Review: The 13th Witch (The King's Watch series)

Review: The 13th Witch (The King's Watch series) - Mark Hayden ***(*)

Of all the flavours of fantasy novels, I only really enjoy those set in the real world (often described as urban fantasy, although some, as is the case here, are mostly rural) - whether it's the intricate cleverness of something like Gene Wolfe's Castleview, or when it's mixed with the police procedural, as in Ben Aaronovich's Rivers of London, Sarah Painter's Crow Investigations or Paul Cornell's Shadow Police. That meant I was delighted to discover Mark Hayden's King's Watch series. In many ways it's great, though it has proved to be something of a curate's egg.

The good news is that Hayden does some things brilliantly. I love the idea of rather than a police tie-in, it's a quasi-military one linked to the Tower of London, with a group originally set up by King James I (the aforementioned King's Watch, headed by a Peculier Constable). Hayden's magickal (sic) world and its political complications are beautifully imagined - whether it's the interplay between various human factions (for obscure historical reasons, for example, the North West doesn't recognise the authority of the King's Watch), or a very rich mix of different races from the near-human to demi-gods. Hayden is also very good at the action scenes - they really carry the reader along with page-turning vigour.

In The 13th Witch, the central character Conrad Clarke, a former RAF helicopter pilot, is introduced to a hidden magickal reality. At the time of writing there are 10 books in the series, with presumably 13 in total as each title reduces the number by one. There's an element of humour that's quite strong in the first book, though this tends to disappear as you move through the series.

So far, so good. But there are a couple of issues. The smallest one is that sometimes the situation Hayden imagines gets a bit beyond his ability to describe it, particularly in later parts of the series where he describes shifting between different planes of reality, some of which involved distorted flow of time. (Never as confusing as the movie Tenet, though.) There is also rather too much domestic background - we spend a lot of time on Clarke's relationships (and cricket playing) that really doesn't take the plot anywhere. Apart from his irritating fiancé, he has a series of attractive female work companions, who all seem to be about half his age, which is a bit creepy. But the thing that really irritated me was the way that you get the literary equivalent of in-app purchases.

As is not uncommon with big series, there are some spin-off novellas. I have no problem with these to optionally fill in back story or generally go off on a tangent, provided the main line of novels doesn't refer to them. The issue hear is that Hayden will mention something significant to the plot... then say 'which you can read about in Novella X, so we won't talk about it here' (or words to that effect). I found that so infuriating that a couple of times I nearly gave up on the series part way through a book. Each time (so far) I felt like that, I was then roped back in by a clever bit of suspense and intrigue. But I really didn't like this approach.

If these are your kind of books, I heartily recommend giving them a try - but they do come with that warning.

See all of Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly digest for free here

The 13th Witch is available from Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.com and Bookshop.org.

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp...

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5. However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor...

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense...

Search This Blog