[EN World Book Club] Dragondoom Discussion [September Selection]

[Sam]

In jester47's absence, I've taken the liberty of starting the discussion on this month's selection, Dragondoom by Dennis L. McKiernan. Normally, I'd expect that the person who selected the book would start off the thread and post why they selected the book and what their thoughts were about the selection.

This time, I'll ask someone else to be brave and take the first step. What did you think of Dragondoom? What did you like? Dislike? Did you enjoy the character development and interaction? What did you think of the background? The plot? The conclusion?

There's a lot of questions there. Feel free to disregard any and all of them. Post what you think. Thanks.

 

[jester47]

In jester47's absence, I've taken the liberty of starting the discussion on this month's selection, Dragondoom by Dennis L. McKiernan. Normally, I'd expect that the person who selected the book would start off the thread and post why they selected the book and what their thoughts were about the selection.

This time, I'll ask someone else to be brave and take the first step. What did you think of Dragondoom? What did you like? Dislike? Did you enjoy the character development and interaction? What did you think of the background? The plot? The conclusion?

There's a lot of questions there. Feel free to disregard any and all of them. Post what you think. Thanks.

Sorry about that, I could not find the thread and so did not know when to post.

So as Sam said, lets start the discussion.

Aaron.

 

[kingpaul]

It took me a while to get into this book. The first few chapters that were constantly bouncing over the years were making my head swim. As the book progressed, the bouncing made more and more sense, and it was limited in the amount of bounce (whereas the first couple chapters spanned several centuries).

 

[JoeBlank]

Initially, I was not enjoying the book. Think I had the same problem as kingpaul, it was difficult to become involved in the story, with it bouncing around so much. That is a good thing about this book club; I was "forced" to keep reading am glad I did.

I particularly liked the premise: What happens after you kill the dragon and get the treasure? And, didn't that treasure belong to someone else before the dragon gained it? This would make for some interesting gaming scenarios.

Busy day at work, but I will try to chime in later.

 

[kingpaul]

That is a good thing about this book club; I was "forced" to keep reading am glad I did.

I'm glad I kept reading to. If it weren't for this, I probably would have dropped this book without thinking twice. Only twice before have I trudged forward with a book and found out I liked it: Sword of Shannarra (tough to get into, only kept doing so because my friends said it was impossible to read) and Great Expectations (English reading assignment).

I particularly liked the premise: What happens after you kill the dragon and get the treasure? And, didn't that treasure belong to someone else before the dragon gained it? This would make for some interesting gaming scenarios.

I did enjoy all the twists about what happnes after you get the dragon hoard. Most stories center on "get the gold", not the repercussions thereafter.

 

[Sam]

I found it very hard to get interested in the story as well. I clearly remember being 200 pages into the book and wondering when things were going to start getting interesting. I agree with JoeBlank, if it weren't for this book club, I would have most likely put the book down and not picked it up again (something I've only done a couple of times).

The main reason I didn't want to start off the discussion was that I didn't want it to begin on a negative tone. Ultimately I thought the story was interesting, though it took a long time to get there. "What happens after the dragon is dead?" was a new thought, as was revenge by Black Kalagath out of some sort of drake-pride. I didn't like McKiernan's style though. I thought the time-shifting was annoying, and couldn't get into sync with his prose. At times it read like an epic poem and others like a romance novel. The relationship between Elyn & Thork was clearly foreshadowed to me from nearly the beginning of the book. I don't think that it was McKiernan's intent to do this though.

I'm trying to be balanced and not overly critical. I certainly don't want to offend anyone who enjoyed the book and perhaps consider it one of the better recent works. It just wasn't for me. There were some interesting points. I think it was more a style thing than anything else.

This was my first time reading McKiernan and I must admit that I hadn't heard of him before. Based on this experience I don't have any strong desire to read more in the Mithgar setting. Has anyone read more of McKiernan's work? How does this book rate compared to those? I am very curious about the story with the female dwarves (Chakkia?). Can anyone enlighten me about that? (If you respond here, use the spoiler tag, otherwise send me an email or PM)

 

[Dacileva]

Oh, good, I won't be the first negative commenter.

I did like a few aspects of the book. He obviously put a lot of work into the background of the world, and his concepts. His take on the "what happens after the dragon is dead", and what happens to the hoard, are interesting, though not very unique (see The Hobbit). I really did like how Black Kalgalath, even though he disliked Sleeth, and considered Sleeth his biggest rival, still felt compelled to defend Dragon honor by humiliating and destroying the upstarts who killed Sleeth. I like the Utruni concept, their pseudo-culture, and their behavior.

There was a lot I didn't like, both about the world and this book in particular.

