King Alfred according to Bernard Cornwell

[Carla]

Anyone else here read Bernard Cornwell's Uhtred series, set at the time of King Alfred's war against the Danes (Vikings) - The Last Kingdom, The Pale Horseman, Lords of the North, Sword Song?

[annis]

Yes, I love this series! I enjoy all Bernard Cornwell's work, but I think the Saxon Chronicles are amongst his best, and I have a theory that his sense of personal connection to the period gives these stories an extra dimension.
There's quite a bit of controversy over his portrayal of King Alfred as something rather less than the traditional heroic ideal, but my take is that we are seeing KA through Uhtred's eyes, and Uhtred and the king have an uneasy relationship, whereby they need each other, but don't particularly like each other.
I wrote a brief review for Margaret's Historical Novels info site playing devil's advocate and exploring this idea.
http://www.HistoricalNovels.info/Last-Kingdom.html

Now I'll sit back and wait for the fallout!

[Carla]

There's quite a bit of controversy over his portrayal of King Alfred as something rather less than the traditional heroic ideal, but my take is that we are seeing KA through Uhtred's eyes, and Uhtred and the king have an uneasy relationship, whereby they need each other, but don't particularly like each other.
I wrote a brief review for Margaret's Historical Novels info site playing devil's advocate and exploring this idea.
http://www.HistoricalNovels.info/Last-Kingdom.html

Now I'll sit back and wait for the fallout!

No fallout from me. I read your review over at Margaret's site a little while ago. I agree that we see Alfred through Uhtred's eyes, and as Uhtred can't abide Alfred that's not going to be a very attractive portrayal :-) I don't have any problem with that; to an aggressive young warrior raised in pagan Danish ways, Alfred may well have looked like a priest-ridden wimp. What I miss is being able to see Alfred through other people's eyes. Not everybody could have seen him as Uhtred does, or they wouldn't have fought for him and he'd have faded away as king of the frogs at Athelney. I want to understand what other people saw in Alfred that made him worth fighting for when all seemed lost. I think that's an inevitable effect of the first-person point of view (which is one reason I tend to get on better with third-person novels).

I also miss the interplay between the all-action warrior and the cerebral strategist that Cornwell did so well between Sharpe and Wellington in the Sharpe series. Sharpe can be a maverick warrior hero without needing to belittle Wellington. There again, Sharpe is in his thirties by the time of the Peninsular War, so he's rather older and more experienced than Uhtred.

[annis]

As I see it, Uhtred’s opinion of Alfred is formed when he is a brash and arrogant young warrior, full of the confidence in his own superiority which so often afflicts the young! Unfortunately he seems unable to progress beyond that initial impression. Uhtred is in some ways a limited person; he is clever and brave, but with him it’s “all about me”; he’s impatient and not given to introspection.
And it is true that in the Saxon stories we don’t see King Alfred through anyone else’s eyes.

I enjoyed reading Guy Gavriel Kay’s “Last Light of the Sun” as a counterpoint to the “Last Kingdom”. In Kay’s novel King Alfred is portrayed as a much more fully rounded person; charismatic, formidably intelligent and utterly ruthless where necessary, all qualities which he must have in fact possessed in order to put his mark on England to such an extent within his relatively short life time. The establishment of an extremely effective administrative infrastructure was particularly remarkable, especially given that it remained pretty much in place for centuries, right up until the Norman Conquest. Even then many aspects of Alfred’s system continued to be employed by the Normans. In his book “In Search of the Dark Ages”, Michael Wood makes the point that the information required for the Domesday Book could never have been collected without it.

It will be interesting to see if Uhtred ever overcomes his ingrained intolerance towards King Alfred. It may be that in time he will find it easier to give his wholehearted support to King Alfred’s redoubtable daughter, Aethelflaed – a possibility mentioned on the old HFF.

[Carla]

Yes, I'm finding Uhtred a rather limited character, especially considering he's the narrator. He'd be fine in a third-person narrative where I could get to know several characters, but if there's going to be a single narrator I prefer them to be someone who likes seeing other people's points of view. I have high hopes for Aethelflaed, when the series gets to that stage. She was a remarkable lady, and Cornwell is quite clearly setting her up to be a major character later on. I think somewhere he's said he sees her as the heroine of the entire series.

