Scan barcode
cqqq17's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
rageofachilles's review against another edition
2.0
Interesting repurposing of the Robin Hood myth, but the magic system was a bit too loose for me, and some things were just a big too confusing. What the author did with Little John, though, was really cool.
dreadpiratejenny's review against another edition
5.0
I have to say first off that I am a Robin Hood nerd. I did an undergrad thesis on Robin Hood in ye olde days of 1989. Errol Flynn is responsible for my love of both Robin Hood and pirates. I am also very much a Celtic folklore nerd, especially when it comes to the fey folk. Have been since I was in my early teens. So when I saw this book, I obviously jumped on it. And it is so close to the story that I would have written if I had either the talent or the drive that I could cry with happiness.It's almost like the author was spying on my brain. :-) In fact, when I showed it to my husband, he responded with, "Are you sure you didn't write this book in secret?" This book has absolutely made my December and quite possibly more.
alanathehangry's review against another edition
Did not enjoy this one. Stale, passive writing. Felt disjointed and plot just jumped around. Only got through it because it wasn't too long.
darri_reads's review against another edition
3.0
I’ll have to agree with those that rated this book 3 stars.
Why?
Well, the book was slow to start. Then it felt slow towards the middle. Then boom, last 20 pages in the book went through the rising action and climax in a blur. The plot hardly resolved itself and the end was abrupt and made a poor attempt at being heart warming. I’m honestly glad where Nick decided to go. Although it was slow, I honestly found the slice of life at the monastery between Nick and Hilde to be relaxing. Then of course we have the wild folk interactions with the adventure that felt thrown in randomly. It felt like a desperate attempt to remind the readers that yes, this is in-fact a fantasy novel with magic and fairies and pagan deities. The action felt more like unnecessary filler than anything important. Lastly, the characters. There were very few characters in this book that I felt a connection to, or had any feelings towards them. Nick felt like some child plopped into the hands of a few deities. He didn’t really do much else. I found myself more interested in Hilde’s story than the whole book. I feel as though Atwood did not put much effort into making me root for these character, or care for them for that matter. That said and minor spoiler, some character deaths did feel like unnecessary filler. Honestly, nobody had to die and the plot to remain unchanged. That being said, I picked up this book because I saw Herne was in it. He was not a major character in the plot at all, he was mostly in the background complaining over nonsense. He felt the most strayed from his original lore, being a huntsman of a king who nearly died to a wild stag. A sorcerer saves his life by mending the antlers of the stag to his own head. Upon his return to the court his mates reject and bully him into hanging himself from an oak tree. He was once a renowned hunter with a story of hardship lost to his own depression, and Atwood takes this lore and crumples it up and tosses it in the bin. She made him into a whining man child. She states at the start of her book in her acknowledgment that she references many upon many folklore to bring about the characters of the Wildwood to their most original form. If this is true, I’d like to see her sources for Herne.
Besides these critiques, I did find himself enjoying the slice of life at the monastery between Nick and Hilde. It was well written and it often felt like I was at the monastery with Nick and Hilde. This was not true for the forest, which felt necessary for a wildwood fantasy. I enjoyed her writing style as well, I didn’t find it hard to read as I often do with many authors.
I rate this a 3 out of 5 stars.
Why?
Well, the book was slow to start. Then it felt slow towards the middle. Then boom, last 20 pages in the book went through the rising action and climax in a blur. The plot hardly resolved itself and the end was abrupt and made a poor attempt at being heart warming. I’m honestly glad where Nick decided to go. Although it was slow, I honestly found the slice of life at the monastery between Nick and Hilde to be relaxing. Then of course we have the wild folk interactions with the adventure that felt thrown in randomly. It felt like a desperate attempt to remind the readers that yes, this is in-fact a fantasy novel with magic and fairies and pagan deities. The action felt more like unnecessary filler than anything important. Lastly, the characters. There were very few characters in this book that I felt a connection to, or had any feelings towards them. Nick felt like some child plopped into the hands of a few deities. He didn’t really do much else. I found myself more interested in Hilde’s story than the whole book. I feel as though Atwood did not put much effort into making me root for these character, or care for them for that matter. That said and minor spoiler, some character deaths did feel like unnecessary filler. Honestly, nobody had to die and the plot to remain unchanged. That being said, I picked up this book because I saw Herne was in it. He was not a major character in the plot at all, he was mostly in the background complaining over nonsense. He felt the most strayed from his original lore, being a huntsman of a king who nearly died to a wild stag. A sorcerer saves his life by mending the antlers of the stag to his own head. Upon his return to the court his mates reject and bully him into hanging himself from an oak tree. He was once a renowned hunter with a story of hardship lost to his own depression, and Atwood takes this lore and crumples it up and tosses it in the bin. She made him into a whining man child. She states at the start of her book in her acknowledgment that she references many upon many folklore to bring about the characters of the Wildwood to their most original form. If this is true, I’d like to see her sources for Herne.
