rameau's Reviews > The Mists of Avalon
The Mists of Avalon
by
by
rameau's review
bookshelves: annoying-1st-3rd-voice-mixing, genre-fantasy, genre-arthurian-legends, read-in-2012, language-english-original
Dec 17, 2011
bookshelves: annoying-1st-3rd-voice-mixing, genre-fantasy, genre-arthurian-legends, read-in-2012, language-english-original
This review can also be found on Book Girl of Mur-y-Castell-blog.
I’ve been actively reading and reviewing books for a year and a half now. In that time, my criteria for rating a book on the one to five stars scale has changed a couple of times. A few things still hold true. The book has to be exceptional and leave an indelible impression to get a five star rating from me. Three stars remains my meh-rating. It’s a book that I can objectively call a good one, something I might have even enjoyed reading, but it’s also something I can easily forget and move on.
My one star rating however, that’s changed the most. At first it was anything and everything I simply didn’t like. If the offences added up to a certain point I’d give it a one star rating no matter what redeemable qualities I’d find in it. But as I read more and actually started thinking about it, I realised there are books that aren’t even worthy of that single star, books that are, to me, beneath contempt. To compensate, I adjusted my personal rating scale and now one star is reserved to books that induce burning white rage in me.
I’ve given good ratings to books with characters I’ve hated when I enjoyed the story, and I’ve given good ratings to books with stories I’ve hated even when I loved a character or two. For me, the style matters little, but dammit, it matters.
And I’m not talking about the clunky language that in a way fits the subject and the legend, but takes a while to get used to.
Ms. Bradley set out to write a retelling of the Arthurian legend from the female perspective, and in that she succeeded. She managed to put together a logical and a somewhat coherent version of the events that put King Arthur on his throne in Camelot and brought him down from it, and she managed to tell it with female voices. Igraine, Viviane, Morgaine, Gwenhwyfar, Morgause, all these women claw their way from the footnotes of the myth and become three dimensional people—not just characters, but people—with worries and joys of their own.
Admittedly those joys were short-lived, but that’s partly why I loved the story. It’s why I love the legend as I do all things heart-rending.
However, as wonderfully flawed all these people were with their virtues and their unbridled ambitions, none of them really had a choice in the matter. Ms. Bradley didn’t write people, women or men, who made the best of their unfortunate circumstances. She wrote people thrown about by the fates and whims of their deities. Morgaine’s last defence is that she never had a choice and that she was merely the Goddess’ instrument.
And that’s why I hate this book.
All the characters, as Ms. Bradley paints them, are passive. None are active. None make choices and then take responsibility for their actions. They’re all thrown into untenable situations where something must break and either give them that what they most wish or take it all away from them.
Igraine marries because she doesn’t have a choice. She goes to convent, because she can’t bear to face the sister who forced her hand.
Gwenhwyfar also marries, because she doesn’t have a choice. She first surrenders to her lover because she doesn’t have a choice. The only stupid choice she makes is so that the author has an excuse to make the pious lady into an adulteress without making her choose it.
Morgaine, the worst offender, chooses nothing. The closest she comes to making up her own mind is when she flees Avalon, but after that she promptly becomes the meekest of them all. She, who should be the fearsome Lady of the Lake and High Priestess of the Goddess, how can she be a vehicle of her Goddess’ will when she does nothing but allows others act around her?
Catalyst, you say? This isn’t a chemical reaction where one substance remains unchanged. People change, people make choices that change them and others around them. Unless, of course, you’re a character in The Mists of Avalon.
But times were different then and women nothing but chattel, you say? There’s difference in being victimised and being a victim. All Morgaine and the others had to do to win me over, was not to see themselves as victims. All they had to do was to endure what was thrown at them and choose to make the best of it. All they had to do was to choose.
Only Morgause and Viviane come close to choosing anything, and how are their choices rewarded? Why of course, they are the great villainesses whose actions lead to a family tragedy after a family tragedy. Their actions bring an end to all those things they love and they don’t live to see the aftermath or acknowledge their responsibility.
Telling a story from the female perspective doesn’t make it feminist; writing capable women doing things, being active, and making choices does. This book is something worse; it’s a pretender.
There are many things I appreciate in this book, one thing I don’t is how it all was told. That matters. Dammit.
I’ve been actively reading and reviewing books for a year and a half now. In that time, my criteria for rating a book on the one to five stars scale has changed a couple of times. A few things still hold true. The book has to be exceptional and leave an indelible impression to get a five star rating from me. Three stars remains my meh-rating. It’s a book that I can objectively call a good one, something I might have even enjoyed reading, but it’s also something I can easily forget and move on.
