derpasaurus's review
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
kikiandarrowsfishshelf's review against another edition
4.0
Disclaimer: ARC via Netgalley
What is it about the bad boys? Okay, I’m not talking about those stalker types of bad boys, but those bad girls that in some way are sexier and more intriguing than the heroes. Take for instance, Guy of Gisburne in the BBC’s recent Robin Hood series. Smoldering Richard Armitage, enough said, right? Gisburne is bad, but not too bad, he is redeemable. To be fair, this trend in Gisburne seems to have been the Robin of Sherwood series, where Gisburne is revealed to have come from an abusive house, is more intelligent than the Sheriff he serves, and is the second Robin Hood’s half brother.
Guy has come a long way since first appearing as a mercenary sent to kill Robin Hood, hasn’t he?
So it’s hardly surprising that Venables makes use of the idea of Guy of Gisburne as hero. It’s more surprising that he seems to be the first author to have done so.
Venables combines the older version of Gisburne, the mercenary/knight with the more current theme of Gisburne as good girl. Of course, in the series, Gisburne is the hero.
This is the second book in a series, and I haven’t read the first. There was times when I wanted to know more, but the lack of knowledge in no way effected my understanding of the plot. It’s the type of series that you can jump into and not get frustrated (or at least it is in the terms of the second book).
The weakest part of the book in some ways is Gisburne himself. He is, at times, almost a too perfect character in general. He is smart, brave, intelligent, loyal, has a wonderful horse, and a dedicated squire. This is a danger that is always there when writing a story where the normal villain becomes the hero, an over use of the reverse of sin. It’s strange, though. Venables also presents Prince (later historically speaking King) John as another wrongly maligned figure, except John isn’t the paragon of perfection that Gisburne is; undoubtedly this is why John is a scene stealer.
It’s good to be the king.
Even if it is a king in waiting.
Despite this weakness of a too perfect character, the book is rather good. It’s a rollicking adventure of a roller coaster ride, to use mixed clichés and what not. Gisburne finds himself tasked so find the mysterious killer of knights, a killer who seems to be waiting to get to John. Then there is the question of the Hooded Man, a believable version of Robin Hood, but one that challenges the image of Hood in so many novels, movies, and television series. There is the question about Marian, though why Gisburne cares about Marian where Melisande is a far more interesting woman, I have no idea.
One would think that the character of Melisande would be the most annoying because in some ways she is most unbelievable, an Amazon of a woman. Yet, if Venables is drawing on the older ballads for his Gisburne, this Melisande makes sense because there is a tradition of her in Renaissance stories – Brandmante anyone? Like John, Melisande does manage to steal scenes, and she has some wonderful lines.
Gisburne too for that matter, in particular a good crack about sanity.
The most interesting part of the novel, aside from the action, is the play with the idea of story and legend. Why does Hood get the press and Gisburne doesn’t? What is it about stories, in particular stories about heroes subverting the rules? And what happens when people gain names they don’t want? Why does society remember things a certain way. This is the idea that Venables is playing with as Gisburne races to save those he is sworn too.
What is it about the bad boys? Okay, I’m not talking about those stalker types of bad boys, but those bad girls that in some way are sexier and more intriguing than the heroes. Take for instance, Guy of Gisburne in the BBC’s recent Robin Hood series. Smoldering Richard Armitage, enough said, right? Gisburne is bad, but not too bad, he is redeemable. To be fair, this trend in Gisburne seems to have been the Robin of Sherwood series, where Gisburne is revealed to have come from an abusive house, is more intelligent than the Sheriff he serves, and is the second Robin Hood’s half brother.
Guy has come a long way since first appearing as a mercenary sent to kill Robin Hood, hasn’t he?
So it’s hardly surprising that Venables makes use of the idea of Guy of Gisburne as hero. It’s more surprising that he seems to be the first author to have done so.
Venables combines the older version of Gisburne, the mercenary/knight with the more current theme of Gisburne as good girl. Of course, in the series, Gisburne is the hero.
This is the second book in a series, and I haven’t read the first. There was times when I wanted to know more, but the lack of knowledge in no way effected my understanding of the plot. It’s the type of series that you can jump into and not get frustrated (or at least it is in the terms of the second book).
The weakest part of the book in some ways is Gisburne himself. He is, at times, almost a too perfect character in general. He is smart, brave, intelligent, loyal, has a wonderful horse, and a dedicated squire. This is a danger that is always there when writing a story where the normal villain becomes the hero, an over use of the reverse of sin. It’s strange, though. Venables also presents Prince (later historically speaking King) John as another wrongly maligned figure, except John isn’t the paragon of perfection that Gisburne is; undoubtedly this is why John is a scene stealer.
It’s good to be the king.
Even if it is a king in waiting.
Despite this weakness of a too perfect character, the book is rather good. It’s a rollicking adventure of a roller coaster ride, to use mixed clichés and what not. Gisburne finds himself tasked so find the mysterious killer of knights, a killer who seems to be waiting to get to John. Then there is the question of the Hooded Man, a believable version of Robin Hood, but one that challenges the image of Hood in so many novels, movies, and television series. There is the question about Marian, though why Gisburne cares about Marian where Melisande is a far more interesting woman, I have no idea.
One would think that the character of Melisande would be the most annoying because in some ways she is most unbelievable, an Amazon of a woman. Yet, if Venables is drawing on the older ballads for his Gisburne, this Melisande makes sense because there is a tradition of her in Renaissance stories – Brandmante anyone? Like John, Melisande does manage to steal scenes, and she has some wonderful lines.
Gisburne too for that matter, in particular a good crack about sanity.
The most interesting part of the novel, aside from the action, is the play with the idea of story and legend. Why does Hood get the press and Gisburne doesn’t? What is it about stories, in particular stories about heroes subverting the rules? And what happens when people gain names they don’t want? Why does society remember things a certain way. This is the idea that Venables is playing with as Gisburne races to save those he is sworn too.
katydetamble's review
4.0
Im so excited to have found a new (er) Robin Hood series that isn't boring!!
More...