be noted that their Allah is a false God.  While they believe that Christ was a Prophet, they do not believe that He is the only Son of God, and is the only way to heaven.  Their beliefs on what heaven constitutes are also significantly different.

This is not that hard to spot in terms of theological inaccuracies, and in my mind doesn’t diminish the story in the least.  Readers should be aware of it, however. In the interests of fairness, this is what Lawhead says on his site.  Let this inform you as to Lawhead’s views on theology, and I do not endorse this view:

The simple fact is that the God of Islam is also the God of Israel worshipped by Jews and Christians throughout history. The Muslim doctrine is that they are descended from Ishmael, who was also Abraham’s son, and to whom God also promised a mighty nation. Thus, the Muslims trace their origins back to Abraham, just like the Jews. Allah is God’s name in Islam. Different name, same God. Although, it could be added that the particular views of that one God have diverged significantly since their common origin.

As I said before…I don’t feel this diminishes the story, and in fact adds to its authenticity.  At the point Aidan actually comes into contact with the Muslims, he would be entirely likely to believe such a view about God.

Overall Recommendation:

Many of you may recognize the title of this book to be the same as a movie that is being played in theaters right about this time. Allow me to assure you, while the book shares similarities on the surface, much of what makes this book interesting is different from the movie. The movie is definitely a great movie, and while I enjoyed the book…well, I’ll let the review speak for itself.

Characters: As I’ve said about many other novels, the characters of a novel make it worth reading. The Prestige is no exception. Borden and Angiers’ rivalry is only believable because of the various obsessive natures of these characters. The supporting characters support the story, as they ought. Never do you feel that a character is unnecessary, or useless. They each have their own complexities to add to an already complex story. Borden and Angiers are magicians in late 1800’s, early 1900’s London, and how these two met and what happened at that meeting is the beginning of a complex story of hatred and secrecy. Borden is far more focused on the showmanship of magic. He is interested in the presentation of magic. Angiers, on the other hand, is far more interested in the “secret” of magic. He wants to understand “The Prestige” of magic. His inability to watch another magician perform a new trick and figure out the secret is crucial to the story as well. These characters are believable, and since they are essentially telling you about themselves, you get the innermost thoughts of each of them.

Writing: Christopher Priest definitely excels here. He tells you the story in a couple different ways. First off, the modern day descendents of Angiers and Borden will tell you their stories as they narrate the happenings in modern day Britain. Immediately, Priest hooked me, as this was a major departure from the movie. Furthermore, the descendent of Borden reveals a strange mystery at the very first chapter, which also serves to heighten the strange hook that Priest has created. Then, the characters of Alfred Borden and Rupert Angiers tell you about themselves and their story from their points of view in journals which the present-day descendents have happened upon. This is a unique way to tell you the story, as each journal merely tells you Angiers’ or Borden’s view of events…not events as they actually happened. Some might feel that this is cheap, as it allows you to believe falsehoods about the story that Priest only reveals when he is good and ready. However, the sooner the reader realizes that he/she is reading a journal, and not an omniscient narrator, the better they will enjoy the story. It really is an inventive way to tell the story, and Christopher Priest pulls it off admirably, inventing writing styles that are unique to the characters he’s pretending to write as. Choosing his words carefully, making sure that you know who is writing simply by looking at the tone of the writing. Priest is an excellent writer, if this work is indicative of his other works.

Plot: This is where I wonder how many of my readers will enjoy the book. There is a sinister aspect to the movie, of course, and many viewers will be turned off by this aspect. If this is the case for you, gentle reader, then I might suggest that you won’t enjoy this book all the way to the end. In the first 7/8ths of the book, everything is somewhat mundane. The rivalry is what it is, and while it helps the characters to do things they normally wouldn’t consider, it really isn’t too weird…until the end of each of the journals, that is. Each of the journals ends with a bit of a horror-esque turn of events that really sort of made me cock my head. I’m not spoiling anything for you by saying this, and I’ll not explain what the events are, but it’s definitely weird. I don’t know that it really fit with where Priest was going up until that point. At any rate, the ending is weirder yet. In fact, it is particularly this aspect that leads me to my reservations about the novel, The Prestige, as it might affect those who are not used to reading horror, or at least darker Science Fiction.

