Grail: Book Five of the Pendragon Cycle [Mass Market Paperback]

Honestly, I don't really understand why Stephen Lawhead decided to write this book. Pendragon was a necessary addition, in my opinion, because much elements were left out before the ending of the Arthur book. For example, the Vandali invasion was just brilliant. Of course, the Grail itself had to appear somewhere in the series, but I personally think that Arthur being healed after the battle with Amilcar was enough. I found the plot around the temple and the guardians of the Grail to make no sense at all. That brings me to another major flaw.

Why is Morgian suddenly so powerful? She was already defeated by Merlin in the Lyonesse years before! All that stuff about Morgian preparing her revenge and raising Morgaws is just plain ridiculous. And what about all those magical creatures? When I first read Taliesin (about 5 years ago), I was disappointed by the lack of all those classical surnatural elements from fantastic novels. But after reading a little more, I realized that the series didn't need all this stuff since everything else was so perfect. While reading the Grail, I almost laughed when the big black beast rushed into the knights. When Gwalchavad fought the undeads, I just couldn't stand it. This series isn't about big monsters and ultra-powerful sorcerers! It's about the birth of Britain and the great battles and heroes that lead to its glory. There's already the Lord of the Rings for all the "magical" content.

At the end of Grail, Llenlleawg is banished from the Cymbrogi, being a traitor. Then, why was he defeated in the battle with Medrault in the Black book?! This just makes no sense. Unfortunately, this is only one of the many contradictions that brings this book.

To me, the Pendragon Cycle is really a trilogy, that is Taliesin, Merlin and Arthur. I would have integrated Pendragon in the Arthur book. To me, Grail is no part of the series. I gave it 2 stars only because of it allowed me to learn more about Gwalchavad. I will do my best to forget it because I want to remember the Pendragon Cycle as a magnificient series that gave me incredible reading sessions. If it is also your wish, here's my advice : do not read Grail.

First - The entire series of Lawhead's "Pendragon Cycle" was outstanding. The first two books ("Taliesin" and "Merlin") in the series were by far the best and I would say that they both deserve a rating of 4 1/2 stars. The third book, "Arthur" was a bit of a dissapointment and I would give it 2 1/2 stars for a rating. I would give Pendragon 4 stars.

The last book, "Grail" was in my opinion worth 3 1/2 stars.

The biggest problem that I have with the last three books in the "cycle" is the telling of the stories in the first person by various hero's and characters within the stories. This worked quite well with the first two books - but I really feel like Lawhead cut himself short in the telling of Arthur's legacy by writing it in the first person. A lot of the story's elements got left out and what could have been an awesome tale (on par with "Lord of The Rings") was lost in the telling of the story this way.

In "Grail," Gwalchavad (Sir Galahad) tells the story (save for a few chapters that open with Morgain's side of the story - never more than a few paragraphs) of how the "holy grail" is stolen and Arthur is betrayed by one of his own, Llenlleawg (Lancelot). Because the story is told solely from Gwalchavad's point of view - the reader is never shown any internal struggle or the mental process of what Llenlleawg was going through when he betrayed Arthur. I felt that this should have been an essential part of the story given the fact that our betrayer was a hero in "Arthur" and "Pendragon." A third person telling of the story could have easily captured that and not left the reader scratching his or her head. That is one example of how the story falls short due to the first person telling of it. Other problems with this lie when Gwalchavad gets seperated from Arthur. There is a big gap as to what happens to Arthur and co. during the seperation - as the story only follows Gwalchavad in the seperation.

Although I did love the stories and highly recommend them - I am sorely dissapointed that the "fullness of the tale" got lost because we only hear from the perspective of the character telling it.

Technically the writing is very good - and the research that must of gone into writing these books is definately evident and will give the reader a great appreciation of the author's effort.

I wish Lawhead would not have made the grail an object of worship - but that is the "Christian" in me coming out. Sorry to say it doesn't work that way - I thought Lawhead knew that. Oh well - still a good story with a shade of truth to it non-the-less.