I have a feeling that some of the shires of Alfred's day survived right up until the local government reorganisation in the 1970s, which would be nearly a thousand years! I haven't checked which ones, though, so don't quote me on that. William the Conqueror must have been thrilled to discover he'd acquired a kingdom with an efficient method for running itself and paying its taxes.

[Ash]

I have not read this series tho my DH has it and need to. I have read the Arthur series; does this one take place before or after? With Uther, I'm thinking before?

[Grasshopper]

Love this series. It may be better than the Arthur series, but at least equal, IMHO.

[annis]

Ash, the setting for the Arthurian "Warlord" series is post-Roman Britain, probably fifth century BC, so earlier than the "Saxon Chronicles" featuring Uhtred, which are set in the ninth century.

Note: I've just checked, and I see that BC says that the sixth century BC is the time frame for his "Warlord" books.

[annis]

Carla, the thought of Alfred's administrative infrastructure lasting for a thousand years is pretty mind-boggling. I knew that many aspects were still in use for a very long time, but hadn't realized just how long.
Alfred's Code also formed the backbone of the English legal system which went hand-in-hand with the administrative system. His successors added to it and it evolved into the body of Customary Law which was the basis of Henry 1's landmark Charter of Liberties.
You can't help but be impressed by his achievements (even if Uhtred isn't)!

[Ash]

Thanks, Annis. I had forgetten how early the Arthur series was, its been awhile and I've read so many of them.... Since my memory is poor, its a good reason to reread them! (tho I want to finish the Archer series and the Saxon series first)

[Eyza]

Carla:I have.* I've been following the series with some interest, though I have a number of problems with Cornwell's portrayal of King Alfred.Anne G


Anyone else here read Bernard Cornwell's Uhtred series, set at the time of King Alfred's war against the Danes (Vikings) - The Last Kingdom, The Pale Horseman, Lords of the North, Sword Song?

[Carla]

Ash, Annis - The Uhtred/King Alfred series is set in the late ninth century AD. The Battle of Edington (Ethandun) in the second book (The Pale Horseman) happened in 878 AD. I don't think Bernard Cornwell's Uhtred is anything to do with Uther Pendragon from the Arthur legends.

The Arthur legends are usually placed at the end of the fifth century AD or the beginning of the sixth century AD (say, somewhere between about 460 and about 530 AD). Nobody really knows when, or even if, they really happened, or whether there really was a 'King Arthur', but the gap in recorded history into which a King Arthur figure fits most readily is about then. So Cornwell's Uhtred/King Alfred series is roughly three hundred years later than his Arthurian Warlord series.

Annis - yes, absolutely! I think the historical King Alfred is a most impressive figure. Admittedly the major source for his reign is Asser's Life of Alfred, which he may have helped to write and certainly had copy-approval of, so it's possible to play devil's advocate and argue that we think King Alfred was a great king because he tells us he was. But if he was all spin and no substance, his kingdom would have fallen apart after his death (if not before) and it demonstrably didn't.

Eyza - hi - were you Eln on the old forum? I thought I recognised your avatar. Are your concens over Alfred's portrayal similar to mine?

[annis]

That's an interesting point, Carla. Kings and chiefs always did have their own personal spin-doctors in the bardic tradition, but with Asser's written biography King Alfred went one better- we can still read it. One thing I love about the internet is that we can just nip over to the Medieval Sourceboo (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/asser.html)k to do that- makes life so much easier.

I wonder if part of Bernard Cornwell's motivation in portraying King Alfred as he does is to get us past the hagiography and remind us that to achieve what he did the king would have had to be pretty ruthless and not worried about treading on a few toes in the process. It's often been pointed out that some of the great saints were very irritating to those who actually dealt with them- they didn't get things done by being complaisant.

[Margaret]

I can still remember the story I read as a child about King Alfred getting scolded for letting the old woman's cakes burn when his war was going badly and he was hiding out incognito in the marshlands. Also the instructive one about him watching the spider trying, over and over, to jump to the right spot to get its web properly built and finally succeeding. They may be apocryphal, but they're great stories, and we don't know that they didn't happen, either.

