Scan barcode
A review by roguebelle
Cursed by Thomas Wheeler
dark
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
2.0
What a very strange book.
I can't figure out why Wheeler bothered to make this book Arthuriana. None of the characters who bear the names from the legends bear any resemblance whatsoever to their legendary counterparts. And I'm not being pedantic -- Arthuriana is extremely malleable, which is part of its strength and joy. You make a lot of exciting changes without breaking the foundations of the canon-such-as-it-even-is. But this book... I dunno, it doesn't even seem to try? It's like Wheeler wrote a completely different, competent-if-uninspired fantasy novel, then slapped Arthurian names on a few characters. It's not in any way that's clever or elucidates meaning or recontextualizes the older stories.
The worldbuilding also feels sloppy and all over the place. It's part reality and part not-even-slightly. It's ostensibly set in... something resembling England? But when? Who knows. Long after the Roman withdrawal. There are Viking raiders. But there's also some place called "Minotaur Valley"? There's The Church, but no actual recognizable church structure -- Wheeler has substituted in malevolent "Red Paladins" in place of any historical group. Again, it makes it feel like he wrote a secondworld fantasy and then decided "Arthuriana sells better" and changed a few things.
I could forgive more of that if the characters were compelling, but they're not. Nimue volleys wildly between inexplicable hyper-competence and utter foolishness. Her relationship with Arthur is flat as dry toothpaste. Morgan is woefully under-conceived and under-used. Not enough time is given to any side characters to really make them breathe, and Wheeler introduces far too many tertiary figures, especially among the horde of Fey Folk, to allow us time to care about any of them.
Honestly the best thing I can say about the book is that it was a quick read, allowing me to get on to other things.
I can't figure out why Wheeler bothered to make this book Arthuriana. None of the characters who bear the names from the legends bear any resemblance whatsoever to their legendary counterparts. And I'm not being pedantic -- Arthuriana is extremely malleable, which is part of its strength and joy. You make a lot of exciting changes without breaking the foundations of the canon-such-as-it-even-is. But this book... I dunno, it doesn't even seem to try? It's like Wheeler wrote a completely different, competent-if-uninspired fantasy novel, then slapped Arthurian names on a few characters. It's not in any way that's clever or elucidates meaning or recontextualizes the older stories.
The worldbuilding also feels sloppy and all over the place. It's part reality and part not-even-slightly. It's ostensibly set in... something resembling England? But when? Who knows. Long after the Roman withdrawal. There are Viking raiders. But there's also some place called "Minotaur Valley"? There's The Church, but no actual recognizable church structure -- Wheeler has substituted in malevolent "Red Paladins" in place of any historical group. Again, it makes it feel like he wrote a secondworld fantasy and then decided "Arthuriana sells better" and changed a few things.
I could forgive more of that if the characters were compelling, but they're not. Nimue volleys wildly between inexplicable hyper-competence and utter foolishness. Her relationship with Arthur is flat as dry toothpaste. Morgan is woefully under-conceived and under-used. Not enough time is given to any side characters to really make them breathe, and Wheeler introduces far too many tertiary figures, especially among the horde of Fey Folk, to allow us time to care about any of them.
Honestly the best thing I can say about the book is that it was a quick read, allowing me to get on to other things.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence