Book Review: A Natural History of Dragons, by Marie Brennan

WHERE ARE MY DRAGONS!?

Erm, excuse me. That was a bit uncalled for. Anyway:

Advertising is deception, and I'm no stranger to warping the truth when it better suits me, but even so I can't help but feel a bit betrayed by A Natural History of Dragons: A Memoir by Lady Trent. I was expecting more dragons.

The subtitle is the most important part of that title - ANHD is not any sort of faux textbook. It is a fantasy novel, written in the style of, as it says, a memoir by one 'Lady Trent'. When this framework is at its best, we get some very good insight into her character. We see the germination of an old woman who is passionate about her study, sometimes critical of the society around her, and nostalgic for her youth. We follow her from childhood as she discovers a love of dragons and peruses her urge to study them first into marriage and then into a perilous expedition to a foreign land. She recounts her thoughts and actions and intersperses the writing with a few of the drawings she made during her adventure, many of them depicting the dragons she has encountered.

Although Lady Trent has a strong voice, the other aspects of the novel fall short. The society it depicts is vaguely Victorian, and quite often Trent voices her discontent with the way woman are treated and how she, as a child, had little say in the path of her life, but it all feels a bit abstract. Her mother is the only character that embodies the negatives of this society in any real way, and she is only present in the margins of earlier chapters. Lady Trent's father is shown as a kind person who lets her indulge in her dragon fixation, and though he forces her to marry, the grooms he lets her choose from are all tailored to her preferences. The man she ends up marrying--Jacob Camherst--also has an interest in dragons, and is more than happy to continue supplying her with books and research journals about them. Although she has to persuade Jacob somewhat in order to accompany him on his dragon-hunting expedition, his resistance is flimsy. Throughout the book she experiences very little fallout for any of the taboos she violates, and her social commentary amounts to little more than "Patriarchy sure sucked back then, but luckily I dodged most of it."

This would be less of an issue, I think, if we understood something about why Jacob and her father are apparently such great exceptions. But they, as with most of the supporting cast, are very underwritten. We get some sense of what they do and why they are interested in dragons, but they show no growth, and we do not spend enough time with them to get to know how they think. Lady Trent's maid, Dagmira, is the only secondary character I felt I understood at the end of the book. The others feel as if they exist only to fulfill their function in the plot; they seem disconnected from the society they were born into. As it is, we are told about a system of oppression without seeing any of its actors or victims.

Alone, this shortcoming might be overcome by a strong plot or an interesting world, but neither are quite as engaging as they should be. The setting is generic. It's not Tolkien-esque fantasy--there are no elves, nor is there any magic--but more of an alternative Earth with dragons. It feels very similar to Ursula le Guin's Malafrena, which was an alternate history that took place in a fictional European country. But while Le Guin takes the time to flesh out the geographic and political landscape of her world, Brennan has Lady Trent gloss over most of the details. In the same way Will Save the Galaxy for Food relies mostly on established tropes to serve as shorthand for its setting, ANHD just sort of assume we get what's going on. The result is a world that feels empty and unexplored. This is a world with dragons, and though they are the primary motivator of our protagonist, they seem like an almost superfluous layer of the world. They are curiosities, little more than exotic big game. There is no indication of how they might have shaped this land's history, or a hint at what alternative taxonomy they might fit into in this world. It's as if dragons showed up in Victorian-era England and everyone just shrugged and ignored them. They exhibit fantastic abilities, yet it seems no one was bothered to really study them before our hero. There has to be a first, I guess, but because we don't have a good understanding of our setting's history it all feels very arbitrary.

Lady Trent talks about how she has become famous for her dragon discoveries, but we only get a glimpse at what she has accomplished. She has lived a full life, but these memoirs cover only a small section of her personal development. Throughout the story she mentions the other adventures she's had, and all of them sounded much more interesting that what was on the page before me. We don't get enough gossip to be engaged in drama; we are too insulated from her society to really get a feel for it; and the plot does not start to get very tense or interesting until the last 50 or so pages, when actual stakes are introduced.

The dragon details we do get are intriguing, but neat tidbits do not make a compelling narrative. In a book called A Natural History of Dragons, there is barely enough of either the science or the animals to hold my curiosity--another unfortunate waste of a good title. There are sequels to this book, presumably where more dragons are seen, but spreading out those scraps just makes for multiple unsatisfying meals. This endeavor would have been better as an anthology of Lady Trent's adventures, or a more scholarly tome with dragon details. As it is I'm not really interested in finding out more, either about the dragons or Trent herself.

