Firelord

Firelord #1

by Parke Godwin

Firelord is a historical fantasy novel by Parke Godwin, published in 1980. It is a retelling of the King Arthur legend.
Godwin tells the story of King Arthur from a historically accurate perspective, based on research & his own archeological trips to various parts of England.
The novel has Arthur dictating a memoir to a friar at a monastery. A flashback leads thru his formative years & his 1st meeting with Merlin. Godwin takes the traditional story & makes it his own, from more historically accurate regional names for the main characters such as Artos for Arthur & Ancellius for Lancelot, to changing key relationships.
Lancelot is no longer the best friend, Bedivere Ap Griffin is. Gweniver is also updated & modernized, possibly patterned after Queen Elizabeth I of England, as Godwin borrows from one of Queen Elizabeth's most famous speeches for a passage in which Arthur forsakes Morgana, his lover, & accepts the responsibilities of Kingship at the cost of personal happiness, just as Elizabeth so famously did during her reign.

Genres: Fantasy, Arthurian, Historical Fiction, Fiction, Historical, Mythology, Historical Fantasy

374 pages, Mass Market Paperback

First published October 1, 1980

About the author

Parke Godwin was an American writer known for his lyrical yet precise prose style and sardonic humor. He was also known for his novels of legendary figures placed in realistic historical settings; his retelling of the Arthur legend (Firelord in 1980, Beloved Exile in 1984, and The Last Rainbow in 1985) is set in the 5th century during the collapse of the Roman empire, and his reinterpretation of Robin Hood (Sherwood, 1991, and Robin and the King, 1993) takes place during the Norman conquest and features kings William the Conqueror and William Rufus as major characters. His other well-known works include Waiting For The Galactic Bus (1988) and its sequel The Snake Oil Wars (1989), humorous critiques of American pop culture and religion.

Parke Godwin also worked as a radio operator, a research technician, a professional actor, an advertising man, a dishwasher and a maitre d' hotel.

Godwin's short fiction has appeared in several anthologies. His short story "Influencing the Hell out of Time and Teresa Golowitz," was the basis of an episode of the television series The Twilight Zone.

Reviews

[Richard · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is probably the most definitive version of the legend of King Arthur in the last thirty years, in my opinion. Godwin has done his research, and traces Arthur's origins from a high-born Romanized Briton in the twilight years of Rome's presence through his rise to power and the creation of a well-organized, effective kingdom that is capable--at least for a while--of holding back the encroachment of the Jutes, Saxons, Angles, and other mainland tribes. If Arthur actually existed, well, it could have been like this.

Good as his research is, that's not what makes this book so worth reading. Godwin has the natural ability to bring his characters to life in a way that few other writers can match. There are no "minor characters" in a Godwin book. Everyone is there for a reason, and everyone has their own story to tell, be it Geraint, Lancelot, Guenivere, Isolde, Tristram, even that legendary whipping-boy King Vortigern gets his due. Everyone is at once larger than life but very recognizably human, and all play their parts for good or ill according to who they are and what they think is best. Godwin doesn't stray too far from the broad outlines of the story of Arthur, but within that outline he has all the room he needs.

Highly recommended.

[Eric O'Brien · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very few of my adolescent loves have survived the rigorous critique I learned in graduate school. This novel has--it enthralls and moves me as much as it did when I first read it when I was nineteen. But it's also very, very smart: one paragraph might contain Wordsworthian neo-plantonism, agrarian critique of industrialized agriculture, matrilineal kinship relations and their ability to resist capitalism, or pastoral food production as rebellion. Historicism abounds, as do striking ideological critiques that scream of Althusser.

However, the action and the characters are also riveting. Amd Arthur's voice is as human--damned AND sympathetic--as any I've read. I've loved every minute I ever spent with this novel.

