Triumff: Her Majesty's Hero (Angry Robot) (edition 2010)

You know I'm still not sure what I think. I know there is some things I hated such as the jump from 1st person unreliable narrator to 3rd person omniscient narrator and back again. Find a point of view or at least blanking explain why you are doing it, just don't jump. That's enough to make it a 1. The dates were confusing. You couldn't figure out if you were in Elizabethan England our time line or if you were in a fantasy time line for quite a while and then it pulled up a date and you knew you were in an alternative history timeline for current era.

What drags it up to a 5 is the descriptions, the characters and the humor. I was laughing so hard I was crying and I have made a note never buy a swiss sword with more than 3 working parts.

So I took the middle and gave it a 3. It could have been very amazing but the lack of stability in the writing itself killed it and it wasn't well done enough to get away with it. ( )

Set in England in 2010, but not the England we know, it is an England little changed from Elizabethan times, an England where Elizabeth XXX reigns, an unbroken succession of Elizabeths since Elizabeth I. The rebirth of Magick at the time of the Renaissance in turn prevented the incidence of the Industrial Revolution; however this alternative England still benefits from many of it own versions of our modern day conveniences.

Set against this background, we soon learn that there is a treasonous plot afoot, a plot to do away with the Queen and change the whole structure of life. Here Sir Rupert Triumff, adventurer, discover of new worlds*, playboy, drunk, and the Queens favourite comes to the rescue (we hope).
(*The new world Triumff discoveres being Australia, an Australia as we know it today, Magick not being practised there it has advanced technologically, although Triumff wants to keep this information to himself)

So much for what the book is about, but how does it read? Firstly it is very funny, it is written in quasi Elizabethan English, but readily understandable, there is much play on words and much amusement to be had from among other things the alternative conveniences of modern day life. But while I found it very amusing, it did not find it a compelling read. I think the reason for this is the shallow nature of the characters, more comic strip than fully fleshed out. Despite the often flowery prose the plot moves swiftly enough, and there is plenty of action, yet this was not enough to sustain my interest, in truth I found that each time I had to make an effort to pick the book up to continue reading.

I should mention to that the book is written mostly in the third person, but sometimes in the first person. The reason: it is “written” by the self-effacing Master Wllm Beaver, a civilian, who writes in the first person when he is there to witness the events, and in the third when these events are otherwise relayed to him.

I am sure there are readers who will find this book very much to their taste, but I like a book where I can identify with the characters, can warm to the characters, or a least some of them, but I did not find this so with Triumff. ( )

Substance: "It is the year 2010. Her Divine Majesty, Queen Elizabeth XXX sits upon the throne. Great Britain's vast Empire is run by alchemy and superstition. Now Sir Rupert Triumff, a dashing swordsman, has uncovered a vile plot to dethrone her glorious majesty. For the honour of the nation: to arms!"
And basically that's it. Lots of buckling swash, bawdry, and evil magicians. Unfortunately, the plot really doesn't hold together, but who cares?

Style: "Triumff is a witch's brew of alternate history, hocus pocus, cracking action and cheesy gags. Reads like Blackadder crossed with Neal Stephenson" or like Terry Pratchett & Neil Gaiman in league.

NOTES: The surprise ending at the very end is kind of flat, since it had no harbingers. ( )

I really wanted to like this gonzo riff on a world where the rediscovery of magic preempts much of current day technology and helps lead to a prolonged Elizabethan age, but this work is so busy and meanders around so much that at a certain point it just gave me a headache; file under too clever by half. It would have made a dynamite graphic novel (as the author originally intended). It still might make a great setting for a video game; imagine a humorous take on the "Assassin's Creed" series. ( )

I’m a big fan of Dan Abnett’s science fiction novels, and had high hopes for this semi-comedic alternative history fantasy novel. Sadly, while the novel had its moments, it wasn’t terribly good and I can’t really recommend it.

Some plot spoilers follow.

It’s set in an alternate history where Queen Elizabeth I of England married Philip II of Spain and created a global empire that persists to the year 2010. Oh and magic exists (under the control of the Church and practiced by hedge witches) and technology is mostly still Renaissance era. The explorer Sir Rupert Triumff has just discovered Australia and returned to London and quickly becomes embroiled in a plot by a group trying to kill him and (eventually) the queen using a mix of assassins and magic. In many ways, Abnett starts telling one story – that of Triumff’s mysterious return from his sea voyage – and ends up discarding it about halfway through to tell another story: that of the evil cabal’s magical threat to the nation. Why are these evil conspirators doing what they’re doing? I have no idea. Why do Triumff and Mother Grundy (a badass old lady who knows some magic) get involved? No idea. Because they were designated as the protagonists? Hopefully Abnett will provide some resolution in the sequel, but I have to admit that I’m not going to rush out and pick it up.

Abnett’s choice of flowery, pseudo-Elizabethan language takes a bit of getting used to. For example, the book opens with a five or so page description of a torrential downpour that is downright entertaining. At first I really enjoyed Abnett’s use of language – because it does offer a lot of comedic potential – but after a while I found it tiresome, as it slowed the pace of the action down even further and made it more difficult to follow. Also, if puns annoy you, then Abnett’s comedy will also lose some of its charm.

One of the other problems with the book is that many of the characters are referred to by: their real names; their titles; nicknames; and assumed names they take on for various nefarious or clandestine purposes. It’s a lot to keep track of, especially when it’s not entirely clear what everyone is up to, who’s working with/against whom, and exactly what the heck is going on. Abnett never really manages to establish the setting and characters’ backgrounds, and information about it only comes in dribs and drabs. One more draft with an emphasis on increasing clarity of the plot and characters’ motivations and identities would have helped a great deal.

I give the book 2.5 stars out of 5, but I wanted to give it a lot more than that. Dan Abnett is a great writer, and there were some fun aspects to this story, but I was alternatively bored and confused between the good bits. It’s not terrible, but it’s not great by any means. Not the author’s finest work, though I still whole-heartily recommend all his Eisenhorn, Ravenor, and Gaunt’s Ghosts work. Recommended for Abnett fans who are willing to give this one more time and attention than I was.

Review copyright 2011 J. Andrew Byers ( )