Conclusions: The Prestige is a DARN good movie. Christopher Nolan has done a spectacular job in capturing the feel of the book up until a certain point. I think it particularly telling that the Nolan brothers (Jonathan Nolan did the screenplay, I believe) chose to leave out some of the stranger aspects of the novel. These stranger aspects make me wonder what Priest was trying to do to his audience. I know nothing of his other works, so this might be common for him. I believe I will check out a couple of his other works to see if this is the case. However, the writing is compelling and the story, even its more horrific aspects, is worthy of the read. It’s not horror…I’ll say that now. It’s a little creepy, for sure. It’s definitely odd. And it might leave your eyes darting side to side a little more, and your ears listening for strange noises at night.  But it’s not REALLY horror. If you like horror, then I highly recommend the book. If you don’t like horror, then I recommend it with reservations. It’s a little too jarring of a change from suspense to pseudo-horror for me to rate this a 10 out of 10. However, I think I could definitely rank it a 7.5 out of 10…maybe an 8.

Overall Recommendation:

First off, allow me to say that I intend this review to be “safe”, and by that I mean that I do not intend to spoil this book for anyone who has not read all the way through it. Please, feel free to read this review and comment.

Characters: The same sorts of things that I said about the last book apply to this book, of course. Cornelia returns to her old characters with the same sense of mystery that she never entirely dispelled in Inkheart. Dustfinger is still…well…Dustfinger! You cannot predict with any degree of certainty what he will do in any given situation. He surprised me again, and it was beautiful. She does introduce new characters, and these characters are wonderful. Reading about the Black Prince is refreshing, The Laughing/Weeping Prince is tragically poignant, Roxane is entrancing! They make the novel, as her original cast did in Inkheart. Absolutely magical.

Writing: Again, Funke weaves a story of suspense, happiness, and sadness. Fenoglio returns, though there are times you wish he would not, but his weaving of a story within a story is incredible (misguided?). :) As I was telling a friend last night, the story moved somewhat more slowly than I expected. (Translation: I was not up until 4am turning pages), but I still felt compelled to find out what happens next. Some characters play a larger part in the story than they originally did, and others fall surprisingly into the background. However, the story is still wonderful, and still highly recommended reading.

Plot: Again, I seem to have covered some of this in the last paragraph, but the plot seemed to move more slowly. When being introduced into the world of Mo, Meggie, Elinor, and Dustfinger, I was reading at a breakneck pace. In fact, this is a common occurrence, as I discuss the novel with my friends. However, this novel progressed more slowly. I still loved how Funke weaved the plot elements, but subjectively, I was not nearly as eager to read the rest of this novel. Perhaps this had to do with other things I had going on, but I just didn’t feel the sense of urgency that Funke conveyed so well in the last novel.

That being said, I do not think that Funke wrote a snail of a novel. I feel she attempted to continue her novel from before, and though much of the novel was new…it was not as new as it was when perusing the first pages of Inkheart.

The final aspect of plot I would like to discuss is the aspect of a sequel’s contrived nature. When someone writes a novel or films a movie that they intended to be the be-all end-all plot device of the complete story, it’s rather obvious when profits and demand forces them to write a sequel. In this, I feel, Funke did a fine job. She added her new plot elements to the story with minimal explanations as to why certain new characters did not make it into the thoughts of older characters though you fully think they would have. She just explains it simply, which is her best option here. That being said, to me it was obvious that she never intended to write Inkspell when she was writing Inkheart. Too much was added, and too little from Inkheart hinted at it. I found on her website where she said that she never intended to write a sequel, and this is obvious. However…as a post-conceived sequel, I think she did a tremendous job with what she had to work! She definitely wrote Inkspell to tie in to the final chapter in the series…that of Book III, however, as the ending is definitely in the cliffhanger style.

