Friday, January 22, 2010

Shadow Hawk

Hello all,


Gee, it seems like it has been forever since I posted on something. Well, this time, I read Shadow Hawk by Andre Norton, which was recommended to me by a friend who hated it. Well, I don't know if she hated it, but she didn't really like it either.

Set in Egyptian times, this book follows the adventure of a guy who is the captain of a group of desert scouts. He has no land to call his own, because his evil brother kicked him off of it or something like that. (I skimmed through some of it) :/ The story follows how he rises in the favor of the pharoah, and gradually earns all that he deserves.

That sounds really general, but I'm telling you, that is almost literally all that happened. There are several moments of suspense that either were too short or lasted too long, ruining the whole "suspense" device. Also, several threads of the storyline that started in the beginning were never followed up later, which might have given the story more depth. I guess the best way to put it is that it was boring. Also, it was disappointing because none of the main characters died. That sounds horrid, I know, but seriously, how realistic is it that all of the main characters take part in a battle, and the worst thing that happens is someone got a scratch!? Come on!

One thing that did catch my attention was that the desert scouts were all archers, which definitely produced some cool stuff. I think archery rocks. So yeah, that part of the whole thing was cool. Other than that.... I don't think I'd read it again by choice.

To sum it up, some parts were cool, but as a whole, the book really wasn't that interesting.

~Tony

1/5 Recommended

26 comments:

  1. Totally agree. When I read it, I could not keep my attention on it for the life of me. Borrrring. And I completely understand about the whole "nobody died" thing.
    It might have been good, though, if you are really into Egypt...maybe.

    ReplyDelete
  2. interesting .... probably wont read that book any time soon :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am in to Egypt, but this book seriously lacked the lush creativity that a good Egyptian based story can have. I mean, think of the possibilities!! Court intriegue(sp?), treason, torture, epic battles, romance- decked to the nines, poison, wierd rituals, oh man, the list is endless!! The Egyptian setting offers such possibilities, but this book didn't really take advantage of them. It's rather sad, actually.

    Yes, H.R.H. Anne, this book will probably never be very enlightning for you. Sometimes, there are some books that aren't wonderful adventure novels or something, but should be read merely for the experience- for instance, Richard Henry Dana's "Two Years Before the Mast" is extremely long and tedious, but really a good read for knowledge. This one, however, is not one of them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Now that I look back on it, I guess I gave a pretty dismal report, didn't I? I hope I didn't ruin anybody's opinion of this book. It certainly wasn't unreadable, if that helps.

    ReplyDelete
  6. definitely not im always open because i've learned that if you trust some one to much you can miss out on a book that could potentially be good.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I do not think I shall put that on my lists of books to read. For one thing, I am not really into the Egyptian era. Another is that you don't make this particular book sound too interesting.

    I thought you were supposed to post on something off the book list? Why did you not?

    ~Rosie Cotton

    ReplyDelete
  8. Good point H.R.H. Anne. I'm glad you think so.

    No, actually we are supposed to follow the list, but some people don't seem to regard it.

    That wasn't pointed or anything, Lady A.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The boss herself told me it is not necessary to go off the list. They are just SUGGESTIONS.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If you disapproved of what I did, why did you do the same thing?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I wonder who is going to post next...we have been going in a strange order.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Did the same thing? Did the same thing!! What are you talking about? Shadow Hawk has been on the list since you and I revised it! In fact, you suggested it! It's not on there now because I removed it, because it has been posted on!! If you had read the post, you would have seen this: "I will remove the books that have already been posted on as we go." That was paraphrased. Not on the list, my foot!! I believe you are the only one who has ever posted consistently off the list!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well, excuse me for making a tiny little mistake that I didn't catch right away. GEE WHIZ. Lighten up. But Tini DID say that we do NOT have to go by the list!

    ReplyDelete
  14. I did not say that we were not allowed to do it, I was just explaining that we are supposed to follow it! That's why we have one!

    You know, you're awfully picky about other people's mistakes, but you sure do pitch a fit when someone points out your own!

    ReplyDelete
  15. WELL! I would have you know I care nothing for your foul remarks! Nothing! At least this is better than you spouting love sonnets and all that junk.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If you wish to say anything else, Dewhurst, call me up because it is not fair that everyone else should have to witness our disagreeable arguments!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well fine! That settles it. If love means always letting you be right, then I want none of it! You are horrid, and I cannot believe that I ever thought that you would feel the way about me that I felt about you. This relationship has ended A, and from now on I shall consider you an aquaintance.

    I decided to make this declaration public, as our readers watched/read this dysfunctional relationship start, and they shall see it end!

    Good bye Lady A. Good bye!

    ReplyDelete
  18. So, you knew that the book wasn't great cause your girlfriend didn't like it, and you read it anyway? Uh... Why?

    ReplyDelete
  19. I am quite sure that besides the amusement that this interchange has caused it was really unnecessary to do it on this site considering that your modern love affairs are hardly the work of classical literature. I would have to say that I agree with Mr. Osgood in the previous post.
    But now that your relationship is tidily taken care of I am sure that we can move on to the discussion of this wonderful literature.
    Yours Respectfully,
    Lady Edith

    ReplyDelete
  20. Agreed though I must point out that lady A did try to stop the interchange on this site and for that I commend her. Dewhurst you have my sympathy.

    Her Royal Highness Anne

    ReplyDelete
  21. I would have you all know we will NOT discuss our relationship on this blog anymore. I do not wish to talk about him at all anymore, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Agreed! I can hardly think about it without throwing up.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well, I confess that I'm relieved. No offense to anyone. I just wouldn't want to start off on the wrong foot, you know? Never really a good idea.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Well, now that IT and I have resolved the matter, what do you think of the blog so far, Josh? Have you read many of the previous posts? We are pleased you have come aboard! We love to have new followers. Nice to meet you.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hey thanks. Um, I actually don't read much because I don't really find it interesting. My mom found this blog on google and told me maybe I would like reading more if I did fun stuff like this. I think she's desperate to make me like reading. It's not working so far, but whatever. Reading you people is better than actually reading a book.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Hahahahaha....well, thanks, if that was a compliment...

    ReplyDelete