A while back I allowed myself some nostalgia by linking to the movie “The Flight of Dragons”. (Check it out. Chances are you’ll recognize it once it gets started.)
Now I’ve gone one step further by reading the book on which the movie was loosely based.
...I suppose it was inevitable that it would disappoint.
The cartoon movie was not without its cheesy points (especially viewed now from the perspective of adulthood). But at the same time it also had an epic sort of quality to it. It was done in the same vein as the Rankin Bass animated films of “The Hobbit” and “Lord of the Rings” (which I also watched many times as a child), and in my mind I always associated all of these films together.
But it’s very apparent from the book that Gordon Dickson is no J.R.R. Tolkien. Some of this no doubt is the problem of trying to review from the standpoint of nostalgia. I’m sure Dickson would counter that he never meant to be Tolkien, and was trying to tell his own kind of story. But I thought it was disappointing.
To begin with, instead of the magical feeling of the movie, this book opens with the problem of Jim Eckert, a graduate student in Medieval studies. Right away the book has a very ordinary feeling as we follow Jim Eckert through all the problems of graduate students: looking for housing, trying to secure a teaching position, dealing with the internal politics of the history department, etc.
Jim’s fiancé Angie is accidently sent back in time during a science experiment gone wrong. Jim goes back in time after her, and (through some unexplained event) ends up in the body of the Dragon Gorbash. Therefore instead of a fantasy, this book reads like a run-of the mill time travel book, with a little bit of bad science fiction thrown in. Sort of like something you might expect from Michael Chrichton.
(The book never makes clear if Jim and Angie are simply sent back in time, or to another world. It implies they go back in time, but then doesn’t explain why there are dragons and talking animals. Or why Jim, a medieval studies grad student, doesn’t seem to see a contradiction in this).
Most of the same characters from the movie are in this book, although the plot is a lot different. There’s not much of a plot in the novel, simply a quest to save Angie from the dark powers, with various excursions thrown in. Also a lot of the characters do illogical things at various points presumably just for the sake of advancing the story.
Most of the standard characters from fantasy novels are present in some form or another: Knight, Mage, Bowman, Robin Hood clone, talking animal, beautiful scantily clad woman, and of course dragons.
This novel is meant to be part humorous, and parts of it did make me smile, but Dickson certainly has nothing on Terry Pratchett.
In short, I certainly wouldn’t recommend anyone go out of their way to read this book. I’d mark it down as only so-so myself.
Useless Wikipedia Fact
A conservative American backlash rapidly ensued against The Beatle's song "Back in the U.S.S.R. , citing the song as evidence of left-wing Beatle propaganda. . A flustered McCartney responded: "'Back In The U.S.S.R' is a hands-across-the-water-song... They like us out there. Even though the bosses in the Kremlin may not, the kids do."
Also during an argument Ringo walked out, and the drums on this song were done by the other Beatles. Lennon, later in an interview was asked "Do you think Ringo is the greatest rock drummer in the world?" To which Lennon replied, "He's not even the best drummer in The Beatles."
Link of the day
Bork links to another fascinating Chomsky lecture. "Poor Noam looks so weary these days. Still, there's fire in this rhetoric - listening to Prof. Chomsky speak is like reading the Old Testament prophets. There's a ferocious and unflinching morality that undergirds his writings and lectures, not to mention a call to wake up and see what's going on in Washington and around the world."
The Dragon and the George by Gordon Dickson: Book Review (Scripted)
No comments:
Post a Comment