[Althea Ann · Rating 3 out of 5]

A retelling of the Arthurian legend... reminded me of Bernard Cornwell's "The Winter King" in that this is a very gritty, militaristic view of Arthur's story, without any mystical or supernatural elements. Perhaps "Winter King" was even more gritty and unromantic, but "Firelord" is also set in a potentially-believable 6th-century (?) Britain. Arthur is an ambitious man ("Merlin" is his 'inner voice,' not an advisor or wizard) with aims on kingship and unification of the tribes of Britain. However, he is torn between his Roman upbringing and his (not-fully-explained, and initially almost dreamlike) passionate relationship with a woman, Morgana, of one of the most primitive tribes of the land (a tribe sometimes referred to as Faerie).
Rome is losing influence over Britain, and the old tribes are dying out.
Together with his wife, the eminent stateswoman Guinevere, Arthur seeks to forge a new Britain. But when Morgana, and Arthur's son from that first marriage, Modred, show up at Arthur's doorstep, jealousy and bitterness mix with politics to tragic result...

The story also has the Grail, Lancelot, Tristan and Yseult, the Knights of the Round Table - all the classic elements, but all re-examined and 'explained' -

An interesting addition to the Arthurian canon...

[Katerina · Rating 4 out of 5]

Firelord è un retelling arturiano che ho cercato per diverso tempo: fuori catalogo in lingua originale, mai tradotto in Italia, lo trovavo solo a dei prezzi improponibili che va bene che sono fan, va bene che mezza roba non la ristampano da circa quindici anni, ma anche no.
A volte 'sti libri li mettono in vendita ad un prezzo che ci faccio spesa per un mese.
Ad ogni modo sono riuscita a trovarlo, su un sito meno conosciuto, ad un prezzo più che abbordabile, probabilmente perché in condizioni disastrose: sono abbastanza sicura che sia sopravvissuto ad un allagamento in cantina, considerando l'odore e quanto è rovinato.
Dopo tante peripezie per riuscire ad averlo le aspettative circa la qualità del titolo sono aumentate a dismisura, e ammetto che l'ho iniziato col timore di non riuscire ad apprezzarlo proprio perché a questo punto volevo che ne valesse la pena.
Firelord è un romanzo profondamente diverso rispetto all'ultimo retelling del ciclo arturiano che ho letto: laddove Exiled from Camelot si concentrava su un unico episodio del mito, in questo caso siamo di fronte ad un retelling che punta a presentarci non dico tutto il ciclo, ma almeno i suoi episodi cardine, in forma di flashback.
La narrazione è in prima persona: Artù, morente dopo le ferite ricevute a Camlann, racconta la sua vita ad un monaco così che possa trascriverla. Un espediente semplice, che pure Godwin ha usato bene, dato che ci permette - spesso e volentieri - di avere non solo il racconto di cosa sia avvenuto, ma anche il parere di Artù, i suoi sentimenti su azioni e decisioni prese quando era giovane, senza sapere cosa si profilasse all'orizzonte.
Artù ci racconta quindi la sua infanzia, tramite i suoi occhi vediamo il suo paese cadere nel caos dovuto al ritiro dei romani e alle guerre interne, vediamo l'eterno conflitto coi Sassoni, e vediamo come questo giovane soldato, intelligente ed ambizioso, inizi un'ascesa tanto inevitabile quanto studiata.
Il mondo in cui questo particolare Artù si muove è molto ben costruito: non sembra mai troppo evoluto, un rinascimento mascherato da medioevo, ma sporco quanto serve a renderlo credibile, frammentario nelle tradizioni, in cui la magia è presente ma mai eccessiva... nel senso che Artù sarà anche destinato ad essere un grande re, ma se non si impegna per diventarlo non succederà mai - profezia o non profezia.
C'è una grande cura anche nella costruzione dei personaggi: Artù arriviamo a conoscerlo intimamente proprio grazie alla narrazione, dato che è lui stesso a raccontarsi, il vecchio che ci mostra quasi con tenerezza il giovane che è stato, mentre tutti gli altri li vediamo attraverso i suoi occhi.
Uomini valorosi ma non perfetti, umani, Godwin per fortuna è uno di quegli autori che non sente il bisogno di sminuire alcuni personaggi per farne emergere altri. Mi è piaciuto come è stata gestita la sottotrama di Tristano ed Isotta, e anche i cattivi meritano: per una volta mi sono trovata di fronte ad un Cerdic che ho sinceramente apprezzato, mentre Mordred qui è veramente un piccolo gremlin pieno di odio verso il padre (interessante che per una volta non volesse tanto il trono quanto ucciderlo, punto).
Ma soprattutto ho apprezzato Ginevra: braccio destro politico di Artù, sua pari per intelligenza ed abilità nel muoversi sul panorama politico (anzi, in questo campo gli è forse superiore), per una volta non la vediamo come la principessa promessa sposa, ma come parte attiva dell'ascesa di Artù, sua consigliera, che si è mossa per essere la regina. E per questo fa così male, sapere come andrà a finire e vederlo succedere.
In definitiva Firelord è un retelling notevole, ben costruito, che riesce in un unico volume a raccontare una storia completa e densa, senza mai dare l'impressione che qualcosa sia stato tagliato fuori, con dei personaggi ben costruiti e ben rielaborati.

[Lesley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Far and away my favorite book of all time. Highly underrated.
Godwin is a genius with a flair for muscular, supple prose and astonishing charaterizations. This imaginative re-telling of the Arthurian legend is one of my annual re-reads.

[Jess · Rating 5 out of 5]

it pains me that this isn't in print in the uk, I'd recommend it to everyone I know

[JJ Waggy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Even though Arthur drives me nuts, I have a soft spot for Arthurian stories because they're part of what launched me into being a medievalist. That said, this is one of my absolute favorite retellings because Godwin is pretty much a genius about characterization. I know enough about the historical references of Arthur (like "History of the Kings of Britain" and such) to appreciate how much Godwin works into this story; he's truly done his research, including the Briton/Saxon/Roman clash of the 5th century.
I also like that all these characters are feisty. Arthur is snarky, Guenevere is totally sarcastic and fierce--even flat Percival has some spunk to him, if only toward the end. They're very real characters in a way that Arthurian folks often aren't. And the Morgana and Modred Godwin cooks up are some of the best fictional represenations out there; I understand why they are the way they are, rather than just "there has to be a hubris flaw somewhere."
A fantastic read that will be staying on my shelves with the few other Arthurian adaptations I like (that of Stephen Lawhead and Peter David, if you're interested). This was an Arthur I totally understand capturing the imaginations of generations, truly giving Britain a standard to follow as the world turned over.

[Stephanie Fachiol · Rating 2.5 out of 5]

“And then Artos with his tallfolk words tells me what he’s learned, how we tumble out of darkness into brief light, and because we know there’s so little time, we breathe our moment full of magic. We reach for something we have named beauty, touch each other in a need called love. We plan and hope, endure and dare for these flickering wonders, then go back into darkness not finished, still caring, still asking why or not even given the chance. [...] And the mourning and the loss ball our souls into fists to strike, not at God but at that pregnant silence where we think He hides.”
“And that’s the joke,” says Artos in me. “Some ancient fool saw in a dream the true face of Man and, having no name for such a beauty, called it God.”
— Parke Godwin, “Firelord”

While the above rambling paragraph might not show it, Godwin can write. He is experimental and literary in what he called (incorrectly, but more on that later) a fantasy novel. He uses present tense to depict the passages in which “Druith” is the firelord, king of summer; it is a subtle way of positioning the pagan “Prydyn” as more immediate, more vivid, more true than the dying Romanized Britain. A new dawn is coming, and Godwin even in the structure of the novel makes his sympathies clear. He switches to second person twice: once to depict a day in the life of Guinevere, once to depict a day in the life of Arthur. Here he does the opposite—he emphasizes the archetypal Man and Woman, the King and Queen, and forces you into that archetype as you read along. It’s clever. I admit it.

But boy did I dislike everything else about this novel. For all the efforts to make the Prydyn feel sublime, to suffuse the everyday with magic, it seems Godwin goes out of his way to do the opposite in every other aspect. Godwin calls this a fantasy novel in his preface; it is not. It is a postmodern deconstruction of fantasy, as palatable to me as Julian Jayne’s theory of the bicameral mind and its supposed explanation of theophanies. In an attempt at psychological realism, Godwin depicts a sort of mentally-fragmented triune Arthur: Druith the pagan, Artos the king, and Merlin the wizard. This is not much of a spoiler; it’s all spelled out by chapter 2. If the trifecta is suspicious, that’s because it should be—Godwin sets up his “human trinity” for a grand sacrifice at the end of the novel: Arthur is warned that he must become a god to the Britons, that they need a leader in whom to put their trust, and in the latter quarter of the book, he cries in despair, “Do I have to die for you as well? Do I? Is that really what a god is for?”