Besides these critiques, I did find himself enjoying the slice of life at the monastery between Nick and Hilde. It was well written and it often felt like I was at the monastery with Nick and Hilde. This was not true for the forest, which felt necessary for a wildwood fantasy. I enjoyed her writing style as well, I didn’t find it hard to read as I often do with many authors.
I rate this a 3 out of 5 stars.
creolelitbelle's review against another edition
4.0
A college literature class on W. B. Yeats turned me onto faerie stories and the strange myths that surround the creatures in the British Isles. In this enchanting novel Rachel Atwood spun a faerie tale that also invokes the legend of Robin Hood and some of his fellows from Nottingham with a dive into history. I really enjoyed Nick’s venture into the Wild and learning why the Wild Folk draw him in so easily. The perspective of storytelling jumps around often between multiple characters — Nick, Tuck. Little John, Hilde, and Jane — but each character feels to have his or her own voice. The chapters are even constructed with clear breaks to leave no doubt of scene or POV changes. Well done both in writing style and clear, visual chapter breaks. The narrative itself moves fluidly and left me feeling immersed in the Wild that Nick stumbles upon. Each time I opened the book I felt as if I dived into another time and place and stopping brought me a feeling of resurfacing. I love immersive reading like this. That Atwood included so many fantastical elements while staying true to core myths surrounding them gives me confidence in her as a writer and the desire to read more books with a similar ring. Sure, the ending is a little open-ended, but in a world of so many near immortal creatures, I honestly expect nothing less. Not all stories, especially those within fantasy, are meant to be tied up with pretty little bows and a “happily ever after”.
alex7's review
adventurous
lighthearted
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.25
rooroo_reads's review against another edition
2.0
Absolutely nothing happened in this book until the last 50 or so pages. It was 250 pages of filler, a lot of it was really unnecessary, and then in the last 20 pages literally all the action happened and then in the last 2 pages the whole thing was wrapped in a nice pretty bow and everyone lived happily ever after.
What.
What.
daylateandabookshort's review
I didn't find this story interesting and I didn't find the writing to be particularly captivating, it started you off in a place where you should have some context, but you don't. It feels like this book starts in the middle of the story and just expects you to jump right in to find out what's going on, even though it's not even remotely interesting enough to care.
zahramclin's review
2.0
this book… was disappointing compared to its premise. the big takeaway is: you need to explain concepts to your readers. just because you’ve studied it for years doesn’t mean anyone else has. it feels like a first draft was polished up on a line-level and then published
SPOILERS AFTER THIS LINE
- the climax is given away by the synopsis
- what was the point of that long description of a girl peeing?
- the author’s view on medieval treatment of women and cleanliness was clearly influenced by the renaissance. (aka it was actually pretty good until the renaissance came along and took several steps back)
- the author is constantly using archaic words And their modern equivalents
- consistency where? (cup vs pitcher)
- lack of transitions (it gets Bad at some point. I have no idea who these people are)
SPOILERS AFTER THIS LINE
- the climax is given away by the synopsis
- what was the point of that long description of a girl peeing?
- the author’s view on medieval treatment of women and cleanliness was clearly influenced by the renaissance. (aka it was actually pretty good until the renaissance came along and took several steps back)
- the author is constantly using archaic words And their modern equivalents
- consistency where? (cup vs pitcher)
- lack of transitions (it gets Bad at some point. I have no idea who these people are)