Denerick's Log

Enkidu

Denerick wrote: »

Even the more noble of the peoples, like the sturdy and virtuous folk of the North (Who remind me of the Ancient Hebrews, for some reason)

Why do they remind you of the Hebrews may I ask? While reading the series I felt they were like some group in the real world, but not who. For example the Dothraki, I alternated between thinking they were like the Mongols or the Indo-Europeans.

Denerick

Enkidu wrote: »

Why do they remind you of the Hebrews may I ask? While reading the series I felt they were like some group in the real world, but not who. For example the Dothraki, I alternated between thinking they were like the Mongols or the Indo-Europeans.

They still followed the old Gods (The ancient and original monotheistic religion - well, in this case the original polytheistic religion) and were quite honourable, maintaining ancient traditions like 'he who passes the sentance should wield the sword' etc. And they seem to have kept their bloodlines pure with little intermarriage beyond their own lands. They are also ancient in their own lands. The Hebrews were ancient in the Arab World even in classical times with a history and tradition spanning millenia, which in turn managed to endure up until the great rebellion against Rome.

Just a theory, and I don't take it terribly seriously either.

Denerick

17.

A Clash of Kings by George R.R. Martin.

High drama, fratricide, incest, intrigue, murder, sorcery, and one hell of a twist at the end. Shakespearean in its ambition. Read it in 3 days. Says it all.

9/10.

Lady von Purple

I read the Song of Ice and Fire series a couple years back-
I'm now re-reading them all because I refuse to pick up A Dance With Dragons while I've forgotten half of the events of the first novels!

I'm actually reviewing all of them as well, to make sure I keep motivated and finish them all. I've re-finished the first three now- just as good as I remember, if not better.

Martin is a truly impressive author. The crafting of this whole other world is flawless. Of course, that's a feature of most fantasy novels, but the scope and depth of Martin's novels is what's really impressive.

Denerick

I'm not really offering reviews here, though occasionally I might throw together some flowery words. For example I could have written a 3000 word essay about Crime and Punishment, I loved it that much, but I don't think I have either the temparament or the discipline to write long reviews. The log is useful in that I can keep track of what I'm reading. I can go back to the first page and remember the books I read last year.

Anyway, I'm about to start book three! This is the one I had originally read and like an idiot thought it was the first book of the series, Which is why I had such a misconception about the books.

Travel is good

High praise indeed!

I've just started "Game of Thrones" so it looks like I have an enjoyable voyage of discovery ahead!

Enjoy the books.

Denerick

18.

A Storm of Swords: Steel and Snow by George R.R. Martin

The third book of the series is actually two books, the first one being 'Steel and Snow'. Dodgy stereotypical fantasy book titles aside, this continues the narrative rather nicely. My appreciation and attachment to certain characters grows organically; gaining insights into characters like the Hound, Tyrion Lannister (Exceptional, truly exceptional) and Arya Stark (Even if it is a little weird that a ten year old girl who has killed two people can not suffer all sorts of mental agonies...) is enjoyable. The book remains a high drama worthy of any Shakespearean tragedy, but it has hints of a gritty, almost excessive realism that reminds me of Seán O Casy... Or someone.

9/10.*

*Yes, all of them will probably get 9s.

Caros

Just started Game of Thrones last night and thoroughly enjoying it!

Denerick

19.

A Storm of Swords: Blood and Gold by George R.R. Martin.

Rob

Joffrey

Catelyn

9/10

Denerick

20.

A Feast for Crows by George R.R. Martin.

I think Mr. Martin may have reached a plateau here. After spending so long developing various strands of storyline, he kind of stumbles and gets overcome by the various webs he weaves. It creates a monster of a book, but with the net effect of tying up some loose ends (Or rather, introducing more loose ends) In effect he is laying the groundwork for a strong end to the series. I understand that A Dance with Dragons is pretty much the companion to this book (Covering the stories of Tyrion/Varys, Daenarys, Jon Snow, Bran) so once that is 'processed' we might get somewhere.

One never ceases to amaze at the character development in these books. The Blackfish is as eminantly lovable and rougish as ever, and there is even a quiet nobility to his nephew. His niece, hideous and deformed by death and grief, is something terrible to behold. And despite myself, I'm coming to admire Jaime Lannister.

The war of the five Kings may be practically won, but the war of the three Queens awaits us...