Conclusions: I initially said that Inkheart is an inventive, and worthy read, and Inkspell fits into the same mold. It carries a bit of a contrived nature, as you would expect a post-conceived sequel to do. However, being that I don’t see how she could have really written a sequel without some aspect of stretching the thoughts of the previous characters, I think she did a fine job, and I still feel that you will not regret spending the time it will take you to read this book. Funke proves herself to be a fine writer of sequels, if not so fine as Rowling, who has always intended Harry Potter to mature through 7 years at Hogwarts! Such a difference must be noted. I highly recommend this novel, and I highly look forward to the final installment.

Overall Recommendation:

I really cannot write enough how much I recommend Inkheart to those who just love literature and books. For those of you who, like me, love to roam used bookstores just listening to the books tell you their stories, this book will resonate something within you. You’ve always felt that books were the gateway to another world, where you could learn about its inhabitants which were much like you…yet so unlike you. You’ve always felt that only a book came close to transporting you to another world. Movies are enjoyable, but books….ahh, books. Nothing is quite like curling up with a book to transport you from the mundane world of ours into someone else’s story for adventures, love stories, happiness, sadness…nothing else can compare. If these thoughts could have come from your very own brain, then you need to read Inkheart.

Characters: How to explain a book where the characters of a book are the characters in this book? Honestly. I’ve talked in my past reviews about the importance of mystery in a character, and Funke really does a GREAT job with this. There are some aspects of her characters you don’t find out until a couple chapters before the end of the novel. And her characters are complex. You can’t look at Dustfinger and say with too much certainty what he’ll do in any given situation. They all have motivations, and they’re internally consistent, but I think that each character surprised me at least once. Excellent characters, with whom you can empathize. How much more can a reader ask?

Writing: Another category where Funke excels so expertly! Her love for books and literature shines through in every letter she has written! Her love for reading is acutely shown in Meggie and Mo, and even stodgy Elinor! These characters’ reverence for books is shown in how Funke writes their very actions! Her love for her own profession, that of writing, is shown so beautifully in Fenoglio. And the very acts of reading aloud and writing are elevated to the highest degree to become agents of telling the story of Inkheart. In addition to her love of writing, Funke demonstrates just how excellent she can be at it! When reading Inkheart, you feel almost as through you’re transported to Elinor’s garden, or Capricorn’s village…you cannot fail to find yourself transported to the world of the book due to her expert weaving of story. It must be said here, that Funke originally wrote these stories in German. I believe I read somewhere that someone else translated them, so some care must be given to say that if the stories in German are anywhere as good as they are in English, the translator has really done his job remarkably. Still, the story sprang forth from the mind of Cornelia Funke, and it is a beautiful story.

Something else I feel I should mention is Cornelia Funke’s awesome ability to pick a quote from another book to adorn the header of each chapter. At the beginning of each chapter is a quote that sort of sets the tone for the chapter as a whole. You don’t necessarily have to read the quotes to enjoy the story, as it sort of pulls you out of the world for a second, but not jarringly so. I loved seeing what she’d be able to pull out for the heading of each chapter and rejoicing when I knew the author, such as Tolkien, or J.M.Barrie. This just serves to highlight Funke’s love for the written tale.

Plot: I covered this somewhat when talking about writing, but I want to highlight that she wove this story perfectly. Everything flowed well, and I found myself reading late into the night to see how Meggie would get out of the situation she was put in, or how Basta and Capricorn would find them after all…you knew they hadn’t REALLY gotten away, after all.  I’ve not been so enthralled by a story for many years. She weaves mystery, fantasy, and the modern world together so that you really wished you were there with the characters, helping or hindering them.

I really can’t talk too much about the story without spoiling some of the wonderful twists and revelations you will see in this story. Meggie lives with Mo, her father. Mo is a book binder, or Book Doctor, as Meggie says. One night, Meggie sees a shadowy figure outside her home, and her life was never the same. More than that, you’ll have to read, and you’ll not regret it!

