Scan barcode
A review by billymac1962
Speaks the Nightbird by Robert R. McCammon
4.0
I had been looking forward to reading this for some time. Speaks the Nightbird heralded Robert McCammon's return to writing after a 10-year absence, and there was much rejoycing amongst readers.
I must say I was very entertained, for pretty much the full 2-volumes of this story. With the exception of some modern figures of speech, I felt quite immersed in the 1699 Carolinas. It's interesting and disturbing to be reminded of the attitudes towards witchcraft. A highly educated man such as our magistrate, exercises a cautious and thorough approach to the trial of a witch, but underlying this is his belief that witchcraft does indeed exist.
What a terrifying and hopeless time this must have been for women convicted and burned at the stake, guilty of nothing more than being dark skinned, beautiful, and different.
Matthew Corbett, a young magistrate's clerk seems to be the lone man who disbelieves witchcraft, and therefore is convinced of Rachel's innocence. Good luck with that.
The story maintains suspense throughout most of the novel. There are very interesting developments, well-drawn characters, and for a 800+ page novel, it moved along very quickly. However, I did have one problem with it.
Spoiler below, in case the spoiler tags fail....
If I had one annoyance, it would be Matthew's performance towards the end. I didn't quite buy into the still-wet-behind-the-ears clerk we were introduced with at the beginning of the story, pulling off a Hercule Poirot, where he commands the room, calling out the murderer and unraveling all the mysteries to his totally believing audience.
If McCammon hadn't glossed over the Matthew's return (he would surely have been lynched at first sight), where he convinced Biddel of the truth, this would have been more credible. It just smacked of taking the easy way out, and after getting through so many pages, I felt gypped.
Oh well, it's no big deal breaker. I enjoyed a very large portion of the book, but I have the feeling Matthew Colbert will annoy me further on down the road, so I doubt I'll continue with Queen of Bedlam.
I must say I was very entertained, for pretty much the full 2-volumes of this story. With the exception of some modern figures of speech, I felt quite immersed in the 1699 Carolinas. It's interesting and disturbing to be reminded of the attitudes towards witchcraft. A highly educated man such as our magistrate, exercises a cautious and thorough approach to the trial of a witch, but underlying this is his belief that witchcraft does indeed exist.
What a terrifying and hopeless time this must have been for women convicted and burned at the stake, guilty of nothing more than being dark skinned, beautiful, and different.
Matthew Corbett, a young magistrate's clerk seems to be the lone man who disbelieves witchcraft, and therefore is convinced of Rachel's innocence. Good luck with that.
The story maintains suspense throughout most of the novel. There are very interesting developments, well-drawn characters, and for a 800+ page novel, it moved along very quickly. However, I did have one problem with it.
Spoiler below, in case the spoiler tags fail....
Spoiler
If I had one annoyance, it would be Matthew's performance towards the end. I didn't quite buy into the still-wet-behind-the-ears clerk we were introduced with at the beginning of the story, pulling off a Hercule Poirot, where he commands the room, calling out the murderer and unraveling all the mysteries to his totally believing audience.
If McCammon hadn't glossed over the Matthew's return (he would surely have been lynched at first sight), where he convinced Biddel of the truth, this would have been more credible. It just smacked of taking the easy way out, and after getting through so many pages, I felt gypped.
Oh well, it's no big deal breaker. I enjoyed a very large portion of the book, but I have the feeling Matthew Colbert will annoy me further on down the road, so I doubt I'll continue with Queen of Bedlam.