Reviews

Give me an historical fantasy book that has a feminist spin on it and I am interested. That’s exactly why I jumped at the chance of reading this book based around the women who were part of the legend of King Arthur.

The book is written from the perspective of Nimue who serves the other women at different points in the story. She has magic that she tries to use to help the other women through some dangerous situations, but magic cannot solve everything. There is evil within the court and with a sorcerer such as Merlin lurking around, Nimue needs to be careful.

There is murder, abuse, adultery and jealousy that these women have to fight against and obeying the men who rule.

I found the story very readable and I really liked the women characters. I felt at times there was not enough time spent with each one due to so many jumps forward in time.

However it is engaging and enjoyable and very refreshing to have the women of this famous legend tell their own story.

ally_red_ink_reads's review

Go to review page

3.0

[Thank you to Angry Robot for a free copy in exchange for an honest review.]

I love a good Arthurian story, so I was excited to get my hands on The Cleaving. Unfortunately, it fell flat and I was left disappointed. Nimue was a good choice for the PoV character, as she could reasonably follow the other main characters in ways that the story demanded, but she didn't feel as well-developed as she should've been. She and Ygraine both felt a bit lacklustre, while Morgana and Guinevere were the stars of the show. And Guinevere didn't even get introduced until 200 pages in.

The book is advertised as a 'vivid reimagining of the Arthurian Legends', and while I may not be incredibly well-versed in every avenue of said legend, even I know that most of this book didn't really diverge from the usual tales. I was hoping for something more. In fact, the story was so familiar that the first half of the book felt unnecessary. It didn't really get interesting until Arthur became king, and while I know the first half was there to 'set the stage', it wasn't really needed as the tale is so well-known. The first 100 pages didn't offer much; the story could've picked up after the first time skip, and just used anecdotes or throwaway lines to fill in backstory when needed.

That said, this review isn't entirely negative! Again, I think Nimue was the best choice for PoV, and I really enjoyed Morgana and Guinevere's characters. The second half of the book was an enjoyable read, and I'm glad I stuck with it through the bits that (IMO) missed the mark.

queenterribletimy's review

Go to review page

This review was originally posted on Queen's Book Asylum!

I received an eARC from AngryRobot via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.

I’m going to start with ripping off the bandage and say upfront that I DNFd The Cleaving 52% into it. Not because it was horribly bad, but because I was kind of bored and I was not invested in the characters or the plot, at all. But let’s take a closer look at things.

The Cleaving was my first book by Juliet E. McKenna, so I didn’t know what to expect. I was on the fence about whether to request an eARC, because I usually don’t gel well with feminist stuff, and also because I’m very picky due to having limited time to read in the first place. Eventually, the history and mythology buff in me won, and I decided to give it a go. Side note, while I’m familiar with the names and some of the stories within the Arthurian legends, my knowledge is pretty patchy as I never dug deeper. Honestly, the bulk of my knowledge comes from the Merlin TV mini series from the late 90s, so… yeah, I wouldn’t call myself an authority.

The Cleaving tells its story through Nimue’s POV. It’s an interesting choice, because on one hand, the way the story is being told, she is there for most of the events, being a first-hand witness and thus can give us all the details. On the other hand, we don’t learn much about her as a person and that makes it hard to get invested in her story. She also comes across as a very passive character, only following the events, and reacting to whatever happens, but never being proactive which makes reading about her a frustrating experience.

Since Nimue is acting as a servant to Queen Ygraine in the beginning, and later to Morgana from what I could tell by the point at which I DNFd, the story is mostly focused on the female characters of the Arthurian legends – Ygraine, Morgana, and I’m guessing Guinevere later on. The story is told from how Uther deceives Ygraine, following their marriage, how Arthur becomes king with the help of Merlin, and beyond. As I never read to the end, I’m not sure where the story ends, but I’m guessing sometime around his death. Arthur being still very young and under Merlin’s influence, it’s hard to tell yet what type of character he’ll become, but up to the 52% mark, we rarely got to see him, and the other male characters, except Gorlois, Ygraine’s first husband are depicted as villains. This is to say, they are everything that’s bad, and the women are everything that’s good, and there aren’t many grey areas. In my experience, people are rarely only good or only bad, and I generally prefer characters with depth. Which these characters lack.