Conclusions: My family is Scottish, and if there’s one thing the Celts loved was a good bard; someone who could weave a spell with no magic at all…just his voice. Storytelling holds a very special place in my heart. While I love reading, and I love hearing a story, nothing beats telling stories to others. This is exactly what brings beauty to this story. In the grand tradition of bards coming before her, Cornelia Funke has woven all forms of story together to bring you the masterful work, Inkheart. Is it the best novel I have ever read? No…I don’t necessarily like to classify stories in that way. Sometimes the best story I have ever read is a James Bond novel. Sometimes a psychological mystery by Jonathan Kellerman holds my literary heart in its hands. Other times, I need to read some Melanie Rawn, or some Robert Jordan to escape to the worlds of fantasy they created. However, this is one of the best books I’ve ever had the pleasure to read, and I highly recommend it.

Overall Recommendation:

Stephen Lawhead is not new to the historical fiction genre. He wrote the Celtic Crusades trilogy, Byzantium, and even the Pendragon Cycle. Now, the Pendragon Cycle could also be considered to be fantasy, but Lawhead did his best to grab at as much actual history to explain the origins of Arthur, Merlin, etc. As with the abovementioned novels, Lawhead did a wonderful job…with some reservations.

Characters: As with all Lawhead’s work, he shines here. Lawhead’s characters are so complex, even they don’t always understand their motivations. While some might consider that over-complicated, I would disagree. Patrick in this work is a person who has no way…no direction. Patrick knows he should be doing something with his life, but he has no idea what it is. He grasps at abstract concepts, such as freedom, and builds his life plans from that. As a result, he comes off as a self-serving, contrary, deceitful person. This is what Lawhead likes to do. He’ll take your perceptions about Merlin, or Arthur, or Patrick, and using actual history he will turn them on their heads. Lawhead’s Patrick (he is returned to his actual birth-name: Succat) is a pleasure-seeking British nobleman, captured by Irish barbarians and taken to live as a slave in Ireland. The entire story is what follows Succat’s capture and enslavement. The other characters serve to aid or hinder Succat in his rebellion against the Lord. His characters are believable because they remind you of the most lost portions of your own life. While Patrick’s decisions and actions based on how they can further his own goals can get rather tiresome in the last third of the book, his repentance and conversion leads him to the most selfless decision he makes in the entire book.

Writing: Again, Lawhead shines here. Perhaps it’s just his affinity for all things Celtic, but I love Lawhead’s writing. His descriptions of what his characters are thinking and feeling are excellent. His descriptions of places are also enchanting. Finally, his working in of ancient Celtic placenames, character names, and stories make his writing a complete joy to read. I have done some research myself, and aside from some personal opinions he holds with which I completely disagree, his ancient Celtic stories and traditions have their basis in fact.

Plot: Most people know, or can find out on the Internet, what is “known” about Patrick. However, it must be understood that serious scholars of Patrick’s life dispute these “facts”, and Lawhead embraces this. Lawhead has turned more to Roman writings, and other historians’ writings than to Patrick’s own Confessions as well as other Catholic writings. Lawhead places Patrick in the Cele De, or original Celtic Christian church. (Also known as the Culdee church.) From the Celtic Church’s early origins, Rome and the Roman Catholic church has strongly opposed their doctrinal stances, such as they are, and this novel eventually places Patrick smack in the middle of this debate. Lawhead claims that the Catholic church claimed Patrick to gain the support of Ireland that they could not gain on their own. While this story is obviously part of the story of Patrick, it is also a story of Patrick’s ultimate alignment with the Cele De Celtic Church.

In this book, you will find an alternate story of Patrick’s life that you won’t find almost anywhere else. What is interesting is that you will NOT find the story of how Patrick helped to convert all of Ireland to Christianity. Lawhead knows that people can find those stories all over. Lawhead’s interest in writing this novel was to find what built Patrick into the man he became. How did Patrick end up in Ireland preaching to convert the lost? This novel is an exceedingly entertaining account of Patrick’s life account. However…

Theology: Lawhead’s affinity for the Cele De leads him to several theological problems. This is not only noticeable in this novel, but also in the Celtic Crusades and the Pendragon Cycle. (Presumably, these errors creep in many places in the novel, Byzantium, which is also about the Cele De, but I’ve not read that one yet.)

