Take a photo of a barcode or cover
markyon 's review for:
The Hexologists
by Josiah Bancroft
Sometimes it's funny how the little details can derail a book*. Case in point - The Hexologists.
The basic story here is that couple Isolde and Warren are hexologists, a selective skill whose abilities to use symbols to create magic are often called upon to deal with strange happenings. The main story here is that the hexologists are dealing with a mystery that needs tact and diplomacy as it involves the Royal family. Isolde and Warren are not royalists, but feel that they should get to the bottom of the cause for King Elbert’s recent illness – a descent into madness that may be arcane in nature. The plot leads the duo to uncovering more than they initially bargained for.
Admittedly, there's a lot to like in this, a mixing of derring-do action with whimsy and humour. Some of the characters our heroes meet are lots of fun – over-officious administrators, sorcerers, wizards (yes, they are different) and even a dragon who lives in a bag and likes fine dining – how could I not like that?
And I did like the setting. Personally, I find that there’s a lot to like about stories with ancient magic, god-like deities, arcane practices and baroque receptions, and there’s a lot thrown into the mix here.
But then there's the downside, when an author's enthusiasm limits the reader’s enjoyment. And I hate to say it, but as much as I enjoyed the general ideas in the plot and most of the worldbuilding, there were a number of issues with this book that made the activity frustrating.
The author himself writes in the afterword, “Novels require a willing suspension of disbelief, not only from readers… but also from their authors…” which I think is quite true. The main issue for me was that as much as I was willing to suspend my disbelief as a reader, the author seemed determined to destroy it. As much as I enjoyed the setting overall, it was the little things that tended to annoy. This was apparent from fairly early on when in the first few pages the main characters Isolde and Warren insisted on calling each other ‘Iz’ and ‘War'. A minor point, but a modernism that I found REALLY irritating, on a level almost as grating to me as when ‘Anakin’ was reduced to ‘Ani’.
Similarly, the mood, initially developed by the writer as some sort of faux Edwardian / Sherlock Holmes type pastiche with mechanical carriages, industrial slums and tea, was ruined by the characters using contemporary phrases such as villains willing to “shake down” the king. I found it to be almost as jarring as if the characters spoke in rap, a determination to destroy my belief in that otherwise vividly imagined world. At other times the dialogue, intended to be endearingly witty, often felt icky and well, like prose when it should have been dialogue. Do I need to point out the irrelevancy of the character’s need to talk about their love-life often and in detail throughout? (It almost made me spill my tea.)
The annoying thing is that the author clearly enjoyed writing this novel. There’s a detailed list of characters and a guide to hexology at the back of the book, which shows how much thought has gone into the background of the book, and it is clear from the off that Josiah wants very much for this to be a successful new series. Nothing wrong with ambition, but for me it doesn’t reach its potential, as it had a rather shotgun approach – lots of ideas thrown out often, but some of them worked and some of them didn’t. Compared with writers of a similar tone and style such as Gail Carriger, this one lacks the internal logic and consistency to make it totally work.
Summing up, The Hexologists is an ambitious book with potential, some interesting characters and an interesting premise, ruined by overenthusiasm, lazy language and a determination to dismantle my suspended sense of disbelief. If you can live with the inconsistencies**, it's a good read. For me, although I finished it, it was a struggle. The book deserves marks for effort and ambition, but demerits for execution. I hope that the next one could be better.
*Please note - I rarely write book reviews on books I dislike.
**And how often am I told that I take my reading/reviewing too seriously? Erm… but I think my annoyance is that there are authors who can do this well, whilst others just want to do well.
The basic story here is that couple Isolde and Warren are hexologists, a selective skill whose abilities to use symbols to create magic are often called upon to deal with strange happenings. The main story here is that the hexologists are dealing with a mystery that needs tact and diplomacy as it involves the Royal family. Isolde and Warren are not royalists, but feel that they should get to the bottom of the cause for King Elbert’s recent illness – a descent into madness that may be arcane in nature. The plot leads the duo to uncovering more than they initially bargained for.
Admittedly, there's a lot to like in this, a mixing of derring-do action with whimsy and humour. Some of the characters our heroes meet are lots of fun – over-officious administrators, sorcerers, wizards (yes, they are different) and even a dragon who lives in a bag and likes fine dining – how could I not like that?
And I did like the setting. Personally, I find that there’s a lot to like about stories with ancient magic, god-like deities, arcane practices and baroque receptions, and there’s a lot thrown into the mix here.
But then there's the downside, when an author's enthusiasm limits the reader’s enjoyment. And I hate to say it, but as much as I enjoyed the general ideas in the plot and most of the worldbuilding, there were a number of issues with this book that made the activity frustrating.
The author himself writes in the afterword, “Novels require a willing suspension of disbelief, not only from readers… but also from their authors…” which I think is quite true. The main issue for me was that as much as I was willing to suspend my disbelief as a reader, the author seemed determined to destroy it. As much as I enjoyed the setting overall, it was the little things that tended to annoy. This was apparent from fairly early on when in the first few pages the main characters Isolde and Warren insisted on calling each other ‘Iz’ and ‘War'. A minor point, but a modernism that I found REALLY irritating, on a level almost as grating to me as when ‘Anakin’ was reduced to ‘Ani’.
Similarly, the mood, initially developed by the writer as some sort of faux Edwardian / Sherlock Holmes type pastiche with mechanical carriages, industrial slums and tea, was ruined by the characters using contemporary phrases such as villains willing to “shake down” the king. I found it to be almost as jarring as if the characters spoke in rap, a determination to destroy my belief in that otherwise vividly imagined world. At other times the dialogue, intended to be endearingly witty, often felt icky and well, like prose when it should have been dialogue. Do I need to point out the irrelevancy of the character’s need to talk about their love-life often and in detail throughout? (It almost made me spill my tea.)
The annoying thing is that the author clearly enjoyed writing this novel. There’s a detailed list of characters and a guide to hexology at the back of the book, which shows how much thought has gone into the background of the book, and it is clear from the off that Josiah wants very much for this to be a successful new series. Nothing wrong with ambition, but for me it doesn’t reach its potential, as it had a rather shotgun approach – lots of ideas thrown out often, but some of them worked and some of them didn’t. Compared with writers of a similar tone and style such as Gail Carriger, this one lacks the internal logic and consistency to make it totally work.
Summing up, The Hexologists is an ambitious book with potential, some interesting characters and an interesting premise, ruined by overenthusiasm, lazy language and a determination to dismantle my suspended sense of disbelief. If you can live with the inconsistencies**, it's a good read. For me, although I finished it, it was a struggle. The book deserves marks for effort and ambition, but demerits for execution. I hope that the next one could be better.
*Please note - I rarely write book reviews on books I dislike.
**And how often am I told that I take my reading/reviewing too seriously? Erm… but I think my annoyance is that there are authors who can do this well, whilst others just want to do well.