Scan barcode
margyzr's review against another edition
5.0
I'm familiar with Norse myth, but I love a retelling. This is a good one, hitting the major beats of some of the most famous myths.
gracielanef's review against another edition
4.0
listened to it on libby! i love neil’s voice and acting as he read. loki’s stories were always my favorite and his characterization of him was brilliant.
goldeye07's review against another edition
2.0
Meh, I don't feel that he brought anything new to the table in his retelling of these classic stories.
j_rowley's review against another edition
4.0
Gaiman retells stories from Norse mythology. This was an easier to follow account than I have read in the past. Loved the glossary in the back to help with some of the names. Wish there was an online pronunciation guide to go with the book.
kleonora's review against another edition
1.0
Verdict; Deft and elegant telling of myths. Any resemblance to other books, with or without giant pencil illustrations is entirely coincidental.
So apparently Gaiman did his primary source research and reconstructed the stories in his book from scratch, as it were. I have no reason to doubt the word of Mr. Gaiman, indeed, he seems like the sort who would actually enjoy research. That said, I need to point out that he could have taken my much loved copy of d'Aulaires Norse Gods and Giants (now rechristened Book of Norse Myths) and saved himself some time. Not only are the stores recounted in d'Aulaires, I’m pretty sure they’re in the same order. I’ll let you know. Reading this has made me nostalgic for those in-your-face coloured pencil drawings so I’ll be rescuing my Norse Gods and Giants from the wilds of my parent’s attic this Christmas.
But back to the book at hand, I may have heard all the stories before but that didn’t mean I didn’t enjoy Gaiman telling them to me. I like the stripped back prose he uses. I’ve seen some comments that consider it childish, but I think timeless would be a better description. It’s deceptively difficult to write that way. That said, it works a treat for bedtime stories.
It is a supremely ego-less book, faithful to the authenticity of the myths as opposed to the author’s take on them. (For that, I direct you to American Gods) That doesn’t mean it’s dry, though. My favourite aspect was the imagined dialogue of the Gods, sparse and serviceable and hilarious, another deceptively tricky rhetorical accomplishment. Loki is a star here, captured in all his cleverness, malice and also self-sabotage. I may be missing the d'Aulaires pictures and remembering the stories, but I have a feeling that once I actually dig my old book out of the attic, I’ll be missing Gaiman’s prose.
An unfair gripe, unfair because it is always unfair to criticise a book for not being what you wanted it to be rather than on what it is, but I rather wish the specifics of Loki’s drunken Gods roast had made the cut. Especially given the afore mentioned excellence of Gaiman’s dialogue and Loki characterisation. Still, he says in the notes (which I read because I finished the book on the tube and still had 6 more stops to go) it didn’t fit in with the tone of the rest of the book and I suppose he’d know best.* I’m going to have to dig out the source material and brush up on my Norse.
To conclude; The thing with books on mythology, from my experience in snuffling them out all through my adolescence, is that they tend to be written by scholars not writers and can therefore skew to the dry and/or confusing** I appreciate that Gaiman wrote this book and think it’s something that, while not coffeeshop prize winning work of literature, will nonetheless last well through the years and I’m going to hang onto it which is rare for me.
*Alternative theory, Loki’s speech isn’t in d'Aulaires either. Just saying. We all have deadlines, Gaiman. You can come clean.
**looking at you book on Egyptian gods that insisted on fracturing any hint of a consistent narrative by explaining how legends different between geographical areas and through time.
So apparently Gaiman did his primary source research and reconstructed the stories in his book from scratch, as it were. I have no reason to doubt the word of Mr. Gaiman, indeed, he seems like the sort who would actually enjoy research. That said, I need to point out that he could have taken my much loved copy of d'Aulaires Norse Gods and Giants (now rechristened Book of Norse Myths) and saved himself some time. Not only are the stores recounted in d'Aulaires, I’m pretty sure they’re in the same order. I’ll let you know. Reading this has made me nostalgic for those in-your-face coloured pencil drawings so I’ll be rescuing my Norse Gods and Giants from the wilds of my parent’s attic this Christmas.
But back to the book at hand, I may have heard all the stories before but that didn’t mean I didn’t enjoy Gaiman telling them to me. I like the stripped back prose he uses. I’ve seen some comments that consider it childish, but I think timeless would be a better description. It’s deceptively difficult to write that way. That said, it works a treat for bedtime stories.
It is a supremely ego-less book, faithful to the authenticity of the myths as opposed to the author’s take on them. (For that, I direct you to American Gods) That doesn’t mean it’s dry, though. My favourite aspect was the imagined dialogue of the Gods, sparse and serviceable and hilarious, another deceptively tricky rhetorical accomplishment. Loki is a star here, captured in all his cleverness, malice and also self-sabotage. I may be missing the d'Aulaires pictures and remembering the stories, but I have a feeling that once I actually dig my old book out of the attic, I’ll be missing Gaiman’s prose.
An unfair gripe, unfair because it is always unfair to criticise a book for not being what you wanted it to be rather than on what it is, but I rather wish the specifics of Loki’s drunken Gods roast had made the cut. Especially given the afore mentioned excellence of Gaiman’s dialogue and Loki characterisation. Still, he says in the notes (which I read because I finished the book on the tube and still had 6 more stops to go) it didn’t fit in with the tone of the rest of the book and I suppose he’d know best.* I’m going to have to dig out the source material and brush up on my Norse.
To conclude; The thing with books on mythology, from my experience in snuffling them out all through my adolescence, is that they tend to be written by scholars not writers and can therefore skew to the dry and/or confusing** I appreciate that Gaiman wrote this book and think it’s something that, while not coffeeshop prize winning work of literature, will nonetheless last well through the years and I’m going to hang onto it which is rare for me.
*Alternative theory, Loki’s speech isn’t in d'Aulaires either. Just saying. We all have deadlines, Gaiman. You can come clean.
**looking at you book on Egyptian gods that insisted on fracturing any hint of a consistent narrative by explaining how legends different between geographical areas and through time.
dontfeedtheyenne's review against another edition
3.0
Really enjoyed the book. It was a quick read and it took me back to when I discovered Norse Mythology by finding the story of Ragnarok in a textbook in Middle School.
It's mythology so any nuance as subtlety is mostly out the window, but Neil Gaiman does a good job throwing in good character moments when he can.
It's mythology so any nuance as subtlety is mostly out the window, but Neil Gaiman does a good job throwing in good character moments when he can.
s0lidarity_f0rever's review against another edition
5.0
Awesome book. Wish I read it before I read American Gods. Would have helped me see more parallels and understand AG at a higher level.
rttgirl's review against another edition
5.0
Beautifully written...but it was a bit disconcerting to have very concrete images of Odin (from the tv series "American Gods") and Thor and Loki (from the bit of "The Avengers" I've seen) in my head...