I'm usually much too lazy to give reviews, but I felt obliged to write one for this series because I believe Elliott's writing is somewhat under-appreciated. Among the plethora of epic fantasy series that came out over the last 30 years, the Crown of Stars is relatively unknown, so I wanted to make it easier for people to decide whether to start on this 7-book series or not with no spoilers attached. Language style: I guess it's comparable to George RR Martin's ASOIAF, not as intricate as that of Guy Gavriel Kay but more subtle than that of Robert Jordan or Brandon Sanderson. Personally I don't care much about the level of language used as long as the story gets across and I think people will have no problem with Elliot's writing itself.World building: some people find too much effort is spent here but I disagree, being somewhat of a history buff. Elliot's rendition of an early-medieval society feels rich, alive and realistic. It is obvious that the author did a ton of research throughout the series. What's more commendable is how she blends it all seamlessly with a religion that is gender-equal. Even if you don't care much for history, the parallels and anti-parallels between Elliot's and the real world is quite obvious so most people should be able to appreciate it.Characters: another strong point, I found that the characters behaved consistently with well explored motivations. Though at times, a couple of antagonists are a bit too arrogant and presumptuous to feel entirely real, the justification here being their faith and noble birth, though it may just be me being a modern-day atheist. Some people point out that it's hard to connect with the protagonists in this series and it's partially justified. Keep in mind though that this is a 7-book series with a main story that spans better part of a decade and Elliot has kept character development mostly to a slow pace, which feels realistic for me but frustrating to many. And unlike in ASOIAF or Wheel of Time where some protagonists gain great political/military power over the course of the series, the harsh realities of the feudal society is painfully reflected in the Crown of Stars.Pacing: I think this is the main reason for the lukewarm reception of this series. There are lots of well depicted maneuvering both politically and on the battlefield, but when compared to many other fantasy series these days it feels just a bit too far in between. Many people complain, especially in the middle of the series, that the story crawls gradually forward at a snail's pace (a common problem with epic fantasies really). So it comes down to whether you appreciate the character interactions sufficiently in the meantime to overcome the frustration. For me it was never a problem because first of all, I do not expect speedy resolution from an epic fantasy, and second, by that time I was too firmly attached to the fates of Liath, Sanglant, and Alain not to continue. So if you have problems finishing books like Crossroads of Twilight or A Feast for Crows then I would not recommend this series to you.Crown of Stars cannot compete with The Wheel of Time for its sheer scope, nor can it compete with ASOIAF for the depth of its political intrigue, and it certainly cannot compete with LotR for the amount of heroic action. Nevertheless, by incorporating all these classical elements of a good epic fantasy into her own creatively imagined and well realized world, Kate Elliot gave us a complete fantasy series that I thoroughly enjoyed reading.
I wonder if I'll like this book better when if I read the others. Because there are a lot of lose ends left untied.There is a story A and a story B, and at times a little A.1 and B.1 as minor characters go off and have noteworthy adventures without the main characters. I expected Story A & B would ultimately converge and am left wondering if they will?At the beginning of the book, it tended towards a bit of melodramatic use of metaphors, but further into the book it settles down into an easily readable pace. It follows the storyline of Liath, who has been on the run most her life, but tragedy causes her to be subjected to the advances of a strangely cruel man. She spends a lot of time being conflicted and confused, about magic, what's dangerous, who she really is. And then it follows Alain, who is promised to the church, and tragedy causes him to become a part of a Count's retinue instead. Both find themselves in a world at war, between Kingdoms, and also a foreign and savage species call the Eika. Three things this book has a lot of is religion and dogs/dog like things and illegitimate songs. Some of the religious statements and concepts, are taken almost directly from the bible, you'll recognize some familiar passages (you know, if there are passages that are familiar to you from the bible) and then comes some tweaking. But even so, that made it very much like...religion, being religious, all that devout, flowery phrasing that makes even the sanest devotee sound insane when they start speaking. I had to skim, it was simply too painful.And dogs, dogs, dogs everywhere. I'm sure there is some significance, maybe the dogs in story A and B are related somehow to each other. But...for the moment it just seems like everyone's got a lot of bloodthirsty hounds.Thirdly, having a Henri, and a Henry, both with illegitimate sons who look foreign compared with their surroundings, was really confusing.It's not a badly written book, but I had a hard time identifying with the characters, perhaps because the characters don't really know themselves, they are vague, because they both have no real sense of identity, where they came from, where they are going.
What do You think about King's Dragon (1998)?
A pretty standard, kingdom in turmoil, invaders from the north, treachery from a sibling, mysterious waif loses guardian to nefarious forces, adopted bastard chosen by fate to be protector of the kingdom type of book. The execution however, is pretty good. The waif suffers true trauma. The kind of thing that can damage a person for a long time. And it's not how her guardian dies, but what happens after. The religion is very catholic-like, with saints and priests, though a more gender-neutral(or even reversed) version of the church hierarchy and dogma. Religion is depicted mostly positively, though some members use the church as a vehicle of their ambition, others are sincere. Saints do appear in exceptional circumstances, but most of the time, people have to follow their religion the same way we do, with faith.The structure of the kingdom is interesting, with a roving court, a semi-autonomous church authority, and a semi-matriarchal line of succession. The politics are introduced slowly, only halfway through the book are we given a real picture of how the land is governed.The characters have some real progression, with loyalties tested, religious callings conflicting with religious morals, trauma forcing an escape inwards, and imperfect mentors.I'll be reading more of this series. I'll let you know if it loses its interest. But I'm optimistic.
—John
Finished this in a day! The whole series of The Crown of Starts was a gift from my boyfriend, and I was eager to start in on this. There is so much going on already in this book. It seems a typical fantasy at first, lost elvish nations, scary lizard-ish bad guys, a brother and sister fighting for the thrown, and a couple of kids caught up in the middle. Mostly, I'm intrigued by the religion Elliot creates in it. Clearly, there is a lot of traditional, Medieval basis in it. Fathers and "biscops" and other such religious titles, but they all serve the Lord and the Lady, a binding of Christianity and Pagan religions. There is also forbidden, lost arts of magic that is simultaneously despised and used by the Church, and mathemagici, which are sort of astronomers or mathematicians...learned men and women whatever way you look at it. As the first book in the series, I'm not going to go to in depth but I am really, really looking forward to finishing this series!
—Shelby
I want to read this because of what Orson Scott Card said about it:"Kate Elliott joins my very small pantheon of great living fantasy writers."[She is] one of the best world creators in fantasy literature."[The readers] are so fully immersed in this world, and its details are created so convincingly and richly, that it's a pleasure to simply live there with these characters."[It has] the most wonderfully frustrating villain you have ever experienced in literature. If Dickens had read these books he might have done a better job of writing Uriah Heep; if Moliere had read them, he might have brought of Tartuffe much more successfully."Sounds good, doesn't it? You can read everything he said about it on his blog, Uncle Orson Reviews Everything.[http://www.hatrack.com/osc/reviews/ev...]
—Tim