8/10

Denerick

21.

Ill Fares the Land by Tony Judt.

Tony Judt is the author of Postwar (One of my favourite books) and one of the great historians of the 20th century. A public intellectual and a strong social democratic voice. He died last year and his influence is sorely missed. This book is an inspiring and interesting polemic, but it is just that, a polemic. I disagree with many of his assumptions; government spending as a proportion of GDP is roughly equivilent today in Britain as it was 40 years ago; furthermore the scope of the state in welfare provision and in most aspects of civic life has not, as Judt consistently asserts, gone into full retreat. True, ideological politics is essentially dead, there is a strange consensus in politics. Ed Miliband and David Cameron differ only in that one sounds like a 15 year old nerd and the other sounds like a toff... But really, I think it takes a lot of cheek to genuinely suggest the Labour Party or Conservative differ in any fundamental ways. True, the fiscal retrenchment under Labour probably wouldn't have been so severe... Or maybe it would have. Who knows. In Britain you can pretty much do whatever you like for five years after an election.

Not this book focuses on Britain. It is a wider discussion about the death of ideological politics in western Europe - and he also has some interesting things to say about the American right (Particularly a polemic against the neo liberal insurgency of Friedman et. all) He reserves plenty of his ire for privatisation, for which he has some due cause, but otherwise the books strength is not in his political arguments. Essentially he is demanding a full retreat from the politics of economism to one of ethics and 'the good society'.

An interesting book from an interesting bloke. It is perhaps telling that as one of these individualist atomised modern young men Judt so stringently chastises, I intend to do absolutely nothing after reading this. I won't get involved in politics, I won't have a fundamental change of political heart. Instead I read this as a lament, a grieving for a lost time. Read it with a pinch of salt, and make sure to absorb the relevant amounts of wisdom. 7/10.

Denerick

22.

A Dance with Dragons by George R.R. Martin

Finally! An utter monster of a book. Significantly better than the previous one in terms of its plot explorations, and some trademark Martin twists in there as well (Principally his fetish for killing characters off when at their most interesting or exciting ) Absolutely fantastic epilogue... But I'll not ruin it for anyone, other than to say that a lot of plots are left in the air, meaning the next book will be all the more tantalising for it.

Now I only have to wait 7 or 8 years until Martin gets around to the next one.

9/10

Denerick

23.

The Trial by Franz Kafka.

I had a good 4 week hiatus from reading there. I discovered the Wire and watched every episode in the space of a month. It deserves the Nobel Prize for literature... But I digress.

I've been meaning to read Kafka for years. Recently I was in Prague and I had a boozy conversation with a Czech who spoke eloquently (in damaged English) regarding the perfection of this Czech national hero. He also claimed Kafka was best read in Czech. Not sure about that. What I got from this novel was a general sense of anxiety; a crushing injustice that was made ever more terrible by the lack of knowledge of the protagonist. Why was he being interrogated, presumed guilty? And what could he do to remedy it? As he swatted around vainly trying to inform himself and do something to protect himself, his fate had been decided by a shadowy bureaucracy that was seemingly unable to reveal itself for what it was. Some great moments of insight, including a conversation with a priest that still leaves me a little puzzled. Above all, I feel slightly nervous having read this, and honestly, don't feel intelligent enough to truly understand it.

8/10.

Denerick

24.

Dracula by Bram Stoker.

The original vampire novel... Apart from anything else is a rollicking good read. It is told through the medium of correspondance and diary entries, which works surprisingly well. It maintains tension at a reasonable level, but I must confess to never feeling 'frightened', not even in the intellectual way.

Above all is a story of Victorian fortitude and manliness triumphing over the evils of... well... evil.

8/10.

Denerick

25.

States of Ireland by Conor Cruise O'Brien.

The Cruiser was one of those rare things in Irish politics - an intellectual, an agnostic, not afraid to sacrifice sacred Irish cows in the pursuit of the truth, intellectually honest to both his constituents and the Irish people, and anything but a 'parish pump' politician. Ireland is the poorer for his death a couple of years back.