Well, not always… but we’re not going to ignore the one major example, are we? Oh, we are? In favor of depicting a noble savage stereotype of ancient Celts? Okay then.

There is no magic. There is no sanctity. The Holy Grail is not really the Grail; the woman whose life mission it is to retrieve it is portrayed as some sort of uptight killjoy (the sort Dorothy Sayers would ironically invoke as the atheist conception of the modern Christian) for comic relief. Amid all this, occasionally some light shines through the grimy windowpanes—Arthur and Guinevere’s passages on attempting to wrangle order out of chaos, a solid kingdom out of a flawed foundation, are easily the best parts of the novel. But the greatest sin the novel commits is not in deconstructing, but flattening the characters. People do not act like people. It would take too long to write out how each and every character becomes a caricature, so instead I will say the double standard at play makes this flattening all the more obvious. Morgana did nothing wrong, she has no blame in how Modred turned out, who cares if she’s been an aggressive warlord since chapter two, everything went wrong because Guinevere is evil and a Christian and a petty woman who doesn’t like polygamy (and how dare she be upset Arthur slept with Morgana after meeting Guinevere, silly woman), and Morgana is right because she’s pagan and worships an earth mother goddess. (Yet again, I must roll my eyes at Robert Graves, because who else can I blame for this ridiculous misconception that the Picts were matriarchal?) Never mind Morgana met Arthur because she KIDNAPPED HIM.

Arthur pays some lip service to saying he truly loved Guinevere and we shouldn’t judge her too harshly and she’s a complex figure and lah di dah, but when you read his own actions, it’s just lip service. He humiliates her in front of the entire court, like a dog. And yes, that language is intentionally invoked. I’m not even saying Guinevere wasn’t reprehensible in this novel, just that the label seems to only go one way. It’s not moral complexity if one character is always wrong and the other is always right.

Like the whole “become a god and die” thing. In an attempt to make Modred seem justified in his hatred of Arthur, any depth in his fight towards his father—which is a plotline mostly confined to the penultimate chapter—and any symbolic significance in Arthur’s death are lost. There are a lot of rambling paragraphs, like the one I chose to open this review, in which Godwin attempts to say something about the divinity in each and every person. Or something. It’s all rather vague and fancy-sounding, but with nothing tangible. It certainly isn’t anything embodied in the characters, who decide the importance of faith is having faith. Because the unity of Britain is better than disunity. Because reasons.

400 pages of setting Arthur up to be a god, and what do we have? An altar that wouldn’t light, a firelord with no heat to him.

Shout louder! Perhaps Merlin is busy, or on a journey, or sleeping and must be awakened!

[Mitch · Rating 5 out of 5]

„Feuerkönig“ von Parke Godwin ist weit mehr als eine bloße Neuerzählung der Artus-Sage; für mich ist es der bislang beste Roman über den legendären Anführer und seine Ritter im Britannien des sechsten Jahrhunderts. Es ist ein Stoff, der mir selten so nah ging – und das liegt vor allem an der brillanten Perspektive, die Godwin gewählt hat.

Von der Sage zur menschlichen Wahrheit:

Während die klassische Erzählung von Thomas Malory die Geschichte in ein sagenumwobenes, fast entrücktes Licht taucht, vollbringt Godwin eine meisterhafte Gratwanderung. Er hebt den Stoff aus seinem mythologischen Korsett und lässt Artus sein Leben in einer Art historischem Tagebuch schildern – so, wie es wirklich gewesen sein könnte. Dieser Verzicht auf ritterliche Romantik zugunsten einer rauen, authentischen Geschichtlichkeit ist eine Qualität, die die meisten historischen Nacherzählungen schlicht nicht erreichen. Godwin übertrifft seine Artgenossen hier um Längen.

Helden in einem grausamen Jahrhundert:

Das sechste Jahrhundert war eine dunkle, blutige und gnadenlose Ära. Godwin versteckt diese Härte nicht, sondern nutzt sie als Leinwand für seine Figuren. Gerade durch diesen dichten historischen Kontext und die zutiefst menschliche, spürbare Sicht von Artus rückt uns das Geschehen so nah, dass es regelrecht unter die Haut geht.
Das Buch zeichnet meisterhafte Grautöne. Es gibt kein einfaches Gut oder Böse, sondern nur Menschen, die in einer harten Welt versuchen, das Richtige zu tun. Man könnte „Feuerkönig“ fast als einen Vorreiter des modernen Grimdark betrachten – und in dieser Kategorie ist es für mich die absolute Nummer eins.

