Are The Witcher Books Good?

Uhhhhhhhhhhh…no. Well…maybe just a bit.

Obligatory “this is my opinion” caveat.

I’m not Polish, so I have no loyalty to it because of that. Nor have I played the games.

When I started reading the books last year I intended to finish them all before the show came out. I didn’t. I read six of the books and for the purpose of this post, flicked through the last two. Why did I read so much if it sucks? I wanted it to be good SO BAD, that I gave it two more chances after I would’ve normally quit. Dandelion also factored into my prolonged stay.

There are good bits (the first book, which I’d recommend, being the biggest bit) but they’re surrounded by clusters of mediocre and hordes of “Why is this here?”

Alright, I say I don’t like the series but what about Dandelion? I ADORE Dandelion. Gaaaaahhhhhh! Why did these books betray me?

A note for those who’ve only seen the show: when I say Dandelion, I’m talking about Jaskier the bard/poet. For the books and games, they translated his name into English.

What I like

This series has many facets, so of course some of them are good. Curiously, my two favorite books, The Last Wish and Blood of Elves, are the only ones translated by the woman.

The Idea

I mentioned in one of my reviews that this world is one I’m interested in exploring. Monsters, magic, battles, bromances, monster hunters, and cool locations are all things I can support. If that had been the core of this series I’m sure this post would be very different. But along with all of those things comes a bucket of no plot movement and random perspectives, and that’s not something I want to sit through.

Dandelion

He is easily my favorite character in the series. I mean, I like Geralt, but Dandelion is not only the best character in the series, he’s a new favorite character of all time. He’s funny, charming, a skilled poet, knows human nature, presses Geralt’s buttons without a care, and wants to go on adventures without having to worry he’ll get killed. Even though he’s a bit of a coward and talkative at the wrong time, I don’t believe he purposefully does it to be irritating.

The perspectives that he has are some of my favorite because in this dark world he can find a way to make it lighter and none of the other characters do that. He also stands out among the cast since hardly anyone else is humorous. Geralt can pull out a joke or witty line at times. But every scene Dandelion is in I always want to hear what he has to say and I want to follow his journeys and I want to see the world through his eyes. Yes, he’s always trying to get with the prettiest women and yes, he can be dense. But a sign of a good character is that their flaws don’t taint your love for them.

Hmm, is that it? There’s gotta be something else. Hold on. Ummm. Ooo, that part in Blood of Elves when Geralt’s on the boat to Oxenfurt. And in Baptism of Fire when Dandelion’s directing everyone to make soup. And Dandelion’s perspective in Season of Storms. Did I mention I like Dandelion?

There are other good bits and pieces scattered across the books. But the reason I started the series was for the idea, and the reason I stayed longer was for Dandelion. I skimmed those last two books pretty much just to find more Dandelion. And to confirm that the ending is as bad as it sounded.

Let us now put aside kindness and get down to brass tacks.

Why I quit reading

I didn’t care

And I came so close to finishing, too. Years ago I might have pushed through because I didn’t like leaving things unfinished, but that was then. The thought of forcing myself to complete it made me grimace and eagerly reach for other books.

Ciri (who else?)

The fact that she isn’t the villain is most distressing. I think she’s a terrible person. She’s mean and vicious toward people who are not enemies. I cannot comprehend why she made a certain choice in The Time of Contempt. Like, what rational, sensible, mildly smart person would do what she does? And then to continue on that path…I don’t know what possessed her. She’s also one of those people who thinks an unborn baby is a parasite. I’m supposed to support this person? Why?

And let’s not forget she’s responsible for a bunch of people…[REDACTED].

There’s so much wasted time

After consideration, I’ve identified the problem: Sapkowski can’t write engaging long stories. If he has to complete the story in under eighty pages, he does good. But as soon as the story can take many books to tell, it goes bonkers.

Why he stretched the plot into five books is a mystery to me. Sure, sometimes the plot can take a break and include more laid back conversations about what’s going on in the world. But it should be at an absolute minimum by the time the last book rolls around. Sapkowski clearly wanted to tell bits of information from a variety of people and it kills the momentum and drags the story out. He zigs when he should zag and tarries when he should skip. He shows, when he should tell, a problem I never knew existed.

