The Dragon Waiting
I went into The Dragon Waiting by John M. Ford with precisely zero knowledge of what it was about and was pleasantly surprised by the story. That said, I think if I'd had some idea what it was going to be about I'd have been a little disappointed if only because the concept alone is probably to raise expectations.
So The Dragon Waiting is, I guess, a fantasy AU focusing on Richard III's rise to the throne and his reign up to the Battle of Bosworth. It's a fantasy AU because this is a world in which magic is real, vampires walk the Earth, Christianity is only a minor religion, and Rome, in the form of Byzantium, never fell. It's protagonists are a motley group of adventurers led by an aging wizard (son of Owain Glyn Dwr) and consisting of a vampiric artillerist, a mercenary in search of a cause, and a female Florentine physician with whom the other three are all a little in love (which was, mostly, rather tiresome of them and largely beside the point).
I'm always a little dubious about alternative history tales, particularly as they get further from the supposed divergence point. I was entertained, back in the day, by a Doctor Who Choose Your Own Adventure book in which one of the "you have failed" outcomes involved the confederates winning the American Civil War, as a result of which America never purchased Alaska, as a result of which COMMUNISM WON!! horror! which I always felt was rather a tenuous train of reasoning. I think The Dragon Waiting gets away with its alternative world because it doesn't pretend to a divergence point but presents itself more as a question - how would these events fall out in this different situation?
I am aware of a spectrum of opinion among my friends about both the actions and character of Richard III and, I suppose, of how his character should be understood given both the historical context and any actions he may (or may not) have taken. The Dragon Waiting seems to be of the view that Richard III was both ruthless and not averse to both actual and judicial murder, but on the other hand it seeks to make him sympathetic because Evil Wizards! and Vampires! I was well entertained by the telling but I was left a little puzzled by what, if any, conclusions the book was seeking to draw about the actual king.
I was slow to warm to the central characters, at least until Cynthia Ricci (the physician) appeared on the scene but, in fact, by the end I was rooting for all of them (with the possible exception of Dimi, the mercenary without a cause, who seemed to be a bit wet a lot of the time). However I did, several times, have the sensation that I was missing out on nuance. Most notably we are supposed to believe that the four of them are united in opposition to Byzantium and this leads them to support of Richard III, but I was never quite clear why Peredur (the wizard) was quite so fanatically against the Byzantine machinations and he was the linchpin that held the group together and directed their actions. There were a number of other moments where I felt I was missing some context or import of a discussion. I'm not sure if this is a reflection on the fact that I only have a passing acquaintance with the period, or perhaps that I wasn't paying enough attention to the details of people and their interactions.
At the end of the day, though I have some minor quibbles about the book, I would happily read more tales set in its version of history and featuring its four central characters and I don't think you can reasonably ask for more.
This entry was originally posted at http://purplecat.dreamwidth.org/95386.html.
So The Dragon Waiting is, I guess, a fantasy AU focusing on Richard III's rise to the throne and his reign up to the Battle of Bosworth. It's a fantasy AU because this is a world in which magic is real, vampires walk the Earth, Christianity is only a minor religion, and Rome, in the form of Byzantium, never fell. It's protagonists are a motley group of adventurers led by an aging wizard (son of Owain Glyn Dwr) and consisting of a vampiric artillerist, a mercenary in search of a cause, and a female Florentine physician with whom the other three are all a little in love (which was, mostly, rather tiresome of them and largely beside the point).
I'm always a little dubious about alternative history tales, particularly as they get further from the supposed divergence point. I was entertained, back in the day, by a Doctor Who Choose Your Own Adventure book in which one of the "you have failed" outcomes involved the confederates winning the American Civil War, as a result of which America never purchased Alaska, as a result of which COMMUNISM WON!! horror! which I always felt was rather a tenuous train of reasoning. I think The Dragon Waiting gets away with its alternative world because it doesn't pretend to a divergence point but presents itself more as a question - how would these events fall out in this different situation?
I am aware of a spectrum of opinion among my friends about both the actions and character of Richard III and, I suppose, of how his character should be understood given both the historical context and any actions he may (or may not) have taken. The Dragon Waiting seems to be of the view that Richard III was both ruthless and not averse to both actual and judicial murder, but on the other hand it seeks to make him sympathetic because Evil Wizards! and Vampires! I was well entertained by the telling but I was left a little puzzled by what, if any, conclusions the book was seeking to draw about the actual king.
I was slow to warm to the central characters, at least until Cynthia Ricci (the physician) appeared on the scene but, in fact, by the end I was rooting for all of them (with the possible exception of Dimi, the mercenary without a cause, who seemed to be a bit wet a lot of the time). However I did, several times, have the sensation that I was missing out on nuance. Most notably we are supposed to believe that the four of them are united in opposition to Byzantium and this leads them to support of Richard III, but I was never quite clear why Peredur (the wizard) was quite so fanatically against the Byzantine machinations and he was the linchpin that held the group together and directed their actions. There were a number of other moments where I felt I was missing some context or import of a discussion. I'm not sure if this is a reflection on the fact that I only have a passing acquaintance with the period, or perhaps that I wasn't paying enough attention to the details of people and their interactions.
At the end of the day, though I have some minor quibbles about the book, I would happily read more tales set in its version of history and featuring its four central characters and I don't think you can reasonably ask for more.
This entry was originally posted at http://purplecat.dreamwidth.org/95386.html.