There are currently 0 users online.
You are here
I was wondering if you had anything you wanted to say on Clothar, Jack. Of all the other books in your series it seems that this one is the one you've talked about least.
In terms of the rest of the series, would you consider Clothar the "Black Sheep"? I'm asking due to the troubles with the release date, multiple titles, seemingly different writing style, and it's having to be split in two like The Sorceror.
I have to say that it is the only book in your series that I honestly did not like, a minority view to be sure, but one that a few of the older forumites also expressed. It seemed to be more about exposition and setting things up than telling a real story.
I want to make it clear I am not bashing your writing or you. I think you are a fine author (and one of, if not the, best at writing action scenes) and a genuinely decent gent. I eagerly await the release of The Eagle and if you do another Ottawa book signing I hope to make it this time and, even if I can't afford the book (poor niversity student that I am) shake your hand.
Hi, William... Interesting viewpoint you express here, and I do have a couple of thing's I would like tosay in response:
The confusion arising from the different title is completely the fault of the US publisher . . . or more accurately, of their so-called Marketing people, who decided, in their collective wisdom, that the great American public is incapable of understanding or accepting a title as obscure and convoluted as "Clothar the Frank" . . . presumably because it ain't American. Thus they changed the title, arbitrarily, to "The Lance Thrower", cunningly getting the point across that this is a book about a fellow who throws lances. In the meantime, however, they succeeded in confusing practically everyone who does not belong to the Marketing Division of that particular publisher. 'Nuff sed about that.
As for your comment about "Clothar" being the black sheep of the series, written in a different voice, I have to disagree. It is written in the First Person Singular, as are all the others with the sole exception of "Uther", and if the Voice seems different, that may be attributable to the fact that the story had a new Narrator, Clothar himself. You seem to think it is "all about exposition. rather than story," and you may have a valid viewpoint there. The amount of exposition, however, was necessitated and dictated by the subject matter. This is/was the first of the stories that did not originate and develop in Britain, and that had to be demonstrated clearly and beyond the possibility of confusion or misunderstanding. In addition to that, I had to be careful in going about my presentation of the entire Lancelot thesis, because my research indicated strongly that there was no Lancelot, at the outset, but that his persona could have evolved gradually over a period of timecenturies, in factoriginating with a single Frankish warrior.
Anyway, the sequel to "Clothar", called "The Eagle" is now in the final stages of copyediting and it will be out prior to Christmas this year. I hope you'll enjoy that one, because it is an extension of, and it involves a resolution to, the Lancelot/Guinivere/Arthur situation.
Jack Whyte
Thanks for the reply Jack. I have to admit I'm a little relieved, I feared you might take my comments in a more negative way, what with the internet being the breeding ground for misconceptions that it is.
I am aware of the likleyhood that Lancelot never existed. I have done quite a deal of reading and research on the subject of the historical Arthur myself, although obviously not as much as someone like yourself who has dedicated over thirty years to the subject.
In fact I recently finished a university course with Prof. Pawl Birt, the Celtists at the university of Ottawa. As a university proffessor yourself, have you met the man? A very good very knowledgable guy and, while the course was a little remedial for me, it was worth it just to be able to discuss theories and the like with him. I don't think I ever felt prouder than when he handed back my course paper and told me it was an excellent, incredibly comprehensive piece of work with at least one idea he had never considered before (Riothamus being a historical basis for Uther).
I was a little surprised when it was announced you were including Lancelot at all. How difficult has it been for you to try and keep things historical, while at the same time trying to create interesting and commercially viable novels?
I posted a note re: Clothar but cannot find it and it may be floating in internet space somewhere. Have devoured every word of every book and honestly did not enjoy Clothar. It lumbers along somehow and I was never made to care about the character as I did in the other books. Looking forward to Golden Eagle as I really wanted to resolve the relationships of Arthur, Gu..., Lancelot. Lancelot may be more important than we really think as the entire chivalry blanket may hang from his images of nobility, prowess in battle etc.
The Lance Thrower
Having devoured every word of the Camulod series and loved them - and reread the series to savor them slowly, I must admit I was disappointed with The Lance Thrower. I never came to the point where I cared one way or the other