Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.51 AVERAGE
3.51 AVERAGE
slow-paced
Full disclosure: I'm a huge fan of The 13th Warrior (the movie based on this book). This was a very entertaining literary experiment. While it gets a bit tedious in parts, it was clearly meant to be this way. It's a short read, a great Beowulf retelling, and no doubt a fun stylistic exercise for an author I very much enjoy.
adventurous
dark
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
N/A
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Decent fantasy fiction, with interesting historic elements.
he fooled me so much I was doubting the foolery (which allowed him to fool me once again)
I had forgotten that this was Beowulf adjacent (even tho it’s shelved that way in my house….). It’s probably been 30 years since I read this. My husband made some comment about it not being Crichton’s best but honestly - if you accept the conceit it’s pretty good. I don’t love all of Crichton’s choices, especially when it comes to women, but what are you going to do? It was 1976.
I was really proud of myself for figuring out early which existing story this connects to.
This is so different to Crichton's other books but still a good read. My main complaints with it (awful representation for female characters, little fleshing out or even naming of characters beyond the key handful, some odd pacing) do all make sense in the style of historical account Crichton was trying to portray.
This is so different to Crichton's other books but still a good read. My main complaints with it (awful representation for female characters, little fleshing out or even naming of characters beyond the key handful, some odd pacing) do all make sense in the style of historical account Crichton was trying to portray.
3
What troubles me about this book was that I had no idea if I were reading fiction or nonfiction, or nonfiction disguised as fiction. Turns out in the afterword MC planned it that way and based most of the fictitious parts on Beowulf (which is exactly what I was thinking of when reading this, pausing to think “this sounds a lot like Beowulf).
Unfortunately, I fear he was too good at blending the real and the fake and this will be a Pet Sematary all over again. (I.e. people who grew up thinking Sematary is the correct spelling thanks to Stephen King).
The best parts of this book are definitely the culture shocks and clashes that are heavily talked about and how cultures can coexist, though not smoothly, and learn from one another.
What troubles me about this book was that I had no idea if I were reading fiction or nonfiction, or nonfiction disguised as fiction. Turns out in the afterword MC planned it that way and based most of the fictitious parts on Beowulf (which is exactly what I was thinking of when reading this, pausing to think “this sounds a lot like Beowulf).
Unfortunately, I fear he was too good at blending the real and the fake and this will be a Pet Sematary all over again. (I.e. people who grew up thinking Sematary is the correct spelling thanks to Stephen King).
The best parts of this book are definitely the culture shocks and clashes that are heavily talked about and how cultures can coexist, though not smoothly, and learn from one another.
Super fast read, and not nearly as dry as I expected it to be.... but I'd prefer to just reread Beowulf?
Also, just not really into white man from Long Island writing from the perspective of a Muslim man from the Middle East? Even though it appeared relatively respectful and it was written decades ago.
3.5/5
Also, just not really into white man from Long Island writing from the perspective of a Muslim man from the Middle East? Even though it appeared relatively respectful and it was written decades ago.
3.5/5