Review: Take it or leave it
Rating: 2 out of 5
Date: 03 25, 2014
I have problems with this book. The year it takes place is 355, yet no care was taken to set the period. The text reads quite contemporary, replete with misspellings, missing words, and references to things that simply didn't exist until centuries after - pistols (1540s,) sandpaper - 13th century, phosphorous matches - 1669, and chewing gum, which would have been bark tar and not called chewing gum.The tension is there, sort of. I disagree with another reviewer's assessment that BDSM was used. Prisons, particularly in "days of old," used torture. To overlook this is not understanding the history of jurisprudence. BDSM has a sexual context, so it's reference here isn't valid at all. Also to assign today's sensibilities to a story that takes place in different times makes no sense.I sense this takes place in an alternate world, don't know for sure. That wasn't clear.Craft-wise, the writing isn't smooth - it's filled with passive voice and filters - he felt himself get hot. If he didn't who did? That goes without saying when we are in a POV character's head.List of proofreaders aside, this book needs some strong editing.I was never immersed in the world, or understood the times they lived in. With references to neighborhoods, etc., I'm not sure the author intended for this to come off as something historical. It had a very modern feel to it, like the Eternal Dungeon co-existed in today's world, underground somewhere.I don't think I'll read the rest of the series. The historical value is not taken seriously. Truly, I only found the seeker interesting. Also, the price points of the other books is outrageous. Not even remotely realistic.Also, in 355, surnames weren't used. To not understand this negates the reason to write a historical to begin with.