Elyn and Thork (and basically everyone) seemed rather stiff and unrealistic in behavior. No one went through any real dynamic changes, other than the changes forced on Elyn and Thork through their adventuring.

Modru and Andrak were the usual "mean, stupid arrogant bad guys"... Kalgalath wasn't quite so bad, but even he made big mistakes that don't seem in character for how awesome McKiernan seems to want to make Dragons.

The races on this world seemed horrendously stereotyped. This really annoyed me, actually. I've been very happy about the way D&D 3.x is starting to draw gamers away from the traditional stereotypes, and this book (admittedly, it was written in 1990) just seems like the same old fantasy tropes revisited in a not-particularly-interesting manner.

The rampant sexism throughout the book may be intended to feel like a fantasy version of medieval Earth, but it just came off to me as rampant sexism. Dwarven women are maybe a different species? Jordian women are meek homemakers, and the only Jordian warrior maid is ridiculed throughout her training? *sigh*

Overall, this wasn't a particularly enjoyable read for me. I may still try reading some other Mithgar books, but McKiernan's got an uphill road to interest me.

Okay, I think I'm done ranting for now.

 

[FraserRonald]

Okay, here's the thing. I didn't finish Dragondoom. I got to page 281 and the pain had become unbearable. In all honesty, I didn't like it at all. I didn't like (well, detest might be a better term) Mr. McKiernans' style and I found the storyline and characters very derivative. I'm sure there are those out there who enjoyed this book. For me, there was nothing that drew me back, even knowing I would have to come on these boards and admit my failure. Honestly, I have to say this is about the worst $10 I've spent on a book in my life. I gave up on the Iron Tower trilogy in high school for the same reasons. I had hoped Mr. McKiernan had improved as a writer. In my opinion, he has not.

I apologize to those who loved the book. I'm sure you'll tell me how wrong I was. If necessary, I can write a much longer, specific critique of this book. There's going to be a fairly damning review in the next issue of my ezine. I will gladly include any rebuttals if that is requested.

 

[Sam]

Sorry about that, I could not find the thread and so did not know when to post.

So as Sam said, lets start the discussion.

Aaron,

I'm curious about what you thought of the book. Why did you choose it for your selection? Was it what you had expected? Had you read McKiernan before? What is your opinion of him after reading Dragondoom?

 

[jester47]

Aaron,

I'm curious about what you thought of the book. Why did you choose it for your selection? Was it what you had expected? Had you read McKiernan before? What is your opinion of him after reading Dragondoom?

Well Sam, I have a confession to make. I did not finish the book either. Part of the problem was that other things kept eating up my reading time and, also, I did not feel compelled to make the time to read it because the book, as many have said, was very hard to get into. This comes from someone who considers himself a McKiernan fan to boot. With that in mind, there is hope. One of the greatest reads I have ever had was Eye of the Hunter, and it was in my opinion good enough to spur me to read the rest of the Mithgar series except for "Voyage of the Fox Rider," "The Silver Call," and "Dragondoom." So when it came time to pick a title, I saw it on my shelf and figured that it worked, so I suggested it.

One thing I might try with this book is to read the events of the different time frames together. I do this with Catherine Kerr books because I hate her pseudo celtic flashbacks. I skip the flashbacks and the stories make great reads for me.

Even early into the book I could tell this one was going to be very different from "Eye of the Hunter." Hunter has a non-typical story, an interesting villan, characters that develop and some clever use of the setting. And the sheer number of unanswered questions about the world gives it a sense of reality that the other books don't seem to have. I think it is his best work. However, for the absolute best in McKiernan, I would highly suggest reading the book "Tales of Mithgar" first. These are great short stories that essentially set up everything that he wrote after, and most of it sets up "Eye of the Hunter."

So knowing that he will write "Eye of the Hunter" later, and he becomes a better story teller, my opinion of him has not changed. I still think that Eye of the Hunter is his best work. However, having read more, I now see his work previous to Tales and Hunter as sort of setting up the world, and the work after it as answering the questions that appear in "Hunter."

One of the interesting things is that I find McKiernan's influence from Tolkien sort of refreshing. Rather than saying, "Hey! This guy is ripping off Tolkien!" I find myself thinking of the very veiled references as tributes to the Don. In fact I am pleased that McKiernan does this because it seems to me that so many writers are afraid of using the "tolkienesque" ideas of fantasy in thier own works in an effort to avoid being called unoriginal. So, I kind of see him as sort of ballsy.

So in conclusion, read the three stories from Tales of Mithgar and The Eye of the Hunter. If you do not find these satisfying, then I hate to say it but you just don't like McKiernan.

Aaron.