For example, at one point Geralt is out of action for a bit and Dandelion finds him and they discuss what’s going on in the world. Instead of using Dandelion’s voice to give information, we went to two, maybe three, strangers’ viewpoints and got the information in a boring, confusing, sideways manner. It’s not immediately obvious where you are or what’s going on, so by the time you’re vaguely aware of things you’re put in a different head. Just use Dandelion.

In the last book they spend way too long ho-humming around a castle doing NOTHING. Why is this happening in the last book? Shouldn’t they be doing something, oh, I don’t know, important?

This series could easily be cut in half and still tell the same core story.

Geralt is not the main character

If a series is named after someone, wouldn’t you expect that person to be the one you follow? Was I wrong to assume that’d be the case?

I mentioned in one of my reviews that I didn’t mind seeing the world from random perspectives. And at the time, I didn’t. But then it kept veering from Geralt and jumping into more and more people who contribute nothing exciting *cough*the sorceresses*cough* Why could the story not be just as good while primarily following Geralt? If Ciri is meant to be the main person then why not make her the main person from the beginning? Don’t get me all excited over Geralt and then ignore him half the time.

Dandelion is not in it more

As I already said, he is my favorite character. I know he’s not helpful in battles and it might be foolish to always have him around, but why couldn’t he be a more prominent narrator? His voice is so different and entertaining and I’m sure he could’ve relaid information in a more digestible way.

The ending

When I started to realize I would not finish the series, I read some spoilery reviews and found out how it ended. *sighs and chuckles in pain* I would never have done it that way and I’m sorry that it could be the direction the show takes. I…it…I can’t believe that’s the end. Where did it come from? Why is it like that? I don’t know. But I’m glad I didn’t care by the time I discovered it or I’d be mighty angry.

How could it have been better?

Make Ciri the villain

A bold narrative choice, to be sure, but I’d have loved to see the conflicts and resolutions of such a choice.

Cut the random narrators

Sometimes it’s a good idea to observe things from a different perspective. But since none of those POVs return, I couldn’t drum up enough sympathy to care for these fleeting glimpses into other lives. Either make one of them permanent or focus more on Geralt.

Make Dandelion the backseat narrator

As I said, I love the voice he uses and having him pop in at random moments would be hilarious and he could clear up certain parts of the plot. Or, can Sapkowski write Dandelion’s Half a Century of Poetry? I’d read that.

More Geralt

The series is named after him and yet he’s pushed aside so often. Let him be closer to the center of things. As it is, the series should’ve been called “The Child, the Sorceresses and Sometimes Geralt.”

Focus

Everything is spread out and meandering and drifting. There’s a lack of motion and concrete achievements. Wrangle the story onto a narrower street and kick anyone off who gets in the way. I just want the action and answers.

ADD A STUPID MAP

Why is it so hard? And while you’re at it, add a glossary with pronunciations.

What can you read instead?

If you like monster hunting…

The Hobbit by J. R. R. Tolkien. I can’t think of another book where killing a monster is prevalent.

If you like bromances…

The Riyria Revelations by Michael J. Sullivan. Royce and Hadrian are so good. Plus, there’s the prequel series, The Riyria Chronicles, where you get to see them meet.

If you like fantasy politics…

Hmm, most adult fantasy books have a degree of politics in them. I haven’t read a politic-heavy series. Maybe The Farseer trilogy by Robin Hobb? Or if you want space politics, the Red Rising trilogy by Pierce Brown.

If you like magic users…

Uhh…Riyria Revelations? That series covers all these points. The Discworld books by Terry Pratchett also cover these areas but I have not read the entire series, so I won’t recommend those.

But if I put aside my dislikes, can I see merit?

Of course. But if you like fast, tight plots you’re probably not gonna make it through the whole thing.

People who like their women “strong and independent” will have a mini field day. All the sorceresses are vocal in their opinions. Since “strong and independent” women are a dime a dozen these days I wasn’t impressed by their characters and I think they all sound the same, with the exceptions of Yennefer and Triss.

Oh. Let’s not forget Ciri. She’s in a league of her own, thank goodness.

There’s plenty of politics to get lost in. Literally lost. I barely followed what was going on among the kings and their problems. I’m sure the answers are there, I just didn’t care enough to fully understand them. It also didn’t help that a map is not readily available.

