Customer Reviews

Rhapsody: Child of Blood

5 star:		(208)
4 star:		(53)
3 star:		(27)
2 star:		(31)
1 star:		(49)

 

 

This book has it all--great writing, characterization, action, magic and mystery. The plot makes sense, the emotions are real, and it is entrancing. The marketing copy on every fantasy book that comes out heralds its author as the new master. This one actually could live up to that title.

Achmed the Snake has to be one of the all time great characters in recent fantasy literature. Flawed, cranky and brutal, he nonetheless rises to greatness in a real and plausible transition through the long trek the three main characters make within the pages of the book. Grunthor is great as well, the comic relief sidekick that also has a very realistic, very serious side. I was reminded of noncommissioned officers in the military when I read about him, the men who follow a leader without question. This rang very true to me, and made the story even more poignant. The relationship between these two men, who often communicate without needing to use words, shows that Haydon is a keen observer of human behavior.

I found the characters of Rhasody and Jo refreshing. Jo is an obnoxious teenager, and anyone who has a child or siblling this age will recognize the behavior at once. While you many not feel fondly for her, she is certainly amusing and a great foil to the other three. Rhapsody represents a great risk for an author to take, a heroine who is strong yet flawed, and who is dealing with powers of a magnitude she can't understand. I found this more realistic that the standard Richard Rahl type, who gets handed a sword and suddenly goes from humble wood guide to war wizard in the blink of an eye. You get to see Rhapsody struggle to learn how to fight, to feel out of place in a land where her skills are not wanted. This is brilliant, risky stuff. People who are only comfortable with cookie cutter heroes and heroines will probably not like this book and these characters.

And while taste differs, and I respect that, I don't get these people who feel the need to tear down a book without any good reason. Ignore anyone who duns this book without giving you any specifics. They haven't read it.

..But not without its share of flaws. The strongest aspect of this book is its imagination and a certain originality that awakes your curiosity (I, personally, am waiting for the sequel with mounting impatience). The supporting cast of characters are very good. The intriguing characters of Achmed the Snake (who is very cool and my favorite character in the book) and his sidekick, the giant and cannibalistic Grunthor were really the best thing about the book. The humor was great if, yes, occasionally juvenile, but it worked, right? The pacing was surprisingly excellent for a story that spends several centuries travelling in a monotonous Root. :) The heroine herself, of whom all rhapsodize in a very annoying manner, was a different story. By herself, I would probably consider her the perfect fantasy female protagonist. After all, she didn't whine (too much) and she wasn't overly self-centered, but neither was she some arrogant princess with a lot of "spunk" or a toughy-tough warrior woman, the equal of every and any man. No, she was human, but better yet, feminine, while still holding her own, being capable and sympathetic, and not thrown in for romantic interest. So where does she go wrong? When the author keeps sticking down our throat how wonderful Rhapsody is and when she suspends our belief by transforming her late into the story into a really irresistable, completely gorgeous, surreal being. Please, Ms. Haydon, what purpose did that serve? I was deprived of getting an honest reaction from the people (especially men) who encountered her ever afterwards, and couldn't add to my understanding of the character, because no one reacts to HER anymore, just to her stunning beauty. That was a bad move in my mind because her meeting with Ashe, which should have been special, was just made really disappointing and commonplace instead. But if the author actually has a reason for this transformation (it wasn't neccessary in the least; Rhapsody was already naturally beautiful and winning) then I guess it's not a real problem. After all, normally something so irritating as Rhapsody's utter gorgeousness would have been devastating to the story plot and interest, but the book takes it in stride and somehow continues to be worth the reading. So, I'm recommending this book I guess, and pretty strongly. Though I never cried (and usually I do), I did laugh a lot (and in all the right places) and was drawn effectively into Ms. Haydon's world.

