Most Helpful Customer Reviews
11 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
An admirable, if not easily readable, novel, January 17, 2004
This review is from: Mother of Kings (Hardcover)
A rather incredible achievement for one of the late Poul Anderson's novel-but not actually a good read. Anderson subsumes his personal style to create the feeling of an Icelandic Saga. He uses historical figures and locations and combines them with minutely researched details about everyday Viking life to the point that you can easily forget you are reading the work of a modern author. However, this epic, distanced style and the overload of characters and kinship ties makes for a ponderous, slow-moving reading experience. Copying the flow of the sagas, the plot often skips quickly over large battle scenes or dismisses them with a few phrases. The fantasy element is slight; Gunnhild sometimes work magical spells to aid her sons maintain power in Scandanavia. It shows a realistic outlook on magic that mirrors the way contemporaries viewed their world. Anderson also handles the primitive conflict between paganism and emerging Christianity extremely well, and is the most involving dramatic element in this extremely admirable but not very likable farewell novel. Casual readers will probably not enjoy it. Readers who love Anderson or have a fascination with Scandanvian culture will adore ever moment of it.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
12 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Ian Myles Slater on: Taking on the Masters, March 26, 2004
It is probably a matter of taste whether one considers this mainly an historical novel, set in the tenth century as remembered by the Icelanders in the thirteenth century, or a fantasy novel based on medieval Icelandic imagination about the past. The late Poul Anderson warns the reader that he is using "facts" about some of the characters which have only a limited connection to historical probability, even discounting the frankly supernatural elements. From either point of view, I consider the book an astonishing success. It is well worth the time, and for the uninitiated in saga-literature, the effort probably needed to read it through. I say astonishing because, despite my very great admiration for Poul Anderson, I had some misgivings about this project. Anderson was setting himself some stiff competition. Gunnhild, the "Mother of Kings," figures prominently in at least three major medieval works: Snorri Sturluson's "Heimskringla" (a history of the kings of Norway); "The Saga of Egil Skallagrimsson" (which some have thought to be Snorri's work, and which is a biography of one of his ancestors); and, more briefly, but equally memorably, in "The Saga of Burnt Njal." In all of these she figures both as a queen and as a sorceress, and in the last especially as a dangerous lover of younger men. Each of these works has been translated into English several times. Translators of the first include William Morris, and of the second E.R. Eddison, both major fantasy writers. Those familiar with Eddison's "Worm Ouroboros" will probably remember the passage from George W. Dasent's translation of "Njal's Saga" which is read aloud in the opening pages. Three original works of genius, all of which happen to be closely associated with the development of fantasy literature in English. Not exactly minor predecessors. (Gunnhild also shows up in other sagas, including accounts of the kings of Norway by other hands, and, in a passage parallel to the account in "Njal," in the great "Laxdaela Saga," but these appearances are, I think, of lesser literary importance. The two-volume 1860 edition of Dasent's "Burnt Njal" included an essay on medieval accounts of Gunnhild, now very obsolete, but interesting to compare to Anderson; single-volume reprintings of Dasent's translation omit this, along with the rest of Dasent's elaborate introduction and appendices.) I was not, however, completely surprised by how successful I found the book to be. Anderson had reworked Icelandic literature in the past, including Snorri's account of a later Norwegian king, Harald Hard-Counsel (in "The Last Viking" trilogy), and the legendary "Hrolf Kraki's Saga," and retold the story of the Volsungs in science fiction terms in "Time Patrolman," before turning to divine mythology (and the relatively obscure accounts of Saxo Grammaticus) in "War of the Gods." He virtually began his career by extending the legendary sagas in "The Broken Sword." In none of these cases, though, were the originals quite so intimidating. He had not lost his touch in "Mother of Kings," despite the length of the story, and the complexity of the histories and legends he was working with.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Involving history but flat fantasy, July 7, 2004
This review is from: Mother of Kings (Hardcover)
"Mother of Kings" is a good historical novel, but as a fantasy, it's flat. Let me explain. First, Poul Anderson did a remarkable job tracking down source material, and in sorting fact from fancy. He deserves much credit for this, as most of the surviving documentation is either spotty or nonexistent. Second, as a fantasy, "Mother of Kings" doesn't read well. How can Mr. Anderson have done both? Simple. Gunnhild, the titular "Mother of Kings," is not a nice person. She meets her husband young, and vows to marry him because he is handsome. This sometimes happens, and it's about the only thing that led me, the reader, into believing that Gunnhild might be worth something. But after Gunnhild gets to the throne by marriage, other than loving her husband and birthing many babies, she does a variety of things that aren't so nice. This is mostly because she wants her own way, and because she's highborn and married well, she gets it. And that means if she has to kill her magic teachers, she does it without a qualm -- and without any regrets. If she feels she has to kill to save her husband or children, ditto, even if the person/people in question have done nothing to upset, anger or threaten her or her family. I'm sorry, but I just can't warm to a character who acts this way. And I'm unsure Gunnhild really was this bloodthirsty; she may have been a pawn, or she may have been as strong as Mr. Anderson paints her -- but not so unthinking or uncaring. Getting back to this story, the other big problem with it is that Gunnhild's offspring are mostly not likable, either. The only likable one in the lot is Gunnhild's daughter, who Gunnhild inexplicably marries off to the most odious man she knows. Granted, it's to form and forge a contract between her family in exile and the rulers of the place they get stranded at, but still -- if she loved her daughter, why do that to her? Especially if Gunnhild is supposed to be so powerful of a shaman? And the shamanic magic isn't really gone into; Gunnhild uses it some of the time, but most of the time she leaves it alone. The reasons for this are spotty. And later, the fact that her sons have turned to Christianity keeps her from her magic as well. Basically, the historical elements (who did what to whom when, and why) are all there, and are masterful. But Gunnhild is cold, and her children (with the sole exception of her daughter) are worse. Her husband, Eirik Blood-Ax, is a cipher, and most of the other folks she knew or grew up with end up dead. Granted, this is probably accurate for the time frame, but it does nothing to further Gunnhild's character. And because I disliked Gunnhild very much (when I was expecting to like her), I could not like this book. Admire it, yes. But like it? No. Mr. Anderson wrote three far better historical books in the "Last Viking" trilogy about Harold Hardrede, and I recommend them, but not this. Three stars. Barb Caffrey
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
