Ted Dekker's The 49th Mystic and Rise of the Mystics:
A Study In Author Revisionism and Reader Disillusionment.
I'm a mess of conflicting emotions -- confusion and disappointment uppermost. I might one day write a longer review, but for now I'll just copy some points across from my updates as I read.
The Writing
Too many now-common YA Tropes (Eerie Pale Skinned Brunette, Love Triangle, Insta-Love, Small Town With Secrets, Chosen One, Mary Sue, I could go on...), too much telling instead of showing, too much winking and kissing knuckles and cocking eyebrows and spitting.
The Eden storyline in the first book was the only one I was at all interested in; the Real Earth plot in the second book was average at best; and I still struggle to even name the main thrust of the events on Other Earth, which were both boring and confusing.
Talya's chapters were yawn-worthy and seemed to be a transparent excuse for ongoing Author Theological Tracts, which sucks when Ted's theology has changed to the point where I can no longer agree with parts of it (more on that later).
From updates:
* "I heard little Maya speak beside me." Oh for goodness' sake. WHAT ABOUT THAT SENTENCE NEEDED "I HEARD" INSERTED IN IT?! COME OFF IT, DEKKER, YOU'RE BETTER THAN THIS."
* "Okay, I had to skip back two pages and re-read a section because of the oddly amateurish mistake of describing someone multiple times as "the mother" instead of by their name, which made me think Person A was dead when it was really Person B."
* "All the Other Earth plots seem a) really slow and b) like transparent excuses for Ted to sermonise about the ---Five Truths--- sparklesparkle, which is c) disappointing given his past stance on story being paramount and d) a letdown because I don't agree with all of his theology."
* "Words we really don't need: "I thought," "I saw," "he heard", "somehow sensing," and any variations of. Especially in first person POV. Also, "he knew," example, "By the long look on his face I knew Tom didn't like whatever his thoughts were." Crikey, that's a convoluted and needless sentence. Tom didn't like whatever Tom himself was thinking? And Protag has to explain that overtly for the reader? Really?"
* "Ted, you're describing a lion that is LITERALLY named Judah. Give the darned cat some texture and weight and colour, for pete's sake, especially when said lion is HUGGING A MAN. #CSLewisDidItBetter"
The Theology
There was a lot here that was good, but there was also a lot that I simply didn't agree with, not helped by the fact it was couched in terms that were part-Fantasy, part-Science, and part-pseudo-Mystical (ha, geddit) and fully deserved the in-text-accused label of New Age Crap. The reasoning was chaotic and circular, the terms used were confusing at best, and biblical statements like "Christ is all; Christ is in all" are acknowledged, unpacked, and then added to, i.e. "Christ is me; Christ is in me," which changes the meaning and, to my view, perverts the whole thrust of the message.
From updates:
* "The same 'there is no death' blanket statement carried forward from the last book. Hoping for some explanation there but no. No explanation. Just: there is no death, Verbatim. Multiple times. Ugh. Come on. No. Jesus died, man. If there is no resurrection of the dead then Christ was not raised, etc..."
* " "The Seals [Mystical Truths sparklesparkle TM] are easily forgotten until you have all five."
Ugh, Narnia/ Silver Chair's "Remember, remember, remember the signs" was so much clearer and more simple than this melodramatic, enigmatic mysticism -- and I feel like they were far more accurate because of that, too."
*" "Judgment of yourself and others -- I am naked, naked is bad, she is cruel, he is Horde -- casts you out of the garden...."
Wait wait hold up. The 'garden' is Eden. So, in context, Ted is saying that all sin is judgement and all judgement is sin (original sin or otherwise)? Ehhhhhhhhhh I don't know. I'd need to unpack that a little more. Or a lot."
*" "...my practice is to align my sight to love. This is how my binding to the world of judgement falls away."
These books have been over-steeped in language that is as far beyond Christianese as Christianese is beyond plain English -- and I don't mean that in a good way. I feel like I need to go read Mere Orthodoxy to cleanse my brain. If I'm struggling with it as a Christian, how much will a non-Christian understand?"
* "Wait, what? So everyone gets saved at the end anyway? What about hell? The outer darkness, wailing and gashing of teeth, depart from me, I never knew you? All that? Hello? Ring any bells?"
* " "All practical good was useless if done in the energy of fear rather than the energy of love." And then you wonder why other characters label it New Age Crap..."
Overall
It's a terrible thing to fall out of love with an author. I've changed as a reader; Ted has clearly changed, not just as a writer, but in his beliefs. I still love his early books; I still love the original trilogy. But I can't say that I look forward to reading his next book, if he ever writes another one, which he has implied that he won't.
The big three overall thoughts, taken from my updates as I read:
* "The depth of the author revisionism in this chapter [or duology] is a little ridiculous."
* "I could make a drinking game out of the words "earthen vessel" and (especially) "polarity", but I would have been completely sloshed before I was halfway through the first book.
e.g.,
"Earthen vessels. But you can use your own terms."
"These clay bodies."
WOW THAT'S SO DIFFERENT. Bingo, check, take a drink!"
* "Okay, classic Red Lake encounter! I should be crying. I should be bawling my eyes out, and I'm not. I'm sitting here feeling nothing. Have I changed that much as a reader? Has Ted changed that much as an author? Is it that I can't trust the emotional stuff because I see too many problems with the theology behind it? I'm sad...
...I should care about these characters, and I don't. I don't remember what they look like, I don't really care what happens to them, and the sad thing is I can see this happening every time Ted's theology changes again, now. The Circle was fine at the end of White, they'd found their resolution, they were the Bride awaiting the Groom. Now? I don't even know what they are now, because these books are so bogged down in...
...circular, confusing philosophy and theology that seems to take five times as many words as needed to get to the point, and still stumbles over itself. Will this happen again? Will our characters get a resolution at the end of Rise, and then Ted decides in another ten years that he was wrong and another trilogy comes out featuring another magic mental-button-push to show Thomas & Co how misled they were?...
...I still love the original trilogy. I love the emotion inherent in it, and I trust the logic and theology that underpins it. But 49th and Rise? I don't trust the logic and theology here, so I don't trust the emotion it produces. A Red Lake encounter should leave me bawling, but I'm cold. I just don't care, and that makes me sad...
...Ted has aways been strong in two areas: story and theology. When the story simply isn't there and the theology is a sprawling, conflicting mess, what remains?"