[FicusFan]

Yob it wasn't the darkness I disliked so much, as what seems like pettyness. The problem with Gloriana was that she couldn't have an orgasm, and so she let it rule her life, and ended up weeping at night, and the whole palace and kingdom knew it. I have no idea if it was supposed to mean anything - but it chapped me. Then the whole idea that Quire decided to bring everything down, and was able to, for me it was a damp squib.

I did notice that she was a big girl. It was a nice change.

Thats a very interesting take on it Holbrook. I can see why it resonates with you. Unfortunately that symbolism is hard for me to see, being from outside the UK. I didn't even realize it had been published in the 70's. The copyright on my book is 2004. I knew it was earlier than that, but I thought it was from the 80s.

I still have to object to the rape theme however, and the idea that it is empowering. Its one thing if it happens in life, and you turn a bad thing into something that makes you stronger, its quite another to build a fantasy world and showcase it as the means of redemption.

[Brys]

I haven't quite finished it yet (I've got about 50 pages left), but I think it's improving a lot as the book goes on. The start seemed a bit weak, as there was a lot of description and not much plot, but the atmosphere was created very quickly and Moorcock's writing wasn't quite on the level of Peake's. Once he started things happening around 100 pages in it became far more interesting, and now I think it's probably Moorcock's best. I found it refreshing to have no characters who are actually good, which is very rare in fantasy (even Martin has his Starks who are almost perfectly good, Bakker has a few, Erikson has his, even Peake has Titus and Fuschia) - and I found Quire to be one of the best characters ever written. He seemed incredibly realistic (or at least more internally consistent than any other character than Steerpike), and a far more interesting take on the spy agent than's been done before.

The obvious parallels with Elizabethan England also are interesting to see presented in this way. While it's a homage to Gormenghast, it's also the opposite - Gormenghast was about stasis vs change, but stasis (at least initially) portrayed as something horrible and wrong. Gloriana is also about stasis v change, but stasis being perfection and good, with change being terrible and a return to the past.

I hadn't thought about it being a parallel to the time it was written, but I can see it now, more or less.

[Kleronomas]

Well, I finished this a couple of days ago and I’m still not sure what I thought. It was enjoyable to read, but really didn’t have me keen to get back to it each day. I was happy to be finished with it by the end. From the opening, paragraph long sentence, MM sets the tone for the book in no uncertain terms. I was quite OK with the style of prose, the flowery descriptions and overly long sentences, which seemed to disappear at times for a different feel, but the lack of any real plot I could get my teeth into was a bit disappointing.

I thought the characters fitted the world nicely, or vice versa, as the case may be. I don’t recall any common folk playing any real part in the story other than Quire and Tinker and maybe one or two henchman, so we are really focusing on a small, insular (even inbred) group of characters in the same way as (I think, since I haven’t read) Gormenghast, and so all their peculiar quirks and deprivations seem to work well enough. I had no problems with any of the things some found distasteful, I thought they were necessary to show how this world was different to ours (or not). The castle was a place where everyone seemed to indulge themselves, and obsess over things. Gloriana’s obsession to be sated was mirrored I think by the other characters in different ways. She epitomised the state of the Kingdom. I think she orgasmed, not because of the raping, but because she held a knife and was about to do what she had denied herself and her reign. She let her true nature come through. As FF says, her refusal to execute, punish, or rebuke is an untenable way to live
and once she overcomes this barrier she gets her redemption.

There weren’t too many likable characters in this story. All the different background plotting and manoeuvring by the various ambassadors, diplomats and envoys seemed to come to nought.

I didn’t get the mad woman being Gloriana’s mother and Montefallcon’s daughter. What was the point of that?

I think the last lines were telling, the image of sinking ships. Gloriana’s fulfilment really didn’t change anything it seems. The “new age” will be based on more lies and deceit.

As big as Gloriana was, wasn't Quire small for a man? Wasn't he described as dwarfish on occasion when compared to her?

[Kleronomas]

I found this at the multiverse forum, thought it would be interesting to readers of the book.

The book was really a discussion of pre-Enlightenment politics and didn't really reflect my own views, save one that's common in all my books -- the search for the balance between Law and Chaos, Vice and Virtue and so on. The book, as I explain in the upcoming new Warner edition, was more a dialogue with Spencer of The Fairy Queene than a description of my own ideal State. It's neo-Platonic, that culture, you'll notice, in keeping with certain late Renaissance thinking.