Wahres Heldentum statt bloßer Trostlosigkeit:

Hier liegt auch der entscheidende Unterschied zu Autoren wie George R.R. Martin: Nur dunkel, schlecht und trostlos zu erzählen, ist aus meiner Sicht keine Kunst. Wir brauchen unsere Helden – vielleicht sogar besonders dann, wenn sie durch so finstere Zeiten gehen müssen wie Godwin’s Artus. Das Buch belohnt uns trotz aller Härte mit echtem Heldentum, das sich seinen Platz in der Welt mühsam erkämpfen muss.

Fazit:

„Feuerkönig“ ist für mich einer der besten Romane der letzten Jahre und ein grandioses Stück Erzählkunst. Ich habe beim Lesen gebangt, geschluckt und geweint. Ich war nicht nur ein Beobachter, ich war mit dabei. Mehr kann ein Schriftsteller mit seinen Worten nicht erreichen. Ein absolutes Meisterwerk.

[Tricia · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a retelling of the King Arthur legend. I thought it was an ok read but in some sections it did not hold my attention well.

[Tara · Rating 4 out of 5]

Favorite Quotes

There’s not a stone or leaf or life that men won’t put a name to. It gives them a nice safe box to collect things in. They get in the habit of collecting things and end up surprised at the weight they’re carrying. A dream they thought might fit someday, something bright and sweet like a woman, picked up for her shine and somehow never left or at least never forgotten. Or an ambition! There’s a fine item in any man’s bag. A great, glowing ambition. They never fade, never wear even when you’ve outgrown them. Always there to look at and remember and play might-have-been.

A while ago in real-time you saw the eagles. And you wished.

You go through it like a dark room, you sweat, you fear, the fear passes, you come out of it and utter nothing but meaningless words about what you saw or felt.

The day comes when love means something beyond a reflection of ourselves, when there is more behind than ahead and the house of mind is haunted in every chamber with old songs, old ghosts, old hopes.

And youth, though they see every day the cradle and grave shaped so alike, never believe death will happen to them. I told you it was a comedy.

I know why men lose sight of the face of God: because it is so close.

Part of what we are is whom we’ve loved.

We play very dangerous games with life and no one knows our rules.

Where do the strong go to be weak?

Perhaps a moment comes when must is to tired to fight and want breaks free to cry I am just once before the sun goes down.

[Camille Siddartha · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a big reader of one subject, I go out of my way to read all versions and formulate my own opinion...

good read..

[Brenden Quirk · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 Rounded down

Perhaps the best "historical" take on Arthur I have read so far. The story was engaging and the characters were well done. I liked that Lancelot was not a major player, and that Guinevere had more space to shine because of it. The way he handled the various other knights was also well done. Godwin was clearly familiar with historical and legendary sources around King Arthur, and did a great job bringing all of them together.

I was not a huge fan of the way Morgan and Merlin were presented in this story, and I am getting tired of depictions of Arthur as "smarter" than the Christians. There were also a few plot points that felt out of place, but nothing so bad as to ruin the story told.

Overall, I really like that he got the whole story told in just one book. Definitely recommend for any fan of King Arthur.

[Jonathan Ammon · Rating 4 out of 5]

"What do you think God does more, Arthur, laugh or cry?"

[Daniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

As realistic a version of the Arthurian tales as you will get while still keeping the magic of the originals.
Highly recommended

[Kara · Rating 5 out of 5]

Oh WOW that was good.

King Arthur on his death bed narrates his life from boy running around the hills of his step-mother’s Roman style villa to a very weary aged king in his last hours after the inevitable battle with Mordred.

Lancelot and Guinevere and Merlin and Magana and Tristian and the Holy Grail and Camelot all dance through the pages as he chronicles his journey…

But it’s all just a bit different this time round - gritty and fantastic and familiar and alien all rolled into one.

Between Roman Briton and Saxon England we have the hazy time period when King Arthur may have ruled, and Parke Godwin fills in the pieces here with 1/3 history, 1/3 fantasy, and 1/3 sheer, basic, human drama.