Another thing that bothered me was that there is just not enough worldbuilding. Things happen and we get just enough info for context, but it feels like those painted backgrounds on stage, they give a good enough illusion, but they are still a far cry from being real. It didn’t help to get myself immersed.

The Cleaving, in the end, proved to be a disappointment for me. It’s a shame, because I wanted to like it, and it seemed for a while that I might, but in the end, it seemed to be better to part ways. If you like Arthurian legends, and feminist retellings, then you might end up being a better audience for The Cleaving than I.

narratricenessa's review

Go to review page

emotional inspiring reflective medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

I received an ARC of this book through Net Galley, courtesy of Angry Robot Books.

The Cleaving by Juliet E. McKenna is a feminist retelling of the Arthurian legends. It follows the intertwined stories of four women: Nimue, Ygraine, Morgana, and Guinevere as they fight to control their own destinies in a male-dominated world of sub-Roman Britain.

“Then let’s craft stories of our own. (…) Let’s tell tales of tragic folly when mortals get entangled with magic. Let’s show how unearned power deceives and corrupts even those who have the best intentions. Let’s convince the people of these isles and beyond to look to their own strengths and to work with each other. To be the masters and mistresses of their own fates rather than blindly following the loudest voice.”

McKenna’s choice to (re)tell the Arthurian legend through the character of Nimue and focus on the characters of women is as intriguing as it is refreshing. By choosing to focus on the lives of Nimue, Ygraine, Morgana, and Guinevere and centre the story on them, instead of the usual (male) suspects (Arthur, Merlin, Lancelot, the Knights of the Round Table, etc.), McKenna does not only brings a new perspective into the familiar Arthurian mythos but also breaths a new life into them.

However, despite the interesting new perspective McKenna brings to the Arthurian legend, the story itself is not the star of the show. Her version(s) of the characters are. The author’s skill is shown in their portrait, character development, actions, and interactions with others. A good example of that are the characters of Nimue and Merlin; McKenna masterfully compares and contrasts the two characters through their thoughts, desires, intentions, actions, and position in society. As an older man in a position of power (compared to Nimue), Merlin has more options available to him and can openly use his magic without (much) censure. Nimue, on the other hand, is not; and the limits imposed on her by society and her social position determine her actions and approach to various events.

“Use your magic sparingly, and always with caution. You can never know what consequences might follow.”

Interestingly enough, although the Arthurian mythos contains a wealth of morally reprehensible (male) characters (Uther Pendragon being one such example) McKenna never (ab)uses their vile behaviour nor does she bash these male characters to show her female protagonist in a better, more sympathetic light. All of her characters are human, imperfect, and imbued with virtues and flaws. Some of them are repulsive, their actions irredeemable and the readers will most likely despise them. The majority of them are in the morally grey territory and the readers’ sympathy will depend on the reader themselves. All are well-written, nuanced characters that enrich this retelling.

The Cleaving is a wonderful, masterfully written novel that gives a new perspective to a familiar legend. Readers, regardless of their level of familiarity with Arthurian mythos, will most certainly enjoy the beautiful prose and excellently crafted characters. The Cleaving is a resplendent book and certainly, a must-read for all mythology lovers.

Content Warnings

obviouslyjudith's review

Go to review page

3.5

I'd like to add to my previous note by saying Guinevere also deserved to punch some people

First of all, I generally enjoyed this book and its plot, especially that it took place over several decades, which allowed for some slow, realistic character development that I especially really liked in Arthur's character. I enjoyed the political side of the Round Table, as well as the role of women in that struggle, specifically how important a queen is to the castle without the king ever seeming to realise that. I can't really speak to the 'accuracy' (a difficult term to use in a retelling) of the plot to Arthurian legend, since I know next to nothing about that, which was both nice (since I wasn't bothered by changes fans of the stories may dislike) and difficult (since there were SO many names I had never heard before and I sometimes felt the author expected the reader to at least be a little familiar with).

