Beware the publisher blurps that call him one of the leading fantasists of the generation and how lyrical his prose is amongst other sky high praise. It is not. It is just marketing, like what good wine bottle these days doesn't have a golden label. The covers vary between Aust and USA. It's is a load of bullcrap that fools only the unwary. Elizabeth Hayden's Rhapsody had more high-ranting praise on its covers and flaps than a Sith Lord has fleas, and it was mostly drivel boredom.
The Swans' War Trilogy is nothing you haven't seen before.
The One Kingdom is almost pure boredom. Russell's site has said how high his appreciation for LOTR is; perhaps he was following in the time honoured tradition of Fellowship's equally pure boredom. You don't get a map as scenary can change, so that makes for a bit of fun. But it's just bloody boring, with insufficient action. Two medieval families have fought for centuries; a wizad family asleep for millennia has awakened. One brother is nice, the other is evil, the sister is both.
The Isle of Battle starts galloping, and is far more engaging. Characters have made partnerships with spirits they shouldn't have to avoid death, and now there are consequences. The brotherly rivalry heats up, and there is far more action. The con is, you must wade through the first boring book to understand the set up. The pros are worth it.
I just finished The Shadow Roads over the weekend. Much like the second book, there's plenty of action, and if you thought the plot of Death wanting to walk the land at the end of the second was cliche, at least you get a little surprise that Death is more human than you thought. In this book, they race the bad brother from finding their slumbering father and making a soul eating monster that is invincible. In the meantime, the two families are drawing closer to war.
The ending is as you would expect: good wins, bad loses, peace is restored. Happily ever after. The problem is, the three cousins who travel down the mystical river first two books are very back seat in the third; the other characters steal the show. I see nothing "lyrical" about this writing or prose, and is in fact quite trite and average in storyline. Chapters flow fast as they are short, often just pages.
However, there are some good scenes that prove Russell can be quite snappy and snazzy, like the chapter Michael resumes command of his family's army after being ursurped. At other times, where was the editor from stopping "Prince Michael" being mentioned trilogy long? Can he not be called just Michael?
Is the trilogy that bad? No, it simply nothing you can't read elsewhere, and is best called light reading and nothing too serious. You can find it engaging, but the throne fued can't be compared to Martin as Martin does two things: his pace is blasted slower, so there are more books, and his examination is more closer. you just can't compare the two. What Martin takes his grand time in, Russell cuts to the chase faster.
All up, if you want a light read of storyline you've seen before, give it a go, remembering, what the first book lacks the other two are more exciting.
