The book: Falling Kingdoms (Falling Kingdoms #1)
The author: Morgan Rhodes
The rating: 4.5 stars
When it comes down to it, there seems to be two main ways authors may write a series. Seemingly the most popular is the "And then..." approach, employed by such trilogies and sagas as The Hunger Games, Divergent, Legend... heck, even Twilight. In this type of series, the story is incredibly segmented, always open-ended and with a hook to keep readers tuning in for the next installment, but with clearly defined and separate plotlines for each entry, and increasing in scope with each passing novel. The Hunger Games is a perfect example: book one is a regular ol' Hunger Games; book two is a super special Hunger Games; book three is a massive revolution. It's very formulaic... first something big happens, and then this bigger thing happens, and then something even bigger. The other type of series is the "Part 1 of X" variety; instead of a set of matryoshka plots, the series tells one overarching story, with twists and turns, new developments and shifting priorities, but it's all one coherent plot nonetheless, broken up over a number of tomes to prevent a War and Peace situation from happening.
In Falling Kingdoms, Rhodes employs the latter, and it's this decision that is responsible for some of both the strengths and weaknesses of the novel. While an "And then..." series delivers immediate gratification at the end of book one, series like Falling Kingdoms play the long game, sacrificing a neatly-wrapped book one conclusion for a gripping, suspenseful setup with the power and pace of a runaway train. Falling Kingdoms spends much of its time planting and cultivating seeds, the benefits of which the reader does not fully reap by the time the final page is turned, but which set the stage for what has the potential to be an immensely more satisfying sequel than an "And then..." series opener would likely have. On the other hand, while Falling Kingdoms hints at lucrative future dividends for its readers' investment, it reads a lot like a prequel, merely priming the pump for the main event.
That's not to say that the novel is lacking in the action department. On the contrary, Rhodes creates a superb pacing, a crescendo of sorts as the reader is eased into the richly-backgrounded kingdoms of Mytica through three differing perspectives (technically four, although insofar as the plot is concerned, Lucia and Magnus are essentially just two characters within the same POV), building up to an exhilarating battle much akin to those of Tolkien or Lewis. These contrasting perspectives are very reminiscent of the similarly-named Fall of a Kingdom novel by Hilari Bell, one of my personal fantasy favourites, and so the resulting effect is definitely a treat. Reading about a character from another character's perspective is, for some reason, so deeply satisfying (particularly when that perspective is unflattering); perhaps this is due to the general appeal of dramatic irony, or perhaps it is because it allows for a more profound characterization. I've written before on the problematic subject of YA and children's authors tending to equate protagonists with heroes, and that provides another rationale for the appeal of stories told from perspectives of characters who aren't on the same side. Through these multifaceted perspectives, we are given insight into not just the character's rationalizations of their actions, but also into their flaws and failings. 'Good' versus 'bad' isn't necessarily so clear cut; 'protagonist' and 'antagonist' do not equal 'hero' and 'bad guy' as the antagonist from one perspective is the protagonist of another. Coupled with the fact that, despite the swords and magic, the societies of the titular falling kingdoms are uncomfortably reminiscent of those of the real-world, and these perspectives encourage the reader to explore certain issues from an angle different from that with which they'd be accustomed. While by the end of the novel the reader will clearly side morally with certain characters moreso than others, Falling Kingdoms accomplishes the admirable feat of not characterizing a conflict in black and white, but in shades of grey.
Falling Kingdoms (or more accurately, the novel's publicists) stylizes itself as "Game of Thrones for teens." I'm typically quite hesitant about this kind of reader-bait; whatever is popular at the moment always gets name-dropped on the blurbs of books - 'it's the most gripping book since X'... 'fans of Y will absolutely love'... The Selection comes to mind, stylized as "The Hunger Games meets The Bachelor." However, this is one monicker I can back 100%. Falling Kingdoms has got incest. It's got merciless character deaths. It's got action and intrigue and a world that you'd love to visit, but you sure as hell would not want to live there. It's not Game of Thrones, but any fan of that series, teen or not, could do a lot worse than immerse themselves in Rhodes' thrilling world to get their next fantasy fix. My summer reading stack is still towering on my night stand, but I can't help but slip in Rebel Spring, the second book in the series, somewhere near the top of the pile.
No comments:
Post a Comment