crowyhead's review

Go to review page

5.0

This may be my favorite book I read in 2008. Avram Davidson is known for his odd science fiction and fantasy short stories, which are often baroque and loaded with references to historical people and places both famous and obscure. This book is not a collection of short stories, it's not quite fiction, and it's not quite non-fiction, either. Instead, it's kind of like sitting down by the fire with an old crazy-yet-brillient uncle who is determined to tell you his theories about the origins of the Phoenix, werewolves, unicorns, and the actual properties of the mandrake root, to name a few. Davidson's writing style is conversational and peppered with very funny asides about conversations he's had and random things that seem to have just occured to him. The result is a book that I found completely absorbing and also had me giggling over and reading aloud sections almost every time I sat down with it. I will note that it is probably best read in small doses, rather than in large chunks, because otherwise it becomes slightly repetitive on occasion.

vasha's review

Go to review page

3.0

The style of these essays is highly eccentric: rambling and jokey, with some sentences so long you have to pay close attention to understand them. But some of the passages struck me as quite good. More important, though, is that (as it seems to me) the contents, analyses of the origins of some legends, are well-considered and thoroughly researched. I haven't found anything (unintentionally) ridiculous in these essays. In particular, the one about Prester John was really fascinating.

kbeddes's review

Go to review page

4.0

Guys, I am like, two pages into this thing and I think it's the greatest thing since baked bread. And I really love baked bread. I will keep you updated. But I am VERY excited about this.

Genre: essay? sci fi? I am not sure to be honest. It's kind of a mixture of all sorts of things.

Summary: Avram Davidson just sifts through the different theories behind how certain legends came to be. Most of the time, he was able to narrow down the make-believe to something concrete and real. Each chapter was self-contained to it's own topic because originally, each chapter was printed separately in various sci fi magazines.

Response: I really really enjoyed this book, with the exception of a chapter or two. It's always interesting to me how certain ideas get started. And like he mentions, everyone knows that wombats are real and dragons are not, but hardly anyone knows what a wombat looks like and EVERYONE knows what a dragon looks like. And sometimes, just the way that he puts things are so beautiful and thought provoking. It also didn't hurt that this was the first book in a long while that I actually felt the need to look certain words up. It was just so pleasurable to read someone who was so obviously well-read himself, because he kept referencing all these peoples and places. It was awesome.

tangleroot_eli's review

Go to review page

4.0

This book is enlightening, perplexing, hilarious, and frustrating, depending on which sentence of which paragraph of which page I'm looking at. Which, ultimately, strikes me as a good thing; certainly I never got bored!

ninjamuse's review

Go to review page

4.0

In brief: A collection of essays on the more unusual aspects of history and folklore.

Thoughts: This was one of the best books (writing- and ideas-wise) that I’ve picked up on impulse in a long time. Davidson’s prose is this amazing blend of literary and colloquial, almost reading like a speech transcript sometimes, and was just a wonder to read. And the subject matter was equally awesome. Davidson was incredibly well-read and manages to connect dots between all sorts of things—ornithological trivia, folklore, etymologies, poetry, ancient trade routes, history, religion, feral children, and so, so much more—in a way that’s both highly logical and highly speculative. For him, it’s more about showing that something might be possible than genuinely proving it, because he’s dealing with a lot of stuff that’s not really provable. Dragons, for instance. Werewolves. How do you account for where those legends came from? His theories are oddly compelling, though.

However, that colloquial style I mentioned? It’s got three flaws. First, it’s colloquial à la the early ‘90s, so a number of his “as we say nowadays” jokes are a bit obscure, to the point where I think some of the essays were actually written in the ‘70s. Second, because it’s all colloquial, it got a bit predictable, repetitive, and annoying by the end.

And third, and this is a BIG THIRD, he’s … kinda _____ist? Native and non-white populations? Speak in broken English. Arabs? Pictured in a couple spots as the stereotypical hookah-smoking merchant, and they’re not the only group to have that happen. Trans people? Oddly come up in the werewolf essay, I don’t even. I don’t remember any particular instances of sexist or homophobia, but I’m fairly sure they’re in there. (This is actually a little odd to me, because Davidson also spends a fair bit of time calling out people for _____ist attitudes and pointing out that the “uncivilized” peoples … weren’t.)

7/10 (would be an 8.5 without the iffy bits)
More...