Bobby Underwood's Reviews > The Gabriel Hounds
The Gabriel Hounds
by
by
It is so rare that I find a book such a waste of my time that I don’t finish it, and even less often that I feel a need to explain why, as a warning to other readers who may be sucked in by so many high ratings. Normally, I have an aversion to reviews written by a reader who failed to read the entire book, so take the fact that I have decided to write about the experience as an added warning of how tedious a read I eventually found this to be.
On the surface, it sounds fantastic, some intrigue in an exotic setting, a bit of second-cousin romance thrown in, and all by a rather famous author beloved by many. It is anything but fantastic. Mary Stewart uses some beautiful descriptive prose to mask how dreadfully slow-moving the narrative is, and how gossamer the nearly non-existent plot. Pages and pages of loveliness where nothing happens turn into — more pages and pages of loveliness where nothing happens. There is almost no movement at all here, a vibrant and colorful portrait which has no layers, no hidden depth, and more importantly, does not entertain as romantic suspense, or mystery. This is dreadful, perhaps more so because of how beautifully Stewart can set the table for the reader. The apprehension comes when we sit down at the colorfully arranged table and realize there is nothing to eat, and the anger when we realize there is never going to be.
I can’t remember at what page I finally stopped reading this artfully described dribble, but by the time what should have been an exciting scene of danger was described like all the other scenes — meticulously but with no movement or excitement — I began perusing ahead, reading sections, until finally realizing how empty and superficial the painting Stewart so meticulously rendered was beneath the surface. The best part of this book is the opening, which promises so much. A second-cousin romance between somewhat spoiled young people, Damascus and Lebanon, a secretive and eccentric relative where surely a great mystery hides. It sucks you in, and with each page, Stewart continues setting the table, yet never brings out the meal. I was perhaps a dozen pages from 100 by the time Christabel even made it to Dar Ibraham to speak with Aunt Harriet, who has patterned her life after Lady Hester Stanhope. Then nothing happens again for a very long time and it’s dreadfully boring. The reader keeps thinking that it has to get better, there has to be a point where lightning strikes, things are revealed, the narrative begins to have some movement — nope.
Having recently read a Martha Albrand novel only half the length of this one, which was also a book of romantic intrigue and danger in a colorful — albeit slightly less exotic — setting, I couldn’t help but have a greater appreciation for Albrand. Unlike Stewart, she picked out a smaller canvas on which to paint her exciting and colorful adventure, giving it great movement and just enough atmosphere to suggest the beauty in which the danger and excitement was taking place. Stewart picked out a large canvas on which to paint her story, filling it with rich and vibrant colors which draw you to it on the wall. But when you get closer, you realize the splash of color is all there is, and then suddenly you turn to Albrand’s smaller canvas hanging next to it. You realize there is excitement suggested in her economical brush strokes, the larger romantic mystery painted on the smaller canvas alive with danger and movement. Albrand’s painting has a life beneath the surface, even if it’s just as entertainment. Stewart’s does not, it is all splash and color to distract you from the truth that her painting has nothing to say. And it’s boring.
My first instinct was to give this three stars so as not to skew the rating, since in fairness I couldn’t finish this — or rather chose not to waste any more time on it — but I simply can’t. I’m giving this two stars, and I suggest anyone thinking of reading this book, read the other two star reviews as well before you make your decision. Reading tastes are different, and others may enjoy this. Just be forewarned, it’s pretty, but it just lays there…and never moves…
On the surface, it sounds fantastic, some intrigue in an exotic setting, a bit of second-cousin romance thrown in, and all by a rather famous author beloved by many. It is anything but fantastic. Mary Stewart uses some beautiful descriptive prose to mask how dreadfully slow-moving the narrative is, and how gossamer the nearly non-existent plot. Pages and pages of loveliness where nothing happens turn into — more pages and pages of loveliness where nothing happens. There is almost no movement at all here, a vibrant and colorful portrait which has no layers, no hidden depth, and more importantly, does not entertain as romantic suspense, or mystery. This is dreadful, perhaps more so because of how beautifully Stewart can set the table for the reader. The apprehension comes when we sit down at the colorfully arranged table and realize there is nothing to eat, and the anger when we realize there is never going to be.
I can’t remember at what page I finally stopped reading this artfully described dribble, but by the time what should have been an exciting scene of danger was described like all the other scenes — meticulously but with no movement or excitement — I began perusing ahead, reading sections, until finally realizing how empty and superficial the painting Stewart so meticulously rendered was beneath the surface. The best part of this book is the opening, which promises so much. A second-cousin romance between somewhat spoiled young people, Damascus and Lebanon, a secretive and eccentric relative where surely a great mystery hides. It sucks you in, and with each page, Stewart continues setting the table, yet never brings out the meal. I was perhaps a dozen pages from 100 by the time Christabel even made it to Dar Ibraham to speak with Aunt Harriet, who has patterned her life after Lady Hester Stanhope. Then nothing happens again for a very long time and it’s dreadfully boring. The reader keeps thinking that it has to get better, there has to be a point where lightning strikes, things are revealed, the narrative begins to have some movement — nope.
