Genre: Fantasy
Series: Empire of the Wolf #1
Page Count: 432
Publication Year: 2022
Publisher: Orbit
Special Notes: I received an early copy in exchange for an honest review.
Summary: Truth, justice and the medieval way.
This book reminds me of The Pariah (here’s my review) because of the downtrodden orphan who gets an education, the dreary setting, the religious upheaval, the mystical-y magic, and the use of retrospective first person narration. This book is better, though not great.
Unlike The Pariah, this one starts with the narrator already living the better life, her miserable time on the streets a receding memory. I think that’s a smart choice; no one wants to sit through past misery when they could be reading the real story. She’s traveling with Justice Vonvalt, a man who is a judge/jury/executioner and holds almost as much power as the Emperor. Vonvalt travels the countryside dispensing the law in small towns and cities far from the capital. When a murder occurs, their investigation transforms into a web so tangled, it may lead to the downfall of the empire.
I assume the narrator’s purpose in sharing this story is to talk about Vonvalt and the empire; so why is she, her name’s Helena, wasting paper on what the cities look like and how she forgot to put on a cloak one time? First of all, why does she remember that info decades later? Secondly, why wouldn’t she trim the mundanities to get to the important parts? She sprinkles her hindsight throughout the book, so it seems like every word is what she’s actually writing in the future. That’s dumb. If it needs hints about the future, have brief interludes, and the rest of it can be like she’s currently living it. Then she could say things like, “It surprises me that such terrible, cruel events can fit in a single paragraph.” I don’t want to be constantly reminded that none of this stuff is worth being invested in because it all ended years ago. And because it’s all long over, Helena’s realness is nowhere in sight and any worry or tension regarding her and Vonvalt is completely gone.
If Helena disappeared, or her narration was replaced by omniscient third person narration, almost nothing would change. That’s bad. It’s extra bad because all Helena does is cry, mope, get angry, do some secretary work, and cry again. I think she’s unlikable. She has one major solo mission, but then it’s back to her talking about Vonvalt, and me not caring about her. Funnily enough, the book’s description on Goodreads doesn’t give a hint of Helena’s existence. Even they don’t think she’s important.
However, Vonvalt isn’t what I’d call a vast improvement. He’s supposed to be wise, imposing, strong and admirable. He has his moments, but to me he’s too emotional and capricious to earn my respect. Those with true wisdom are not governed by emotions, but they can be compassionate, friendly, and sorrowful. They have a tamed fire and an inner strength that is never shaken. I should feel fear and admiration when I observe Vonvalt. I don’t.
One other guy travels with them and he’s the type who drinks, laughs and loves women, a.k.a. the comic relief. I don’t dislike him, but I didn’t get any real positive vibes from him either.
The other characters, both heroes and villains, are…there. One guy has promise, but not enough to keep me around.
Another similarity to The Pariah is the people are zealots, cultists or not religious at all. Where are all the other religious types? Maybe the author doesn’t understand that with religion it’s not just all or nothing. A bit of nuance would be appreciated.
I can always visualize a book’s locations, no matter how they’re written. As I write this review I can clearly see the pictures I made for this book. Does that mean the description is really good? I honestly don’t remember it, so take that how you will.
As for the dialogue…I saved some quotes, but I really like conversations and when I can’t remember much of what a book says, that makes me sad.
Other reviewers say they couldn’t put the book down. I disagree. The third quarter has the best action but the rest of it is the equivalent of molasses in January. I didn’t care who murdered the lady or what kind of schemes are afoot and the reveals didn’t make it any better. The thing that truly kept me reading is my interest in justice being upheld. That’s good, since it’s kinda the point of the book, but even that didn’t satisfy me in the end. Again, I know things aren’t looking up for the trio, so the fleeting victories they have are tainted by the bleak horizon.
And yet. And yet…I think the author isn’t a bad writer. My previous words may make that seem like a contrary statement, but some people can write, they just choose the wrong story. Murder mysteries and political intrigue are sides of different coins. One should clip from clue to clue and build in excitement, whereas the other takes time to unravel and may not greatly impact the story for several books. Blending the two doesn’t quite work because it starts/stops so often it feels like it isn’t going anywhere. So if the author stuck with one main storyline—or wrote something else entirely, I don’t really care at this point—it would probably be better.
I know what you’re thinking: If this book is so-so, why didn’t I quit? Looking back on it, I don’t know. I guess some part of me refused to accept that it’s a peanut butter sandwich: dry, bland, and full of regret. If this wasn’t an ARC—I tend to finish those unless it’s absolute garbage, which has happened—I wouldn’t have finished it.
Check out my rating here.