First off, Patrick ends up at some point as a druid, which isn’t that surprising, really. It is entirely likely that Patrick had some training as a druid given his place of slavery. However, while not all the druids were tree-worshiping heathens, they all relied far too heavily on “the powers of nature”, or magic. Now, since this is historical FICTION, I don’t have a problem reading it. Harper Torch sells this in their FICTION division. However, in reality, there is no power of nature as Lawhead likes to write it. There is what is termed as sorcery in the Bible, and it’s clearly wrong. That’s error #1.

Error #2 is a little less overt, and quite a bit insidious if someone without much knowledge of the teachings of Pelagius reads this novel. Lawhead’s alignment with the Celtic Church leads him to claim that Pelagius was far from the heretic he was claimed to be. Don’t believe that for a second. Ultimately, the claims of the church that someone is a heretic can only be evaluated based on the teachings of the person in question. Being a heretic is not like being Caucasian…or being a man or woman. Being a heretic is based entirely on one’s teachings. And Pelagius taught some very incorrect things. Pelagius denied Original Sin. Pelagius claimed that Adam’s sin holds no power over us, and that we can freely choose to do God’s will. This is completely against the teachings of the Bible. In Romans 3, Paul says:

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips.

That’s it, people. There is none righteous, and Pelagius’ claims that man can choose to do the will of God are completely unsubstantiated since apparently no one has chosen God! No, Pelagius was a heretic, and Lawhead’s core problem is his inability to separate the “nice-ness” of people from their doctrinal positions. Your only exposure to Pelagius in this novel is when Pelagius shows up to heal Succat one day. Succat’s opinion of Pelagius isn’t based on his teachings. In fact, the teachings of Pelagius really never make their way into the story at all. So Lawhead appears to believe that Pelagius couldn’t have been a heretic because he was a nice guy.

As long as you recognize this problem, gentle reader, you’ll not fall into the errors that Lawhead falls into. The Cele De is far too entrenched in the mysticism of the Celtic culture to be a doctrinally correct church. They are grievously mistaken about much of the teachings of the Bible.

Conclusion: If you’re hoping for a Catholic retelling of the life of Patrick, you’re going to be disappointed. However, if you’re looking for an alternate retelling of what made Patrick who he was, then you’ll be very pleased. Indeed, Lawhead’s account of the life of Patrick is possibly even better researched than the Catholic accounts of Patrick’s life. What you read is more likely to hit the mark than even Patrick’s own writings. As long as you are equipped to reject the theological underpinnings of this novel, you should quite enjoy it.

Overall Recommendation:

(With A Strong Theological Caveat.)

Next Review: Inkheart, by Cornelia Funke

I felt that Eragon left a lot to be desired in many ways. I liked the story, and I called it a grand first attempt. I still feel that Eragon lacked in some areas. However, I feel Eldest easily makes up for most of Eragon’s lacks! I’ll review the book here like I reviewed Eragon, so that you can easily see where I feel the book surpasses its prequel.

Characters: Given the fact that Eldest is book 2 of the Inheritance Trilogy, I feel that Paolini pretty much nailed it again. The characters deepen quite a bit, and you learn quite a bit more about many of the characters…especially our main protagonist! Even characters who you thought you knew most everything about get a little bit of the “AHA!” treatment here.

Writing: I said about Eragon that I felt that Paolini was trying to impress me with his vocabulary…trying to prove he knows more words than anyone else putting pen to paper these days. I no longer feel this way. While I think it’s possible I’ve just gotten used to his style of writing, I think it’s very possible that he’s come into his own. After seeing how well Eragon has done, I think Paolini has determined that he no longer needs to weave such a complex tapestry of language that he loses many of his readers. He still has an excellent vocabulary, and I found myself greeting some obscure words as old friends, exclaiming about how long it’s been since I’ve seen them and asking what they’ve been up to. But I don’t see these words as focal points…and I don’t see the story they represent as sort of a contrived method to using as many oft-neglected words as possible. I hoped that Paolini would come into his own in this area, and I feel he has. It’s a great accomplishment when the writing no longer detracts from the story. My old band director used to tell us that only after we’d technically learned the notes and the instrument could we then progress to making real music. Only then could we really REHEARSE! Until then, it’s all just practice. Paolini has done a stellar job at allowing his story to shine.

