The Mists Of Avalon

This review is not as complete as I would like, but I had to publish something here.

Ok, first of all, this book is HUGE! I should have written a review for each of the 4 parts, which are available as separate books as well. Overall it has many flaws, a few of which are major ones, specially in the last book. But I enjoyed so much that I can gladly overlook them.

The book is a retelling of the classical King Arthur story through the point of view of the women, so much that I could see how a men would take issue as how the male characters are under represented, and also how women often feel reading the typical male centered medieval fantasy stories.

However, I don't have strong opinions on the gender issue, and I try to judge a story by it's quality alone, not political correctness issues. When I read a book with a unidimensional female character, I think of her as an unidimensional female person, and if that fits well within the plot is what interests me.

Before talking about the story itself, this book is beautifully written. It could be used as a teaching aid in how to write, even by modern standards.

Anyway, this phrase has been repeated to death, what does it mean “from the point of view of the women”? Well, the women are the main focus of the story, and the book is written in a first person point of view, alternating between the protagonists. In order of importance and amount of appearance, first comes Morgaine and then Gwenhwyfar (copy and pasted this, of course). The first book is almost exclusively of Igraine, Morgaine's mother. Also throughout all the books, main roles are given to Morgause, Morgaine's aunt and Viviane, the Lady of the Lake and Morgaine's foster mother. Some minor roles are given to to Nimue, a priestess used to seduce an enemy, and Niniane, Viviane's successor.

The arthurian story, although very much present, is used as a backdrop for the lives of these women. They are fully fleshed out characters whose emotions, motivations and desires are beautifully conveyed.

Most of the myths regarding the classic tale are expressed as rational facts, adding even more to the original story. Excalibur? Forged from the metal of an meteorite, granting some of its legendary attributes, like being indestructible. Magic? Mostly explained by the interaction of wise and intelligent individuals dealing with unneducated common folk. Somethings like clever reading of another's body language in order do “divine” what they are thinking, deep understanding of human psychology in order to predict the future. Also praying on peoples false beliefs to apply some clever trick and to fool them.

The myth of King Arthur is told as an actual historical account, with real names of places, accurate dates relating events. The story is also enriched by explanations like the origin of Lancelot's name. His real name is Galahad. Which is what he calls his son. In fact, all of the knights of the round table have intrinsic relations with each other. All very well constructed.

Everything about Morgaine is nicely exposed. How she gainned her reputation as first a sorceress, then an evil one.

Nimue's plot in the last book was the weakest one, although it was still pleasantly written. The priestesses were quiet for a long time in the face of much depredation of their faith, and the case the they decided to use their powers was such an inconsequential one.

Also, the shift of attitude in Morgaine was way too sudden. Her motivation was very clear, but the way it was represented was like she woke up one day and decided to destroy Arthur.

Couldn't finish this; how do you manage to make the tales surrounding King Arthur so resolutely boring? All this book seems to achieve is to confirm that the lot of women at the time was largely crap, with little control of their lives, bodies and destinies. While that might well be true, the end result is a litany of misery where nothing much happens for what feels like hundreds of pages.

I'm giving this two stars rather than one as I'll admit that it does feel like there is an interesting story under this somewhere, however I don't care enough about any of the characters to try and dig it out.

I almost embarrassed at how long it took me to read this book. I've started it half a dozen times. It has been lent to me by multiple friends, all of whom I was forced to give it back to before they started charging me overdue fees. I think partly, I was intimidated with the size of the book, never having been lent it during a time when I had sufficient reading time to tackle it. Partly, it was the weight of the words that require a slow, deliberate read. Partly, it was just the knowledge that as a female fantasy fan, it was something of a crime that I hadn't read this.

However, as always works for me, I have a list, and I got to this book on the list, so after much effort in between my work schedule, I can finally say that I both read and enjoyed “Mists of Avalon.” It definitely lived up to its fanbase, and I don't really feel qualified to review it (it sort of feels like reviewing “To Kill A Mockingbird” or some other accepted piece of literary greatness), but as part of my resolution to read critically, I will try.

Despite being based on Arthurian legend, every chapter presents something to be spoiled, so I'll just spoiler warn from here on in.

The word "Epic" gets tossed around a lot, and very few books truly live up to the title. This is an epic novel. The sheer time-span makes you feel you've lived these women's lives with them. We watch babies grow up, grow old (or more frequently not) and die. We watch lifetimes slip by and by then end, we remember the young women at the beginning of the novel as we remember ourselves as little girls playing princess. This scale is what impresses me most about the book, As Morgause reminisces about little Morgaine spinning finer thread than she, I have to look back in my own memory, though only a little over a week has passed since I read that chapter. Bradley weaves this timeline masterfully, never letting the memories feel too much like flashbacks or the foreshadowing take away the suspense.This last if more impressive when you consider this work is really one of the single greatest pieces of fanfiction of the modern literary world. I myself, have only a passing (read: Disney and Monty Python) familiarity with Arthurian legend, so I'm sure there are dozens of references I didn't catch. Still, Bradley takes the tropes we know best (The sword in the stone, the Lady of the Lake, Lancelet's betrayal with Gwenhwyfar, Morgan le Fey) and she changes our perspective just enough to make this a brand new tale. On a simple story-telling level, the book is genius. She breathes personality into characters that have always had life. I think I'm most impressed with Gwenhwyfar who is introduced as someone in stark contrast to the powerful priestesses of Avalon, the only women we've gotten to know. In this way, Bradley gets us comfortable with those outside the norm, so that the norm seems bizarre. Gwen is raised to be a terrified, shamed nun, and indeed states that a convent is the only place she feels safe. I spent the book as exasperated with her as Morgaine, yet pitying her in the end, forced to deny her freedom when she finally found it. I respected Viviane, and had to reread her death several times because the shock was as great for me as for the court watching. I was perplexed by Igraine, who was always a deeper mystery than she appeared. I was wary of Morgause from the moment of her introduction to her ill-fated scheme of the end. And the men were not flattened by this not being their story. Arthur is a real person, not a legend. Lancelet is tortured on more levels than Bradley has time to address directly, and you feel the weight of his burden in his love of Arthur, all the more reason to pity Gwen. Kevin is another character, like Igraine, who always has another secret layer. I feel I know everyone in the story, and every death cut at me as it cut at those who loved them.There are dozens of themes in here from the ties of blood to gender roles to the meaning of sin, but the one I've heard most about and so am choosing to bring up here is the Pagan/Christian dynamic. All the criticism I've ever heard comes back towards this book being too hard and critical of Christianity. This makes sense seeing as our primary perspective is Morgaine. She goes from devout to denier to zealot, and it's her we are meant to sympathize with. If you never finish the book, then yes the Christianization (spellcheck says that's not a word, but I'm going with it) of Britain is a harsh and sometimes terrible thing.However, stick with Bradley till the end. Even while we are as outraged as Morgaine at Arthur's betrayal of Avalon, Kevin's theft of the Holy Regalia, Gwenhwyfar's narrow-minded piety, we are brought back to Taliesen's words in the end. The Holy Grail manifests in Arthur's court and some see it as the Virgin Mary and some see it as the Goddess and nobody is wrong. All Gods and Goddesses are One in this book, and Morgaine realizes her true purpose is not to win dominance of Avalon, but to see the protection of beauty, knowledge, music, and spirituality from those who would destroy it (the Saxons before the peace is made). Once Saxon culture merges with the Britons, that Holiness is preserved by any name. The merging of Pagan and Christian traditions is one I've always found fascinating, and I don't believe there are really any heroes or villains in either the story or the history. Avalon and Camelot don't fall so much as evolve into the next stage of history. The gods never die.Besides, Wikipedia could tell you this book wasn't going to end happily for either side. This may be the longest review I've ever posted here, and I feel a bit silly about it. I mean everyone already knows this is a good book, and Bradley doesn't need me trumpeting her success, but it's a book that left me wanting to talk about it. Makes me wish I'd read it back when people first told me to read it. Serves me right for having a bookshelf that refills before it ever empties.

I just don't like this book that much. I always hate it when someone tries to take an established legend like the Arthurian tales and “re-envision” it. It's plenty envisioned as it is. It doesn't need to be redone from a femminist point of view. It was fine as an original.

To me, this is like doing a cover of a Beatles' song. You can do a cover–but it will never, ever be as good as the original.

I loved this book! I found myself harboring pretty strong feelings about each and every one of the main characters (though if they were kind feelings is not quite so certain), and I was definitely wrapped up in the story. Bradley does a wonderful job writing the Arthurian legend from a new angle – the woman's angle. Never before had I seen this story the way it's presented by Bradley. Women are in power, women are strong and willful and people listen to them... until Christianity comes through and patriarchal reasoning becomes the way of the land, pushing the more feminine pagan ways into the past (and further into the mist, becoming harder and harder to reach).

It's long and it's involving, but it is worth it in every regard. There are characters you come to love, and characters you come to hate – I personally came to loathe Gwenhwyfar, and love Morgaine. I will definitely be rereading this.

FINALLY. After like a year of both reading/listening to this book I am finally done. I highly suggest listening to it vs reading, as the narrator Davina Porter (for the one I listened to) was amazing. She annunciated every sentence much better than reading it. Old English is hard at times to breathe life into (especially when just reading it). I have so much and so little to say about this book. First, when I was young reading tales of quests for Camelot I loved the story of Gwenivere and Lancelot. When I got to the second part of this book and the character of Gwenivere was introduced, I got very excited. However, as soon as she started to play a more major part I was sick of her. She was poison to the whole book. Though I think that was the point, for her to be a foil to so many other characters, I still thought she was the worst. I would that the book probably could have been 50 pages shorter just by cutting some of her banter out. I felt as though several situations involving her and a few others were rehashed so many times that it was like the author typed the same paragraph every chapter. The other part that stood out though was how complete this book was. The timeline for the book was very extensive and ranged about 70 + years with many many main characters. The organization and separation of chapters and parts were skillfully done and the writing was woven into a complete and very complex plot that spanned several theologies and large themes. I have so much to say about this (almost) 900 page book, but it's too much for a review. All in all a very solid historical fiction novel that possessed themes about the differing of religion and the faults of people that still ring true to the 21st century. 4⭐️/5

I enjoyed this telling of the “Arthurian Legend” more than the others that I have read (Once and Future King, White; and Story of King Arthur and His Knights, Pyle). Boring tales of knights fighting for their king, winning over beautiful maidens, and questing have left me tired of the genre....

This telling is dark, real, and touching. I felt the despair of the characters, especially Morgaine. Refreshing, actually.