Pendragon: Book Four Of The Pendragon Cycle (Mass Market Paperback)

Firstly, "Pendragon" is not a continuation of the story that ended in volume 3. "Taliesin", "Merlin" and "Arthur" complete Lawhead's retelling of the Arthurian legends, and form a complete and independent story in themselves. In "Pendragon", Lawhead expands on a part of the story about king Arthur that he has already described by recounting one of the struggles that the king Arthur faced in the early days of his kingship.

Secondly, "Pendragon" does not match the high standards of the three volumes that preceded it. Readers familiar with the first three volumes will find that Lawhead recounts much of Arthur's life that they are already familiar with. In fact, the description of Arthur's king-making is nearly identical word for word to the description of this same event found in "Arthur", the only difference being that "Pendragon" recounts the event from the perspective of Merlin. But the initial drama and sense of passion and glory is gone, because we have been here before. Even though events such as Arthur's youth are described in more detail here than in "Arthur", the fact remains that we already know the basic plot, and this detracts from the amount of enjoyment you can expect.

Yet with this warning in mind, "Pendragon" is still a worthwhile read. Lawhead focuses on one aspect of Arthur's reign, namely his conflict against the barbarian Vandals and against a pestilent plague. Don't be confused: this is not an enemy described in "Arthur", hence its ascription as "The Forgotten War" (Chronologically both "Pendragon" - aside from the first part - and "Grail" both fit between books 2 & 3 of "Arthur")

In this great conflict, the human element strongly comes into the foreground, especially the twin roles of the bard Merlin, and the king Arthur. The first point of view heightens the readers understanding of Merlin's role in this conflict. Lawhead's treatment of Merlin is profound, and particularly outstanding in my mind is one passage where Merlin comes to realize that "in order to welcome redemption, one must first embrace the utter hopelessness of failure. For how can a man look for rescue unless he knows he is truly lost?" (p.69) - a wonderful metaphor of salvation for lost sinners. Equally outstanding is Merlin's journey to the other-world, where Lawhead uses a profound sequence of events to bring Merlin to understand his role in the great conflict over against evil.

Also profound is Lawhead's treatment of Arthur. The last third of the book in my view is a climactic masterpiece, and after being entranced by the last section of the novel, Lawhead's weaknesses in the first half of the book were quickly forgiven and forgotten. Arthur's role in the struggle against the enemies of the people is central: as leader and king he must fight on behalf of his people. In an absolutely unforgettable climax, the whole weight of his people's hopes depend on him, as Arthur himself must single-handedly take on the leader of the barbarians in a battle to the death. The imagery will not be lost on you, as Arthur makes a distinctly Messianic figure, bruised for his people, a Christ-like king giving his everything for his people at the risk of his own life.

Yes, "Pendragon" has weaknesses. Does this make "Pendragon" a failure? If you were not forewarned, you would likely be disappointed. Even if you are forewarned, you may still be disappointed with the first half of the book because it lacks Lawhead's typical depth and drama. But in the last half of the book Lawhead more than redeems himself with a captivating narrative that you won't be able to put down, and will in the end leave you breathless at its sparkling imagery and depth, and eagerly grabbing the next volume in the series.

The legend that concerns Twrch Trwyth is actually the story of Culhwch and Olwen. Culhwch wants to marry Olwen, but before he can do so, he must fulfill a series of quests put upon him by Olwen's father. One is to kill the boar Twrch Trwyth (whose name I was unable to find a meaning for) and get the comb and razor from between the great boar's ears. This boar just so happens to be a king who ticked off God and, Quite literally, was turned into a boar, and all of his household and followers were turned into piglets. Arthur is not the main character in this story, he has sort of been just stuck in, because all he really does is assist Culhwch in his various tasks (along with another character, Mabon, who happens to be a Celtic god). The chase of the hunt for Twrch Trwyth starts in Ireland, but ends up in South Wales and Cornwall--not Scotland. Arthur does not get so severely injured that he needs to be healed with the Grail, either--in fact, this tale is an oddity in the Arthurian mythos because it has absolutely nothing to do with the Grail, or any of the other stories in the Arthurian legend.

Lawhead also employs a very odd narrative technique here, one that ended up irritating rather than helping. In the middle of the battle, Merlin suddenly goes racing off, and of course the reader is forced to follow him because he's the narrator. This was very annoying, because then the reader is left wondering what is happening with the battle while Merlin goes off investigating the plague. It would have been far better to have someone else narrating this part of the book, like Bedwyr or Cai, so that Merlin's racing off doesn't produce such a weird break in the action, and when he came back he could tell them all about the plague. Even though Merlin does eventually return, and finds out nothing has happened since he was gone (?!), this has still got to be one of the worst ways to write a book.

Oddly enough, the plague is supposed to be this big huge menace, but it gets very short shrift in this book. I suppose the reason for this is that the plague problem will be dealt with in Grail.

Gwenhyvar--well, we get more background on her, but still no explanation of why she's got a Welsh name and she's Irish. In the original Arthurian myths, she is Welsh, so the name makes sense there, but not in Lawhead's book.

I am still completely mystified as to why Charis is called The Lady of the Lake. At least we get to see now the connection between Avallach and the Grail, and that "The Fisher King" is not just a title, but that he really does have a connection to the Grail like the Arthurian Fisher King did.

Llenlleawg--it should have been pointed out earlier that he was supposed to be Lancelot. All through Arthur I thought Lot was Lancelot, because Lancelot is the only knight who falls out of Arthur's favor. While it was briefly mentioned in this book, it still should have been done earlier.

Also, after swearing off fighting because of the loss of Ganieda, why does Merlin pick up a sword again? In Merlin he is committed to helping the Summer Kingdom come to fruitition, but not through fighting! Suddenly he picks up a sword again, forgetting all about his lost love and his unborn child that was killed, and goes off fighting again! His vision is restored fairly quickly after he lost it--how is it that Aneirin, the narrator in the last section of Arthur, still thought he was blind? This section picks up many years after Pendragon--something like 5-10 at least, maybe even more than that.

There are a lot of mistakes and inconsistencies in this book. I really dislike this kind of sloppy writing, and "rewriting because I feel like it" is not a good enough reason to me to be severely altering the Arthurian stories, which are good enough in their own right.