There's a lot of nineteenth century romantic fiction about Alfred (not all listed at www.HistoricalNovels.info yet - I'm working on a major reorganization of the overly long medieval page, and they will go up when I get that finished), but there doesn't seem to be much by modern authors other than Cornwell's Uhtred series, which as people point out, involves an unreliable - or at least prejudiced - narrator. Has anyone read a realistic novel that centers on Alfred as the main point-of-view character?

[Grasshopper]

That's an interesting point, Carla. Kings and chiefs always did have their own personal spin-doctors in the bardic tradition, but with Asser's written biography King Alfred went one better- we can still read it.

I've always wondered about this assertion.

My opinion is that, while there were very likely scalawags of falsehood in most cultures and areas, I think that for the most part, those who wrote history (i.e. Asser re: Alfred) wrote accurately and without significant embellishment or change.

I may be just naive, but to me, logically, if, during the Early Middle Ages for example, all writers of events embellished more than they wrote accurately, how could we have anything from these time periods at all that didn't contradict other writings?

Again, maybe I'm way off base...I don't really have any proof...just conjecture.

[annis]

It's human nature to embellish a bit, Grasshopper, and talking up your exploits was part of the Saxon culture- it was a way of encouraging people to take even better and bolder action and a competitive game of sorts, especially when a few ales had been taken.

I'm sure that Asser's commentary was basically accurate, but those early medieval historian monks did often add their own brand of Christian spin to events, and as they were the only ones who could write there was no-one to contradict them. I can think of one particular incident where Attila the Hun was reported as having met with the Pope Leo and been persuaded by the Pope not to attack Rome. This was quoted as fact for so long that it became accepted as the truth, but according to John Man in his book "Attila the Hun" that meeting never took place. So, the monks weren't above a bit of aggrandizement either- all in the name of the Faith, of course!

[annis]

Margaret, Alfred Duggan did write a book about King Alfred in 1961 called "The King of Athelney" which is probably a pretty straightforward biographical novel, though I haven't read it myself. It's apparently a sequel to "The Conscience of the King" about Cerdic, the founder of the House of Wessex, one of my favorite Duggan novels - Cerdic is just so bad!

There's Joan Wolf's "Edge of the Light", which is a kinder portrayal of KA, but it's more focused on his relationship with his wife.

I came across this one a while ago which I'd like to read. It intrigued me because the basic storyline seemed rather similar to Bernard Cornwell's. It's an old one which has recently been reprinted, but is available on Project Gutenberg.
"King Alfred’s Viking (http://www.amazon.co.uk/King-Alfreds-Viking-Story-English/dp/1406522082/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220603631&sr=8-16)" by Charles W. Whistler. Subtitled A Story of the First English Fleet, the book description states it involves “Alfred’s rise to the throne as seen through the eyes of an outsider, Ranald the Viking.”

.

[Grasshopper]

It's human nature to embellish a bit, Grasshopper, and talking up your exploits was part of the Saxon culture- it was a way of encouraging people to take even better and bolder action and a competitive game of sorts, especially when a few ales had been taken.

I'm sure that Asser's commentary was basically accurate, but those early medieval historian monks did often add their own brand of Christian spin to events, and as they were the only ones who could write there was no-one to contradict them. I can think of one particular incident where Attila the Hun was reported as having met with the Pope Leo and been persuaded by the Pope not to attack Rome. This was quoted as fact for so long that it became accepted as the truth, but according to John Man in his book "Attila the Hun" that meeting never took place. So, the monks weren't above a bit of aggrandizement either- all in the name of the Faith, of course!

I see your point...

I dunno, at my job, if I alter someone's prescription, I could hurt them. I try to do my job as accurately as possible, for the sake of the public. Same goes for a cop or teacher or construction worker or artist. Mistakes happen, yes...but to have a culture that purposely does this as a rule...they are who ruin a good thing, like Christianity in your example.

Thanks for the example.

[annis]

I guess when it comes to political expediency, idealism tends to take back stage, Grasshopper- it sounds cynical, but it's always been the case and not much has changed, as we can see in the current rounds of electioneering taking place in various countries around the world.

[Margaret]

not much has changed, as we can see in the current rounds of electioneering

So true, so true. When people want something as badly as they can want a throne or one of our modern political positions, "spin" just happens - if not from the candidates themselves, then from their supporters. I'm inclined to think that medieval herbalists were as careful, in their own way, as modern pharmacists. Politicians have a lot to gain by twisting the truth, whereas healers have a lot to lose. I have a modern edition of an old Welsh herbal that gives advice on how to tell whether someone is going to live or die, so you can refuse to treat them if they're going to die no matter what.