Plot: This is where I felt Paolini suffered the most in Eragon, and this is where I feel he’s made the greatest strides in his skills!

When Paolini began Eragon, he was 15, and I think that really showed through in his writing. I felt the story lacked a certain amount of depth. Eldest does not lack that depth. Christopher Paolini wove a story that sucked me in until I hit the last page. When I finished Eragon, I didn’t sigh with regret, as I do with so many of my favorite books. When I finish Harry Potter books, and I know I have to wait more than a year until the next installment, there is a feeling of sadness. Almost a going-away sort of feeling. You know you’ll see your familiar friends in the story again, but you know it’s going to be a long time. I definitely was sad to see Eldest come to an end.

Part of this was much like Rowling in that she knows how to give some closure with each of her novels while still leaving you wanting more! In Eragon, Paolini closed things up, and sure, I wanted more. But with Eldest, I desperately want more. My wife said, “A great deal happens right at the end of Eldest”, and she was right. There’s a virtual roller-coaster of events that lead up to the last page of the book, and you don’t want it to end.

Another aspect of the story that I found compelling was his ability to give me a sense of foreboding. I knew something was coming. I knew that everything was about to change. This sense was so strong that I made predictions about what was going to happen. I made some guesses, and I was close enough to what actually happened to make me proud, but not close enough to surprise the heck out of me. Some stories are fairly predictable, and while I knew something would happen, and I knew a bit of the nature of what would happen, the actual unfolding of events left me saying, “What the heck???” Nice job, Mr. Paolini.
He inserts a little letter to his readers at the end in the form of Acknowledgements. In this section, he lets you know that he’s now 21. I had no idea it had been so long since Eragon was started, but after reading the book, I can see the emotional maturity. He’s still writing infatuation as opposed to love, but I think it’ll deepen for the characters, as they come into their own. In Eldest, the flaws in the characters in their love, or in their views of the world seem more intentional than they did in Eragon. In Eragon, I got the impression that Eragon was emotionally shallow because Paolini lacked the ability to write with depth. Whether or not that is true, it doesn’t seem to me an impression you want to give your readers. Eldest is worlds better in this area. He says in the acknowledgements that the story of Eragon is really his own story, and I can see his maturation in emotional depth as well as in his writing.

On a final note, I think his ability to jump between converging plotlines is an excellent skill for him to possess. Roran’s story is one that could have gone either way, and I very much anticipated how Roran’s evolving emotions, and changing role in life would play out. With some authors, I am annoyed when the author takes me back to some other plotline when I wasn’t done with the initial! Not so with Paolini! When I switched from Eragon’s training as a Rider to Roran’s fights with the Ra’zac and his subsequent flight from Carvahall, I looked forward to knowing what would happen on each thread…and for far different reasons. With Roran, I wanted to see what aspects of his personality Paolini would develop now. Would he kill again and again until he came to like and enjoy it? Would revulsion at what he was becoming drive him to madness? Would he actually join the Varden, or would he change his mind due to his accusations of Eragon in Garrow’s death? So much could have gone either way. While I won’t reveal what all happened, I will say that I am very satisfied on a great many levels as to how things turned out.

With Eragon’s storyline, I anticipated what new skills he would learn with the elves. Would he ever approach the female of his dreams about his feelings for her? Would he screw up badly enough so that his back injury would actually kill him? Would the elves be able to heal him? How would Eragon continue to mature under his master? I looked forward to it for far different reasons, and yet, no less of an anticipation. Very well done, indeed.

Unacknowledged Sources: Aside from some placenames, and some standard fantasy story elements, I still don’t feel that Paolini draws too heavily on other sources, though I’ve not read Anne McCaffrey. It must be noted that she gives praise of Paolini’s works rather than criticism. That should tell us something, should it not?

