Scan barcode
beau_kemp's review against another edition
4.0
A great story, and although a bit confusing at times, I really enjoyed it. I think it was a bit too long. I suspect I'll pick up the next book the next time I get the hankering for chivalry.
wyopoke87's review against another edition
adventurous
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.0
amanda31's review against another edition
5.0
A damn good book! So glad to have found another great HF writer with enough published to keep me going for a while!
speesh's review against another edition
3.0
The story, what there is, is basically a tour around France and down that way, in the 14th Century. When, as I've mentioned before, the days were filled with knights. William Gold is having a piss-up in a tavern, and, in the first of many similarities with Geoffrey Chaucer we encounter at various times in this book, he gets persuaded to tell his comrades a tale. Of his life.
The Ill-Made Knight revolves around Gold's early life, and his progression from basically being a street urchin who is handy with his fists, to becoming, maybe, a knight himself. Working his way up the 14th Century social ladder, Gold more or less moves from on fight to another, one disappointment to another, as he always seems to be just two steps behind bad luck. If he didn’t have bad luck, he’d have no luck at all. Some of the talk early on in his career, where he had a lot of ambition but no money and no equipment and had to basically gather what articles of clothing and armour from the dead and dying he has bested in battle, reminded me of the situation some parts of the Russian army were in in the Second World War. They were sent into battle without the proper clothes and many times without firearms, and had to scavenge what they could from the dead and dying on either sides. Imagine that. Some things never change, eh?
And speaking of sides, if Gold states that he's sometimes a little confused about which side he’s on, who he’s supposed to be fighting for, or against - spare a thought for the poor reader. We have absolutely no idea. Well, I didn't for long periods of the book. Mostly he was for (or was it against?) the French, though he spoke French, didn't he? Though he was best buddies, some of the time anyway, with Geoffrey Chaucer, who wrote Canterbury Tales in English, so maybe he was English? But he did seem to switch sides once or twice. Though it's not like anything was ordered down there, back then. Every group of men out for themselves, and allied themselves with whoever looked most like 'winning.' Chaucer doesn't come out of The Ill-Made Knight too well. A real arrogant, elitist bastard, I was thinking most of the time, though, if I remember my school book-learnin' right, Chaucer's The Knight's Tale, does have some similarities with Camerons Ill-Made Knight's tale. In the latter 14th Century, populists were questioning the nature of the class structure - "When Adam delved and Eve span, who then was gentleman?" They were casting doubt on gentlemen's right to see themselves as better than 'commoners' (and the Peasants' Revolt wasn't that far away, was it?) William Gold highlights this, calling his audience Gentlemen, or just Gentles, many times throughout the book. Chaucer's Knight can be seen as the perfect example of what the ruling class produced and called Knights - violent snobs, who saw the classes lower than them, as ripe for, or only, there for them to exploit. And rich. You had to be to afford all the armour and clothing, and manners. A Knight is thought to have been worth between £300 and £1,000 back then, somewhere between £120,000 and £400,000 in today's money. In The Ill-Found Knight, Gold comes from the exploited end of society, but desperately wants to be at the other end of the exploitation, though with his background, he wouldn't want to indulge. For him, the noble ideals of Chivalry are what he sees as defining a Knight. A knight is knightly, as he sees it, by what a knight should do. What he finds in reality, of course, is more like Chaucer was to write about. What Gold realises, maybe, is that you don't only become chivalrous when you become a Knight and therefore are in that rarified strata of 14th Century society. Chivalric behaviour is just as often, if not mostly more so, found lower down the scale as well. It's not new, but still interesting. How much of that is purely a concept seen though 21st Century eyes, and pasted on a 14th Century figure, I can't say.
If you've read any Chaucer, you'll also recognise the themes raised here of the (various) knights supposedly fighting for their people, the peasants, though killing them off like flies at every opportunity. The various armies are as locusts, stripping the countryside of everything - another similarity to World War II, where Germany went over eastern Europe, into Russia, Russia was forced to retreat and employed a scorched earth policy, then Germany was forced to retreat backwards again, and employed a scorched earth policy, Russia overran the eastern countries again, and removed everything that wasn’t nailed down. The poor people, the peasants, caught in the middle time after time.
Mr Cameron is, I understand, big on the re-enactment front. And he really wants us to know what he’s learned about knights of the time. Some of the insights and attention to detail are, I'll admit, well done, well sneaked in. The weight of the armour, and therefore how strong they must have been at the time, the amount of mud, they climbing on the underside of the ladders while scaling a wall. But, whilst not quite in the "you haven’t done your homework, have you boy? Every other word needs explaining, does it boy?!" class of Prof Harry Sidebottom, it can be wearisome. You can see it in the situations, as here, where the character narrating comes to a word, or the name of an item of clothing, or armour, whose name would have been either common enough knowledge at the time, or if not by the general populace - the serf in the street - then certainly by the people the narrator, as here, is relating their story to. In short, this audience of 13-whatever would have known exactly what he was talking about, but we wouldn’t. So we get an explanation. Other authors do it better. C.R. May, Angus Donald (etc) are all in the no explanation needed camp and, in my opinion, the better for it.
He does, however, stray away from the age of Chaucer (probably better for the sales figures to do that), and remember that this is supposed to be a bestselling Historical Fiction book, and employs many of the cliches of the Hist Fic age too. There is a spray of scarlet, a couple of almost imperceptible nods, a sword that does become like a living thing. There are way too many raised eyebrows as well. So much so that it at times gives the last Anthony Riches’ one I read a run for its money. Though CC needs to raise his pursed lips count significantly to compete properly in the wider Hist Fic arena, as there are only two that I can remember. A couple of the similes stopped me in my tracks as well. As in "Erm, Chris; did they know of such things at that time?" Fist-sized rocks “left by the glaciers” was the best of them. Obviously Anthony Riches' editor freelancing for a section or two.
When she/he wasn't freelancing, the rest of the book is entertaining enough, though staying well outside 'classic' areas. There's plenty going on, but making head or tail of it, is, as I've said, just as difficult for us as it was for William Gold. I won't say I was disappointed, but I did expect more from it than it ended up delivering.
Blog: Speesh Reads
Facebook: Speesh Reads
Pinterest: Speesh Reads
The Ill-Made Knight revolves around Gold's early life, and his progression from basically being a street urchin who is handy with his fists, to becoming, maybe, a knight himself. Working his way up the 14th Century social ladder, Gold more or less moves from on fight to another, one disappointment to another, as he always seems to be just two steps behind bad luck. If he didn’t have bad luck, he’d have no luck at all. Some of the talk early on in his career, where he had a lot of ambition but no money and no equipment and had to basically gather what articles of clothing and armour from the dead and dying he has bested in battle, reminded me of the situation some parts of the Russian army were in in the Second World War. They were sent into battle without the proper clothes and many times without firearms, and had to scavenge what they could from the dead and dying on either sides. Imagine that. Some things never change, eh?
And speaking of sides, if Gold states that he's sometimes a little confused about which side he’s on, who he’s supposed to be fighting for, or against - spare a thought for the poor reader. We have absolutely no idea. Well, I didn't for long periods of the book. Mostly he was for (or was it against?) the French, though he spoke French, didn't he? Though he was best buddies, some of the time anyway, with Geoffrey Chaucer, who wrote Canterbury Tales in English, so maybe he was English? But he did seem to switch sides once or twice. Though it's not like anything was ordered down there, back then. Every group of men out for themselves, and allied themselves with whoever looked most like 'winning.' Chaucer doesn't come out of The Ill-Made Knight too well. A real arrogant, elitist bastard, I was thinking most of the time, though, if I remember my school book-learnin' right, Chaucer's The Knight's Tale, does have some similarities with Camerons Ill-Made Knight's tale. In the latter 14th Century, populists were questioning the nature of the class structure - "When Adam delved and Eve span, who then was gentleman?" They were casting doubt on gentlemen's right to see themselves as better than 'commoners' (and the Peasants' Revolt wasn't that far away, was it?) William Gold highlights this, calling his audience Gentlemen, or just Gentles, many times throughout the book. Chaucer's Knight can be seen as the perfect example of what the ruling class produced and called Knights - violent snobs, who saw the classes lower than them, as ripe for, or only, there for them to exploit. And rich. You had to be to afford all the armour and clothing, and manners. A Knight is thought to have been worth between £300 and £1,000 back then, somewhere between £120,000 and £400,000 in today's money. In The Ill-Found Knight, Gold comes from the exploited end of society, but desperately wants to be at the other end of the exploitation, though with his background, he wouldn't want to indulge. For him, the noble ideals of Chivalry are what he sees as defining a Knight. A knight is knightly, as he sees it, by what a knight should do. What he finds in reality, of course, is more like Chaucer was to write about. What Gold realises, maybe, is that you don't only become chivalrous when you become a Knight and therefore are in that rarified strata of 14th Century society. Chivalric behaviour is just as often, if not mostly more so, found lower down the scale as well. It's not new, but still interesting. How much of that is purely a concept seen though 21st Century eyes, and pasted on a 14th Century figure, I can't say.
If you've read any Chaucer, you'll also recognise the themes raised here of the (various) knights supposedly fighting for their people, the peasants, though killing them off like flies at every opportunity. The various armies are as locusts, stripping the countryside of everything - another similarity to World War II, where Germany went over eastern Europe, into Russia, Russia was forced to retreat and employed a scorched earth policy, then Germany was forced to retreat backwards again, and employed a scorched earth policy, Russia overran the eastern countries again, and removed everything that wasn’t nailed down. The poor people, the peasants, caught in the middle time after time.
Mr Cameron is, I understand, big on the re-enactment front. And he really wants us to know what he’s learned about knights of the time. Some of the insights and attention to detail are, I'll admit, well done, well sneaked in. The weight of the armour, and therefore how strong they must have been at the time, the amount of mud, they climbing on the underside of the ladders while scaling a wall. But, whilst not quite in the "you haven’t done your homework, have you boy? Every other word needs explaining, does it boy?!" class of Prof Harry Sidebottom, it can be wearisome. You can see it in the situations, as here, where the character narrating comes to a word, or the name of an item of clothing, or armour, whose name would have been either common enough knowledge at the time, or if not by the general populace - the serf in the street - then certainly by the people the narrator, as here, is relating their story to. In short, this audience of 13-whatever would have known exactly what he was talking about, but we wouldn’t. So we get an explanation. Other authors do it better. C.R. May, Angus Donald (etc) are all in the no explanation needed camp and, in my opinion, the better for it.
He does, however, stray away from the age of Chaucer (probably better for the sales figures to do that), and remember that this is supposed to be a bestselling Historical Fiction book, and employs many of the cliches of the Hist Fic age too. There is a spray of scarlet, a couple of almost imperceptible nods, a sword that does become like a living thing. There are way too many raised eyebrows as well. So much so that it at times gives the last Anthony Riches’ one I read a run for its money. Though CC needs to raise his pursed lips count significantly to compete properly in the wider Hist Fic arena, as there are only two that I can remember. A couple of the similes stopped me in my tracks as well. As in "Erm, Chris; did they know of such things at that time?" Fist-sized rocks “left by the glaciers” was the best of them. Obviously Anthony Riches' editor freelancing for a section or two.
When she/he wasn't freelancing, the rest of the book is entertaining enough, though staying well outside 'classic' areas. There's plenty going on, but making head or tail of it, is, as I've said, just as difficult for us as it was for William Gold. I won't say I was disappointed, but I did expect more from it than it ended up delivering.
Blog: Speesh Reads
Facebook: Speesh Reads
Pinterest: Speesh Reads
chrudos's review against another edition
4.0
This book (and hopefully series) shows a lot of promise. I like Cameron's writing in general and I have a great appreciation for the extra details he puts in because of his re-enacting experience. Unfortunately, more detailed descriptions was what this book was missing. For example, author was apologizing for including too much of religion in the author's note. I am not a believer, but to me there was too little of it. Religion was what was giving structure to the people that were living in that period and it would be more interesting to reflect it more in the thinking of the main character. And religion is only one aspect. I would have liked author's help when I was imagining the landscape, villages, town defences, castles and the life in the castes etc. Using of the period jargon only goes so far. Moreover, there was so much movement across the map of France in the book, that it felt a bit like the author was trying to show off how much he knows without actually introducing the episodes properly. Nevertheless, I really liked the story and the main character, even though sometimes it felt a bit like tragic version of "Knight's tale" movie :). I am certainly planning to read the next book!
theknitterwithabook's review against another edition
4.0
If you wish to read very heavy historical novel, this book is the perfect option. This is well researched, accurate and fascinating.
This is not a book pacted with epic action, there is nothing grand or fantastic. It is slow paced and it is a lifetime story. A fantastic and interesting story does not need an incredible hero. Common characters can make good stories too. We are far from good guys fighting bad guys with an epic boss in the end. It is a very linear story, there is no surprises or big "edge of your seat" moment. But that doesn't mean it wasn't enjoyable.
I truly enjoyed this read ! For someone with an history degree, I confirm that it was well done and beautiful. It met my expectations without being over the top.
I am very curious for the next books in this serie.
This is not a book pacted with epic action, there is nothing grand or fantastic. It is slow paced and it is a lifetime story. A fantastic and interesting story does not need an incredible hero. Common characters can make good stories too. We are far from good guys fighting bad guys with an epic boss in the end. It is a very linear story, there is no surprises or big "edge of your seat" moment. But that doesn't mean it wasn't enjoyable.
