21st Apr 2008
Review - Sword of God by Chris Kuzneski
 |
Sword of God by Chris Kuzneski |
I have finally struggled through to the end of this book but I have to admit that at least the last 150 pages (yes that’s close to half of it) was to find out if it would EVER get round to the point of the plot-line which is advertised on the back of the book. I have not read James Patterson’s “Murder Club” books but if he really thinks that “Kuzneski’s writing has raw power” and was referring to this book (which admittedly he may not have been), I’m not going to risk it. It is possible that the author has deliberately littered his pages with cliched phrases, derivative characters and clunky exposition because he thinks it appropriate for the “blockbuster” style he is trying to write but frankly that is an insult to both “blockbuster” writers and their audience.
I am no snob when it comes to novels - years producing audio books from all kinds of novels knocked any potential for that out of me. When I read a novel I read for the same reason I watch a film or a television series - to be immersed in a story. If the quality of the writing isn’t perfect but the story is engaging then that’s fine by me - goodness knows there are many “well written” or “literary” novels which will put you to sleep! Give me a good story over good grammar any day. Unfortunately, Sword of God gives you neither.
The plot is the good ol’ retired-military-man-is-the-only-man-who-can-stop-the<insert topical nationality/culture> terrorist’s plot. Yes there are a few more twists and turns than that but nothing substantial (unless you find it unusual for a US military man to become a bad guy due to military manipulation and trauma… sigh). On top of that, the writing in Sword of God actually gets in the way of what story there is. For example, I know readers of these military type novels love copious details about military hardware and process but plonking them down right in the middle of potential action scenes, destroying any flow which may have existed, is just inexcusable especially when it is done over and over. Similarly there is no excuse for high school phrasing to end sections as in: “She didn’t think it could get any worse. But she was wrong.” (p253) and the book is full of it.
I will admit that, perhaps, if I hadn’t been lured to buying the book under the pretence of it being a very different kind of plot, I might have been more open to the story, if only because I wouldn’t have been quite so focused on waiting for that plot-line to re-appear. Which brings me to something probably more interesting than this book: blurbs.
Blurbs for books are not written by authors but, obviously, by publishing staff keen on sales. I used to edit them for the backs of our audio books and was often struck by how they reflected the contents of the books to varying degrees. The blurb for this one is truly false advertising. In fact here it is:
Tunnelling deep under one of the most holy cities in the world, an ambitious young archaeologist slowly works her way towards an unthinkable goal. Somewhere ahead is a chamber containing the collected fragments of an ancient scripture, a find of unimaginable significance…
Meanwhile, halfway round the world, a covert military bunker holds a macabre secret. An elite special-forces officer seems to have been brutally murdered - but how, and more disturbingly, why? Any hope of solving the mystery rests on the grisly clues that remain.
As the race to uncover the truth begins, a plot unfolds that could burn all of civilization in the fires of holy Armageddon…
Sounds like the archaeologist plot and the “find of unimaginable significance” would have at least equal significance to the plot of this novel as the military plot, yes? Or at least SOME significance at all? The archaeologist does, early on in the novel, discover a sword which, it is hinted at, may be the sword of Mohammed which it is rumoured may be the sword Jesus will use on judgement day AND THAT IS THE LAST TIME THE SWORD IS MENTIONED. At no point does the sword or the ancient documents have ANY RELEVANCE WHATSOEVER to the plot beyond being reason for being in the convenient place at the convenient time. In fact, you could happily remove the archaeologist subplot entirely without effecting anything but the length of the novel. Sure, there would be a couple of loose ends, you’d need some other character to hand over one piece of evidence but that’s about the only important role she plays and could have been handled for more elegantly. Certainly there was no threat of holy Armageddon other than that the attempted terrorist act may have sparked a war which would be justified by the combatants as a “holy war” but there would certainly not have been anything supernatural about it. Very very disappointing.
REVIEW
Overall Score: 17/60
Story: 2/10 - derivative
Structure: 4/10 - all over the place, too much left undone or unsatisfactorily tied up.
Dialogue: 3/10 - cliche but not unbelievable for the characters, particularly bad when used for exposition
Characters: 3/10 - stereotypes (and I don’t mean archetypes, just stereotypes)
Descriptive style: 4/10 - cliched phrasing, lack of flow mostly due to badly inserted exposition
Exposition handling: 1/10 - clunky, incongruous, often resorts to straight lecturing, inconsistently breaks rules of POV in 3rd person intimate
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.