Conclusion: This work was infinitely better than Eragon, I feel. He’s really hooked me on his epic, and I think that I’ll definitely feel some sadness when this work comes to a close. He has said that he wants to write more, and I look forward to see what else this excellent author will churn out. I said in my Eragon review that I think he’ll come into his own and mature as a writer, but to be honest, I didn’t think that it would happen while he was writing this novel. Even at 21, I feel that Paolini possesses great skill where I would have expected his writing to still only be tolerable. The gems in Eragon are found in spades in Eldest, and I am very much looking forward to the conclusion of this excellent series.

Overall Recommendation:

Welcome to the new Book Review feature of my blog. :) I’m hoping to make this a semi-regular feature of this blog, and I’d be interested to know what everyone thinks. :)

Now, to the review:

This review may contain mild spoilers. Read at your own risk.

Eragon is a grand first attempt at an epic fantasy story. While he may have written other works that have not been published, to the eyes and imaginations of the public, this is his first attempt, and it is a great effort. However, I feel it falls short in several aspects. I’ll cover what I think of each aspect separately.

Characters: Everyone gives a different amount of importance to characters and character development. I feel it’s pretty important. Cornelia Funke’s characters in the Thief Lord are a good example of what bad character writing can do to the interest in a story. I couldn’t bear to read more than a few chapters of the Thief Lord because she just couldn’t make me care about the characters.

Paolini writes characters that are somewhat mysterious, and this is a good technique, in my opinion. Just as revealing too much about the plot too quickly can be devastating to a book, revealing too much about characters can cause the reader to feel as though they know everything already. Like there’s nothing left to be known. Similarly, it’s important to create a sense of mystery around one’s characters as quickly as possible. Let the readers know there’s more to be known about the characters, and Paolini does this as well. Who is Eragon’s mother? Who is Brom, really? What is the deep, dark secret that keep Murtagh from wanting to go to the Varden? Who the heck ARE the Varden? These questions keep me turning the pages of this book. I want (or wanted) to know the answers to these questions. I have gotten most of them. :)

Writing: I am a proponent of people having large vocabularies. I feel our society suffers from a lack of understanding of our language. Some would call it the evolution of language, but I call it the dumbing down of our language. Despite my feelings on this topic, I find myself annoyed at Paolini’s insistence on using many different synonyms to describe one thing. I feel as though he is trying to find as many different ways to describe things as possible…as though he’s trying to prove that he can write as well as anyone. Let your story prove that for you, sir. Don’t attempt to be as loquatious as absolutely possible just to show us you can write. If I focus on the language you’re using to tell me your story, then you are failing at drawing me out of the mundane and into the fantastic. You are causing me to remember on a regular basis that I’m a dude reading a story, and not an observer to a reality that is unfolding before my very eyes.

That being said, Paolini is a great one for description. His use of adjectives, while tiring at times, helps the reader to understand what he’s trying to show them, if falling short of complete immersion. When Eragon walks into the center of the home of the dwarves, I really understood the sheer scale of the interior of the mountain. I really understood how the central city was dwarfed (pun intended) by the surrounding cavern. However, his insistence on finding as many ways to describe things as possible distracted rather than immersed me.

Plot: This is where I feel Paolini suffers the most, and I don’t know that there’s going to be much that he can do for some time.

To begin with, his story does not flow as well as other authors I have seen. Reading Robert Jordan, Melanie Rawn, and George R. R. Martin, I have become accustomed to a certain level of writing. With the aforementioned authors, their characters are developing, but there is a certain amount of continuity and congruity of thought. With these authors, you can see where the characters came from, and it’s a smooth transition to get where they end up. I liken Eragon to Mallory’s L’Morte de Arthur. The stories are wonderful in their own way, but they lack depth. It’s almost as though they were a collection of short stories rather than a large, overarching story.