My one star rating however, that’s changed the most. At first it was anything and everything I simply didn’t like. If the offences added up to a certain point I’d give it a one star rating no matter what redeemable qualities I’d find in it. But as I read more and actually started thinking about it, I realised there are books that aren’t even worthy of that single star, books that are, to me, beneath contempt. To compensate, I adjusted my personal rating scale and now one star is reserved to books that induce burning white rage in me.
I’ve given good ratings to books with characters I’ve hated when I enjoyed the story, and I’ve given good ratings to books with stories I’ve hated even when I loved a character or two. For me, the style matters little, but dammit, it matters.
And I’m not talking about the clunky language that in a way fits the subject and the legend, but takes a while to get used to.
Ms. Bradley set out to write a retelling of the Arthurian legend from the female perspective, and in that she succeeded. She managed to put together a logical and a somewhat coherent version of the events that put King Arthur on his throne in Camelot and brought him down from it, and she managed to tell it with female voices. Igraine, Viviane, Morgaine, Gwenhwyfar, Morgause, all these women claw their way from the footnotes of the myth and become three dimensional people—not just characters, but people—with worries and joys of their own.
Admittedly those joys were short-lived, but that’s partly why I loved the story. It’s why I love the legend as I do all things heart-rending.
However, as wonderfully flawed all these people were with their virtues and their unbridled ambitions, none of them really had a choice in the matter. Ms. Bradley didn’t write people, women or men, who made the best of their unfortunate circumstances. She wrote people thrown about by the fates and whims of their deities. Morgaine’s last defence is that she never had a choice and that she was merely the Goddess’ instrument.
And that’s why I hate this book.
All the characters, as Ms. Bradley paints them, are passive. None are active. None make choices and then take responsibility for their actions. They’re all thrown into untenable situations where something must break and either give them that what they most wish or take it all away from them.
Igraine marries because she doesn’t have a choice. She goes to convent, because she can’t bear to face the sister who forced her hand.
Gwenhwyfar also marries, because she doesn’t have a choice. She first surrenders to her lover because she doesn’t have a choice. The only stupid choice she makes is so that the author has an excuse to make the pious lady into an adulteress without making her choose it.
Morgaine, the worst offender, chooses nothing. The closest she comes to making up her own mind is when she flees Avalon, but after that she promptly becomes the meekest of them all. She, who should be the fearsome Lady of the Lake and High Priestess of the Goddess, how can she be a vehicle of her Goddess’ will when she does nothing but allows others act around her?
Catalyst, you say? This isn’t a chemical reaction where one substance remains unchanged. People change, people make choices that change them and others around them. Unless, of course, you’re a character in The Mists of Avalon.
But times were different then and women nothing but chattel, you say? There’s difference in being victimised and being a victim. All Morgaine and the others had to do to win me over, was not to see themselves as victims. All they had to do was to endure what was thrown at them and choose to make the best of it. All they had to do was to choose.
Only Morgause and Viviane come close to choosing anything, and how are their choices rewarded? Why of course, they are the great villainesses whose actions lead to a family tragedy after a family tragedy. Their actions bring an end to all those things they love and they don’t live to see the aftermath or acknowledge their responsibility.
Telling a story from the female perspective doesn’t make it feminist; writing capable women doing things, being active, and making choices does. This book is something worse; it’s a pretender.
There are many things I appreciate in this book, one thing I don’t is how it all was told. That matters. Dammit.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Mists of Avalon.
Sign In »
Quotes rameau Liked
“There is no such thing as a true tale. Truth has many faces and the truth is like to the old road to Avalon; it depends on your own will, and your own thoughts, whither the road will take you.”
― The Mists of Avalon
― The Mists of Avalon
Reading Progress
December 17, 2011
– Shelved
September 4, 2012
–
Started Reading
September 6, 2012
–
3.95%
"Of Uther: "-how clumsy he was! Like a big, friendly puppy!" I'm imagining giggling Tony Head puppy."
page
35
September 17, 2012
–
16.72%
"Random change from Galahad to Lancelet. Or it could be my week long break from reading this thing."
page
148
October 12, 2012
–
35.82%
"Did I mention that I really, really, don't like this Gwen? Well, I don't."
page
317
October 12, 2012
–
37.63%
"Which is the greater sinner? The "harlot" who embraces her sexuality or the "chaste Christian woman" who doesn't but dreams of adultery?"
page
333
October 12, 2012
–
38.98%
""—the faith of Christ is a fitting faith for slaves who think themselves sinners and humble—""
page
345
October 12, 2012
–
40.56%
""I sent her from me because I felt it better, if it came to be a choice of evils, that she should be in Avalon and in the hands of the Goddess, than in the hands of the black priests who would teach her to think that she was evil because she was a woman.""
page
359
October 12, 2012
–
42.94%
"*headdesk*
I understand why she is the way she is, but, but why must she be that way? Why?"
page
380
I understand why she is the way she is, but, but why must she be that way? Why?"
