Opinião:Já gostava de Bernard Cornwell mas, após a conclusão da leitura desta trilogia, passo a olhar o escritor com outra admiração, compreendo agora porque muitos dos seus admiradores consideram este o seu melhor trabalho. As qualidades que admiro no escritor, bem como o que tanto me agradou nesta trilogia, no fundo já foram todas elas referidas nos comentários aos primeiros dois volumes que foram comentados aqui no blog: Rei de Inverno e O Inimigo de Deus. De forma resumida, pode-se dizer que é um escritor muito consistente, apresentando um ritmo de escrita mais moderado quando tem de efetuar um enquadramento do enredo, explicar de forma gradual o que está em jogo e mesmo aprofundar o carácter das personagens. Por outro lado imprime um ritmo forte quando tem que de o fazer, em especial quando descreve, aquilo que não vejo ninguém fazer igual, a descrição de combates. Penso que a maioria de todos nós já lemos algures nomes de personagens como Artur, Morgana, Merlim, Lancelot, Guinevere, Ceinwin, Igraine, Talesin (nenhuma destas a minha preferida na trilogia) e associamos à idade média e em concreto à Idade das Trevas. Cornwell não trouxe de novo, apenas nos presenteou com a sua visão e mestria que lhe é reconhecida, deu vida ao mito arturiano, combinando com perícia a lenda e os factos históricos conhecidos. Posso afirmar que dos vários livros que li sobre esta época, como As Brumas de Avalon da MBZ, Tapeçaria de Fianovar de Guy Gavriel Kay (um dos meus escritores preferidos) esta trilogia é o melhor que li até hoje, a par do Ciclo Pendragon de Stephen Lawhead. Para quem goste do período medieval, encontra nesta trilogia, e em particular neste livro, as eternas lutas dos Bretões contra a invasão dos Saxões, lealdades, mortes cruéis, diferenças de ideologias, onde o Cristianismo se opõe ao conhecimento antigo (druidas), personagens muito bem desenvolvidas, intrigas politicas, questões de honra, traições, tudo ingredientes bem desenvolvidos a que se junta uma escrita cativante, com momentos que nos deixam empolgados. Em resumo um enredo complexo e bem desenvolvido. Apenas tenho a apontar, como menos positivo, o desenvolvimento dado a um personagem, que tinha tido um enorme crescimento no volume anterior, que apresentava um enorme potencial e que acaba por sair de cena de forma que não se espera, ainda assim não coloca em causa a forma muito consistente como o escritor encerra esta trilogia. Do melhor que já li de Romance Histórico, altamente recomendado.http://leiturasdofiachaocorvonegro.bl...
Bernard Cornwell's affection for the characters and the Dark Age British landscape of this gritty retelling of the Arthurian legends is evident throughout the Warlord Trilogy. Despite the undoubted hardship and savagery of such a time and place, Cornwell's evocation of a boggy, Saxon-threatened West Country actually makes it feel like an imaginitive refuge from the modern urban world, and fantastical legends are not unbelievable when viewed through Cornwell's earthy interpretive filter. The research behind these books has given the narrative an iconoclastic tone (see Derfel's weariness at Igraine's mythologising of the events/non-events he witnessed), and I suspect that Cornwell's portrayal of Britain's brutal post-Roman religions would stand up to scholarly scrutiny (see Merlin's wonderfully patronising lecture on the "obvious" influence of the Roman god Mithras on the story of Christ). The works of Gildas, Nennius, and the relevant early parts of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle would certainly have been far more readable and consistent if Cornwell had been around back then to contribute... An objective review of the Warlord Triliogy can't really justify a five star rating - it's not literature; Derfel's personality occasionally seems incongrously decent and sentimental (as observed by Merlin) for a Dark Age, gut-spilling uber-warrior; and the anachronistic covers of the latest editions alone are worth one star off - it's hard to imagine Mr Cornwell approving of the shiny, chivalrous knight-errant artwork (I once sent a question to Mr Cornwell's website asking whether or not he had control over his novels' covers - he kindly replied that he didn't) - but my repeated readings of these wonderful tales easily adds up to five stars worth of enjoyment.
What do You think about Excalibur (1999)?
First let me say that 3 stars does not mean that I disliked this last book in Cornwell's Arthur Trilogy. 3 stars for me usually means that I liked the book but it just didn't stand out. Also, I've read all of his Richard Sharpe books and a few of his stand alones and feel that the character development in those books was of a much higher quality.This book was some what of a let down for me since I really did enjoy #1 & #2. In my opinion the ending fell flat. I also felt that Lancelot came off as almost cartoonish, not really evil but shallow and vain. Since the story is told through the POV of Derfel, who is one of Arthur's warriors, the character of Arthur is actually in the background and most of his story is told through the eyes of others. So definitely a different look at the legend.The highlight of this book for me was the transformation of Guinevere. Still tragic but much more human and likeable then in the first two books.
—Peggy Z
This, the final installment in the Warlord Chronicles, can be summed up pretty well as 'more of the same'.It's a solid, well-written novel as you would expect from Bernard Cornwell but, like the preceding books in the series, it's a little underwhelming to anyone that will have read the Making Of England series Cornwell went on to write.I think my biggest problem with the overall story is that where the tales of Uhtred Of Bebbanburg were first-person epics, this tale of Arthur is told from the perspective of one of his most loyal spearmen rather than the man himself, leaving you feeling a lot more like a spectator than feeling all the nuances and causes of Arthurs actions as you would Uhtred.As always it's hard to slate Cornwell novels too hard as they are still very well written books, it's just that this Arthur saga falls somewhat short of the other multiple book series he has written such as those of Thomas Of Hookton or Uhtred Of Bebbanburg.A good read but not really essential to anyone but the completist.
—Paul
NOTE: This is book #3 of a 3-book series. For best effect, read in sequential order. We've all heard the mythical story of King Arthur, Lancelot and Guinevere. But Bernard Cornwell has taken what what we may believe about the story and given it a fresh twist. He's scraped away the fairy tale and woven a story that shows us real humans with all their quirks and frailties. In my opinion, a much more believable story with many levels that was a real page-turner for me. The story is done as a narration by Derfel (pronounced "Dervel"), a friend of Arthur and a top warrior in Dark Ages Britain. Arthur is the bastard child of King Uther who's given the responsibility of raising Uther's newborn, legitimate heir (Mordred) until he's old enough to assume the throne. As a man of scruples, Arthur takes this position very seriously and spends years fighting off enemies (alongside Derfel) who want to seize Mordred's land. Derfel is also a friend of the Druid Merlin and his lover, Nimue. Derfel and Arthur are pagans. Derfel believes in the old gods of ancient Britain. In his mind, it's necessary to keep them placated so they won't adversely affect the lives of humans. Arthur believes in the goodness of mankind and wants to bring law and order to Britain. He seeks peace at all costs and must deal with religious fanatics, invading Saxons, ambitious men and women, and even civil war. Merlin believes the gods love chaos.These books show us human beings living real lives filled with triumphs and tragedies. An ongoing and gripping tale of hopes dreamed and then lost and the consequences of both. I highly recommend them!
—Denise
