Book Review: From Darkness Won by Jill Williamson
Overall Rating: 3/5 Stars.
I wanted to rate this book higher, I really did. But I have too many criticisms for the series as a whole to give it more than an average rating. There were things I liked about it too, which is why I didn't just drop it. I'll try to summarize briefly.
Pros
1. I like the main character, Achan. He's tenacious, teachable, but hangs on to his old "less desirable" identity as a stray even as a prince. He makes plenty of mistakes but bounces back from them having learned to be a better man.
2. I can tell that Williamson put a lot of effort into writing a story that would point to God and not to man. I read very little Christian fantasy because most of it is trite. While The Blood of Kings trilogy didn't escape that unscathed, it was still an enjoyable read that ultimately gave credit to God for the triumph over evil.
Cons
1. Williamson's writing is simplistic and sometimes confusing. There were chapters written ambiguously enough for several paragraphs that I lost track of whose point-of-view I was reading for a minute. Her descriptions often focus on the wrong things; e.g., one description of a palace used several architectural terms that an average reader will likely not comprehend, instead of providing a general impression of the structure. Her descriptions aim to be precise, but because of that make it difficult to envision anything at all.
2. Many characters feel indistinct. Aside from a couple with very specific dialects that affected their dialogue, every character "sounded" the same to me. The exception to this was Achan and Vrell, the two POV characters. The supporting cast was almost entirely made up of knights who spoke the same way. The only way I was able to separate them from each other was by the traits ascribed to them by either Achan or Vrell in their own thoughts.
3. The allegory for faith felt weak to me. I admit I have not read a Christian fantasy in which I actually enjoyed the allegorical element so far, though, so perhaps it just isn't my thing. I tend to find these stories wholly insufficient to show the theological complexities and depth of faith that true Christian belief has. This one leaned heavily on the "faith" aspect of belief with almost nothing to explain why these characters were willing to trust their God with so much aside from, literally, a warm fuzzy feeling. Achan was supposed to be on a journey of faith through the series, and I was entirely let down that not one of the characters that was already a believer took the time to try to explain their faith to him. He prayed and Arman occasionally answered as a literal voice in his head accompanied by a warm glowy feeling inside, and that was the only support Achan received while being told consistently that Arman had chosen him as King and it was his destiny as such to push back the darkness. There wasn't even an explanation about why Caan (Jesus) had died and risen again - which is the crux of Christian theology and something the earliest converts learn quickly. The poor explanations in this area left me - a Christian of some years now - understanding Achan's doubts far more than his belief. Perhaps I'm just a skeptic. My own faith has always been inseparable from my intellectual understanding of the Bible, so faith without that grounding knowledge feels empty to me.
4. I enjoyed the adventurous plotline of books 1 and 2, but book three seemed entirely too focused on pointless relationship drama for my tastes. I ended up pushing myself to finish it just so I could move on to something else more enjoyable. I do like Achan and Vrell's relationship, but her memory loss seemed designed simply to extend the length of the series. It did (view spoiler), but with how many people tried to tell her that in the beginning, it felt idiotic that she needed to go through a spell of amnesia and regaining memories one by one to figure out what she should have at the start of the book. I understand that willful self-deception is something people do all the time in real life, but Vrell's case of it seemed particularly strong and particularly pointless. What was she hiding from? Her reasons seemed insufficient compared to the amount of painful drama it caused for both her and Achan.
All in all, I'm likely not going to pick this one up again. I enjoyed Books 1-2 (despite the poor allegorical elements and overall writing) thanks to the likable main characters and their adventures across Er'Rets, but I feel as though book 3 lost that charm and got bogged down by attempts at romantic tension and the continuance of poorly explained Christian allegory.
P.S.
Being asexual may have something to do with my disdain for the drama in the romance plotline. I've never had much patience for it, to be honest. While I don't mind romantic relationships in books, I dislike when they are dramatized and become central to the book's plot instead of a subplot. This one felt particularly ridiculous to me in that aspect.