October 12, 2012
–
44.18%
"As much as I hate Gwen, I hate the priests more. Of course it's the woman's fault."
page
391
October 13, 2012
–
46.33%
"And why is Morgana whining now? I thought this was supposed to be a feminist version of the Arthurian legend?"
page
410
October 13, 2012
–
54.24%
""Why, Gawaine, what then will you say to all those priests who profess devotion to Mary the Virgin beyond all things on earth? Would you have it they all have a scandalous carnal devotion to their Christ? And indeed, we hear of the Lord Jesus that he never married, and that even among his chosen twelve there was one who leaned on his bosom at supper—"
*falls off her chair laughing* Oh, Morgaine!"
page
480
*falls off her chair laughing* Oh, Morgaine!"
October 14, 2012
–
58.64%
"I don't who to be angrier at? The character for being so stupid or at the author for being so lazy."
page
519
October 14, 2012
–
58.64%
"I don't know who to be angrier at? The character for being so stupid or at the author for being so lazy"
page
519
October 14, 2012
–
60.23%
""I must not hate her. She is as much victim as I."
I. Hate. That. Line."
page
533
I. Hate. That. Line."
October 14, 2012
–
68.93%
"Remember one of my earlier status updates saying I was shipping all the ships? As of now, or a bit earlier, I'm no longer shipping anything except death to them all."
page
610
October 14, 2012
–
74.35%
"Must everyone have the exact same scar on cheek to prove they've done battle?"
page
658
October 16, 2012
–
97.74%
"All this book has made me want to do is to read the honest, gay version of the legend."
page
865
October 16, 2012
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-11 of 11 (11 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Sandra
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Oct 16, 2012 08:20AM
oh dear...and it started out so well.
reply
|
flag
You know, I agree with your review. The characters are portrayed as victims and the few who pull the strings are demonized.
"Telling a story from the female perspective doesn’t make it feminist; writing capable women doing things, being active, and making choices does. "Amen.
Even chattel can rebel. If it does not, it still dreams of it. Did they even think of doing something else, but gave up?
Now I feel like continuing this even less.(view spoiler)
Sandra wrote: "You know, I agree with your review. The characters are portrayed as victims and the few who pull the strings are demonized."For me that was enough to drop the rating. I can see why others might love this, but since the story is a retelling of a well known legend, I'll need a bit more than the bones she picked from someone else's carcass.
Helen wrote: "Even chattel can rebel. If it does not, it still dreams of it. Did they even think of doing something else, but gave up?"
The thing that comes to mind is (view spoiler)
I dont' think she didn't truly dream of rebelling. I don't think anyone of them did.
There are many good things that I didn't mention, the religion aspect for one, but you do have to get through 876 pages of dull narrative. I was too stubborn or stupid to quit.
rameau wrote: "I dont' think she didn't truly dream of rebelling. I don't think anyone of them did."
Hm. Of course historical/mythos characters did. But from what your review says, author doesn't make it seem that way.
Even if they can't change, say, whom they are married to, they can still make some small things go their way.
(view spoiler)
The religion aspect makes me even more wary, actually.
Helen wrote: "The religion aspect makes me even more wary, actually. "The old religion of the druids was done quite well—iffy but good. Some of it reminded of Freja actually, but the best part was the clash of the druids and Christian priests. Or Morgaine/Merlin/Kevin and Gwenwyhfar. If we'll forget the Grail incident, I can say I really liked it.
rameau wrote: "Helen wrote: "The religion aspect makes me even more wary, actually. "The old religion of the druids was done quite well—iffy but good. Some of it reminded of Freja actually, but the best part wa..."
Well, we'll see. I kinda have other ancient religions to deal with first these days...
I also have issues with Morgaine claiming not having a choice. God that sucks.And Viviane, I actually like her, though I don't think the author cast Viviane and Morgause in a particular bad light or viewed them as mere villains.