I truly enjoyed this read ! For someone with an history degree, I confirm that it was well done and beautiful. It met my expectations without being over the top.
I am very curious for the next books in this serie.
hteph's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
informative
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
The author succeeds in writing combat scenes that feels both exciting and realistic. The story feels believable, (mostly in a depressing way) and is emotionally engaging. People that lacks interest in historical detail may find it a bit too detailed in places, but to me that is not a bug but a feature.
carolhoggart's review against another edition
5.0
I've never read a medieval-set historical novel that feels so very authentic. Cameron is a dedicated historical re-enactor, and shows in every page of The Ill-Made Knight. The Hundred Years' War of the 1350s and 60s is brought to vivid, uncomfortable life. Warfare isn't just about blood and swords, but also about sewing ripped clothing, scavenging for dead men's armour of your size, blurring boundaries between enemies (some of the English hero, William Gold's, best 'friends' in the first part of the book are French), and being everlastingly short of money.
The story is, as the title suggests, centred around William's ambition to become a knight. Yet it is not enough for William simply to be dubbed, but he must learn through often horrendous experience, just what knighthood and chivalry means. War in France is shown to be soul-destroying. The English rape the French countryside (and the women) in the aftermath of Poitiers. William Gold does as all the rest do, and dies inside as he does so. William must discover a saving grace in order not to descend to the barbarity of characters such as the Bourc Camus.
Despite its wonderful authenticity and the thought-provoking treatment of knighthood, I took quite a while to read this book because it lacked a driving plot. I'm not sure this is a flaw, for William's drift from one scene of war to another felt very real. It did, however, slow the reading down a lot.
I wasn't completely convinced by Cameron's treatment of Geoffrey Chaucer. While Chaucer's cutting critique of William's actions and warfare in France in general certainly rang true, Chaucer himself seemed a bit too acerbic to be in keeping with the tone of his writing. I was intrigued, however, by the possibility that Cameron based aspects of William Gold's character and career on the Knight of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, who notably wears armour "al bismotered" with dirt, tells a tale of beautiful "Emelye", and is about to go on Crusade as the book ends.
Finally, a very minor niggle: Cameron's portrayal of medieval swearing was oddly mixed. He seesaws between modern swearing and medieval-style blasphemy. As I understand it, medieval Christians did not consider explicit reference to bodily functions to be particularly bad words. The sort of phrases that Milady or Father Pierre really would object to, however, were those that took the Lord's name in vain.
But there isn't a historical novelist alive or dead who manages to avoid all anachronism or minor error. A friend lent me this copy of The Ill-Made Knight. I'm going to go out right away and buy my own so it can sit in pride of place in my bookshelf!
The story is, as the title suggests, centred around William's ambition to become a knight. Yet it is not enough for William simply to be dubbed, but he must learn through often horrendous experience, just what knighthood and chivalry means. War in France is shown to be soul-destroying. The English rape the French countryside (and the women) in the aftermath of Poitiers. William Gold does as all the rest do, and dies inside as he does so. William must discover a saving grace in order not to descend to the barbarity of characters such as the Bourc Camus.
Despite its wonderful authenticity and the thought-provoking treatment of knighthood, I took quite a while to read this book because it lacked a driving plot. I'm not sure this is a flaw, for William's drift from one scene of war to another felt very real. It did, however, slow the reading down a lot.
I wasn't completely convinced by Cameron's treatment of Geoffrey Chaucer. While Chaucer's cutting critique of William's actions and warfare in France in general certainly rang true, Chaucer himself seemed a bit too acerbic to be in keeping with the tone of his writing. I was intrigued, however, by the possibility that Cameron based aspects of William Gold's character and career on the Knight of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, who notably wears armour "al bismotered" with dirt, tells a tale of beautiful "Emelye", and is about to go on Crusade as the book ends.
Finally, a very minor niggle: Cameron's portrayal of medieval swearing was oddly mixed. He seesaws between modern swearing and medieval-style blasphemy. As I understand it, medieval Christians did not consider explicit reference to bodily functions to be particularly bad words. The sort of phrases that Milady or Father Pierre really would object to, however, were those that took the Lord's name in vain.
But there isn't a historical novelist alive or dead who manages to avoid all anachronism or minor error. A friend lent me this copy of The Ill-Made Knight. I'm going to go out right away and buy my own so it can sit in pride of place in my bookshelf!
stephend81d5's review against another edition
4.0
enjoyed this first part of a new series based during the hundred years war book starts around time of the battle of poiters, fast paced on lines of cornwell and you had the backrground of the main character William gold. looking forward to next part of this 14th century epic
More...