![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dangermousieI've just finished Lord of the Firelands by Dave Duncan, a fantasy take on Hamlet, even down to being set in a fantasy (but not very far-fetched) version of viking Scandinavia.
Well, it would be Hamlet if Hamlet
a. had a lot more about Hamlet Sr, Gertrude, and Claudius during Hamlet's childhood
b. was a lot less willing to vaccilate and a lot more willing to wreak havoc
c. Queen Gertrude went for Claudius because she was enchanted to do so
I loved the little allusions to Hamlet throughout, from big (Radgar is a Prince educated abroad, returning to find his mother married to his slimy uncle who also murdered Daddy - there is a ghost involved in the reveal, even if it's not the same one as in Hamlet. He has a reasonable best friend, there is a challenge and fight in front of Uncle who tries to cheat and is unwittingly prevented by the Queen etc) to small (one of the characters is named Yorick, surfaces again under the pseudonym of Geste and has a sword named Fancy. I loled at that one).
It's a good book and I recommend it. The one problem for me was that I didn't love any of the main characters - by that I mean I found them interesting, interesting aplenty, but my heart wasn't wrung when bad things happened to them. I think the reason for it, parodoxically, is because the author didn't try to modernize what is clearly a thinly veiled fantasy version of Vikings - the characters aren't peace-loving vegetarians or something equally anachronistic, but their ruthlessness sticks with me too much. Aeled (Hamlet Sr.) whose actions and whose murder moves most of the story (he is as much a protagonist as his son) might be an able ruler, a great war hero, a good father, and a loving husband, but it doesn't negate the fact that he goes raiding and pillaging on a regular basis. I think I might have shrugged even that off, but the Vikings of the story tend to take all the slaves they capture and turn them into 'thralls' - people whose souls have fled but whose bodies remain to be worked as slaves. In fact, when the flashback which comprises more than half the book starts, he had just led such a raid and captured a lot of youngsters of a particular town to be turned over to what consitutes basically child murder. So ultimately, when Aeled meets his demise and the assassin tells him that it was his brother who betrayed him, and the payment for that would be the woman Aeled loves being turned into brother's love slave, basically a more functional version of thrall, a part of me can't help but think: "Now you know what it feels like to have everything taken from you by someone whom you never did any harm but who wants what you have. And now you know what it's like to have someone you love turned into a thrall."Still, Aeled was hot.
And Radgar decides to continue the war against their neighbor country once he comes to the throne, and even if his grudge against the enemy king is legitimate, kidnapping, raiding, enslaving, and thralling people who only happen to be that king's subjects, does not endear him to me.
The only characters I really loved were Maud, Radgar's grandmother (she was only in one scene but she rocked), Durendal (who had a brief cameo. I have SUCH a crush on him from The Guilded Chain. Now, that was a character I could adore) and Queen Charlotte (this version's Gertrude) because she was amazing. In fact, I kept hoping that at the end she'd fight off her conjurment, take a sword and run amuck, hopefully killing her slimy husband number 2, but no such luck).
Anyway, fun read.
Well, it would be Hamlet if Hamlet
a. had a lot more about Hamlet Sr, Gertrude, and Claudius during Hamlet's childhood
b. was a lot less willing to vaccilate and a lot more willing to wreak havoc
c. Queen Gertrude went for Claudius because she was enchanted to do so
I loved the little allusions to Hamlet throughout, from big (Radgar is a Prince educated abroad, returning to find his mother married to his slimy uncle who also murdered Daddy - there is a ghost involved in the reveal, even if it's not the same one as in Hamlet. He has a reasonable best friend, there is a challenge and fight in front of Uncle who tries to cheat and is unwittingly prevented by the Queen etc) to small (one of the characters is named Yorick, surfaces again under the pseudonym of Geste and has a sword named Fancy. I loled at that one).
It's a good book and I recommend it. The one problem for me was that I didn't love any of the main characters - by that I mean I found them interesting, interesting aplenty, but my heart wasn't wrung when bad things happened to them. I think the reason for it, parodoxically, is because the author didn't try to modernize what is clearly a thinly veiled fantasy version of Vikings - the characters aren't peace-loving vegetarians or something equally anachronistic, but their ruthlessness sticks with me too much. Aeled (Hamlet Sr.) whose actions and whose murder moves most of the story (he is as much a protagonist as his son) might be an able ruler, a great war hero, a good father, and a loving husband, but it doesn't negate the fact that he goes raiding and pillaging on a regular basis. I think I might have shrugged even that off, but the Vikings of the story tend to take all the slaves they capture and turn them into 'thralls' - people whose souls have fled but whose bodies remain to be worked as slaves. In fact, when the flashback which comprises more than half the book starts, he had just led such a raid and captured a lot of youngsters of a particular town to be turned over to what consitutes basically child murder. So ultimately, when Aeled meets his demise and the assassin tells him that it was his brother who betrayed him, and the payment for that would be the woman Aeled loves being turned into brother's love slave, basically a more functional version of thrall, a part of me can't help but think: "Now you know what it feels like to have everything taken from you by someone whom you never did any harm but who wants what you have. And now you know what it's like to have someone you love turned into a thrall."
And Radgar decides to continue the war against their neighbor country once he comes to the throne, and even if his grudge against the enemy king is legitimate, kidnapping, raiding, enslaving, and thralling people who only happen to be that king's subjects, does not endear him to me.
The only characters I really loved were Maud, Radgar's grandmother (she was only in one scene but she rocked), Durendal (who had a brief cameo. I have SUCH a crush on him from The Guilded Chain. Now, that was a character I could adore) and Queen Charlotte (this version's Gertrude) because she was amazing. In fact, I kept hoping that at the end she'd fight off her conjurment, take a sword and run amuck, hopefully killing her slimy husband number 2, but no such luck).
Anyway, fun read.