I had forgotten about The King of Athelney. Duggan is pretty reliable with his historical research. Cerdic in The Conscience of the King is certainly no romatic hero!

[annis]

Good point about the need for exactitude with those involved in healing, Margaret, though it seems that some of the later physicians got by on a great deal of bluster and blood-letting! I think that the herbalists would always have needed to be very careful, though, especially when accusations of witchcraft could be so readily leveled against them if something went wrong.

It would be interesting to know what Duggan made of King Alfred. Sometimes I think his characterisations of well-known figures were a bit flat, whereas with an unknown quantity like Cerdic he could let himself go a bit more. Maybe someone has read "King of Athelney" and can comment?

[chuck]

Good point about the need for exactitude with those involved in healing, Margaret, though it seems that some of the later physicians got by on a great deal of bluster and blood-letting! I think that the herbalists would always have needed to be very careful, though, especially when accusations of witchcraft could be so readily leveled against them if something went wrong.

It would be interesting to know what Duggan made of King Alfred. Sometimes I think his characterisations of well-known figures were a bit flat, whereas with an unknown quantity like Cerdic he could let himself go a bit more. Maybe someone has read "King of Athelney" and can comment?

I prefer BC's spin of Alfred the Great....I don't mean to over simplify the Great Alfred....but he as a man in a time of a constant turmoil.....Was he a guilt ridden warrior, administrator, or a pious clerk? Take your pick...To me he was all three and those roles took their toll on the "man"....Can you imagine if the Great Bard or Marlowe would have penned a play about Alfred?.....Saint Olaf, 995-1030 the martyred Saint of Norway....a Viking King and a Saint huh?.....I realize he helped Norway to take up the Cross. but at the same time he like Charlemagne was unforgiving when dealing with the vanquished...... Olaf, Charlemagne, and Alfred they all had some Cerdric in them.....or how could you explain their impersonal and violent behavior in dealing with their enemy.....My opinion....I think the Pagan/Berserker element influenced them especially when their Blood was up...... Alfred's greatness is still a mystery to me.....I cant get past the Cleric's propaganda....I will take the middle road on his greatness.....He did not do it alone.....Charlemagne had Alcuin....Alfred had.....Must stop this babble.......

[annis]

Hi Chuck - I think that the really great commanders have always needed to have that ability to assess a military situation in a dispassionate, ruthless way. They may have been attached to their warriors and sorry to lose them, but that wouldn't influence a pragmatic decision to sacrifice them where necessary, and I'm sure that Alfred was no different in that respect.

In the early medieval days of Christian conversion, too, I think that warriors didn't necessarily see being a Christian as something which conflicted with traditional pagan beliefs and actions, but more as yet another god to worship- one with the added advantage of giving you a chance at life after death. That's my take on how Charlemagne could massacre all those Saxons at Verden ( though I know some historians dispute whether that massacre actually happened) and then ride off to celebrate Christmas, for example. He certainly didn't see any inconsistency in maintaining his large number of wives and mistresses.

That reminds me - getting off the track of KA, I know--I came across another novel about Charles Martel (though sadly, not about Charlemagne, who remains elusive in the HF stakes.)
"Charles Martel and the Lance of Destiny" (http://www.amazon.com/Charles-Martel-Lance-Destiny-deMartelly/dp/1434360377) by Louis deMartelly.
Btw, I tracked down a copy of Harold Lamb's "Durandal' and really enjoyed it- a good old-fashioned adventure in the Boy's Own model.

[annis]

We've been discussing propaganda in relation to King Alfred, and I happened upon this story which discusses the "burnt cakes" legend mentioned by Margaret. It points out that both the English and the Vikings competed in efforts to make themselves look good and the other side bad. The cake story is almost certainly a piece of morale -boosting propaganda, but the question seems to be- whose story was it first?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/mar/13/britishidentity.research

[Carla]