States of Ireland is part political polemic, part history and part family autobiography. His ultimate thesis, best described in the appendix (A speech he made against Sinn Féin in the early 70s) is one I had already agreed with thoroughly; that the Irish Republican movement, in its adoration of dead heroes and its contempt for democracy is in essence a fascist movement and an unmitigated evil. States of Ireland was written in the early 70s, right when the Irish Troubles seemed to be at its most electric, and when the path to full blown civil war seemed somewhat inevitable. There is a gloominess to this book, but also a rich vein of optimism. Above all, O'Brien was a rational man, and his insights are wonderful to behold. When an IRA man said he was militantly anti sectarian he was correct; Irish Catholics, if they think of Protestantism at all, don't see it as a fundamental affront to the Catholic faith. Many like to simplistically see Protestantism as a mechanism for Henry VIII to get through so many wives. These silly preconceptions ensured that Irish Catholics were genuinely unsectarian; Protestantism was just a byword for the 'enemy', a strange folk who deliberately provoked Catholics with weird marches and silly slogans.

Protestants on the other hand, were a people under siege following a religion that was fundamentalist by any measure. I liked his description of the two communities as being Jewish; the Catholic gaels thought of themselves as the sons of Israel, as did the Ulster Scot Presbyterian. A tragic state of affairs that was doomed to perpetuate a cycle of mutual division and mistrust. O'Brien is sensitive and highly knowledgable of the differences between the communities, and navigates the nuances with a fairness and intellectual honesty that must have been very rare indeed in 1970s Ireland.

9/10

Denerick

26.
The Age of Revolution, 1789-1848. By Eric Hobsbawm.

I wanted to reacquaint myself with a period of history I have long been obsessed with (late 18th and early 19th century Europe and North America). I have plans to read Middlemarch by Eliot, and to re-read War and Peace by Tolstoy and A Tale of Two Cities by Dickens, three novels set in this remarkable epoch. I’ve read a fair few narrative histories of the general period as it is (more specifically histories of France, America, Britain and Ireland) and so decided to pick up Hobsbawm, looking for interpretation in place of narrative. Hobsbawm is most rewarding when you have a relatively systematic knowledge of the period in question – you can actually challenge some of his conclusions.

He writes from an unreservedly Marxist perspective and it is of course very interesting in its own way. But in his selective use of statistics (It is impossible for an economy to be simultaneously expansionary, short of labour and also possessing massive structural unemployment caused by technological advancement – two clearly paradoxical claims he repeats often without any sense of irony) and the way in which he pushes people into convenient political boxes, he displays some weaknesses which are common to his political associates. Burke has about two pages where he is dismissed as an ‘irrationalist’ voice of conservatism (despite the fact that he is regarded by most modern historians as one of the great liberal voices of his age. He was anti-Jacobin and instinctively opposed to the violence inherent in massive political revolutions – and with good reason) O’Connell, leader of a mass peasant movement and probably the first democratic demagogue of the modern world, is similarly reduced to a ‘charismatic nationalist leader’ who fought for a fundamentally bourgeois system.

I like Hobsbawm, I really do. (I’m just picking at him a little) He is insightful, and writes ever so well. Highly recommended. 8/10

Denerick

1.

Cosmos. By Carl Sagan.

This was good. But the tv show was better. Stupid people like me need moving pictures to really understand science. His scope was also a little too limited. I feel I now know more about our solar system, the theory of relativity, some early modern astronomers etc.

It was ok. Easy to read. Not especially taxing. I'm pretty confident that there are better popular science books out there.

6/10

Denerick

2.

Coming up for Air. By George Orwell.

Like many, I only really think of two books when I think of George Orwell (Animal Farm and 1984) That is perhaps unfair, but this is what he is most well known for. Coming up for Air is more of a middle age reminiscence kind of book, all about lost youth, a partly imagined rural idyll, and the unsettling nervousness of England in 1939, directly before the start of WWII. There are familiar sights - communists locking horns over insignificant points of dogmatic doctrine, anti fascist radicals appearing to be more violent than they enemy they so despise, the 'five minutes hate' of the left book club. I enjoyed it. Intend to tackle more Orwell over the coming months.

8/10

*I'm halfway through Middlemarch at the moment. I'm enjoying it, but man is it slow. I haven't had internet access for the better part of a week so I only got round to updating this log today.

Fo Real

Back when I was a teenager, I bought a 6-in-1 collection of Orwell's novels for €15. It was an absolute steal. Glad to see you enjoyed Coming up for Air. It is probably my favourite of Orwell's books. Descriptions of the proletariat living like slaves in rows upon rows of tenement houses struck a chord with me. Yet IIRC there is a paragraph about how the working class are always happy because they are free, whereas the middle class are trapped by their relatively luxurious lifestyles and are forced to work more to fund it. Ring any bells? Regardless, it's a fantastic read and a great insight into life in Britain around the outbreak of WW2.

