32 of 32 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
King Arthur - legend or real?, December 29, 2003
This review is from: The Kingmaking (Pendragon's Banner Trilogy, Vol 1) (Hardcover)
Many reviewers of this book center their review on their previous encounters with Arthur. Since most of us learned about Arthur via the legends - Morte d' Arthur or even Disney's Sword in the Stone - we had the picture of Arthur as the legend.This legend of King Arthur, as ingrained as it is in our culture is not real. It's myth. Historians are just now beginning to debate the idea of the 'real' King Arthur. Who would he have been? Where would he have travelled? What would his culture have been. And we know that the culture of these dark times after Rome left Britain is indeed, dark and fearful.
This book, The Kingmaking, looks at Arthur through that historical eyeglass. What would he have been like as a real, breathing human being? His strength of will, body and spirit are all shown here as well as his human failings. Ms Hollick draws characters who are completely human - with all that that entails...including being inconsistent. I found Arthur and Gwenhyfr to be excellent characters and enjoyed their firery encounters immensely.
There is no need for amazon.com reviewers to blame the author for typos and copy mistakes. Write the publisher!
Read this book as the great historical fiction it is. Dump your preconceived notions of the legendary Kind Arthur and just sit back and enjoy a good read!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
24 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
The Kingmaking Fell Far Short of Expectations, January 30, 2011
The first in a series of three books, "The Kingmaking", English writer Helen Hollick's maiden novel, is an historical romance set within the legend of King Arthur. Presented as an attempt to separate the historical Arthur from the many myths that have grown out of this period in British history, this effort is part generic period drama and part erotic fantasy, without any inspirational value (unless you happen to be Bob Guccione). Without sufficient knowledge of the historical period, very little awareness of the warrior culture of which she would write, possessing unrefined writing skills, but with an apparently strong desire to explore the love story of Arthur and Gwenhwyfar (that's Guinevere to most of the rest of us), an inexperienced author bit off more than she was ready to chew. The result, unfortunately, was "The Kingmaking".
This novel opens with Arthur, in his sixteenth year, voyaging to Britain with Uthr Pendragon, an exiled claimant to the British throne who is preparing to fight another campaign for his birthright. Unknown to Arthur, he is Uthr's illegitimate child and heir. Also unknown to Arthur, Gwenhwyfar, a spunky tomboy, is waiting in Britain with her nine older brothers and their father, an old ally ready to help Uthr claim his crown. In a pattern that will repeat itself many times over the next seven years (and five hundred and fifty-five pages) of narrative, Arthur and Gwen immediately find themselves in conflict. She dislikes him intensely, soaks him with a bucket of water for his insolence, he kind of likes her spirit and then tries to help her, she resents it but is intrigued by him, then she helps Arthur and finally falls madly in love with him.
When Uthr dies in battle, Arthur is advised of his status and acknowledged as Uthr's heir. He and Gwen continue their adventures from Gwynedd (her home, in modern Wales) to Lesser Britain, to the court of Vortigern (the usurper), and into the field to battle Saxons, Picts and other enemies. Finally Arthur and his allies face the Saxon leader, Hengest, in a showdown that will either cement Arthur's position as a leader of the Britons or will destroy him. Along the way we learn that Arthur isn't a great military leader, doesn't have much of a sense of honor, drinks a lot, and is a horrible womanizer. Gwen, on the other hand, is pretty cool.
While the focus of the story is often away from the battlefield, it's when we find ourselves inevitably drawn to those venues that the narrative becomes most uncomfortable and suspension of disbelief is particularly challenging. Ms. Hollick clearly has limited understanding of combat and very few skills to help bring those scenes to life. In his final battle against Hengest, Arthur finds himself in man-to-man combat with a menacing Saxon warrior. This combat continues for nearly two pages, but most of the narrative is around Arthur's thoughts (like he really wants the guy's sword), rather than the action itself. Finding himself at some disadvantage, he "squirms" to avoid the danger. Then he thinks about wanting that sword. Then the Saxon presses Arthur and his life is in danger, so he "squirms" again. By that point I was squirming, too. I think it might have been an intestinal disturbance.
Arthur finally, and mostly by accident, dispatches the Saxon warrior. Inexplicably, it's only then, through the eyes of Hengest, who is wondering what happened to his champion, Aethal, that we learn the significance of Arthur's individual combat. Aethal, we discover, is a renowned warrior, possessed of a sword that reputedly makes him invulnerable in combat to everything except dragons. Hengest fears that if something happens to Aethal his men will lose heart and all will be lost. Then he learns that Aethal is dead and, oh yeah, all is lost. Imagine what this information might have done for the dramatic tension of Arthur's battle scene if we had known that before they fought!
Equally disturbing is the tortured prose that suffuses most of Ms. Hollick's narrative; and it's no simple Chinese water torture that ensues. Her nouns and verbs are water-boarded almost beyond endurance by a virtual flux of flamboyant, vague and largely unnecessary adjectives and adverbs. Nothing escapes. It's a take-no-prisoners approach to writing prose that leaves the battlefield strewn with thousands of innocent and irrelevant descriptive phrases where simple and direct depictions of action could better help the reader to understand what is happening and why it's important.
Most frustrating for the reader with some knowledge of the Arthurian tradition is the way in which this tradition has been utterly abandoned, then replaced with nothing of real value. The spiritual Arthur, the chivalric Arthur, the noble Arthur, the sleeping Arthur whose legend inspires hope for the British people are all gone. In their place is a greedy warlord who aspires to little more than women, power, booze, and, did I mention, women? We have no idea what Gwen sees in him, but she's a saint.
The only saving grace in this story is that this Arthur is probably closer to the historical figure (if he actually existed) than most of the fictions we enjoy today. But beyond supposition, there's little evidence that establishes this version over those it seeks to replace. There's nothing gained by supplanting an inspiring fictional character with one who may be closer to the texture of the warlords who lived in fifth and sixth century Britain without, at least, some evidence that the new version is reasonably accurate. And when one considers the number of anachronisms sprinkled through the text, one is hardly inspired to believe that this account of Arthur's history is particularly accurate.
In praise of this work, the pace of the narrative is adequate, the interactions between characters can be compelling, and the dramatic tension is occasionally engaging. But overall, the effort is quite disappointing.
A more charitable review for a rookie author might have noted the major flaws in passing, offered a few words of praise for the effort and, perhaps, awarded two stars for work that wasn't a total failure. But Helen Hollick took on the Matter of Britain before she was remotely ready for the challenge, failed rather badly, and hubris has its price. In the final assessment, "The Kingmaking" is nothing more than a bodice-ripper that insinuates itself into, and detracts from, the Arthurian legend to no discernible purpose; except, perhaps, to stimulate the libido and to sell a few books.
Finally, I should note here that Helen Hollick does deserve more than a little credit for having the courage to share her vision with us. I'm sure she put a lot of effort into this novel and it's probably a bit disheartening when some sod takes a blunt instrument to her work with gleeful abandon. Had it not been for the many highly positive reviews of this book here at Amazon, and the influence those reviews had on my decision to purchase and read "The Kingmaking", I would have preferred not to do so. But because of this, I feel the need to make other potential readers aware that not everyone had such a favorable view of this novel, with apologies to Ms. Hollick for any undue harshness and in the hope that I will be able to offer more positive reviews of her work in the future.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