This book introduces a number of interesting ideas about life, time travel, immortality, and the demonic. All this interesting stuff, however, does not necessarily a good book make. Truth be told, the book's pace is choppy; The character development is not thorough; and the plot twists are hard to follow cleanly. There are elements of the story that one wishes the author would have better explored, while others enthrall. Despite the author's best intentions, the book did not have the edginess or the gripping/page-turning nature one truly hopes for. The main character goes through two(or more) incarnations as the book progresses, which leaves the readert wondering --"OK, why is the character acting this way now? Did I miss something?" Rhapsody is introduced as a go-getter, who has a lot of confidence -- even though her boyfriend is the scum of the earth. Great stuff. But through her associations with Achmed and Grunthor, she takes second place to story events, and fails to move the plot along in a way one knows a heroine should. In fact, Grunthor and Achmed seem to bend the story more than she does -- and even then ones gets the distinct impression that the author has (still) made them sidekicks -- not main characters. If the author intended to shift Achmed and Grunthor forward, it is certainly not effective here. All that said, it IS worth reading - just don't expect a miracle.

I bought "Rhapsody" while searching through Amazon looking for the next Robert Jordan Book. It's high review rating enticed me into buying it. I expected greatness! What I received didn't knock me over like I hoped it would.

My problem with the book was that, even though it had some nice ideas for plot, it didn't go about hitting them very well. Many plot and character points seemed to fall into the lap of the main characters. (If you aren't at least half of the way through the book this is a "Spoiler") Such as Grunthor gaining his land lore by just randomly deciding to dig from the center of the earth, then getting so into it that he becomes part of the earth. That just seems a bit too easy for me. Also Rhapsody finding her powerful sword Daystar Clarion just sort of sticking out of the ceiling as she walks by. It is as if Haydon has an agenda of things to fill her prophecy so just kind of throws things in. I want to see these great and powerful things take more to achieve. There are enough examples of this sort of thing that I can't just forget about it and go on. Since I had such expectations for this book I tried very hard to let myself forget some of the little things (like Grunthor carrying a poleax, a sword with a five foot blade, a long bow, and many other weapons around with no problem.... logistically it just doesn't work for me) but whenever I felt myself getting into the characters and story, I would run into a long winded section about killing worms and walking in a root forever.

I like Mrs. Haydons ideas, and her intricate world, and her humor or at least attempt at humor. Even "trying" to be funny in a fantasy novel is a pleasant novelty. Her plot just needs to be connected on a string and not seem like a collection of short stories. I always rate books by whether or not I can get into them during some boring college class. I don't even take Rhapsody to school anymore. To conclude: If you have finished all your Tolkien, Jordan, and Eddings you might want to borrow a copy of Rhapsody from a close friend.

My biggest problem with this tale is that I simply couldn't figure out the book's intended target audience. The story is too unsophisticated for adults and is too full of sexual references for children. It might have made a fine "young adult" novel if not for the frequent sexual content.

The first chapter reads like some sappy "true confession" romance magazine and involves a sex scene between a 13 year old girl and a 14 year old boy, which occurs not long after they first meet. There seemed to be no reason for the children to have had sex. Why not have them share a first kiss instead? Or, if the sex serves some purpose, why not make them older?

The heroine of the story, Rhapsody, is just too good to be true. She begins the book as the most beautiful woman living, but a few chapters later, she transforms herself into a goddess-like being who is the most beautiful woman who has ever graced the planet. She is good and kind to all she meets, talented at everything she attempts, and humble too. Every single man she meets, from the youthful to the elderly priest, from friend to enemy, is filled with lust at the sight of her. A child might have accepted this description and been able to view Rhapsody with admiration, but an adult reader is quickly going to be grinding teeth over Rhapsody's perfection. It is nearly impossible to identify with her, or to want her to succeed.

The story is full of holes and leaps of logic that, again, will leave an adult frowning. For instance, during her transformation into the goddess-like being, Rhapsody also regains her virginity. How this is done is never fully explained, but let's look at it logically. Rhapsody and her lovers apparently still have their sexual memories, so if she knows that she's had sex, how can she possibly be a virgin? And as any doctor will tell you, there is no physical proof of virginity.

Prior to the start of the novel, Rhapsody worked as a prostitute. Her previous occupation seems to make no sense, given what else we learn about the character. Since the author makes Rhapsody talented at virtually every skill there is, why would she choose such a profession?

Rhapsody is miserable throughout the entire story because she's been dragged forward in time and desperately misses her family, especially her mother. Yet Rhapsody admits that she ran away from home as a young girl. She was apparently gone from home for years, but she made no effort to write to her family or to travel to see them. During a brief stay, Rhapsody "adopts" some children that she meets and during the rest of story, she worries about them, she writes to them, and she stops to buy them gifts. If Rhapsody is such a caring person, why didn't she show the same concern for those she claims she loved most of all?