Orwell actually helped shape my political beliefs. Yes I know he identified as a leftie and even fought against Franco in the Spanish civil war, yet a common theme throughout his literature is the bitter socialist blaming the rest of the world for his failures. In Keep the Aspidistra Flying, when the protagonist tries to put his socialist beliefs into practice and live a life outside the capitalist money system, his life becomes a series of disasters. I don't think I'm spoiling the ending by revealing he eventually compromises his principles and enters reality. A bit like Trinity arts graduates. A must-read for all, especially Orwell fans.

Denerick

3.

The Island of the Day Before. By Umberto Eco.

Call me an Ecophile - this has it all. Set in the 17th century at the height of the 30 years war, the novel follows the life story of a young North Italian nobleman who fought in a great siege and steeped himself in the intellectual milieu of the time. Blackmailed by the French state into an espionage mission (Something to do with discovering the scientific secret of longtitude) Roberto finds himself shipwrecked and trapped on a ship that straddles the date-line meridian. There is also the imaginery character Ferrante - his natural half brother who he attributes for all the many ills that bedevil his life.

Its a grand little novel that has all the familiar Eco gambits - a rich and highly unpredictable plot, lugubrious characters (Is lugubrious a word?), and a highly developed sense of the human spirit. This is the fourth Eco book I've read, and though it probably isn't his best, if this is his worst then he has little to be ashamed of.

8/10

Denerick

Fo Real wrote: »

Yet IIRC there is a paragraph about how the working class are always happy because they are free, whereas the middle class are trapped by their relatively luxurious lifestyles and are forced to work more to fund it. Ring any bells?

I think he was making the point that the middle class weren't substantially better off materially - they spend their lives paying off their mortgages and scrimping and saving towards their bills for their modest luxuries.

Orwell actually helped shape my political beliefs. Yes I know he identified as a leftie and even fought against Franco in the Spanish civil war, yet a common theme throughout his literature is the bitter socialist blaming the rest of the world for his failures.

Orwell was a democratic socialist.

What he was opposed to were the odious creeps of left and right who demand that people think in a uniform way, and hate the correct sorts of people, and feel they have an inherent right to force their worldview on others. This is best displayed in the left book club meeting, where he sits back and pictures the 'anti fascist' with a bludgeon, kicking the shít out of anyone who gets in his way. Powerful stuff.

In Keep the Aspidistra Flying, when the protagonist tries to put his socialist beliefs into practice and live a life outside the capitalist money system, his life becomes a series of disasters.

Its sitting on my shelf. That and 'Down and Out in Paris and London'

I don't think I'm spoiling the ending by revealing he eventually compromises his principles and enters reality. A bit like Trinity arts graduates. A must-read for all, especially Orwell fans.

Lol. I can identify with that

Denerick

4.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. By Ken Kesey.

That rare thing - the complete novel. It grasps its issue by the balls and makes a convincing point. It is a tale of power, control, and elusive liberty. I enjoyed every minute of this book, and cried like a girl at the end (Having already seen the film I already knew what was going to happen, but regardless) I liked what wikipedia had to say about it: this is a humanist novel that rebels against the authoritarianism of its age. This could have taken place in an army batallion, a school, a workplace, a pub... the pyschiatric ward offered compelling pre existing material but it is a universal tale.

An outstanding novel.

10/10

Denerick

5.

The Prague Cemetery. By Umberto Eco.

Eco's most recent novel offers a familiar package; historical drama, extravagant characters, a firm grasp of the cultural and intellectual milieu of the time (19th century western Europe) It also contains some disturbing explorations of the various darker aspects of 19th century Europe, such as anti semitism (the protagonist apparantly wrote the protocols of the learned elders of zion and forged the document that led to the Dreyfus affair) Like most Eco novels, I can't really say I fully comprehend what he was saying, but I enjoyed the challenge of attempting to understand.

7/10

Denerick

6.

Trotsky. By Robert Service.