In this version Merlin comes now and then to visit Arthur in visions – he may be some sort of spirit, he might be a Time Lord, he might be some sort of weird time twisting in on itself allowing for Arthur to meet his future self, or he might well be having hallucinations cooked up and served by his own brain.

Godwin seems to be going for some so of mystical, or at list metaphysical kind of angle, but more and more research today supports the idea that we humans do a lot of thinking and planning out and puzzle solving at a sub or un-conscious level – so when we suddenly have a fully formed idea – the painter suddenly seeing the picture before his eyes fully formed, the musician waking up with a full song in his ears, the writer suddenly knowing the plot, beginning, middle and end – it isn’t coming from the magical ether, but rather a timer has gone off in our unconscious oven, and the idea is ready to be looked at consciously.

But I digress.

Arthur goes on a lot of campaigns, at first fully embracing the ideals of old Rome, but pretty soon realizing that the glory days of Rome are long gone, and what’s more, the only thing they are ever going to get from Rome are pretty letters dripping in perfume, promising everything and nothing as the once magnificent empire shrinks to the size of a pinprick on the map.

And then Arthur gets a lesson in realpolitik when he spends 6 months living feral with a very small tribe of nomadic, short people who are going to go on and be the basis of tales of fairies and elves. He falls in love with Morgana, a matriarch of the group, who teaches his the simple lesson of Love.

But he has to give that all up because There Is Work To Do. (Oh, isn’t there always?)

He leaves her pregnant with a vague nagging feeling that may come back to haunt him later, and oh boy does it ever with a vengeance!

But in the meantime, there is a crown, queen, and country to claim, and then the day to day business of holding on to what you’ve claimed.

When King Arthur lays out the whole mess with Guinevere he is a surprisingly fair narrator. Turns out – he doesn’t even care she was having a fling with ole Lance, because he gets it that a person has ore needs than just one other person can fulfill, but he DOES object to her taking the power of life and death into her hands. That is so totally only up to him, and no one, not no one, can make that decision but him, and he is Royally Pissed Off.

So she whips up an army of her own based on Righteous Anger to negotiate her way out of a cell, to a bargaining table, to back on the throne. (Which just proves my theory that, throughout history, the winners are always the one with the better army and better PR.)

Just when Arthur thinks he might be actually be successful in keeping things civilized, Mordred shows up and demands a reckoning…

[Jacob · Rating 5 out of 5]

Parke Godwin's specialty is the retelling of the classic legends. In Firelord he takes the legend of King Arthur and rewrites it in a way that fits the likely historical era in which the real man who was probably the basis of the legend lived. It's not a history text, but entirely a fictional novel, but the book brings a historical realism to the story that really resonated with me. Beloved Exile follows Guinevere after Arthur's death and is set in the period that the Germanic tribes are slowly taking over from the Romanized Celts. The Tower of Beowulf is the same sort of retelling of the old Germanic saga.

[Andrea · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is my all-time favorite Arthurian novel. I hated when it went out of print because I couldn't use it in classes anymore, even though the students never liked it as much as I did. It is available used for as little as a penny at Amazon, and its sequel "Beloved Exile," which focuses on Guenevere is still in print. If you want a thoroughly modern and equal Art and Gwen, this is your book.

[JHM · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another of my all-time favorite books. Arthur Pendragon narrates his life story from his deathbed after the Battle of Camlann.

No magic in this tale. This is Roman Britain, and the story is about the gritty details of war, religion and politics in a land being transformed by the forces of history.

[Dulce · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of my absolute favorite books of all time. The voice of Artorius comes through like he was speaking right at your ear... from the innocence of childhood, to his experiences as a soldier, to the early years of kingship and lastly the majestic voice of the old king, Godwin brings to life the evolution of a man into a legend.

[Pequlyar · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am a big fan of Aurthurian Legend. This is a wonderful take on a story we all know. It is by far my favorite King Arthur story.

[Jeff Stevens · Rating 1 out of 5]

I got to the pagan dream state and put it down. It was barely decipherable. I love Arthurian legends, but I couldn't stomach this. I had such high hopes.

[Kim Headlee · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is another novel that inspired me in the early days of my writing. Godwin's prose & storytelling in this novel are superb.