Rhapsody's major talent in the book is her ability at music and singing. She is apparently able to change the very nature of reality with the power of her voice, as is shown when she sees an abusive father and his son and is able to completely change their relationship. If she is this talented, why doesn't Rhapsody use this incredible power to to fix, for example, the murder/war situation that occurs with Achmed's people? And finally, if she is so lonesome for home, why doesn't she sing her way back in time?

Thumbs up to E.H.'s debut novel. Not since D. Edding's Belgariad have I stumbled over a group of protagonists that are so endearing, even though their background is less than savoury, to put it mildly (assassin, cannibal and one-time whore). Haydon shows uncanny talent to give her characters texture and life, she clearly loves her "gang" and lets everybody share that feeling. The universe she has created for her protagonists is complex and quite intriguing, with her very own, refreshing twists on common folklore and conventional high-fantasy settings we generally encounter in the dozens out there. Just try the sequence of the world tree and you'll see what I mean. The plot itself is rather conventional, but presented in an entertaining and crisp way - three characters that are trying to flee their past (absolutely charming how literal E.H. took that concept) embark on a journey of discovery in a land that is far, far away, trying to remake their lives. If David Eddings had been the screen writer to "The Man Who Would Be King", this book could have been the result - at least for 2/3 of the movie. Overall, the result provides for a highly enjoyable read; however, there are a few trouble spots that could compromise future instalments if not resolved adequately, e.g.

(1) a certain lack of dramatic tension that makes part of the plot seem a little flat. The trio grows and gains its space, but the evil they will eventually be forced to confront is not very much in evidence. A real pity, because Haydon knows very well how to build to it. House of Remembrance, anybody ? More of that, we really want to root for our heroes here !

(2) raison d'vivre of major characters, or the risk of "sidekick-ization", as I would call it, e.g. what is the purpose of Jo in the entire story ? E.H. has only started yet, so time to make that character gain real life is given, but this type of standardized cannon fodder is what did the pos-Belgariad D. Eddings in.

(3) the interrelationships seem a little banalized - especially among the three protagonists. The way these characters are structured, there should be way more friction and blow-ups among them. Whenever it may get to a real, interesting conflict, everything resolves to a teaparty-like, harmonious understanding. Nice, but ultimately tedious - especially in latter instalments, when the novelty effect of this saga has worn off. That's another thing that is doing Eddings in nowadays.

In any case, these are just some minor details that do not take away very much from a highly captivating book. There are enough narrative threads left to keep future volumes as entertaining as this one.

A very nice debut, indeed (if the rating scale allowed it, I would give it 4 1/2 stars).

This book is imaginative, it's alluring, it's fantastical, but it isn't very good. Why NOT? It's like this.

Fantasy is another form of fiction, a story told by an author. At the heart of it all is the plot and the characters. With fantasy, the plot and the characters are doubly important as they are the only believable things. A creative setting is great, but one cannot build a story on top of a setting, but must rather build the setting around the story.

What Haydon has created is a masterful piece of ingenuity that shows no skill and sagacity. For all its colorful characters and interesting locales, its vitals are not very good. Despite what some might think, it takes more than a good imagination to write fantasy. Imagination is easy, writing is hard.

I get the feeling Haydon tries to hard to be creative and not hard enough to be constructive. It shows in this book. Great setting, colorful characters, but abysmal plot, and simplistic childlike dialogue. It might be interesting to read about the characters and their world but it'll get boring if there is no story to drive it forward.

Only an average book at best. For truly superb fantasy, read George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire series. It starts with A Game of Thrones.

I was fortunate enough to get to read an advance copy of this book, and have been haunting the web, looking for it ever since. I cannot wait for its release in the actual hardcover.

Finally the fantasy genre has produced an author who is both a born storyteller and a wordsmith, someone with a feel for legend lore and mythos that harks back to Tolkein [the inevitable comparison, this one actually deserved] or Robert Jordan at his best.