A critical biography of Leiba Bronstein (Better known to the world as Leon Trotsky), Service does an excellent job of exploring the life, the complexities, and the many hypocrisies of this giant of 20th century history. From his early intellectual ferment to his heroics in the October revolution and Civil War, Service illustrates a man of fixed ideological belief - a demagogue, an intellectual, but most importantly a deeply inhumane individual.

Trotskyists have always asserted that the USSR would never have degenerated into totalitarianism if Trotsky had only have pipped Stalin to absolute control of the communist regime following the death of Lenin. They claim he was a democrat with fundamentally humane inclinations. As Service demonstrates this was simply not the case. Trotsky held most people in contempt and was extraordinarily selfish and egotistical. His supposed humanitarianism is a myth, one that can easily be debunked by his conduct in the civil war (As well as his despicable suppression of the Kronstadt mutineers who demonstrated in favour of a democratic system and against the budding totalitarianism that was evident long before the ascent of Stalin) His dogmatism, his inherent lust for violence, his inability for compromise all indicate an intellect clowded by its own egotism. His was an undoubtedly eloquent and sophisticated pen; but he had a tendency for unnecessary alienation. He was a bad politician and a brilliant orator.

For all his talk about 'democracy is the life blood of socialism' there is actually very little evidence that he truly believed in a democratic socialism. When he was in a position of authority he was consistently in favour of uncompromisingly oppressive policies.

This man was no saint.

The biography itself is rather conventionally written; the sentences lack cadence and Service is uninspiring in his delivery. It is a functional work. Furthermore his analyses of leftist revolutionary thought is shallow and almost non existent. His analysis of Trotsky's political writing are similarly woefully inadequate. Read this book for a strictly historical account (With some fair minded and much welcomed criticism), but find the deeper political analyses elsewhere.

Based on what this book set out to accomplish (Re-evaluate the life of Trotsky and liberate him from the various hagiographers) I would have to say that it is groundbreaking scholarship, a transformational book. But its shortcomings are apparent also.

7/10

Denerick

7.

Middlemarch. By George Eliot.

I've been reading this on and off for around five months. It is told at an intensely lazy pace, and the author switches from the various characters (And there are many) often and for hundreds of pages at a time. I gave up trying to read it as a standard novel - it is not. It is a snapshot of a particular period of English history; an examination of class, politics, gender and wealth (Particularly the tension between new money and old money)

Its certainly in the traditional 'canon' of what would be considered great literature, and I couldn't possibly dispute that. Unfortunately I do not possess a 19th century attention span - I got bored in various parts and had to skim some of the more (what seemed to me) irrelevant dialogue. It has it moments though, and overall I can see how it is an 'improving book'. People have written theses analysing this novel so I won't bother with a synopsis - I doubt I possess the knowledge or the patience to attempt one. Suffice to say that the culminating scandal which acts as the moral centerpiece of the novel is the most interesting part of it; the greatest detraction in my view was its lack of references to the Great Reform Act. This is mentioned mainly in passing, and is a kind of atmospherial background noise to the novel itself.

*SPOILER*

The final line is just fantastic. Really special.

Denerick

8.

Freedom, by Jonathan Franzen.

The great American novel still lives, it seems, in this ponderous story. Freedom follows the lives of the Berglunds, an atypically liberal middle class family, and their various tribulations. The title probably alludes a certain political underpinning but I'm not sure this was the author's intention. Overall it was interesting, well written, packed with insight, but it was missing a little... I don't know. Can't put my finger on it. As fiction it is wonderful, as what is fiction if not an exploration of the condition of mankind? Its exploration of the complexities of the individual is elaborate and at times elegant. I can identify with Walter, particularly his six year hermitage in the woods - his life long niceness and agree-ability that inevitably descends into cranky misanthropy after the various seismic events in his life.

On the flip side, I've recently come across a literary term called 'hysterical realism' (Franzen is described on wikipedia as belonging to this genre). This 'genre', if it can be called that, explores the universal in the particular but with hysterical intensity. It probes normal people and lives with a decidedly abnormal obsessiveness. A certain authenticity dies (As the novelist attempts to portray his work through the prism of ordinary domestic settings - which at times reaches an un-lifelike silliness). I can't criticise Franzen too much as I haven't read any of his other books, but the critique certainly makes some sense.

7/10

Denerick

9.

Homage to Catalonia. By George Orwell.

Like many writers of his age, Orwell found himself fighting for the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War. He saw the defiance of the Spanish working class against fascism as a turning point in European history. Many men of the left shared this view.

