1982.
346 pages, Corgi/Random House paperback.
Several thousands of years ago the seven Gods created the world, and chose a people to care especially for. All of them did this, except Aldur, who became the God of magicians. He also created a powerful Orb which the evil God Torak coveted, and later stole. The sorcerer Belgarath and a few others took the Orb of Aldur back, and gave it to the people of Riva for safekeeping. Ever since this happened, Torak and his followers have been searching for a way to steal it back, as it holds the power to destroy the world.
The boy Garion grows up knowing nothing or little of this, and caring even less. He grows up on a farm in the (uncannily egalitarian) kingdom of Sendaria, and is raised by his Aunt Pol. Life on the farm is completely safe for the most part, and occasionally the farm is visited by an old storyteller, whose disregard for his Aunt Pol’s authority Garion finds attractive.
However, such a life cannot last (at least not in this genre; we’re talking hard core Epic here, as you’ve probably gathered already, from the hopelessly Silmarillionesque description I gave in the first paragraph of this review). Before long, agents of Torak have driven Garion on the run, along with Aunt Pol, the storyteller, and the usual ragtag posse of Epic stereotypes.
At first, I thought Pawn of Prophecy was a chore. The first 150-odd pages read like resin, and it didn’t particularly help that the language and narration was written in a hopelessly ridiculous style; at a certain point Eddings takes half a page to say that time passed, and describes what usually takes place during the passage of time. I recognize and accept a writer’s urge to fill out his tale somewhat, but to read things like this feels utterly redundant, and makes me more disposed towards skipping passages of text — neither of which are results Eddings set out to bring about, I’m sure.
Obviously, I ought to have read enough Epic fantasy by now to know that these kinds of books usually always start slow. The setting needs to be established, the characters presented, and one or more conflicts introduced. And as Eddings ticked off more and more of this points on his to-do-list, Pawn of Prophecy grew on me.
While I still found the novel’s plot and setting laughably predictable and Tolkien-copied, the characters stereotyped and Eddings’ prose rather simplistic, the plot intensified a bit, the setting filled out, the characters became more interesting, and the prose occasionally better, especially in dialogue. I also managed to remind myself that this is usually considered children’s’ fantasy, although personally I’d probably label it more as a novel for kids in their early teens.
Of course, I’m still a bit bothered by the simplistic nature of a lot of its elements — such as, for example, one of the first “evil” Sendarians being described as an impolite and ugly lout with bad personal hygiene, or Belgarath’s speech about “them” disliking something “we” do, and “them” hating “us” for it (aren’t we, perhaps, occasionally bothered by what others do, and in turn start to hate them? I guess not; at least not if you’re seven fucking thousand years old and one of the most powerful entities in existence). And Aunt Pol’s disinclination to answering Garion’s questions, as well as his childish reactions to a lot of things, are still annoying and repetitive. But at least I get something out of reading this now; and at least Barak and Silk are still present.
6.0/10.

Posts
An almost ironic aside to the Tolkien-copying of this novel and series, is that the editions I’m reading have cover art which includes cut-outs from a map of Beleriand and the lands of the West in the First Age of the Sun.
2. January 2008 @ 02:21 ( Permalink )
Glanced your last sentence, and yes, Barak and especially Silk rocks. I’m also quite fond of Belgarath and the yet-to-be-introduced Beldin and Ctuchick, as well as the kings of the two kingdoms of… whatever people Barak and Silk comes from. Can’t remember their names now. I will read this review tomorrow and respond to the rest.
2. January 2008 @ 03:25 ( Permalink )
I also managed to remind myself that this is usually considered children’s’ fantasy, although personally I’d probably label it more as a novel for kids in their early teens.
Huh. It’s normally recommended as a good starting point for new, young readers to the genre, but I’ve never heard them recommended to “kids”.
I read Belgarion a long, long time ago when I was eleven or twelve (it seems a long time ago at least), and I also have very fond memories of it. Not so fond that I’d consider re-reading ‘em, but they did the trick for me at that age.
2. January 2008 @ 12:41 ( Permalink )
Indeed. Eleven or twelve, here too, and my (gazillion) rereads all occured before I turned sixteen I think. I’ve read some Eddings after that, but just new stuff. (Though the difference is maybe a little hard to spot, the guy recycles characters and plots without blushing) Glad you validate my opinion that this is a good introductory series to the genre for young readers, though. Quite honestly, I’d rather see them read the Belgariad first than Harry Potter.
2. January 2008 @ 13:52 ( Permalink )
Ah, Drasnia and Cherek were the names of the kingdoms. I knew I knew it, it just took a while.
2. January 2008 @ 14:46 ( Permalink )
Read it now, seems like you liked it better than I’d have feared you would. Will you check out the next one too? If I remember correctly, book 2 and 3, and maybe especially 3, are the better parts of the quintology. 4 and 5, while they struggle a lot with the stereotypical plotlines again (2 and 3 do too, of course, just far less), are probably still better than 1, though.
2. January 2008 @ 14:50 ( Permalink )
“Will you check out the next one too?”
If you mean the next book, yeah. I plan on reading the whole series, now that I’ve started it, so unless books four and five turns out to be black holes of boredom and awkwardness, I’ll read those, too.
“Quite honestly, I’d rather see them read the Belgariad first than Harry Potter.”
I’m not sure I necessarily agree with that. I think I’d rate the two pretty much equally, and recommend one of them above the other based on an evaluation of the whole primary/secondary world thingy, as well as some other things. But I don’t think I’d make a general recommendation. (No matter how much I want to place my beloved Harry Potter on top, I’m afraid I can’t honestly do so, at least not yet.)
5. January 2008 @ 01:16 ( Permalink )