We just finished our first two-month long book. It started in March, when the pandemic hit, so it was an interesting couple of months. Many of us didn't even start in March because that was when everything started to get right crazy and we were worrying about other things than book club. I ended up reading The Priory of the Orange Tree in the last two weeks of April and first week of May. I got it done though, all 804 pages of if it in time for the meeting! So proud.
Priory has a gratuitous amount of good reviews and many of the people I follow on bookstagram also really liked it, so there was plenty of anticipation on my end. I'm so glad Carmen chose it for her pick, because I'm right along in the flock with those who liked it. I gave it a 9/10 for our club rating system and if it was out of 5 stars, then it got 5 stars. In fact the rating was positive across the board with this one. Even Elissa, who doesn't read a lot of fantasy, gave it a 6/10, shocking us all! That is a really good rating from her!
There was A LOT to discuss with this book, so I'm not surprised our meeting was almost 3 hours in length with only a few tangents from the actual book conversation. As with many fantasy novels, there was significant world-building, so there was no surprise when we all agreed that it didn't start to pick up and engage us until at least Part 2, and even later for some. We even debated quite a bit about the structure of the book: Could it have done better with more than one volume? Maybe not a trilogy, but maybe a duology? Would the ending have been better with a "10-years later" epilogue? Could some of the history have been revealed in a prologue at the beginning? We all unexpectedly agreed that the ending felt very Lord of the Rings-ish with every character getting a little wrap up. Funnily, Lord of the Rings ended up being one of our tangents because we equated Loth to Samwise Gamgee.
Speaking of the ending - I didn't quite get it. Particularly the part where Ead is talking to Captain Harlowe. Why him? What was the significance of their conversation? I am partial to the epilogue because the ending didn't quite make sense and could have been done better. Another thing about the end that chapped me, and Elissa agreed, was that they done Loth dirty. Everyone else got what they wanted and had a happy ending. He just got an ending, that's it. Nothing else special to it, other than the tiniest glimmer of possible hope that wasn't expanded on; makes me grouchy. Loth deserved better, and maybe even more than some of the other main characters got.
We talked and at points heatedly discussed the characters of the book. Who was our favourite; who did we hate; who was flat; who was complex; who we wanted more from; etc. My favourite character was Kit (which Janean KNEW it was going to be), but SPOILER: he was fucking killed off at the end of part one. I was CHOKED! Arrgghhh. To drive the knife in further too, my second favourite was ALSO killed off. I liked Kit particularly because he reminded me a lot of the bard from The Witcher franchise, but also cause he was loyal to Loth. I wish that dynamic was not ended so early on. I really didn't like Kalyba's character even though she was quite integral to the history of the world. I felt like she was inserted at points just to terrorize the characters. I didn't like that. We all concurred that Niclays Roos was by far the most complex character in the book, even if we all didn't like him that much. I think he was the most developed because he was a character the author had spent a lot of time on and then kind of wrote a book around him, but purposefully not with him being the solo main character. Tané was one of the four main characters, and we all felt she was so under developed and under utilized with her warrior chick persona that her arc fell super flat by the end.
There was a discussion on the world-building, geography, and the magical and religious systems of the book as well. I had strong opinions on this, especially with the geography and the representation of ethnicity in the book. I used the word 'stereotypical' a lot when expressing my opinions during this part. While I liked the book, I felt the religious aspects and diversity of characters was a little too on the nose. As Jane said when she was sort of summarizing my feelings: it was almost like there was a 'list' of everything that should be in a book and the author was kind of ticking them off as she went. Are different ethnic groups present? Check. Are they in non- or slightly non-stereotypical roles? Double-check. Is there a big issue between religions? Check. Is one religious group called 'heretics'? Double-check. Are there bad-ass female leads? Check. Are they almost completely gender-swapped with male roles? Double-check. Are there same-sex relationships? Check. Made sure there wasn't one heterosexual main couple? Double-check? Some of it just seemed so forced, but yet none of it was in your face.
Overall, I really really enjoyed this book, and I liked it a lot. I would absolutely recommend it to fantasy lovers and those who like strong female leads. Mostly because of Ead, as I wish Tané had been done better. I wish there was a little bit more of a grey area within the world and within the characters, and it wasn't quite so black and white and balanced.
UP NEXT: Our May pick is our first Canadian author for Book Club. Serenade a little music themed and takes place in the Rocky Mountains. It is a much shorter book, so that will be nice after a long read. I'm looking forward to this one because some stuff will be familiar in the setting and landscapes.
No comments:
Post a Comment