Historia Brittonum (Nennius)

Historia Brittonum, (probably) written in the 800s, is a brief historical work attempting to capture the history of Britain. Its accounts are confusing, fantastic, and of questionable accuracy. It is significant in that it's the first historical account that mentions Arthur and his military victories. It also touches on Vortigern, Briton Ruler who allowed the Saxons a foothold on the island for the hand of their King's daughter.

The work is speedily read, but, save for the mention of Arthur, is a curiosity at best.

Rating: D

The Island of Dr. Moreau (H.G. Wells)

The Island of Dr. Moreau is a novel about a shipwreck survivor who ends up on an island with Dr. Moreau, his assistant Montgomery, and a slew of strange creatures, amalgamations of human and beast, that the doctor has created in an attempt to (presumably) improve upon nature. The beast-humans have characteristics of both, the most intriguing similarities to the latter being in their talk of law, and worship of their creator.

This work intrigued me in several ways. First, novels of this variety- I'd group this with Shelley's Frankenstein, for example- I find much more horrifying than their modern "horror" counterparts. Tackling difficult life questions, and exploring those who go to great lengths to answer those questions, with no regard to cost or consequence, can be much more fear-inducing than the modern horror tale.

Second, this novel gives intriguing treatment to creation and evolution, topics of extreme popularity in Wells' time. It looks at the possibility that creatures can evolve down as well as up, and that creatures require the presence of their creator, or at least belief in a being greater than themselves, providing law and structure, to avoid reverting back into beasts. I confess, I'm not entirely sure where Wells stands on the issues of God or evolution, but it doesn't matter, for the book accomplishes what I believe is an important aim in any literature- it forces the reader to think over the issue(s) presented, and evaluate their own stance on the matter. Whether or not the author provides answers is irrelevant- the reader must decide where he or she stands.

Wells ends the book with the following: "I hope, or I could not live." A fitting quote, after seeing the horrors inflicted on the island. In this life is evil, brokenness, and failure; we must hope that something better can be attained, whatever our beliefs, for refusing to do so will lead only to a quick descent into either denial, or chaos and madness.

Rating: A

On Arthur

Living in England, I’ve become quite interested in the legend of King Arthur and the various iterations of his tale that have fallen out over the centuries. The story of Arthur has been told and re-told for almost a thousand years, and each version reflects, to some degree, the cultural ideals of the society in which it was penned.

Arthur was likely a real person, though people throughout the centuries have added to his legend until fact and fiction are so intertwined, it’s hard to know who he really was, if he existed at all. There are hundreds of Arthurian books out there; sticking to the “classics” in this specific genre, I have produced the below reading list of 10 books. Of them, I’ve read 4 thus far, and not been disappointed. The majority are considered pure fiction, save for Geoffrey's work (history) and Cornwell's trilogy (historical fiction).

An Arthurian reading list

Geoffrey of Monmouth: The History of the Kings of Britain (c. 1136)

Chrétien de Troyes: Four Arthurian Romances (1170s)

(Unknown): Sir Gawain and the Green Knight (late 1300s)

Sir Thomas Mallory: Le’ morte de Arthur (1485)

Alfred, Lord Tennyson: The Idylls of the King (1850s-1880s)

Howard Pyle: The Story of King Arthur and His Knights (1903)
T.H. White: The Once and Future King (1940s)

Bernard Cornwell: Warlord Trilogy- The Winter King, Enemy of God, Excalibur (1990s)

Vlad (C.C. Humphreys)

Vlad is a historical fiction novel about Vlad Dracula, "the Impaler," the historical figure on whom Bram Stoker's Dracula is based. Set in the late 1400s, it chronicles Vlad's life- his childhood as a hostage in Turkey, his struggle to claim and hold his father's throne, and his cruelty to those who opposed him. Told from the vantage point of 3 people- his lover, his best friend, and his priest- it provides interesting insight into the real Vlad, and attempts to do so in a neutral way that allows the reader to draw his or her own conclusions about the man.

The novel offers glimpses of excellence, but on the whole is an average work. Humphreys did his homework, that's for certain, and it's a good story- but it's not told tremendously well. The book's latter half is better than the first, but it still felt lacking. In the hands of a more polished storyteller, I'd highly recommend it. As it stands, pick this up only if you have either an intense interest in the real Dracula, or nothing better to do.

Rating: C+