It’s been ages since I last encountered something so tone-deaf to the natural cadence of English. Five pages in and I burst out laughing at this:The sheriff raised a single eloquent eyebrow. “Did he teach you that? Did he also teach you the sword?”She knew precisely what he meant, though not long ago she had known nothing at all of hardship or the harsh argot of such men. Now she knew, and spoke it, answering him in kind with cool self-possession, fully cognizant of what admission could mean. “The fleshly sword, yes…” (5)THE FLESHLY SWOOOOOORD! Not the most auspicious opening, Roberson, if your heroine is faced with attempted assault and I’m sniggering at your hackneyed prose. Yet I sallied forth, undaunted, through the twisting byways and knotted paths of Roberson’s attempts at syntax, until by the end I was left wondering if she had ever sat through an English class in her life:“Gore-clotted tusks slashing, trying to rend fragile flesh....Beyond, he heard the hounds, most eloquent in their yearning to answer unreasoning instinct, born and bred; the duty trained into them: to find and rend the boar.” (87)I assume Roberson’s fondness for “eloquent” is born out of longing for something she will never have.“He had not expected to sleep, but at some point near dawn the enemy Exhaustion had wielded the sword of a Saracen and defeated his attempt to remain awake.” (264)Oooooh, but was it a FLESHLY sword? *bow-chicka-bow-wow*“She had lied to him: ‘I am not what you need,’ she had said, meaning not good enough, too innocent, not able to ease his needs. But she was wrong. She was what he needed; a woman to ease his pain, ease his needs, give him back what he had lost.”(370)So apparently, in the absence of quality psychotherapy services, PTSD can be cured with a good round of boinking. Someone should let the VA know.“DeLacey stood at an angle to Marian, shoulder turned obliquely....In no way did he indicate the intensity of his anticipation as the moment drew nearer. He wanted to shout aloud exultantly, crying his jubilation, because to him it was as gratifying as carnal congress to witness a plan come together.” (415)Now there’s an image I’ll never get out of my head.There were times when I’m not even sure Roberson herself knew what she was trying to say:“[The alleyway] stank of refuse and ordure, damp and slick underfoot, treacherous to a man more accustomed to stone floors beneath a lord’s high roof than a ceiling of stars overhead.” (258)Yes, I can see why a man accustomed to stone floors would have difficulties traversing the ceiling of stars overhead. *cues Lionel Ritchie*“Better to itch than to die for want of a scratch, [thought the sheriff].” (534)Truly, it is better to itch than to die for not scratching the itch. Though Roberson will have to explain to me how you couldn’t have it both ways. “The earl held himself very erect, superficially a younger man, until one looked farther and saw that he was old.” (555)And he was old, except for superficially, where he was a younger man than the older man he actually was. Thanks for clearing that up, Roberson.And of course there were moments when I had to wonder which dictionary Roberson was thumbing her way through as she wrote this:“Then, as de Pisan waved him on, he crossed into the chamber and came face-to-face for the first time in his life with [Prince John,] England’s sanguine savior.” (67)I’m trying to think of another modern text where “sanguine” was used to describe a personality and did not mean “optimistic.” Because since that’s how we use the word now, that’s the first connotation to come to mind. A competent writer would be aware of this and would have gone with something like “sanguinary,” but it seems Roberson didn’t want to begrudge her readers a few lexical brainteasers scattered throughout her opus.“Matilda’s eyes were crouched in creases more pronounced in her weakness, though her color was mostly restored.” (127)It’s couched, Roberson. Unless her eyes have actually sprouted limbs and are lying prone behind her wrinkles.Which- not gonna lie, I would read that novel. But seriously - vocabularies are like fleshly swords, Roberson. No one is impressed with the size when it’s laughably clear you don’t know how to use it.“The sun edged down the sky to dip below the canopied screen of overlapping treetops, filtered now through boughs and branches in a counterpoint of dark and light, a leafy chiaroscuro.” (203)I could comment here on the brilliance of describing a medieval forest using an art form that wasn’t invented until 500 years later, but I’d rather try my own hand at it instead:The sun glinted off the edge of his scimitar like streetlights off the curve of a Mercedes C-Class.The thundering clanks of longswords striking chain mail filled his ears like a tumult of a bullet train surging into the station.I think you may be on to something, Roberson. But you know, every historical novel has its blips, its tiny anachronisms that tumble through the cracks as you’re frantically bolstering the crumbling architecture of your storyline. It doesn’t mean you’re a lousy author, right? Surely even the best authors are entitled to at least one mist-“The oil lamp cast a wan, ocherous glow, painting the royal pavilion in a chiaroscuro…” (327)Oh.
