Skip to main content

The Valisars, at War and in Peace

Image
By
One of the reviews on the cover of Fiona McIntosh's book stated that she was set to inherit the mantle of David Gemmell. I hold the late Mr. Gemmell in such great regard that I was skeptical of this claim. When it came to action fantasy, there was no one like him, and as much as I like McIntosh's work, she is not David Gemmell. Gemmell was a class unto his own.

Fiona McIntosh is good in her own right, without comparison to anyone, whether Gemmell or Jordan, Robin Hobb or P. V. Brett. After having finished the third book in her "Valisar" trilogy last night, I was very glad that I stuck through the first two books. The last hundred pages of "King's Wrath" were worth the entire trilogy. Our story began in "Royal Exile" with the attack by the barbarian Loethar on Penraven. The Valisar King, Brennus, sends his son into exile, and Leo escapes with an oath of vengeance. By the third book, ten years have passed, and all the Valisars (we learned that there were two others, plus Loethar who was revealed to be of the Valisar family as well) are rushing towards a confrontation to decide who will rule the empire, whether Loether, the exiled Leo, his brother Piven or the newly-revealed Valisar Princess Evie. 

In a way, this followed the style of "The Quickening" trilogy that I read several years ago, in which the first book was rather slow, but the pace of the story picked up as it went along, with events rushing to a conclusion in the final volume. This is not to say that they were rushed, for they were not, but the final events of the story happened very quickly. The characters were very interesting, with a lot of complexity and shades of gray rather than pure good and pure evil. No one was particularly "pure" in the books; each one had their flaws, their inner darkness, and this only made the story more worth reading. A number of the characters serve as an example of how the single-minded pursuit of power can pervert and distort the morality of even the most well-meaning of people.

After this trilogy, I look forward to McIntosh's next work.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

By
Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...
18 comments
Read more

How I Left Creationism

By
There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...
23 comments
Read more

The Hovinds...Still Poking at Straw Men

By
Kent Hovind, the false "Dr. Dino", and his ilk are at it again. In a new article on his website, Hovind (or whoever authored the piece, perhaps his son) claims that while creationists have no problems using miracles to explain events (a habit that perpetually makes them unfit to do real science), evolutionists criticize them for it, even though, in Hovind's mind, they rely on miracles just as much to explain their "religion" of descent through natural selection. This is, at its core, demonstrably nonsense. He claims that a "miracle" is needed to make stars and planets form out of gas, a supposed violation of Boyle's Law because there was no "outside force" acting on the gas and dust. How about gravity, Dr. Dino? That would certainly explain it, no miracles needed here. This attack is a non-sequitur. The objection has everything to do with astronomy and cosmology and nothing to do with evolution, which is the development of new species o...
11 comments
Read more