Take a photo of a barcode or cover
25 reviews for:
Silverlock: Including the Silverlock Companion
John Myers Myers, Pam Fremon, David G. Grubbs, Fred Lerner
3.69 AVERAGE
25 reviews for:
Silverlock: Including the Silverlock Companion
John Myers Myers, Pam Fremon, David G. Grubbs, Fred Lerner
3.69 AVERAGE
Read in the mid 90's as I worked my way down a usenet list of the best fantasy novels of all time. I remember zero details except that I loved it.
I thought I was well-versed enough in Brit Lit, but I found the need to use the footnotes so often that it was hard to stay in the story.
A rotten sort of man is brought to the land of stories, in order to face himself.
This is exactly the sort of book whose plot I've read too much of: the narrator, who is a complete jerk, is the main problem to be resolved in the story. However, I very much enjoyed this variation, which drags said jerk through everything from the Odyssey to Hell, offering him a final choice as to the disposition of his soul. (The Hell sequence is delightfully, and surprisingly, dark and awful.) What this book does is puncture the illusion of being a reasonably good man when all you've done in life is coast on your entitlements, and show an alternate path to cynical disengagement. I came out of the book refreshed. Of course my description doesn't do the book justice.
This is one of those very rare books where I would say, "Keep reading." (I normally abandon books early on if I'm not having fun.) The narrator is a piece of work, and the book starts out nearly as tiresome to read as the narrator finds his own existence. Of note, there are a bunch of references. It may feel frustrating and belittling at first if you don't "get" them all: the narrator certainly feels that way. Again, I recommend to keep reading. I think the obscurity is intentional; the main guy that the narrator runs into is *very* obscurely named, and a lot of the references would have been mostly-missed by readers even when the book was first written (1949). If it really bothers you, you can look up the main ones on Wikipedia later. I think the point of all the references was to be confusing and almost offputting at first for the majority of readers, then bring them to appreciate plunging into new stories by the end of the book. I may be wrong.
Recommended for fantasy readers, and for those going through a discontentedness of spirit.
This is exactly the sort of book whose plot I've read too much of: the narrator, who is a complete jerk, is the main problem to be resolved in the story. However, I very much enjoyed this variation, which drags said jerk through everything from the Odyssey to Hell, offering him a final choice as to the disposition of his soul. (The Hell sequence is delightfully, and surprisingly, dark and awful.) What this book does is puncture the illusion of being a reasonably good man when all you've done in life is coast on your entitlements, and show an alternate path to cynical disengagement. I came out of the book refreshed. Of course my description doesn't do the book justice.
This is one of those very rare books where I would say, "Keep reading." (I normally abandon books early on if I'm not having fun.) The narrator is a piece of work, and the book starts out nearly as tiresome to read as the narrator finds his own existence. Of note, there are a bunch of references. It may feel frustrating and belittling at first if you don't "get" them all: the narrator certainly feels that way. Again, I recommend to keep reading. I think the obscurity is intentional; the main guy that the narrator runs into is *very* obscurely named, and a lot of the references would have been mostly-missed by readers even when the book was first written (1949). If it really bothers you, you can look up the main ones on Wikipedia later. I think the point of all the references was to be confusing and almost offputting at first for the majority of readers, then bring them to appreciate plunging into new stories by the end of the book. I may be wrong.
Recommended for fantasy readers, and for those going through a discontentedness of spirit.
I want someone to explain to me in great detail why this book isn't a rip off of [b:The Complete Compleat Enchanter|420277|The Complete Compleat Enchanter|L. Sprague de Camp|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1174587580s/420277.jpg|409411].
And that book was funnier.
It's kinda cool combining all the stories and stuff, but honesty, it's been done better.
And it didn't need three introductions.
And that book was funnier.
It's kinda cool combining all the stories and stuff, but honesty, it's been done better.
And it didn't need three introductions.
If you don't have a solid grounding in Western mythology and classic literature, then this book might seem a little disjointed and bizarre. But it's entertaining
On the cover of Silverlock, Jerry PournelIe is quoted as saying, "You can now have the pleasure of [reading] Silverlock for the first time. I envy you.” Well, Jerry, you can stop envying me. I did not find reading Silverlock pleasurable. (He also suggests that it improves on the re-reading, but I will never know if that is true.)
I did not find Silverlock engaging, enlightening or entertaining. Do you have to like the main character to enjoy the book? I doubt it, although I certainly did not like the misogynistic and chauvinistic Silverlock. I am apparently not learned enough to understand all the smug obscure references, and the weaving together of many stories was not compelling enough to keep my interest while I also wondered what I was missing.
I picked this “classic” for my sci-fi/fantasy book club. I skimmed the last quarter. I suspect this will not be a popular selection. My library is the only one in our system that owns a copy; now I understand why. A classic that deserves to fall out of favor.
I did not find Silverlock engaging, enlightening or entertaining. Do you have to like the main character to enjoy the book? I doubt it, although I certainly did not like the misogynistic and chauvinistic Silverlock. I am apparently not learned enough to understand all the smug obscure references, and the weaving together of many stories was not compelling enough to keep my interest while I also wondered what I was missing.
I picked this “classic” for my sci-fi/fantasy book club. I skimmed the last quarter. I suspect this will not be a popular selection. My library is the only one in our system that owns a copy; now I understand why. A classic that deserves to fall out of favor.
i was really unimpressed with this book - it was recommended to me beause of my love for thursday next novels, and it was reminiscent of them in that the main character encounters various people from mythology and literature, i.e. circe from the odyssey, sir gawain & the green knight, faust, and others. however the main character has such a lack of personality that he makes an awkward vehicle for the story. additionally there is not much of a plot tying all of these random encounters together. blech.
This looks interesting, but I don't remember it. Yes, the author's last name is repeated twice, perhaps for emphasis, I don't know.
soooo much fun - i only wish i was enough of a reader to get all of the literary references!!
adventurous
emotional
funny
hopeful
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes