The Game of Kings, by Dorothy Dunnett-- first impressions

[rachelmanija]

I have placed this book at my bedside, to read before sleeping. Last night I remembered why I've never been able to get far into it. There are some wonderfully gripping and witty passages, but they are inevitably followed by the introduction of bunches of characters who I can't figure out or keep straight who they are, political analysis which I can't figure out or keep straight, or some clearly significant remark from Lymond which I can't make heads or tails of. Still, I mean to persevere in the hope that eventually I will either figure out who everyone is, or get sufficiently engrossed that I won't care that I have no clue overall as to what's happening and can just enjoy the prose, individual scenes, and characterization-- which is how I read much of John M. Ford. I'm hoping to get far enough into the series that I will either have fewer books of it to take with me and be thoroughly engrossed by then, or else have given up for all eternity and know not to take any.

So far, the disgraced presumed traitor Lymond has snuck into Edinburgh and is running around doing all sorts of dramatic things with his band of merry men, but I can't figure out why he's doing anything, or even why other people think he's doing anything. What was the purpose of the escapade with the pig? Was he stealing the smuggled wine? Why did he need to barge into the room where everyone was conferring and then run away?

The scene with his mother and brother's wife was pretty good, although again I have no idea what he was up to. Supposedly he's siding with the English in the hope of taking his brother's place-- why he needs to steal his family's jewelry and set fire to the ancestral castle is unclear.

Then I got to the bit where some kid who's part of the nobility shows up at his camp in Sherwood or wherever, and then all this stuff happened with an entirely new set of characters and I was totally lost, but should probably re-read that part tomorrow as it's getting late.

I'm assuming Lymond is not really a traitor and is playing some deep game, and I have to say that he seems to be having altogether too much fun playing it. Does he ever get less perfect, or make a mistake?

Comments

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

He makes some extremely, extremely large mistakes.

[veejane.livejournal.com]

Although, they are mistakes designed to make you revel in his otherwise-perfectness.

I couldn't get past the perfectness aspect, and never could cotton to the Lymond books. (Or, anyway, I had a screaming match with Dunnett herself over her character choices, and we have not been friends since.) Yes, I am one of those failures who Just Doesn't Get It, although Dunnett fans keep hoping I will pick up her other series, and like that much better.

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

Interesting. I didn't feel that way at all. (I have not yet read the last two books; they're on my desk.) I just kept thinking, "Oof, ****ed that one up again, dincha?"

[kateelliott.livejournal.com]

I could never get past page twenty of the first book, despite it being recommended by people who were crazy about it. I don't consider myself a failure.

It's just not my kind of stuff.

[yhlee.livejournal.com]

I gave up by p.100 or p.50 or thereabouts. I couldn't figure out what the heck was going on or why I would give an aw-shucks, let alone a damn. And there are so many other books to read, I decided it was Not My Thing.

Although, rachelmanija, your initial reactions sound like a transcript of mine, so if you persevere and are converted, let us know and I might someday try again.

[veejane.livejournal.com]

I do recall remarking, on page 75 or so, that I could have used a map, and possibly a Cliff's Notes to Scottish History, and was consistently using my Bartlett's to unpack Dunnett's references to other texts. But, in the end, that wasn't what annoyed me about the book.

[riemannia.livejournal.com]

He's a superhero, but he's not perfect.

[fioretti.livejournal.com]

Just happened to browse in via misia and wanted to let you know I feel your pain. It took me almost three years to get through the whole Lymond of Crawford saga. Like you, I found them dense and difficult and fabulous and enchanting and infuriating. I had to choke down the urge to hurl the book across the room on more than one occasion--many, actually. I alternately admired Dunnett's brilliance and loathed her for the show-offy, over-educated dork she must have been. You see? No rational reaction here.

All I can say is stick with it. Because even if you end up hating it, it is an accomplishment.

[jonquil.livejournal.com]

You are not supposed to be able to figure out what the hell Lymond is doing.

Yes, this is annoying.

[jonquil.livejournal.com]

(You will be enlightened, later in this book, and it will all make (a little) more sense.)

[rilina.livejournal.com]

Oh, he makes plenty of mistakes. And plenty of people who love the series found the beginning of the first one slow going. (I know I did.) I thought the fire at Midculter was the big turning point, but that might have been just me.

And I don't think you have to like Lymond to enjoy the books. Not that sort of character at all.

[pameladean]

Lymond, as has been said already, makes a large number of very expensive mistakes.

I didn't like him at all on first reading, and fell for the not really very opaque notion that he was a traitor with a sweet but poisoned tongue. I liked some of the other characters, mostly the women -- Mariotta, Sybilla, Christian, Janet -- and also Will Scott, who poignantly reminded me of my dead brother, so I can't really expect that to carry over to anybody else. Anyway, I never expect to understand a book the first time through and am often disappointed if I do, so I made it through happily enough because I found sufficient sympathetic characters for sufficient time. I had my head turned inside out and rearranged several times, but I didn't mind that.

I can see most of Dunnett's flaws pretty clearly after fifteen or so readings of the books, but they don't penetrate the delight I experience at the basic flavor of the books. I love her completely goofy sense of comedy, the literary denseness, the prose, and the relationships between characters. I laughed myself silly at the scene with the pig, which seems to be a serious drawback for many readers.

P.

[rilina.livejournal.com]

I wonder if the problem with the pig is one of expectations. When I reread that scene, I appreciate how funny it is. But the first time through I think I was looking for all the angst and drama that I'd heard about on LJ. Drunk pigs were never mentioned in the advance billing.

[rushthatspeaks.livejournal.com]

Now they have. I'm still swearing over the fact that my local library seems to have every single one of the Lymond books in at all times except, of course, the first one, and so I only just gave up and requested it. Note to self: drunk pigs.

[adrian-turtle.livejournal.com]

I have a strong suspicion that the series would work better if you started with _Queen's Play_. If you feel strongly about beginning at beginnings, you can wait for the library. Or you can have my _Game of Kings_. It's not the drunk pigs that bother me, so much as the drunk people (drunk, lethally stupid, people played for laughs, more specifically.) But that's my problem more than Dunnett's, and the writing is competent in _Queen's Play_ and afterwards to compensate.

[oracne.livejournal.com]

GAME OF KINGS was slow for me until around the time Will Scott showed up, when my interest caught fire...so it may catch on with you soon, or it won't. Lymond seems to be one of those "love it or can't finish it" sort of series.