Something that did kind of bother me was the lack of worldbuilding in very specific places. The story takes place in Britain, which I'm generally familiar with, and although I enjoyed the descriptions of the castles and the landscape, there were parts of the world that felt underdeveloped, specifically the hidden people both Nimue and Merlin belonged to. Who, exactly, are these hidden people, where do they live, how does their magic work, do Viviane and the Lady of the Lake also belong to them? I have literally no idea. Nimue and Merlin just had natural magic and we were supposed to accept that and move on without much explanation, which made it harder for me to be immersed in the story. The suspension of disbelief is made more difficult if there are really obvious holes in the worldbuilding, and this was one that kept popping up for me as Nimue turned out to be able to do increasingly complicated magic as the story progressed.

Speaking of Nimue, she was an observant main character, which allowed the plot to develop quickly, as she usually knew what was going on pretty quickly. Nimue's observance thus made her a useful main character, but she felt a little flat, more like an almost-omniscient narrator than a character in her own right. The only character that really made me feel something was Guinevere, who finally gave us an example of a woman who at least vocally protested against the way she was treated (cue me yelling 'YOU TELL HIM GIRLFRIEND' as she yelled at Lancelot). The other women just didn't really do much for me (I was a little invested in Ygraine, too, but especially Morgana and Nimue herself were not very interesting to me), although I could see they were being treated badly, something that was repeated in the book but not really examined or discussed further.

This kind of brings me my final point, which is that this was marketed as a feminist Arthurian retelling, and it just kind of didn't do that for me? It was focused on the female characters (we love to see it) and the narrator insisted multiple times the girls were being treated badly, but it would have been fun to see the girls actually do something about this, or some other twist given to the story, instead of just identifying it and moving on. I think what one identifies as a feminist retelling is very personal, and this just wasn't one to me, which is maybe more of an issue with the marketing than with the book itself- the description raised expectations for me it just didn't fulfil.

I received an ARC from Netgalley in return for an honest review.

readwithjuna's review

Go to review page

adventurous tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

2.0

the_mad_bird_diaries's review

Go to review page

So, I think that the marketing aspect is a little bit tricky for this book.

It is described as "A new, feminist retelling of the Arthurian legends" and that's why I wanted to read it so much. I have a rather deep knowledge of these legends and wanted something new and fresh.

When I hear the word "retelling" I think about new story elements, the subversion of tropes, changes in motivation, and reflecting on an old story with a modern mindset.

That is what I expected from The Cleaving from the marketing blurbs. Especially because it was described as a feminist retelling.

But it is not what I got from the book itself.

The book follows the plot of the Arthurian legends as they are, and the only change, really – is the POV. Our POV is Nimue and we see the events through her eyes. But her position(as the position of other women in this story) is the same – she isn't a proactive character and the changer, but now we see much more suffering and research it deeper. But it doesn't change anything for the story.

Reading original legend texts I already knew the fate of Ygraine, for example – and was horrified by it. But if in the original text, it was 5 pages, here it is 20% of the book. Did I need to see it? To explore this sad story deeper and get the same conclusion? I don't think so.

So here we are – I think I'm not a target audience of this book. I know too much to be really interested in it. I think the perfect audience is readers who heard something about King Arthur and are interested in him but are not that familiar with the legends. In this case, this journey can be engaging, though still sad.

The writing was nice and the characters have some depth, so I think this story has potential. But the key is to make the right marketing for it. I don't feel like it's a retelling, and it doesn't feel like a feminist story to me.

I decided to DNF this book after reading the initial 40% - I think I read enough to be sure that this book will not work for me. All the events were as I know them from legends and the change of POV isn't enough to engage me in the story.

I'm really grateful to Angry Robot and Edelweiss for providing me with this ARC in exchange for my honest review.

More...