[Michael McGrath · Rating 5 out of 5]

Some good Arthurian books are as elusive as the Grail! I can't believe that this novel lingered unread on my shelf for so long, whilst other less worthy Arthurian efforts got my attention. How many versions of the Arthurian legend have I waded through to get to this forgotten gem! Think about it: wherever you turn you can find a reprints from the long-winded New Age Marion Zimmer Bradley to the Evangelical “Tolkien wanna-be” Stephen Lawhead. Although some of these books do contain a few good ideas, the prose style is as cringe worthy as the prose to be discovered in the selections from an Evangelical bestseller list.

Parke Godwin deserves better than to be relegated to the out-of-print shelves, especially when these other works are still in print pretty much everywhere. As others have said, the prose style of Parke Godwin is well suited to his subject—he captures an entire realm, with such minutiae that somehow deftly avoids being prolix or purple. There is no filler like Bradley or Lawhead, both who would have benefitted from being mentored by Godwin in a creative writing course had he ever given such a class.

The story is told from Arthur’s point of view like Sutcliff’s equally superb “Sword at Sunset” and covers the same period, although Godwin injects a bit of dreaminess into his narrative with an imaginary Merlin whom only Arthur sees. Godwin’s book feels a bit like a cross between Mary Stewart and Rosemary Sutcliff with a lot more grit and gore. The battle sequences are truly riveting, as the familiar cast of characters take the stage—Bedivere, Gareth, Geraint, and Gawain to name a few (and yes we have the later French addition of Lancelot too!)

Be prepared to be amused at Godwin’s take on Tristan’s Ysuelt whose love triangle is not celebrated with romantic flare but deconstructed with Ysuelt’s confession to Trystan: “Love? Love, who? When? Where? I was sixteen. We had a few weeks, we had a boat, and then it was Mark…I but a torn scrap of meat between your jealousy and his fumbling.”
Finally, after the whining of Bradley’s so called feminist take on the legend, we have some Arthurian women with some bite, standing up and challenging even those old ideas any of us may have had of the old romances.

Oh, but it gets better—much better. We have the ardent Lancelot befuddled by the manipulative and sly Guenevere, and we cannot help but love her still! Lancelot thinks he loves a queen whom only he can fulfill and even challenges Arthur: “Why in God’s name did she marry you? Why you when I could been happy all my life with nothing but her?” Godwin’s contrast before the Lancelot who gets played and the Arthur who doesn’t turns the whole love-triangle into a refreshing spin.

Guenevere sees Arthur as an unrefined peasant, who entangles himself with Morgana and the faerie people; Arthur sees his queen as an aristocrat and bitch, which she doesn’t deny: “That I am, and the best in Britain. God wouldn’t waste a nice girl on you, Pendragon.”

I love them! These are flesh and blood people, in a time of turmoil and strife. Of course, the novel is not without its faults–there are unfortunate pacing issues at the beginning of the novel, which may deter many readers from completing as it did me so many years ago. The Morgana of this book did not quite take with me—something a bit too outlandish, even untouchable, and I think this may have been the author’s intent. But, it is so worth it to get to the latter half of the novel with an invocation of the chivalric legends that will come.

Trystan foretells the legend that they will become: “…Camelot! Palace of the mind that will endure as long as men dream. The Grail, the great deeds, the battle, the songs. I’ve been writing some of them myself. Ought to have something tasteful before the Christians get hold of you.”

Exactly! And that is what Godwin delivers before Bradley and Lawhead got hold of him.

[Edwin Wollert · Rating 5 out of 5]

Firelord is in fact my favorite novel. I've read it in English 11 times, German once (slow going... Ich kann nicht so gut Deutsch...), and might consider selling a kidney for a Spanish copy, especially since the latter translation seems never to have occurred. This is a loosely-based semi-historical Arthur, along with memorable descriptions of most of his loosely-historical companions (as an historian, I have to contend with the ongoing debates and attitudes about anything regarding an "historical" Arthur, and this gets off set by what here is outstanding storytelling, along with the need of everyone to have a useful myth here and there to latch onto). Anyway, it's the latter half of the 5th century, and the novel contains plausible explanations of the departure of the Romans from Britain, along with their culture, and how the remaining Celtic tribes had to contend with new threats. The Grail quest and the Battle of Badon Hill are especially well depicted here, with much more emphasis on a "how it could have been" and none of the magical or otherwise unexplained elements that pertain more to general fantasy. There's a sequel, "Beloved Exile," focusing on Guenevere, who narrates ("Firelord" is likewise in first-person, narrated by Arthur himself), and it's set just after the fall of Camelot and years beyond that, while the curious prequel, "The Last Rainbow," offers some fascinating insights into the life and times of the man who would later be known as Saint Patrick.

