Dragon Blood

There are a number of problems that fantasy writers get with the territory, as it were. One is a weird and simplified attitude to law and ethics, and in particular, primogeniture. The King is the King because he's the eldest legitimate son of the King, or, if the old king had no legitimate heir, the nearest legitmate male descendent on the bloodline. Patricia Briggs hero, Ward of Hurog, holds his own position essentially by right of primogeniture. So when he finds himself inescapably in conflict with the legitimate King, he faces a problem.

In classic fantasy fiction this problem does not arise. Tolkien's King is inherently good; the Return of the King is an icon of the return of good governance. But Patricia Briggs is more subtle and is exploring the genre in new ways (and is in any case nowhere near such a good writer). Brigg's King, Jakoven, is a pretty nasty character and Ward, though on the whole gentle and easygoing, is pushed into a position where he cannot but revolt.

So what does he do? What does the fantasy hero about town do when he's forced to revolt against the king? Well, in this tale, he joins a rebellion led by the king's (illegitimate) half brother in favour of the king's (legitimate) younger brother. Not surprisingly, the said younger brother is more than somewhat suspicious of Ward's motives. The fact that Ward can gather to him sufficient forces to make a revolt successful against the present king makes him a dangerously overmighty subject for the next king.

And the question I have to ask is why does he do this? The question is such a blatant void in the plot that Briggs has to address it in the book, and while the answers she gives make sense to a degree - it's credible that Ward doesn't himself want to be king - it doesn't explain why he's setting out to replace a paranoid, psychologically damaged king with a young man who has been held in solitary confinement since his mid-teens, and who is himself clearly disturbed and paranoid. Indeed, before this book ends it seems more than likely that the plot for the third, as yet unwritten book of this trilogy must revolve around the structural conflict between a weak and suspicious king and an exceedingly powerful subject. I have to say if this prediction turns out to be right I'm going to be very disappointed.

Because despite it's glaring plot faults, and a stylistic problem I'll come to in a moment, this is an extremely engaging book. The first person narrator, Ward, is thoroughly likable, as, seen though his eyes, are most of his companions; the pace is brisk and the narrative flows well; the love interest, which was only touched on in the first book, is much more developed in this one. You like these people, you want them to succeed, and you're glad when they do.

Oh, that stylistic problem. Ward narrates most of the book first person, and that narrative works. Then, when the author wants to describe things Ward can't possibly have seen, she doesn't switch to another first person narrator, she switches to an old-fashioned omniscient narrator. Considered in isolation, the omniscient narrative works as well, but frankly the transition jars.

So, overall a thouroughly pleasant and likeable piece of fantasy. Not classic and not great literature but nevertheless a very enjoyable read. I do look forward to the sequel - I assume that one is planned - but with a little trepidation because I feel the author has left herself with a difficult plot corner to get out of.