I think there's an alternative version of the story about Alfred and the cakes in which he remembers to turn them and they don't get burnt. Make of that what you will.... Possibly both the Alfred and Ragnar stories (is Ragnar Hairybreeks the one I know as Ragnar Lothbrok?) were borrowed from folktale motifs independently of each other, maybe when the people involved had already passed into legend. The Alfred story is, as far as I know, first written down in the 12th century, though of course we don't know how long it had been in circulation before then. Somehow I find it hard to imagine people fighting a propaganda war with stories about the leaders' relative incompetence at cookery :-)

The story about Alfred and the cakes seems similar to the story about Robert Bruce and the spider - here's the defeated king reduced to living as a hunted outlaw, yet he triumphed over his adversity and became a great king. The worse the adversity, the greater the triumph when the king wins. Stories like this make most sense to me as embellishments added later to stress how low the king had come; after all, a comeback from doom and disaster is a better story than a comeback from a minor local difficulty. That's not to say they may not have been based on some grain of truth; maybe Robert Bruce did while away a bad night in a cave watching a spider and decide to have one more go. I just suspect that they became important stories after the event, when the contrast between the great man's dire straits and his eventual success was known to everybody.

About 'spin', I wasn't thinking of chroniclers deliberately falsifying events, but more of the interpretation they choose to put on those events. For example, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says for 875,
"This summer King Alfred went out to sea with an armed fleet, and fought with seven ship-rovers, one of whom he took, and dispersed the others."

A pro-Alfred chronicler might have said that Alfred fought with great skill and bravery and despite being greatly outnumbered succeeded in capturing one enemy ship and the rest were so afraid of his valour that they fled. An anti-Alfred chronicler might have said that owing to Alfred's incompetence and cowardice six of the seven ships got away unscathed and one was captured due to the skill and bravery of one of Alfred's commanders. Neither has altered the facts: seven ships engaged, one captured and six went away, but they give a very different picture of Alfred. Then there's the issue of selection. No chronicler can write down every little thing that happens, so each has to make decisions about what is important enough to be worth recording. A chronicler used to big sea battles might have thought a naval action involving only seven ships was too trivial to bother writing down, without any intention of 'spin' at all.

[Rowan]

Since no one has written a review for The Pale Horseman, I thought I'd inject this here. Although I am listening to the audiobook, I'd rather not write the review as I know a lot will have been left out. However, I would like to say that the gentleman who reads for the audiobook - Jamie Glover - is the most enthusiastic reader I've ever heard!! When he reads about Uhtred's battles, it's as if it's his own feelings. This may only apply to Cornwell's books, but I've thoroughly enjoyed listening to him. And yes at some point I will go back and read the book itself. I'm just trying to limit what I buy at the moment.

[annis]

Carla, not long ago I came across this article (http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba7/ba7feat.html) , which disputes the validity of Asser as the author of King Alfred's biography.
(Scroll down to "Unmasking Alfred's False Biographer")
Do you know what other historians think about this theory?

[Carla]

Interesting theory. I remember seeing it a while ago and had forgotten about it until you mentioned the article. He has a fair point that the story about the reading competition between Alfred and his brothers contradicts the idea that Alfred learned to read only as an adult (and John Peddie points out in his book on Alfred that some of Alfred's brothers would have been young adults at the time and would certainly have had better things to do than engage in reading competitions with their baby brother). What I'm not clear about is how he can tell the difference between a wholesale forgery (which is what he claims), and a contemporary biography that's had bits and pieces accreted to it by later copyists. When there are multiple surviving copies of the same document in different manuscripts, it's quite common for them all to be a bit different from each other as different scribes edited, reworded, added bits of explanation or related stories and information that they knew about from elsewhere. Something like that could have happened to a biography of Alfred written by Asser during the king's lifetime, as claimed, that was then expanded by a later writer who had access to some legends and stories about Alfred and decided to add them in for completeness. Without several copies to compare I don't see how one could tell whether that had happened or not.

I don't know what the consensus opinion is among historians. Given that the article is dated 1995 and as far as I know people still use the Life of Alfred as a source, it looks as if his theory didn't set the world on fire.

[annis]

Given that the article is dated 1995 and as far as I know people still use the Life of Alfred as a source, it looks as if his theory didn't set the world on fire.
Thanks, Carla- that was my thought too. Given that it was a fairly radical theory you'd think there would have been more debate around about it if it was taken seriously. Good point about the variation in manuscripts. Each copyist would have added some individual aspect to the original he was copying.

