Camelot’s Sword, Sarah Zettel
Originally reviewed in February 2010

I’m liking all of these books in my second reading. It’s interesting to see all the different threads of Arthurian myth and Celtic myth brought together in this way — this book especially weaves so many things together: Tristan and Iseult, Lyonesse (Laurel) and Lynet, Lancelot and Guinevere, Morgaine, the Celtic Otherworld… I think I’m focusing a lot more on that, in this reading, instead of on the romance — which isn’t actually as central as I thought. It could do with more time spent on it, actually, because Gareth’s transformation from a womaniser into Lynet’s faithful knight is very hasty and not really given the time and space it should be. Perhaps the scene on the moor could’ve been expanded — another fifty pages would probably have made the love story much more engaging and satisfying. There were some parts of the relationship with Ryol that were glossed over a bit too much — that was closer to the centre of the story, I think, and didn’t suffer too much, but there were a few places where I wondered why the heck it was happening like that. For example, how did Guinevere figure out that the mirror was the problem? Whence came her sudden decision to confiscate it?

One thing that is becoming clear to me is that the relationships aren’t as cookie-cutter as I thought, my first time through. The relationships between Gawain and Rhian, Geraint and Elen, Gareth and Lynet… they’re much more distinct than I thought at first, and the brothers are less alike than they thought at first. I’m not sure why I thought them so cookie-cutter the first time through, actually. Possibly because all the romance is that bit hastier than I’d like. Possibly I’m a slightly more discerning reader. Possibly my taste has just changed!

I really wish this book had received a little more attention from a proofreader. The little nags I have about grammar and punctuation are really little. For the most part I like the writing. But it’s so distracting to keep thinking, “But where is the comma?”

Rating: 4/5

Camelot’s Honour, Sarah Zettel

Originally reviewed in February 2010

The first time I read this series, I wasn’t all that impressed. There are still things I’m not so keen on — the love at first sight, for one thing, doesn’t ring very true, and also the books could do with better proofreading. There’s punctuation missing, and I’m pretty sure “grieves” and “greaves” don’t mean the same thing. But, this time, I found myself a lot more interested. I preferred Geraint to Gawain, I think, and I was interested in him and his feelings about his relationship to Morgaine, and his way of dealing with his legacy from his father — and his love for Elen.

I don’t know if the story of Elen and Geraint is based on any legend, Arthurian or otherwise, although I suspect that the story of Gwiffert, at least, has some kind of link to existing mythology. Still, it’s nice to see a lot of mythology together and coupled to the Arthurian mythology, to make something new. The ongoing story of Morgaine is interesting, too: I can’t actually remember very well how that’s resolved, and I forgot that she seemed genuinely in love with Urien.

I originally didn’t like Elen much, but there is something compelling about her, too, and her struggle, and Collanau. I wished the book had more about the Lord, the Lady, and Elen’s family. As far as I remember, the Lord and the Lady don’t come into it again, which is a shame.

(Erec and Enide is, of course, where I think this comes from. It doesn’t follow it directly in plot, but I think the idea of the bird came from there.)

[Note in 2016: I know much more about the various sources now — The Mabinogion is a big one.]

Rating: 4/5

Camelot’s Shadow, Sarah Zettel

Originally reviewed in February 2010

Since I’m hoping that the module on King Arthur will run next year [note in 2016: it did], and reading widely in the tradition helped me with the Robin Hood module, I decided to revisit these books. As I said in my review almost two years ago, I’m not really one for romance books, generally, but these are Arthurian — which helps a lot, since it’s something I’m always interested in — and they’re not exactly bodice-rippers, and I do like Sarah Zettel’s writing. There’s genuinely a plot alongside the romance — at least in this first book of the four — and earlier elements of the tradition are woven into the story, while it’s also not quite a carbon copy. It could have deviated more from the tradition, easily, and perhaps been more engaging then, but this is interesting enough. I like the portrayal of Guinevere, very much in love with Arthur, and though she’s mischievous, she’s a good queen. If I remember rightly, the betrayal of Arthur with Lancelot isn’t re-enacted in this quartet, which I quite like. That’s something new. And I like this portrayal of Gawain, as compared to some quite loutish ones I’ve read before.

It’s interesting how close it sticks to the plot of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, which I’m doing a module on at the moment. I hadn’t read that the first time I read this, so I didn’t really appreciate how it had taken that plot but also woven in the women, Rhian and Kerra, and how it’s also woven in the story of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnell — which I haven’t read, but I know a decent amount about.

It’s nice that there’s an overarching plot to these four romances, with the figure of Morgaine, about whom we learn little in this book. It’s also nice that they’re romances in both the medieval sense and the modern sense. At least, it is for my inner geek.

Rating: 4/5