Read the review on Goodreads.
 |
| From Darkness Won (The Blood of Kings Book 3) by Jill Williamson |
I wanted to rate this book higher, I really did. But I have too many criticisms for the series as a whole to give it more than an average rating. There were things I liked about it too, which is why I didn't just drop it. I'll try to summarize briefly.
Pros
1. I like the main character, Achan. He's tenacious, teachable, but hangs on to his old "less desirable" identity as a stray even as a prince. He makes plenty of mistakes but bounces back from them having learned to be a better man.
2. I can tell that Williamson put a lot of effort into writing a story that would point to God and not to man. I read very little Christian fantasy because most of it is trite. While The Blood of Kings trilogy didn't escape that unscathed, it was still an enjoyable read that ultimately gave credit to God for the triumph over evil.
Cons
1. Williamson's writing is simplistic and sometimes confusing. There were chapters written ambiguously enough for several paragraphs that I lost track of whose point-of-view I was reading for a minute. Her descriptions often focus on the wrong things; e.g., one description of a palace used several architectural terms that an average reader will likely not comprehend, instead of providing a general impression of the structure. Her descriptions aim to be precise, but because of that make it difficult to envision anything at all.
2. Many characters feel indistinct. Aside from a couple with very specific dialects that affected their dialogue, every character "sounded" the same to me. The exception to this was Achan and Vrell, the two POV characters. The supporting cast was almost entirely made up of knights who spoke the same way. The only way I was able to separate them from each other was by the traits ascribed to them by either Achan or Vrell in their own thoughts.
3. The allegory for faith felt weak to me. I admit I have not read a Christian fantasy in which I actually enjoyed the allegorical element so far, though, so perhaps it just isn't my thing. I tend to find these stories wholly insufficient to show the theological complexities and depth of faith that true Christian belief has. This one leaned heavily on the "faith" aspect of belief with almost nothing to explain why these characters were willing to trust their God with so much aside from, literally, a warm fuzzy feeling. Achan was supposed to be on a journey of faith through the series, and I was entirely let down that not one of the characters that was already a believer took the time to try to explain their faith to him. He prayed and Arman occasionally answered as a literal voice in his head accompanied by a warm glowy feeling inside, and that was the only support Achan received while being told consistently that Arman had chosen him as King and it was his destiny as such to push back the darkness. There wasn't even an explanation about why Caan (Jesus) had died and risen again - which is the crux of Christian theology and something the earliest converts learn quickly. The poor explanations in this area left me - a Christian of some years now - understanding Achan's doubts far more than his belief. Perhaps I'm just a skeptic. My own faith has always been inseparable from my intellectual understanding of the Bible, so faith without that grounding knowledge feels empty to me.
4. I enjoyed the adventurous plotline of books 1 and 2, but book three seemed entirely too focused on pointless relationship drama for my tastes. I ended up pushing myself to finish it just so I could move on to something else more enjoyable. I do like Achan and Vrell's relationship, but her memory loss seemed designed simply to extend the length of the series. It did (view spoiler), but with how many people tried to tell her that in the beginning, it felt idiotic that she needed to go through a spell of amnesia and regaining memories one by one to figure out what she should have at the start of the book. I understand that willful self-deception is something people do all the time in real life, but Vrell's case of it seemed particularly strong and particularly pointless. What was she hiding from? Her reasons seemed insufficient compared to the amount of painful drama it caused for both her and Achan.
All in all, I'm likely not going to pick this one up again. I enjoyed Books 1-2 (despite the poor allegorical elements and overall writing) thanks to the likable main characters and their adventures across Er'Rets, but I feel as though book 3 lost that charm and got bogged down by attempts at romantic tension and the continuance of poorly explained Christian allegory.
P.S.
Being asexual may have something to do with my disdain for the drama in the romance plotline. I've never had much patience for it, to be honest. While I don't mind romantic relationships in books, I dislike when they are dramatized and become central to the book's plot instead of a subplot. This one felt particularly ridiculous to me in that aspect.
Comments
Post a Comment
Thoughts? Go on. I'm interested.