My Synopsis:Lady Of The Forest by Jennifer Roberson is a re-telling of the Robin Hood legend.Maid Marian is still reeling from the death of her father, Hugh FitzWalter, and wondering what will happen to her childhood home of Ravenskeep, when the Sheriff of Nottingham takes an interest in her.Robert of Locksley has only recently returned home from the crusades where he fought at the side of Richard the Lionheart. Still nursing old wounds and deeper emotional scars he fights to return to his old life even though he has become a different man.The lives of Marian and Robin are destined to intertwine as the heir to a vast throne becomes known as an infamous outlaw, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. Or is that how the story goes? What of Little John and Sherwood forest? What did Will Scarlett do to receive punishment of death? Will Prince John succeed in stealing Richard's throne... Guess you'll have to read to find out!My Thoughts:I actually read this book over a long period. It is over 600 pages long and is a bit on the slow side in the beginning.I, like most readers, was very much aware of the Legend of Robin Hood, from movies, like Kevin Costner's, "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves" and the BBC weekly show, "Robin Hood." It's a story we've always heard. Robin Hood stole from the poor and gave to rich. He was able to shoot a bow so well that he could split another arrow in to. He was the confidant of King Richard. I believe when I started this novel I was expecting to have those tried and true idea's about Robin Hood challenged. I was expecting something new and different. I realize that re-telling a legend is probably one of the more difficult pursuits for an author, but I was a little disappointed. After reading the entire book I felt like I hadn't learned anything new.The story telling was excellent the characters were very well developed, the settings were descriptive and beautiful. But, you knew exactly what was going to happen. Maid Marian and Robin Hood's love story has been told time and again and I just wanted something more, some sort of different take on the tale.Jennifer Roberson's follow up book, The Lady of Sherwood continues the story where Lady of the Forest leaves off. Sadly, I haven't picked that one up. I've read other books by Jennifer Roberson that I enjoyed very much. Like the Sword-Dancer series and the Karavan's Series which I highly recommend, but I just wasn't too thrilled with Lady of the Forest.
What do You think about Lady Of The Forest (1995)?
This set of novels by Jennifer Roberson is an adult version of the Robin Hood story. The original characters are here(Robin, Maid Marian, Friar Tuck, Little John, the Sheriff of Nottingham) along with some of Roberson's additions. Very well written, action packed, and will keep you turning pages. While the story is much like the old tale I would not recommend it for my 13 year old as there is some adult content. (My daughter always wants to know what I'm reading. Maybe I'll get her to start her own journal, she is a very avid reader of youth fiction.)
—Shelly
I really liked the history that Jennifer Roberson wove into this story. She does an excellent job of creating a picture of Medieval life from peasant to Prince. She also does a very nice job of describing the politics during this period. It's obvious that she did a lot of research before sitting down to write this book.I recently read 'Roselynde' by Roberta Gellis, it covers the same period in time as 'Lady of the Forest' but gives greater details about the politics and the conflict between King Richard and his brother John. It gives a good foundation of knowledge for reading about this period in history and the books share a similar theme woven through; the unmarried landholding maiden vulnerable to plotting and ambitiotious men.I liked the way Jennifer Roberson created circumstances that brought Robin and his men together. She twists things just slightly to make her story work and sometimes the relationship between Robin and Lady Marian was too drawn out and melodramatic for my tastes but I did enjoy this book. For me the romantic relationship was the least interesting and satisfying thread woven into the story. I liked the male characters and all of their posturing, competition, conniving and camaraderie.I really enjoyed the character Much, a boy who nearly loses his hand for stealing the Sheriff of Nottingham's purse. And he brought to mind another cut-purse who endeared himself to me in 'The Court of Illusions' by Rosemary Hawley Jarman. I also liked the character Robert of Locksley, 'Robin', who suffers from memories of battles fought in the Crusades and his experience as a prisoner of war.I think this book could have been improved with a little more editing, there were phrases that were repeated too often and too much attention paid to the paling and blushing of people's faces. I think a shorter story would have had greater tension and been more satisfying overall.I thought this was an interesting historical novel with a lot of attention paid to detail, it was enjoyable and well written but I think that less could have been more.
—Barb
Well, I finished it--and I don't have any qualms about not finishing a book I'm not enjoying reading. I liked the setting a lot, and I really liked the characterization of Robin as a PTSD-haunted veteran. I thought Marian developed nicely, although I do have issues with the way every single man she meets (except Robin's father) falls hopelessly, crazedly, willing-to-kill-people in love with her. I have known a few women like that; I had a roommate in college whose ex-boyfriend went into the priesthood when she dumped him, and another one who sold his car to buy her an apartment full of presents. But it works better in real life than in fiction, because you can see that men who do that kind of thing are typically pretty weird or not very bright. William deLacey and Guy of Gisbourne, especially, don't fit either of those descriptions (although Robin kind of does, with his blackouts and gory flashbacks to the Crusade). I also liked the history. I have no idea how accurate it is--many reviews I've read suggest that Jennifer Roberson is very good with her history, but I personally don't have enough knowledge of English history to be able to judge. I will say that this is the first book I've read about Robin Hood that I think adequately explains his motivation to rob the rich. Novels usually have a sentence or two about how Richard is being held in some other land and the sheriff of Nottingham and Prince John are conspiring to keep him there, but I can't recall another book that actually gives Robin more motivation for wanting to raise the ransom money than "but he's the KIIIINNNNGGG!" [NOTE: I will grant that much of my knowledge of the Robin Hood legend comes from my first exposure to it: the Disney movie that features Robin and Marian as foxes and Prince John as a lion, and he's such an annoying character that I've never questioned why Robin wants to get rid of him.]I do think authors should have a firm limit on how often they can use words like "balefully" and "lank" (I would suggest once per book, but certainly no more than once every few chapters). I think the book was too long, but unlike other reviewers, I liked the little subplots that kept popping up with the minor characters. So I didn't hate the book, but I doubt I'll ever read it again.
—Molly