I mentioned depth, and this is another way I feel that Paolini’s writing lacks. While he could work on the flow deficiencies of his writing, this is an area that he isn’t going to be able to do much about until he lives and experiences some things. An example is in order:

When I played in College Wind Symphony, our conductor, Dr. Stroud loved the music of Richard Wagner. He conducted both the Day Band (made up of younger college-age musicians) and the Night Band (made up primarily of older musicians who had day jobs) and had conducted Wagner with both bands. He said once that it was very interesting playing Wagner with both bands. The day band was made up of musicians in their prime. They were technically more proficient with their instruments. However, they lacked the emotional depth required to play Wagner really well. The Night Band, made up of musicians who had lived longer lives, and had a larger depth of experience upon which they could draw to summon the emotion needed to make Wagner’s music sound like he would have wanted it to sound.

I say the same applies to Paolini’s writing. Paolini writes Eragon very well when Eragon is stuck in his flyspeck village. Before Eragon has seen much of the world or experienced much in the way of loss or emotion. However, after Eragon experiences some of these things, Paolini appears to be at somewhat of a loss aside from writing how he thinks Eragon ought to be feeling. My wife expressed that he has probably not lost anyone close to him. I don’t know about that, but his writing definitely seems that way.

He does write Eragon’s first impressions of Arya very well. His infatuation with her physical beauty is likely something a 15 year old has experienced. He could have been writing directly from his experiences, in my opinion. However, dealing with complex issues of Eragon not knowing his parents, or losing his mentor finds young Paolini somewhat deficient.

I would like to remind my readers at this point that I am forced to compare Paolini to other authors I have read, from Robert Jordan, who writes personalities very well, to Melanie Rawn who writes the most deep love I have ever had the pleasure of reading, to George R. R. Martin, whose Song of Ice and Fire deals intimately with the loss of loved ones. Maybe Paolini makes no claim himself to be in the same league with these great writers. However, his subject matter and the widespread nature of these books place him in the line of fire, as it were, for inevitable comparison to the greats. He does fall behind them, but it must be stated that he is young. His deficiencies are due to his age and inexperience, and can be remedied with time. Having said all of this about his writing, I feel we can expect great things from Mr. Paolini in the future, once he has had a chance to mature, and once his writing deepens.

Unacknowledged Sources: Eragon and Eldest have been heavily criticized for their “borrowing” of plot elements from other fantasy and science fiction works. From Tolkien to Anne McCaffrey to George Lucas, Paolini is criticized for not being original. I disagree entirely. Tolkien himself did not create dwarves, or elves…he borrowed them from mythology and folklore. The Fair Folk have been around for hundreds of years in Celtic mythology, and have become fantasy conventions. With regards to the “stealing” or derivations of names, one could call this tribute to the greats rather than stealing from the greats. And Eragon being compared to Luke Skywalker? C’mon…avenging the death of a family member was invented by Lucas? Lucas himself borrowed heavily from mythology! Look at his work. Derivative works are commonplace in literature, and contribute to the rich tapestry of works that we can enjoy reading.

edit: I happened to notice on the author’s own site, he considers Eragon to be an “archetypal hero story”. Archetypes are, by nature, derivative. This was his intent, and to criticize him for it is somewhat unrealistic. As well say that Da Vinci should have painted a male instead of the Mona Lisa.

Conclusion: I feel that there are reasons to be critical of Paolini’s writing and weaving of story, but overall, considering that the book was written beginning at 15 years old, it’s a good book. He will continue to age and mature, and we can expect his writing to do the same.

I have been unable to verify this independently, but I have heard that Christopher Paolini has refused to take classes or acknowledge that his writing is deficient in any way. It is possible that my review of his work has been influenced by this, and if the account is true, then my respect for Paolini will go down severely. It is one thing to say that he wouldn’t change a thing about his work. An author’s work represents his skill and vision at a point in time, and there is no reason to change an already-written book. However it is quite another thing to say that there is nothing wrong with his writing, and that he does not need to improve. I am of the belief that no one should ever say that of themselves. Always continue to grow and improve. I will continue to search for another account of this, but I feel that Eragon is a good read, if not as stellar as some of the other authors and works I have mentioned.

Overall Recommendation: