Scan barcode
A review by myth
The Hedgewitch Queen by Lilith Saintcrow
4.0
My fluctuating opinions of this book, let me show you them.
On the one hand, I loved it. It had politics (sort of)! And a tough (mostly) believable heroine!
As you can see, it has qualifiers.
The politics were politic-y for the first chapter or two. And then we were just told that politics happened? I don't know, it felt like reading Crown Duel without its (much more interesting) sequel Court Duel. Tristan felt very much like Shevraeth/Vidanric. Vianne felt a lot like Mel without the bad temper.
And then Tristan turned out to be possibly evil. And I may have seen that coming, but more in a 'there are enough hints here for it to happen, and it would make this a much more interesting story if it did' way instead of my usual 'yeah, here's what's going to happen, don't try and be cute with me' way. It's possible that when I read the sequel I will do exactly what I did with Crown Duel upon finishing Court Duel - declare 'THIS IS AWESOME. GIVE ME MORE.' And hopefully Ms Saintcrow will comply, as Sherwood Smith did not see fit to do. You see, the world revolves around my reading taste. I know this for a fact, because I want to read more about white guys saving the world and the Fantasy/Sci-Fi genre has complied! (my sarcasm has hopefully been noted)
If you're confused as to why I seem to be reviewing three-ish books here, let me explain. The Hedgewitch Queen has a lot of potential. A hell of a lot of potential. I wanted this thing like a Hobbit wants elevensies the second I read the description. And I love Lilith Saintcrow's novels, especially Jill Kismet (Steelflower I loved but fell just short of the mark of awesome for reasons I cannot fully articulate. Possibly it's to do with the soulmate principle). Dante Valentine is pretty damn epic, too, and I need to take a gander at her earlier books because WOMEN. BEING WOMEN. AND STABBING THINGS. By which I mean that often authors, male and female, fall short of writing women as I have observed them my entire life, most especially myself. Many times authors think that writing a tough woman involves adding breasts and often upsetting and confusing messages about sexuality (on either side of the spectrum of NOT DOING IT RIGHT) to a man. And I would argue, normally, that I fully believe that a great deal of masculinity and femininity is a product of environment and socialization and all that jazz, but please assume that that argument (and the accompanying one about the marginalization of traditionally feminine traits) (and the one about how most authors write with the same sort of underlying societal structure that means they should deal with that baggage, dammit) has been made at length and in detail for the purposes of trying very hard to get to a point here. Lilith Saintcrow writes women. And gosh golly darn it, I would forgive her a fuckload more than an issue that boils down to me wanting more of something she's written just for that reason.
That paragraph got away from me there. Back to why I was discussing Sherwood Smith in a Lilith Saintcrow review.
Because it was incredibly similar, both in writing style, characters, and... not themes. What's the word I'm looking for here? Maybe structure? At a few points during the reading of this, I looked up and thought to myself, "Hunh, Sherwood Smith did something a little different there" only to remember that no, I was reading Lilith Saintcrow.
And I think that's my real problem with this book. For some, it may not be a problem, especially if you (as I do) like Sherwood Smith. But for me, it was jarring, and confusing, and somewhat irksome. (please excuse any and all fragments in this post; stream of consciousness ends in fragments and humorous or ragey run-ons for me more than I'd like)
ANYWAY. Moving away from the Sherwood Smith comparisons.
I loved that Vianne never forgot her Princesse. I loved that she was motivated more by her duty and love of a friend in the end than she was by her love interest. I loved that that love interest was mostly supportive in the end, and I loved even more that Vianne learned that she could live without that support if she needed to. I loved that she didn't want to. I loved Rhisaine, whose name I am probably butchering. I loved the Baroness (no, not THAT one). I loved, loved, LOVED that Ms Saintcrow seems to be going in the crazed love/obsession direction with Tristan, and I sincerely hope that if she really is it does not get watered down or made okay in the end. I loved more than that that Vianne came into her own on her own, and that she didn't fall into it but decided to do so.
4/5, for women who do stuff, more women who do stuff, interesting plot and character twists, and women who love other women. It will probably be made higher when the second one comes out.