For this particular book, the main mistake Lawhead makes is not reading his other books in this series, or at least not remembering what he said in them. At the end of "Arthur", it is noted that "the Grail was never found". Um...but in this book, it was found, and lost, and recovered, and at the end of the book a shrine to it is made in the Northern end of Britain. Since there is no indication anywhere else that the Grail disappeared from Northern Britain, one would have to assume it's still there. This makes me realize how inconsistent of a writer Lawhead is. This guy could be a great writer, but it's mistakes like these that keep him from becoming such. Lawhead is definitely no Tolkien.

Another major mess-up is in his inability to keep Loth and Lot straight. Loth is Lot's father in "Arthur", and by the time the book starts introducing Lot it is clear that Loth is already long dead. By the end of "Arthur" it is clear that Morgian seduced Lot to produce the twins Gwalchavad and Gwalcmai, and in this book Morgaws. Yet in this book Lawhead keeps calling Lot "Loth", although it is pretty clear that it is Lot that is being referred to and not Loth. It also is not clear to me why Morgian's relationship with Lot is considered incestuous, since Lot is the son of his father Loth and his first wife, and Morgian was Loth's second wife. Lot is not her flesh and blood; she's his stepmother. Although it's weird to be sleeping with your stepmother, it's definitely not incestuous is she's no blood relation.

It was very pointless to make Gwalcmai and Gwalchavad twins. This did not serve any literary purpose. The fact that Gwalcmai gets sent off and doesn't return until the end of "Arthur" is testament to his uselessness. I honestly thought that "Grail" would be about Gwalcmai, but was sorely disappointed. We are never given the story of his wanderings, although according to "Arthur" he's been gone for 17 years. The other thing is that it is not revealed until the last book of "Arthur" (the chapter that Aneirin narrates) that it is revealed that Gwalchmai and Gwalchavad are the result of a union between Morgian and Lot. So how is it that Gwalchavad already knows this by "Grail"? According to Lawhead, "Grail" comes before the last book of "Arthur". Gwalchavad can't know it. It hasn't been revealed yet. Gwalchavad states Merlin told him--how did Merlin find out? I would think that in "Arthur" Gwalcmai and Gwalchavad wouldn't be surprised by Morgian revelation if they already heard it from Merlin, yet they are shocked to hear it when she says they are her sons in "Arthur". And why is it Merlin can't figure Morgaws out at all, if he knows about Gwalcmai and Gwalchavad? I couldn't understand that at all.

I am still not convinced that Morgian was any great threat. She seems way too easily defeated. I don't think that Morgaws (who never existed in any Arthur tales and is a figment of Lawhead's imagination) is that threatening either. I'm still trying to figure out why Charis was so freaked out by her but refused to say anything.

I recall one of the opening statements Morgian makes in this book is "Not for nothing am I called the Queen of Air and Darkness". The first thing I thought was, "Oh, yes, you are". Lawhead has not really developed Morgian much, and even though he finally does so here, it's not enough. Fine, so we finally know why she's so pissed off. It doesn't strike me as any reason to get so vengeful towards someone she hardly knows--ie. Arthur. She also seems very ineffectual. She tries to kill Charis and fails, and never tries again. She tries to kill Merlin and fails, and never tries that again either. Every attempt she makes is doomed to failure. So it wasn't that surprising that she failed again here.

There is also a scene where some of the Cymbrogi are supposedly dead. If you're like me and read the last chapter of "Arthur" before reading "Grail", this scene is ruined for you. There's no surprise to it.

I read somewhere that Lawhead believed that the King Arthur tales needed to be brought back to "their Christian roots". Um..guess what. The King Arthur tales started out as part of Celtic mythology, and authors such as Geoffrey of Monmouth and others are the ones responsible for inserting Christian lore into a tale that was never Christian to begin with. I have done some reading on what past editors of these tales have done, and most of them edited these stories with a particular goal in mind--ie. for Monmouth it was turning Arthur into a Norman hero, and emphasizing the fact that he fought battles against the Saxons, who were the Normans' enemies. These tales have been subject to so much manipulation over the years--isn't it time to say "enough's enough"? Apparently not, for Lawhead has decided that the legend needs even more manipulation. I can't say he's done a good job.

I suppose I only have myself to blame. I really should have done more research before buying these books. Now I can't even give them away--most people I know weren't that impressed with the series either.