Unlike the typical fantasy model of callow young hero up against the forces of darkness, RHAPSODY gives us a totally new construct, a trio of flawed characters whose weaknesses are as appealing as their strengths. Haydon has a true understanding of magic [though I don't think she ever uses the word] and shows it to her readers not only in its traditional form but in every aspect of her world, in the geography, the history, and the people who make it up. She spins a tale that is mysterious and fascinating.

When this book came out for review, some of the most respected authors in the field raved about it, but the most interesting to me was Piers Anthony's comment. He said while most of the strong new voices appearing in fantasy these days are male, Elizabeth Haydon is sure to change that. I agree. She holds her own with Jordan, Goodkind, Martin, and the best of them, and brings something new and magical to the genre.

I cannot recommend this book too highly, for anyone who loves epic fantasy, or anyone who just loves good writing.

Haydon has the surprising ability to describe scenes both breathatkingly beautiful and nightmarishly terrible like nobody's business. Her word usage is great, and she paints a vivid picture for the mind's eye. Achmed is a wonderful character, and so is Grunthor, both of whom play sidekicks of sorts to the main character, Rhapsody.

That, however, is the end of the positives. For those of you familiar with the net term "Mary Sue", the main character, although starting out well enough, quickly degenerates into one of these mindless, perky and perfect drones who spread love and defecate fairy dust. For those of you unaccustomed to the above terminology, I shall define it for you. A Mary Sue, and her male counter part, the Gary Stu, is a term coined for characters whom the author has made flawless. They can do no wrong, or if they do there's always a way to fix it, they are always attractive, alluring and yet somehow innocent in some way. Everyone loves them or lusts after them, usually even the villain in a sort of twisted way, and they are usually some long-lost royalty or become royalty later on. Often there is a tragic past to overcome, but it leaves them scarred only in their wee little hearts and is to be mended by their one true love with tears and the kind of love-making ONLY found in fiction. You know, the perfect kind. The sort that somehow goes from tender and tearful to lustful and ravaging and back again, and one might expect a fluffy bunny to hop across the bed or a wispy cloud to form a heart over the love-at-first-f*** couple. That aside, they have abilities that not only defy logic, but quite often just manifest out of the author's brain when he or she has written themselves into a corner that the character's other abilities and the author's waning wits do not have the capacity to escape from.

Such is the case with Rhapsody. Her beauty puts a bulge into the pants of evry man who happens to glance her way, and he instantly falls into love and lust for her. That same beauty brings a tear to every lesser female's eye and a sigh from every comparably imperfect breast. This is not just in the first book, no. It happens in at least the first three, which is as far as I got before I became so sick of it I could take no more. Only Achmed and Grunthor, who play second fiddle to the perfect demi-goddess, kept me going that far. If I ever pick up the series again, it will be for them alone. Sadly doubtful. Oh, and I should mention that if one perfect maiden (whom, at the risk of a small spoiler, was once a prostitute but is now made a VIRGIN again) isn't enough, her leading man is the Gary Stu to end all. Though he is less glaring than she, primarily because you are forced to read more about her than him.

If you loved R.A. Salvatore's tired series about recycled plotlines, races and ideas stolen from Tolkien, and re-re-revived dwarves, barbarians and an unfortunate Drow who transforms from great character into the perfect Stu (although admittedly still far better than many of the other characters) the farther he goes, then this series is for you. Particularly if you are female and the hormones are driving you toward romance novels with just enough swords and sorcery to be called "fantasy". May Rhapsody's heartbreaking beauty bring a tear to your eye and a stirring in your breast. I know it did this for me, although the tears were over my wasted dollars, may they forgive me, and the stirring was a mild case of nausea.

I am not a reader of epic fantasy any more, having been disappointed with the current crop of offerings which all seem to be variations on the same theme. I was given this book by a colleague who urged me to put aside my ambivalence and give it a try. This is the first 5 star rating I've ever given a book, and will probably be the last for some time to come.

As authors go, Elizabeth Haydon is one of the most accomplished I've ever read. She has a true gift for subtlety and humor; her characters talk like individuals and do not all sound the same. Rather than resorting to the cheap techniques many fantasy writers use, like cliff hanger chapter endings and a constant state of emergency to build action, she understands the stops and starts of storytelling. This is an amazing book, and one of the best in any genre out there.