Note from the present (but the future at the time this (older) review was written): It was not made higher. I am very upset.
On the one hand, I loved it. It had politics (sort of)! And a tough (mostly) believable heroine!
As you can see, it has qualifiers.
The politics were politic-y for the first chapter or two. And then we were just told that politics happened? I don't know, it felt like reading Crown Duel without its (much more interesting) sequel Court Duel. Tristan felt very much like Shevraeth/Vidanric. Vianne felt a lot like Mel without the bad temper.
And then Tristan turned out to be possibly evil. And I may have seen that coming, but more in a 'there are enough hints here for it to happen, and it would make this a much more interesting story if it did' way instead of my usual 'yeah, here's what's going to happen, don't try and be cute with me' way. It's possible that when I read the sequel I will do exactly what I did with Crown Duel upon finishing Court Duel - declare 'THIS IS AWESOME. GIVE ME MORE.' And hopefully Ms Saintcrow will comply, as Sherwood Smith did not see fit to do. You see, the world revolves around my reading taste. I know this for a fact, because I want to read more about white guys saving the world and the Fantasy/Sci-Fi genre has complied! (my sarcasm has hopefully been noted)
If you're confused as to why I seem to be reviewing three-ish books here, let me explain. The Hedgewitch Queen has a lot of potential. A hell of a lot of potential. I wanted this thing like a Hobbit wants elevensies the second I read the description. And I love Lilith Saintcrow's novels, especially Jill Kismet (Steelflower I loved but fell just short of the mark of awesome for reasons I cannot fully articulate. Possibly it's to do with the soulmate principle). Dante Valentine is pretty damn epic, too, and I need to take a gander at her earlier books because WOMEN. BEING WOMEN. AND STABBING THINGS. By which I mean that often authors, male and female, fall short of writing women as I have observed them my entire life, most especially myself. Many times authors think that writing a tough woman involves adding breasts and often upsetting and confusing messages about sexuality (on either side of the spectrum of NOT DOING IT RIGHT) to a man. And I would argue, normally, that I fully believe that a great deal of masculinity and femininity is a product of environment and socialization and all that jazz, but please assume that that argument (and the accompanying one about the marginalization of traditionally feminine traits) (and the one about how most authors write with the same sort of underlying societal structure that means they should deal with that baggage, dammit) has been made at length and in detail for the purposes of trying very hard to get to a point here. Lilith Saintcrow writes women. And gosh golly darn it, I would forgive her a fuckload more than an issue that boils down to me wanting more of something she's written just for that reason.
That paragraph got away from me there. Back to why I was discussing Sherwood Smith in a Lilith Saintcrow review.
Because it was incredibly similar, both in writing style, characters, and... not themes. What's the word I'm looking for here? Maybe structure? At a few points during the reading of this, I looked up and thought to myself, "Hunh, Sherwood Smith did something a little different there" only to remember that no, I was reading Lilith Saintcrow.
And I think that's my real problem with this book. For some, it may not be a problem, especially if you (as I do) like Sherwood Smith. But for me, it was jarring, and confusing, and somewhat irksome. (please excuse any and all fragments in this post; stream of consciousness ends in fragments and humorous or ragey run-ons for me more than I'd like)
ANYWAY. Moving away from the Sherwood Smith comparisons.
I loved that Vianne never forgot her Princesse. I loved that she was motivated more by her duty and love of a friend in the end than she was by her love interest. I loved that that love interest was mostly supportive in the end, and I loved even more that Vianne learned that she could live without that support if she needed to. I loved that she didn't want to. I loved Rhisaine, whose name I am probably butchering. I loved the Baroness (no, not THAT one). I loved, loved, LOVED that Ms Saintcrow seems to be going in the crazed love/obsession direction with Tristan, and I sincerely hope that if she really is it does not get watered down or made okay in the end. I loved more than that that Vianne came into her own on her own, and that she didn't fall into it but decided to do so.
4/5, for women who do stuff, more women who do stuff, interesting plot and character twists, and women who love other women. It will probably be made higher when the second one comes out.
Note from the present (but the future at the time this (older) review was written): It was not made higher. I am very upset.