I’d previously enjoyed books by the author of Godslayer, Jacqueline Carey. Her Kushiel books were thick stories of political intrigue in a fantasy world (with more focus on the courtesans than I appreciated, but that happens), and I loved the cover of the first book in this duology when I picked it up… so high hopes ensued.

Before I began reading Banewreaker, I had heard a vague rumor around the internet (because I can’t remember where exactly), that the inspiration for the story was a what-if: What If Sauron wasn’t the bad guy Middle Earth thought he was?

This sounding like a fascinating jumping-off point- an interesting take on good, evil, and how people can be manipulated into one or the other.

What I didn’t count on was that it wasn’t so much inspired by LotR as a near-direct mirror image copy. I tried, really hard, to give the books a chance. I slogged through the difficult-to-get-into first half of the first book, and then found myself having an easier time telling what was going on simply because of the relation to LotR.

Yes, there were a few characters that weren’t exact copies of Tolkien’s, but those were few. I found myself annoyed by the lack of originality, and irritated by the total lack of empathy that any of the characters inspired. I’ve always found it difficult to tolerate stories that are blatant rip-offs, but this was one of the worst offenders I’ve ever dealt with.

Fast-forward several years, and I found the second book at Half-Price Books, and figured it couldn’t possibly be as dreadful as I remembered. So I bought it. And it took me months upon months to dreg up the interest enough to actually start reading this book.

Oh, it was hard to read. Again, it took my a good quarter of the book before I sank into the rhythm of just remembering characters by their LotR equivalents, and the parallels (to be as kind as possible…) grated on my nerves.

Add in the fact that it was difficult to read at work based merely on the title… for example:

Customer: Godslayer! What a terrible title!

Me: It’s a fantasy novel.

Customer: Well! Talking about killing gods! (flounces off)

Me: (sigh…)

…and you get a book that while I was able to finish it, I didn’t enjoy it. At all.

Seriously, they even have the White Wizard on a White Horse, convincing the people who are known for their Awesome Horses to fight back against The Bad Guy (who is soooooo emo and not at all sympathetic or A Good Guy), the King of Men taking his throne and wedding The Elf Chick, while his sidekick dies to buy time for The Bearer (of a clay vial and not a ring) and his companion to get down to the bowels of The Bad Guy’s Fortress and enable the death of The Bad Guy by falling into a pit of lava.

I am not kidding. ( )

The conclusion to the Sundering series, Godslayer, marches us inexorably further toward the inevitable clash between two differing beliefs and two unyielding sides.

Continuing on from Banewreaker the story develops into the intricacies and dogged determination of the characters within their pre-ordained role in the fulfilment, or not, of the prophecy. Carey, however, offers the reader more balance in this tale by affording a more sympathetic ear and a greater understanding of the supposedly darker side. As the blurb keeps shouting: ‘if all that is good considers you evil, are you?”

For the whole time I read this book I could understand – if not always condone - the actions of all players and I’ll readily admit that in the end I was barracking for the side that wore black! That a final battle was inescapable was obvious, even in the first book, but the actions and interactions and, in particular, the thoughts of the participants offered a valid credence to the outcome and consequences of these. At times the tension was palpable and it was frustrating, and it was saddening, to watch helplessly as events conspired to force the unavoidable finale.

The moral of the tale may be: even if there are greater forces leading you to a predestined fate beyond your control, and opposite to your desire, there are many ways to tread this difficult path. If you traverse this road with honour, if you are faithful to your oaths, if you fight with, and for, the survival of loved and loyal comrades and if you are true to yourself; it is the journey that matters, not the end result.

This was a grand journey, an epic in the true sense. I wanted a different ending, but I understood it had to be, for, as in reality, with war, there are no winners. Like good fantasy should – it gave me food for thought - and left me wondering too 'what might have been'!

(Dec 8, 2007) ( )

(Alistair) Much of what I had to say regarding Banewreaker also applies here, so I shall endeavor to refrain from repeating myself too much, the continuation of the tale of the allies of Haomane to destroy Satoris Banewreaker - only told from the point of view of his side every bit as much as from the supposedly "good" side.

And, by and large, it delivers on the promises set up in Banewreaker. While I have, and have become aware of others' having, a tiny comment regarding too much derivation from Tolkien, it's only a minor complaint, and is also very much the point.

In fact, I would say that this second book delivers the change-of-viewpoint much better than its predecessors. You can understand with the motives and actions of the "good" allies of Haomane, but the author especially creates sympathy for their opponents, for Satoris (whose motives and long-range plans are much more elegant and necessary than one might gather from Banewreaker) and the Three, the fallen Sorceress of Beshtanag, and especially for those who joined with them out of free choice, as the unforeseen consequences of the own actions and the inexorable working-out of prophecy doom them in spite of their best actions - the fates of the Three and the final downfall of the Fjeltroll should move the stoniest heart.

Highly recommended!
( http://weblog.siliconcerebrate.com/ce... )

(Amy) History, they say, is written by the victors. This concept pretty much encapsulates the entire plot of the duology of which this is the second half (the first was read before I started booklogging).

Herein we find a fairly standard epic fantasy - but it rapidly becomes quite obvious that the assorted protagonist characters are not on the side that would be, in traditional tellings, the side of light and right. They are at least as sympathetic as the Good Guys are, though, and I found myself decidedly on the side of the Sunderer's faction throughout most of the story.

While I did occasionally feel as if the author may have created a checklist the last time she re-read her copy of The Lord of the Rings and had a goal of ticking off an alternate-perspective view of at least 90% of the items therein, I still enjoyed the story, and an idea that occurred to me partway through - that it could be very nearly the same tale (with a bit of Silmarillion extract tossed in for good measure) without the warped view of the victors and the polishing of many centuries of retelling - was, I thought, an interesting twist, if not in fact terribly likely.

Good reading, all in all, and I would definitely recommend both books to just about anyone who a) is familiar with epic fantasy and b) doesn't mind a little bit of perspective stretch.
( http://weblog.siliconcerebrate.com/ze... ) ( )

I stumbled on this series while putting books back on the shelves at my local Border's store. What I loved the most about it was the perspective it brought to the ideas of black and white, or good and evil. What disappointed me was the way it ended. It is not the first book or series I have read where the author seemed to either lack the vision or courage to really take a bold stand in the resolution of the story. ( )

http://insomniel.blogspot.com/2007_07... ( )