dint talk to you here for Fantasy you will eventually believe that on one hand I do not read it and secondly I am the champion. Both are wrong of course. A warrior in full armor mounted on a caparisoned horse and illustrated by William Sorel never enough to make me buy any book. I would even rather wide recoil against him. However I must admit that since I read Lord of the Rings (finally late enough, I had just over 20 years) ten years ago, the few shelves dedicated to gender have greatly satisfied. So I can reasonably consider myself a reader of heroic fantasy, it remains only to let me grow and the hair and beard, letting my fingers disappear under a mass of rings and leathery mitts and the range will be almost complete. Except I do not read fantasy, I read only good books and simply and in the case of the Book of Ash by Mary Gentle, I read (almost) always good books. Ash is an alternate history, a "what if the Visigoths finally landed in Carthage after the fall of the Roman empire had prospered and that their civilization had dominated the Western world until the 15th century?" So much for the alternate history and reading, I'll just say it's a damn good idea, just by mixing it with ash, a replica of Joan of Arc in less virgin but equally blessed by God and giving the latter a historical reality in the Charles the Bold of Burgundy. All that it is good, just like the direct style of Gentle, the ability to embrace his character twisting until he (or she) has purged all the marrow of his feelings and his doubts to the variable geometry of his intestines during the course of a battle. I still found many errors in these four books (over 2000 pages in total!), Starting with the relative worthlessness of book 3, which extends ad nauseam the seat of Dijon and, thinking renew the plot imagining the agony of the Duke of Burgundy merely obliges Mary Gentle to reinvent the agony (at least to renew) the following volume. Missed. The other constraint of the Book of Ash is the association of early book trade in emails between Professor Ratcliff, the discoverer of the truth about Ash! -And-go fast and its editor, not fully convinced of the veracity of the facts that his doctor tells him the manuscript. In short, an oiling verbose not very interesting and not even saved by the rather simple form that takes its trade. Except that these exchanges will depend the end of the book, and here's the rub, I jumped me these bullshit, and reached the end of book, that's all the exaltation which falls understanding that trying to spin uchronia on 2000 pages, in Mary Gentle would necessarily fall in Ashes history. And it's a shame as the book is raw and at times good, some poignant chapters of bitter realism and voracious so bloody cut is full. But I have great difficulty in considering that the author wanted to happen, assumes perhaps not quite the load of fantasy that has naturally given to his book. This is not noble, not the fine science-fiction on which you can rattle galore, this is the fantasy many dirty, there is neither dwarf nor elfle but miracles and demons, big battles like Dijon revivaitpar his seat on Helm's Deep.
Taking fantasy in Ash would have to go to Mary Gentle at the end of his story in a much more convincing and more legitimate with respect to the characters themselves, and I could not get that impression as pccchhiiittt I got it, closing the book.
0 comments:
Post a Comment