And I guess it was difficult not to occasionally indulge the creative urge.
I'm thinking about "Hereward's Exploits", for example, which was written (most likely) by the historian monk Richard of Ely, not that long after Hereward the Wake's death (though we don't know exactly when or how he died)
Despite the the fact that the author had first-hand information and talked to several of Hereward's companions, who although elderly, were quite capable of remembering their old campaigns, it still came out full of mythological happenings. I wonder if the original author was using his imaginative powers or if it might have been a case of copyists embellishing things later.

[Eyza]

annis:

Richard, the monk of Ely(I thought it was Crowland, but never mind), certainly did stick some pretty improbable stuff into his tale of the life of Hereward. OTOH, he was aiming at a particular audience, who was familiar with certain 'epics" that were floating around at the time. There was one, for example, about the supposed exploits of Alexander the Great, which was, um, pretty, um, mythological. Richard just created a "heroic" Hereward modeled from these epics, and attached all sorts of fantastic adventures to his name, especially in the earlier portion of the tale.
Anne G



And I guess it was difficult not to occasionally indulge the creative urge.
I'm thinking about "Hereward's Exploits", for example, which was written (most likely) by the historian monk Richard of Ely, not that long after Hereward the Wake's death (though we don't know exactly when or how he died)
Despite the the fact that the author had first-hand information and talked to several of Hereward's companions, who although elderly, were quite capable of remembering their old campaigns, it still came out full of mythological happenings. I wonder if the original author was using his imaginative powers or if it might have been a case of copyists embellishing things later.[/QUOTE]

[annis]

That's interesting, Anne, thanks. Richard the inventive historian-monk could well have been from the abbey of Crowland/Croyland, which is closely connected with the Hereward story-- I had only seen him mentioned as being from Ely, but that might have been a loose geographical description.

[rex icelingas]

I love Cornwall`s take on King Alfred
Our greatest Kings and Heroes dont have to be super goody goody`s or particuarly nice,Arthur himself may not have been, but effective yes!

Cornwall turned Alfred different,yes hes still a great King but not universally loved! he did a similar job with Lancelot in the grail series and made it far more interesting for it.

Theres certainly a huge interest in Anglo-Saxon and seems to be a hole for those writing of the 8-9th Centuries,cant think of many books on Offa offhand?

[annis]

I can't think of anything which focuses directly on Offa, but Susan Mayse's "Awen" is a story of the conflict between the Welsh and the Mercians, based on the 8th century Canu Heledd. It's a great read if you haven't already come across it.

Synopsis:
Awen is a tightly woven novel of suspense, intrigue, love, and warfare set on the border between the Welsh kingdom of Powys and the English kingdom of Mercia at the end of the eighth century. Battles and kidnappings, blood feuds and political murders entangle the poet Cynfarch, as Brochfael of Powys struggles to protect his people's culture and sovereignty from the growing might of Offa of Mercia. From the harsh mountains valleys of North Wales to the quiet streams of western England, from the vanished court of Mathrafal to Charlemagne's throne, a bloody apocalypse looms as Cynfarch pursues both Meirwen's heart and his own quest for reinstatement as bard to the king of Powys.

[EC2]

[QUOTE=annis;24708]I can't think of anything which focuses directly on Offa, but Susan Mayse's "Awen" is a story of the conflict between the Welsh and the Mercians, based on the 8th century Canu Heledd. It's a great read if you haven't already come across it.

I have that one on my shelf but it was a DNF for me. It's well written but I found it just so slow. It was recommended to me on another reading list by someone who had really enjoyed it. I think you need time and space to read and digest it.

[rex icelingas]

Ive a great interest in the 8th Century Disputes between Powys and Mercia
However I do have a huge problem with the usual interpretation of the Canu Heledd and people and Geographical locations used in it so it`ll probably put me off reading it

If you can recommend any more early Anglo-Saxon novels though they`d be greatly appreciated! :)

[annis]

Posted by Ec
I have that one on my shelf but it was a DNF for me. It's well written but I found it just so slow.

Id have to agrre that "Awen" is quite convoluted and meandering You do have to be in the mood for it.

[Ariadne]

I'd have to agrre that "Awen" is quite convoluted and meandering You do have to be in the mood for it.

It took me about three weeks to read Awen. I enjoyed it a lot, but fast-paced it wasn't!