The memoir itself is intriguing, full of the familiar reflections on the camaraderie of young men at war, the drudgery of trench life, the sheer boredom of it all. But as those who are familiar with the Spanish Civil War well know, a darker and more sinister fate was to await those who enlisted for the POUM (A nominally Trotskyist militia organisation) or fought for the anarchists. Orwell writes vividly of the paranoia and the senseless that gripped Barcelona during its Trotskyist/Anarchist purge. This atmosphere of political totalitarianism, suspicion, propaganda and paranoia was to deeply influence all of his subsequent writings.

My edition has two appendixes which are full chapters taken from the first edition - they were attached to the end of the book as they were political analyses and unrelated to the narrative. Unsurprisingly, Orwell gives an original and insightful interpretation to events, scolds propagandists, and generally proves how remarkable a human being he actually was. Truly, 'a secular saint'.

Eliot Rosewater

You should read the essay "Looking Back on the Spanish War". It obviously covers the same time period, but was written a few years after and so is more interpretative than biographical. The seeds of Animal Farm and 1984 can be seen clearly:

Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as 'the truth' exists. There is, for instance, no such thing as 'Science'. There is only 'German Science', 'Jewish Science', etc. The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but THE PAST. If the Leader says of such and such an event, 'It never happened'--well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five--well, two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs--and after our experiences of the last few years that is not a frivolous statement.

http://www.george-orwell.org/Looking_Back_On_The_Spanish_War/0.html

Denerick

10.

The Transformation of Ireland, 1900-2000. By Diarmuid Ferriter.

Nice to read an Irish history book once again.

Ferriter is an accomplished historian of modern Ireland, particularly famed for his explorations of sexuality in Irish history with his 'Occasions of Sin'. This book is the most authoritative one yet of Ireland in the 20th century. He combines social, cultural, economic and political history to create a great canvass of Irish 'progress' throughout the century. His conclusions are what any member of the liberal intelligentsia would conclude, so don't expect any great revelations. He has written an excellent and insightful history of Ireland, and I'd recommend it to anyone. Definitely the most complete narrative history I've read in some time. Flawless.

9/10.

Denerick

11.

The Steps to the Empty Throne. by Nigel Tranter

This book promises a lot but in reality delivers very little. Its the first book of the trilogy, and takes us from the dethroning of John Balliol by Edward the Longshanks up to Robert the Bruce's coronation. From its very grand introduction, it delivers very little. - 'This enormous and ambitious theme of Bruce the hero king is no light challenge for a writer... he [Tranter] ends that long apprenticeship and takes up the challenge'

We do not, in any sense, get to know anything about any of the characters. Everyone is very one dimensional. Robert the Bruce's character goes something like this; Gets outraged - spends three paragraphs of narrative explaining why he is outraged, then proceeds to do what is obvious to the reader immediately before he gets outraged. Then his wife, Elizabeth de Burgh would provoke him, thus Robert the Bruce overcomes his crisis of confidence. To say it is formulaic is to underestimate. It quickly becomes insufferably dull. And all the wretched dialogue - I've never read a book in which so many people have something to say but none of them ever reveals anything interesting about how they might think, feel, or really believe.

This is a world of good and evil, where good men are forced to make harsh compromises in the face of irredeemably evil characters. Comyn, Bruce's rival and co-Guardian, has to be one the worst and most unintentionally awful characters devised by a writer.

My biggest gripe is that this books tells me nothing of what it is like to be Robert the Bruce. Since he is the protagonist, you would think that we would learn something about how he thinks. Instead we get a pretty standard narrative and an extremely boring collection of events as opposed to a novel that aims to properly flesh out and explain the personal reasons behind each decision. At times it felt like I was reading a chronicle.

And some of the writing! Just read this: 'The spread cloaks on the floor received them, and with swift, sure co-operation she disposed herself, guiding his clamant manhood and receiving him into her vital generosity.'

That was a sex scene. At this point I began to wonder why I read on and even finished the damn thing.

You might imagine that before reading this book that I would have brushed up on my knowledge of Scotland's wars of independence, that I read many great tomes by eminent scholars in the field. In the event, I watched Braveheart. (Which is a brilliant film!) I'd recommend that people watch that seminal and often absurd film rather than waste their time with this tripe.

1/10. The worst novel I've read from beginning to end.