These are largely out of print, sadly, and Parke Godwin died just several years ago. My autographed copy of a hard-cover first edition is a personal treasure, and I've read paperbacks of all three novels until they've had to be held together with a mix of packing tape and desperation.

[Samantha · Rating 5 out of 5]

👏👏👏👏
Well, my Arthurian April started off with a bang!!! I can't believe i had never heard of this book. I am so thankf👏ul a friend suggested this to me because it is forever going down as a favorite piece of Arthurian literature! Discovered none too late!!!

The PROSE!!! OH MY GOD, THE PROSE!!! the quotes in this book blew my mind. Told from Arthur's POV. Some of the things he says will stay with me forever. I found myself highlighting theoighout this book because I just can't forget the many amazing quotes.

Love the layers of medieval philosophy, theology, and social norms. Again, many of the quotes in here made me stop and think about the very nature of humanity for hours after I read them.

Read if you love the following:
- Stories from Arthur's POV
- Lance/Gwen/Arthur triangle
- Morgan as a bad ass
- Tristan and Isolde
- The Orkney boys
- Mordred
- Merlin
- Roman British Arthur
- Classic Arthur in a Knightly castle

ITS ALL HERE AND THEN SOME!!

This Arthur and this book will forever live in my soul! Beautiful, just beautiful!!!!

[William Hill · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm a big King Arthur and Camelot fan. I read this 30 years ago, and kept it around to reread as research. This version is more bare bones with no armor and Arthur and his men on horseback as calvary who form a force to save Britons from outside enemies. Such a defense, leads to Arthur's rise to king when Rome refuses to help Briton, and they take their fate in their own hands. The story is told from Arthur's POV as he writes in a journal as he is dying. I didn't appreciate this approach back when I was 30, but now, at 60, at the age when Arthur is looking back, it makes more sense, as I have changed POVs. There is less about battles and more about what is necessary to rule and the difficulties of human foibles, relationships, predjudice, and politics. It's complex and compelling reading. I didn't care for Merlin being Arthur's higher self. All in all, a very satisfying read, better the second time around.

[Rebecca · Rating 4 out of 5]

These books were written a long time ago. However, they have remained favorites of mine for years, although I eventually even forgot Parke Godwin's name, and could not find them! I am thrilled that I now have all three of his Arthurian cycles, and his Robin Hood books on order!

Firelord is the story of Arthur, himself, from the time he became a soldier up to the end of his life at the hands of his son. The thing that I may love the most about this book is that the magic has been very deftly replaced with events and thought-processes that might well have been. It takes the legend, and makes him a man, warts and all. The story of Arthur, as told very deftly by Mr. Godwin, is clearly recognizable as having come from the legends, but one thinks, over and over, "Well, yes, it would make sense for it to happen that way!"

Rediscovering these books after decades away has been a joy to me.

[Daniel Ford · Rating 5 out of 5]

I cannot help but feel that Godwin is becoming something of a forgotten master. This book is a wonder from start to finish. I can't count the number of times I paged back to reread a spot here or there. What it does, perhaps better than any Arthurian adaptation I can name, is make the names of legend - Arthur, Bedivere, Lancelot, Gareth, Gawain, Agravaine, Peredur, Guenivere, Morgana - into people who feel real. Other adaptations have done this, but somehow Godwin put the seeds of the legends into the real people. It's a brilliant book and I can't believe it took me until now to read it.

[Mary · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fascinating retelling that combines traditional Arthurian legend with a more historical setting and characters, plus some fantastical elements.
The prose is good, though the dialogue is sometimes not. I personally did not enjoy the more cynical nature of some of the story. Also the fantastical elements were confusing. I'm still baffled about Merlin.
I did not like the ending (though I did like one element of it).
I did like the practicality of some of the story, and the heroism of some of it. And I loved a lot of the supporting characters. Overall, a slightly mixed bag, but worth reading.