[Grey Sea]

Hi, my first book club experience, which is telling because I would not have chosen to read this book on my own. Not that I hated it, or even didn't like it, just something rubs me the wrong way. I am glad I read the afterward to discover the parody on Spenser. That sing-song quality in the early chapters began to annoy me. This is also my first Moorcock fantasy. I did enjoy his writing style. It was one of the reasons I didn't put the book down. The other, I wanted to participate in the forum. Ficus has already put to words my own objections. Decadence into debauchery. Again, the afterward was helpful when MM explained his intentional duality. I was never really convinced there existed a "Golden Age", it seemed to be more bronze than anything else. Just horrified by Gloriana. The appearance of propriety is not propriety. The weird thing is I really did want to keep reading, because I enjoyed MM's prose so much.
Weird because this isn't my taste in fantasy. I am more questy I guess you'd say. However, once Quire decided to bring down the realm I had to find out what would happen, so I got a little satisfaction out of that. Not that the conclusion satisfied me, but at least there was one. Admittedly, not very PC.
For all that I felt the work was well crafted. Moorecock's characterizations were consistent throughout, and I believed they were who he said they were from beginning to end. Now, can we read something else? :rolleyes:

[Nevyn]

I still haven't finished the book yet and maybe only my stubborness will have me do so. I honestly feel the need to burn the bloody thing to get my twenty dollars worth... or something!!
For me reading this one is like being the only sober person at a party! I don't like anyone in the whole book and really couldn't care less for Gloriana and her obsession me, me , me , me!! Sorry , I was hoping for something much better than this. Maybe it's the way it's written.
FicusFan you have really summed it up well , though I wouldn't have been as diplomatic about it!

[FicusFan]

I have been called many things, but usually not diplomatic. :D

[Brys]

Nevyn, your main objection to it is exactly the reason I like it - I don't like most of the characters, which I find far more interesting and entertaining to read about than characters I can immediately associate with. It makes the story a lot less predictable - if anyone had been someone I liked, it would probably be a much weaker book IMO. However, I think Moorcock is good at making you initially sympathetic to some of the characters - to Quire, to Gloriana, to Lord Montfallcon, to Dee - but then he reveals what they really are.
It was intended as a homage to Peake though, and it could hardly be that if there were any pure characters - no one is perfect in real life, and no one is perfect in this. And I thought that Quire was one of the best characters in fantasy - he takes the opposite approach of Peake here, by giving you a very sad ending portrayed as something good, and it has a lot more depth to it than most novels.

[Eventine]

OK, I finished this last week. It took a while to get shipped to me (I've got the Fantasy Masterworks edition) andf thenit didn't grab me that much. to be honest, I read most of a book called Fast Food Nation at the same time and found it much more interesting. One of the first things that struck me when reading this was the difference in writing style between this and what I'd read of other Moorcock books (Hawkmoon, Elric). Whereas they were unashamedly pulps, Moorcock here definitely went for a much richer style of prose. During the openig chapters I remember sitting back and thinkinh "man - this guy can write". Unfortunately the subject matter and characterisation didn't grab me near as much as the prose. Gloriana's obsession seemed incredibly shallow, and I couldn't understand how someone who had never experienced orgasm could go to such lengths and depravities to try to experience one. I think most people would have given up long before going to those extremes of debasement (the scene with the ape-like men comes to mind). I felt that apart form Montfalcon and to a lesser extent Dee, most of the nobles were not very well characterised and fell into a bit of a blur for me.
Some other things that bothered me were Quire's gift of a "better" simulacrum to Dee being Gloriana's mother, and the fact that Quire didn't kill Una. I just didn't understand why he would do that.
It was interesting to see Moorcock still threw in the concept of the Multiverse into this novel, albeit very slightly.

Overall I though the style was good, but the rest was a bit of a letdown. I think I prefer Moorcock when he's writing something a little more fun.

Now to comments on posts:
One thing I didn't think was so successful was that Moorcock seemed to be making the suggestion that Gloriana's unfulfilled sexual desires and Albion's fate were tied together, but failed to really express how that fate was to be so negative.

There was also the interesting study of how the old reign was affecting the new one, years down the line. That she was Montfallcon's grandaughter seemed a little too convenient for my tastes, though.

Yep, I thought the same.

this deadness at the start carried over into the characters. They seemed silly and lifeless for most of the book. I never was very interested in them, nor did I care what happened to them.
I'd have to agree with this as well.

The problem with Gloriana was that she couldn't have an orgasm, and so she let it rule her life, and ended up weeping at night, and the whole palace and kingdom knew it. I have no idea if it was supposed to mean anything - but it chapped me
Yep - as I said above, it just didn't gel with me.


And I thought that Quire was one of the best characters in fantasy - he takes the opposite approach of Peake here, by giving you a very sad ending portrayed as something good, and it has a lot more depth to it than most novels.

I'd be interested in seeing what you mean by depth there Brys?

[Brys]

I mean depth as in its allegories to the real world. For example, there's a pretty clear analogy to propaganda and how effectively it can be used - the time was called a golden age and the people accepted it because of memories of the past, but it was simply a disguise. This has been used throughout history.
IMO there was also a lot of depth to some of the characters - mainly Quire, but also to Montfalcon. Quire I still can't decide whether he was good or bad. He may have been trying to bring down the state, but he was also acting in the interests of the people in that way, even if he always thought of himself first. I think Moorcock took the idea of Gloriana a bit too far - it could have been more subtle, but as for the other characters they were generally done well.