Dunnett, Dorothy - The Game of Kings

[oyceter]

I took a very long while getting into this, which was mostly my own fault -- it's a bit hard falling headfirst into Dunnett's labyrinthe plot when you read the book in vast intervals. The plot's still not very clear in my head.

It's funny because I began wondering what all the fuss was about Lymond. I could intellectually note everything that would have made him very appealing to me, but I had already heard so much about him via LJ that he had some pretty high expectations to live up to. But then, gradually, Dunnett kept revealing lines Lymond would not cross, and that, coupled with the sheer ruthlessness of him had me quite in his thrall by the end of the book. *wibble* Especially that scene when he and Richard duel. *wibble*

I spent a long time trying to decide if I generally liked the women in the book or not, and what I thought about the fact that certain women were just pure beyond reckoning. I also found it interesting that one of the big things against Lymond was his willingness to use women ruthlessly. I'm still not quite sure what I think.

I very much like Sybilla though. She is cool. I don't particularly like Mariotta, although I wibbled at the scene with her and Richard. Ditto Will Scott (minus the wibbling)... I can't decide if I want to hit him over the head for extreme vacillation or dubiously like him for the end. I am also quite fond of Richard just because everyone likes Lymond better than him, it seems, and I feel bad for him.

I also very much liked Christian Stewart, despite the fact that she became the sort of symbol of goodness and purity to the point in which Lymond will not have her reputation sullied for anything. I was quite traumatized when she died and I realized I wasn't reading fantasy, so really, there was no way she would be brought back to life a la Gandalf.

So. On to the next book!

ETA:
tenemet's review
rilina's review
inklings_lj's GoK entries
rachelmanija's first impressions, first 150 pgs, complete review
loligo's spoilery review and non-spoilery review

Comments

Ahhh...Dunnett

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I'm currently reading and almost finished the last book in the series which is the best.

It is a series about a complicated, non-traditional, classical hero, who like classical heros (a la Hercules, Oedipus, etc) tends to be a bit of an anti-hero. Think Spike, Angel, T.E. Lawrence. He does questionable things. He hates and loves himself at the same time.
And treats people at times like dirt. If you can't handle that? Stop now. Because it does get much grittier. Pawn is probably the most
emotionally grueling.

The books that link to each other are Disorderly Knights - Pawns in Frankinscense - Ringed Castle - Checkmate. All are long. Ringed is the shortest.

I got bogged down in every single book but Checkmate. Dunnett tends to lose me in the middle with all her long drawn out action sequences and description. Also Lymond is often removed from us - we see him through others eyes up until the last two books, in Ringed and Checkmate. Those two books, we see a great deal from his point of view. Also the female characters are stronger in the later books.

But Dunnett isn't easy going and her focus isn't on romance so much as action and adventure and the exploration of the journey of complicated and at times very dark hero. Not for the faint of heart.
If you don't like pricky characters - you won't like Lymond.

Re: Ahhh...Dunnett

[oyceter]

Oooo, angst? Looking forward to it ^_^. I like Lymond best when he is in horrible pain. Hrm. I wonder what that says about me....

Dunnett loses me as well, especially when I'm just trying to figure out who everyone is (and their titles and various family members and relationships) and where there are.

Glad to here there are more strong female characters!

Re: Ahhh...Dunnett

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

You'll like the later books better. She really punishes
Lymond in Disorderly Knights, Pawn, Ringed Castle, and
Checkmate. Actually what Dunnett does to Lymond and other characters in the later books makes Whedon and ME look like wimps in comparison. It's graphic, it's gut-wrenching and it is filled with angst. I barely made it through Game of Kings and Queen's Play, also got really bogged down in Disorderly Knights. But Pawn began to take off a bit, got bogged down a little. Ringed Castle bogged down in the middle, second half kept me up nights. And Checkmate I can't put down at all.

So if you can hang in there - she does reward you in the later books.

Re: Ahhh...Dunnett

[oyceter]

Ooooo, sounds good. Wow. It tooks me months to make it through Game of Kings, so it's nice to know it picks up!

Re: Ahhh...Dunnett

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

It tooks me months to make it through Game of Kings, so it's nice to know it picks up!

Good to see, I'm not the only one. I should confess: it took me a godawful time to finish that book. I gave up on it at one point and read another book in between then went back. I think I started it last June and finished it in Sept. Queen's Play went faster, two months, Oct-November. Disorderly Knight's? I gave up on at one point (granted I was ill at the time) and read Da Vinci Code, then went back to it - plowed through in 3 months. Took a break and read several other books. Then
picked up Pawn - that took about two months. Ringed Castle a month. Checkmate? Possibly three weeks.

As wonderful as the characters are and the writing, there are times I want to kick the writer and say -"clarity! and stop showing off for god's sake and tell the story!" Luckily it's a great story with some fascinating characters and accurate history. But, man, I wish the writing was a little less dense at times.

Re: Ahhh...Dunnett

[oyceter]

LOL!! Good, I feel better too ;). I don't even remember when I started Game of Kings, but I would just keep rereading the same paragraph over and over. Then the same chapter. Finally, I brought it with me on a plane ride, which made me just read a chunk of it. Then I sort of abandoned it again, then picked it up again.