The Worm Ouroboros

by E.R. Eddison

1967, mass market paperback reprint edition (of a work first published in 1926), Ballantine, NY. 520 pages. Black and white illustrations throughout. Two separate introductions, as well as after material. This work has been called "a majestic romance and an enduring masterpiece." "An epic fantasy to compare with Tolkien's Lord of the Rings." The author died in 1945, leaving behind 3 completed novels, linked together. He was working on a 4th part of this sequence when he died.

Genres: Fantasy

520 pages, Mass Market Paperback

Published January 1, 1967

About the author

Eric Rücker Eddison was an English civil servant and author, writing under the name "E.R. Eddison."

Reviews

[Julian · Rating 5 out of 5]

I last read this book 31 years ago and hesitated to pick it up, partially in the fear that I wouldn't enjoy it as much as I did then. I needn't have worried. It's a tremendous book and utterly unique, far beyond the power of any to imitate it (in the unlikely event someone cared to.) The language is archaic, the heroes are somewhat flat in the tradition of heroic high fantasy (I mean Homer and Le Morte D'arthur, not 20th century pap.) The villains though are wonderful, and Eddison spends almost as much time in the court of Witchland as he does with the Demons (yes, those are the good guys!)

Ever ache for a fantasy novel where the language and the scenes actually echo Shakespeare instead of a 4th-hand derivative Tolkien? Where the author is not just a master of Norse scholarship but pleasingly lifts poems from Herrick, Carew, Donne and more because their verse is called for and he won't do any better?

Yes, it's a little goofy, particular the first chapter (but also, lovely and sets a wonderful tone).
Yes it's Difficult... sometimes overwritten (lots of baroque description of the natural world and clothing).. but at every turn echoing Elizabethans, Jacobeans or the classics themselves-- Homer, the tragic poets etc. But great heroes doing great deeds against worthy villains, some of whom are even their equals in honor and passion.

And Lord Gro, a much trickier character than we get in Homer, or even Shakespeare... a traitor's traitor!

I feel like I need to re-read it every few years going forward, it's dense and wonderful and occasionally even funny enough to bear it, I think.

[Pierre Parent · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this ~40 years ago for the first time and I would have given it 4 stars based upon my remembrance of the book, particularly how different it was from other fantasy books I was reading at the time. Rereading it now I have to give it a lower rating, even considering when it was written (1926). The highlight is the very descriptive, flowery language the Eddison uses to describe the people and places. The plot is a fairly straightforward mix of adventure tale and epic war story. There aren't really significant twists in it. The setting has a little magical background which impacts the plot in a few major areas, but it is not a constant part of the story. On the downside, the groups of people in the story, though called by fantastical names such as imps, pixes, witches, goblins, and demons, are really just normal people with little differentiation between them. And the characters are one-dimensional with really no character arcs and characterized by often by one theme, for example, honor as a attribute of the demons, that never gets 'colored' in the story. Still an enjoyable listen, but something I wish was deeper.

[Chiolerious Reads · Rating 4 out of 5]

An odd but interesting read. It's a peek into what fantasy would have looked like pre Tolkien. Some of the old / middle english can be a real challenge to read.

[Lord Bathcanoe of Snark · Rating 1 out of 5]

Did thou enjoy this book?
Nay! Methinks it's shite.

[Alexander McDonald · Rating 4 out of 5]

Absolutely unabashed and monolithic

[Lewis Carnelian · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've hesitated on what to write on this book because I feel like I can't possibly relate all the complex feelings I have about it, both frustration and elation involved. I'll try to be brief:
1. Most of the complaints on this book are the elaborate diction, characterized as a form of Jacobean English. I can't attest to that comparison, but I can say, for me, the style was essential to my enjoyment of it. Eddison, a civil servant, with perhaps an unhealthy interest in the Norse Sagas, felt compelled to write this in such an exalted, obfuscated style that had me from page one. It is not easy to read, but it is utterly original, as far as I can tell, and elevates the material into...well, and here I am at a loss for words.
2. Another complaint levied against this work is its predilection for ridiculous names. Please see my response above for my particular take on that.
3. A third complaint, perhaps best characterized by Tolkien's misgivings about it (and he no doubt was influenced by this, but also criticized it) is its morality, or lack thereof. I think it would be easy to position Eddison philosophically in the realm of Nietzsche or Thomas Carlyle, in terms of supermen and great men versus Christian morality. That may a bit of an oversimplification on Eddison's part, but his lack of a Christian ethos is a valid observation. Beyond that, it gets more complicated, and the ending, the *ending* is a particular conundrum that has stupefied many and frustrated some, in terms of an ethos, or simply in terms of a philosophy. All this may be putting too many logs on the fire, and so, I exit this stage.
4. I will restrict myself to two more points. This one will be about the characterization, or lack thereof. I am reminded of my particular view of Othello, in that the titular character lacks interest to me; instead Iago seems far more interesting. Gro, Lord Gro, rather, positions himself here as well. Gro's role as a villain is far, far more complicated, and therein lies the rub, ahem, sorry, and he is by far one of the more tragic characters. Eddison is slipperly about this, but not, I think, as slippery as Homer is about Hector in the Iliad.
5. Finally, what is fantasy for, but to provide escape but also to provide *challenge*? There are plenty of fake Heroes of a Thousand Faces narratives, King Arthurs and children with secret powers who ascend the throne, many tales that seem mere stitch-cloth of those that came before riddled with gravity and befuddlement. When I say befuddlement, I mean it in the best way. There can be no easy answers, even in such works as The Silmarillion. It is that friction, that ambiguity in what I rank as the best that fantasy has to offer, that enchants *and* unnerves us. If you can adapt to the strange and wooly style of the Worm Ouroboros, you will find that befuddlement here. Give my regards to Gro, if you do.