A decent amount of fighting occurs if that’s something that interests you. I can take it or leave it.

The monsters fade into the background as the books progress, but when they are there it makes for a nice diversion.

And then there’s the friendships. Geralt and Dandelion are the first ones that come to mind. But a lot of people meet Geralt and he forms some curious alliances, lasting friendships and other things. *wink wink*

Lastly, there are the conversations about morals, prejudice, destiny, life, beliefs, destiny, children, war, history, allegiances, and fate (which is just another way of saying destiny). Some of the conversations are good, but several times I wanted to shake Geralt and say, “Stop being neutral and do something!”

Further reasons you might want to read the books

You love the show and/or games

I understand the desire to stay with certain characters and worlds. When you love them to bits and just need to follow them more, it’s hard to leave. The Witcher is a rare case where you have three different ways to experience it and each of them excel in certain areas, so there’s something to be gained from all of them.

You love the idea and don’t care about the wasted time

I’m with you. I think it’s a fascinating fantasy story to tell. But where I see most of it as a heap of, “Whoa, what happened here?” you might be completely enamored. I guess it’ll depend on how critical and patient you are.

You don’t want Geralt to be the lead

That sounds sacrilegious to me. I wanted the man the carry the story and he didn’t. But certain readers may not want him to lead the books, so there are plenty of other POVs for them to engage with.

You think Ciri/the sorceresses (in the show) are the greatest

I’ve already expressed my distaste for Ciri.

The sorceresses are all exquisitely beautiful, jealous, bland people. Not exactly anyone I want to connect with or root for. However, there are those who’ll find them empowering and amazing and desperately enchanting. Not I.

You want to get ahead of the show

Cliffhangers got you down? Never fear! The book series is done and you can finish it all before the show returns.

Will it enhance your tv watching experience?

I gotta be honest: I didn’t watch the whole show. I don’t give a fig about Ciri or the sorceresses, so I skipped most of their stuff just to find Geralt and Dandelion.

Since I’m not going to do a full review of the show, there are just a few things I’ll mention.

Geralt’s okay. I hope he gets a bit less agitated and broody and embraces more of the books’ humor and conversational skills.

Dandelion/Jaskier is much better in the books. He’s more confident, charming, clear spoken and overall more mature. And his friendship with Geralt is not as antagonistic as it’s portrayed in the show. While he’d absolutely be my favorite character in the show, I wish they’d gone with more of the book persona. And if they make him bisexual…tables will be flipped. WHAT IS WRONG WITH A PLATONIC FRIENDSHIP? Do you have any idea how many women Dandelion sleeps with in his lifetime? I don’t either. All I know is he likes pretty women. He’s the most womanizing womanizer who ever womanized a woman. Period.

I’m so glad I didn’t have to read Yennefer’s backstory. Her time as a hunchback, on the sorceress island, and before she meets Geralt, might take a couple pages across all the books. If you’re hoping to read about her early years, you’re not going to.

Ciri’s time wandering through the woods with a black elf is, mercifully, also not in the books.

Speaking of black…everyone in the show who isn’t white, is white in the books. Forcing diversity continues to be annoying and here, it’s disrespectful to the source material and Poland. Would it really be so bad if people looked the way they are described in the novels? It’s such a simple thing, but apparently too much of a hardship.

One of the best, and inconsequential, moments is the song played over the title sequence of episode six. And as far as “Toss a Coin to Your Witcher” goes, I don’t find it as incessantly catchy as everyone else.

Anyway, will knowing the books make the show better? It’s hard to know. It will give you a better grasp of the timeline. But about half the show’s content is severely truncated or doesn’t even happen in the books. And only a tiny bit is adapted so there’s no telling how far off the rails they’ll go.

Are the books superior to the show? Possibly. That’s an unfair answer on two levels, as I didn’t watch the entire show and there’s only one season to judge. Both mediums have strengths and weaknesses but it remains to be seen which one covers its weaknesses better. From what I saw of the show, I was not terribly impressed.

And there you have it. My analysis of The Witcher is complete. As is becoming usual, it’s on the unpopular side of things but I hope I’ve expressed myself in way that shows you why, in my opinion, this series is not good.

Want to read my reviews? Start here.

Got crypto?