Yet, even after everything I have said, this is not a bad book. I was never mad while reading it, only a little bored at points. I can't quite say it's good, but it far surpasses something like Autonomous, which was interesting because of its flaws not in spite of them. The prose itself is good, and Lady Trent is a strong character. The dragons, when they do show up, are interesting and creative; if only they showed up more. The artwork is lovely, but too sparse to elevate the work as a whole. A Natural History of Dragons displays real talent and has good ideas, but the entirety of the work is less than the sum of its parts. This is just above average as a novel, I'd say. Probably still worth a read, if you like dragons, but only if it's on sale.

 A Natural History of Dragons is available on Amazon and in most retail book stores.

Book Review: 2001 A Space Odyssey, by Arthur C. Clarke

The most interesting thing about adaptions, I think, is how they compare to their source material. Adaption can be anything from an attempt at replication (anime adaptions tend to be almost shot-for-shot recreations of the manga they pull from), to creating something almost completely new (the Marvel Cinematic Universe takes the names of its Avengers events from the comics, but they are only loosely related to the plots therein; a more extreme example would be something like the original Full Metal Alchemist, which might as well be a whole new new show by its conclusion). In any case, I love being able to watch something and getting a sense of what choices were made in its creation: Why did they move this character here? Why did they cut out this scene? Why did they add this plot point? The mechanics of storytelling can sometimes be as interesting as the stories themselves, and dissecting them is as much fun as watching them play out.

I was excited to learn then, upon reading its forward, that 2001: A Space Odyssey is not the source material for the movie, nor is the movie the source for the book. The script and book were written concurrently--the story was a collaboration between Stanley Kubric and Arthur C. Clarke, based upon a short story Clarke had written much earlier in his career. The book released several months after the movie hit theaters, and the most notable thing, I think, is how it is at once identical to the movie in plot, structure, and tone, yet still compelling for its own sake.

If you have seen the movie, you know what happens. The monolith lands on Earth. It gives apes knowledge. Man reaches the moon, and discovers a second one that sends a signal to Saturn (in the movie it was aimed at Jupiter, one of the few big differences). A space ship is sent out. Hal 9000 becomes murderous. David Bowman reaches the final monolith ('The Star Gate'), and after traversing an unfathomable distance becomes something quite more than human. However, while 2001 the movie has an almost overwhelming sense of awe and mystery, the book's purpose is to explain. This is partially a result of the medium--one can write about haunting Latin chanting all day, but it will never convey a tenth of what is so unnerving about the film's Requiem--but Clarke's style suits the choice well. He does not focus on character: the ape we follow in the beginning is treated as little more than an animal, and the two men we see later feel very much the same. This is mostly because we simply do not spend much time with Heywood Floyd, the man who goes to investigate the monolith on the moon, and so we walk away with only an impression of who David was before he ascends with the aliens. We are told why things are happening in mostly explicit detail. We known the purpose of the monolith from the start. We get greater insight into the rational behind Hal's betrayal. We are told what happens to Dave in the end. There is little to interpret here, and even the ending has a clear purpose. The only thing left up to the imagination is the fate of humanity, and the fate of whatever David has become.

I could see people being disappointing with this; 2001: A Space Odyssey is so captivating precisely because it is vague. The movie works on a sensual level, and our interpretations make it more personal, more interesting to discuss. The novel is more of an intellectual curiously. We are drawn forward by what the answers might be, and then we get them. The movie is like a magic trick, and the novel is the magician, teaching us how it was done. However, even though the movie and book are nearly twins, that does not make them inseparable. If knowing how the trick works ruins it, then I would not recommend this book; but barring that, it makes a great companion to the movie, and stands up just fine on its own.

Clarke's writing is never too flowery or too technical; it is clear and precise. I don't really have much to say about it. It is the kind of effective you do not notice--like good special effects in a movie. We experience wonder with our characters, and tension in tense situations. I could find a few things to nit-pick if I gave it another go through, I'm sure, but it is good writing. I have no complaints. I'm glad I read it.

If you liked the movie and want more answers at the expense of some of the awe, then definitely pick it up. If you want solid, classic sci-fi, I would recommend it. A good book.

2001: A Space Odyssey is available on Amazon and wherever books are sold.