Having recently read a Martha Albrand novel only half the length of this one, which was also a book of romantic intrigue and danger in a colorful — albeit slightly less exotic — setting, I couldn’t help but have a greater appreciation for Albrand. Unlike Stewart, she picked out a smaller canvas on which to paint her exciting and colorful adventure, giving it great movement and just enough atmosphere to suggest the beauty in which the danger and excitement was taking place. Stewart picked out a large canvas on which to paint her story, filling it with rich and vibrant colors which draw you to it on the wall. But when you get closer, you realize the splash of color is all there is, and then suddenly you turn to Albrand’s smaller canvas hanging next to it. You realize there is excitement suggested in her economical brush strokes, the larger romantic mystery painted on the smaller canvas alive with danger and movement. Albrand’s painting has a life beneath the surface, even if it’s just as entertainment. Stewart’s does not, it is all splash and color to distract you from the truth that her painting has nothing to say. And it’s boring.
My first instinct was to give this three stars so as not to skew the rating, since in fairness I couldn’t finish this — or rather chose not to waste any more time on it — but I simply can’t. I’m giving this two stars, and I suggest anyone thinking of reading this book, read the other two star reviews as well before you make your decision. Reading tastes are different, and others may enjoy this. Just be forewarned, it’s pretty, but it just lays there…and never moves…
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Gabriel Hounds.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
November 7, 2016
– Shelved
November 7, 2016
– Shelved as:
to-read
February 15, 2017
–
Started Reading
February 19, 2017
–
9.32%
"It's interesting to read this on the heels of reading Martha Albrand. Albrand's main focus is on the intrigue and danger, and romance. Her narrative swiftly moving and lean, using colorful locations as enjoyable window dressing. Stewart makes the colorful locations paramount to the story, which slows down the action, and makes it lengthier. Great atmosphere, just more of an investment for the reader. Good so far."
page
30
February 23, 2017
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-23 of 23 (23 new)
date
newest »
message 1:
by
Kate
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Aug 07, 2017 05:35PM
Definitely not fair that you did a scathing review of this when you didn't finish it. I did finish it and would call this a "slow burner" - once I got to the last 100 pages I couldn't put it down and it definitely paid off for the slow build up in the plot.
reply
|
flag
Kate wrote: "Definitely not fair that you did a scathing review of this when you didn't finish it. I did finish it and would call this a "slow burner" - once I got to the last 100 pages I couldn't put it down a..."
While I didn't read every word, I did finally make it through later on, and still felt the same way. And there are a number of others who felt the same way. The number of reviews for books I've given this low a rating to is less than 1% of my reviews, I believe, nowhere near, cough, 5%. That should be an indicator of how dreadfully boring and empty I personally found it to be. There are certainly enough glowing reviews by others who loved it - including friends - to offset one dissenting opinion. It wasn't like I threw up a "This was dreadful" or anything equally brief, but rather I articulated clearly why I didn't personally enjoy it. I'm happy that you did, and I would be glad to read how you felt about the book. But there are others who said likewise, as a counterpoint.
While I didn't read every word, I did finally make it through later on, and still felt the same way. And there are a number of others who felt the same way. The number of reviews for books I've given this low a rating to is less than 1% of my reviews, I believe, nowhere near, cough, 5%. That should be an indicator of how dreadfully boring and empty I personally found it to be. There are certainly enough glowing reviews by others who loved it - including friends - to offset one dissenting opinion. It wasn't like I threw up a "This was dreadful" or anything equally brief, but rather I articulated clearly why I didn't personally enjoy it. I'm happy that you did, and I would be glad to read how you felt about the book. But there are others who said likewise, as a counterpoint.
This is always going to be a topic of discussion among the Goodreads community. I admire how well you have stated the case, Bobby. There will likely be books in all of our lives that just don't work and we need to decide whether our time can be better spent. For myself, I appreciate when my friends "call out a warning." I still have the choice whether to dip my own toe in the water.
HBalikov wrote: "This is always going to be a topic of discussion among the Goodreads community. I admire how well you have stated the case, Bobby. There will likely be books in all of our lives that just don't wor..."
I think how shallow and slow moving a read it actually was overall may have been magnified because not long before I read this one, I'd read a pretty exciting and enjoyable Martha Albrand novel from basically the same genre, and it was very much alive with movement. Mary Stewart painted something pretty, but it had no vibrancy or movement, so might as well have been a still-life for 3/4 of the book.
I think how shallow and slow moving a read it actually was overall may have been magnified because not long before I read this one, I'd read a pretty exciting and enjoyable Martha Albrand novel from basically the same genre, and it was very much alive with movement. Mary Stewart painted something pretty, but it had no vibrancy or movement, so might as well have been a still-life for 3/4 of the book.
Fred wrote: "I’m with Bobby on this. He gave an honest review."
Thanks. I do very few of these, but in this case I'm sure a writer as popular as Stewart once was has better stuff out there. I love atmosphere, setting, and there are some lovely descriptions, but that's virtually all you get, as it frames a threadbare story which takes FOREVER to get going, and then doesn't amount to much. One reviewer who also had an adverse reaction to this one noted that it became so boring she didn't care about the setting, the people, nothing, and that pretty much sums up how I felt about it, unfortunately.
Thanks. I do very few of these, but in this case I'm sure a writer as popular as Stewart once was has better stuff out there. I love atmosphere, setting, and there are some lovely descriptions, but that's virtually all you get, as it frames a threadbare story which takes FOREVER to get going, and then doesn't amount to much. One reviewer who also had an adverse reaction to this one noted that it became so boring she didn't care about the setting, the people, nothing, and that pretty much sums up how I felt about it, unfortunately.
Jill wrote: "I trust your judgement, Bobby. I pass on this book."
Thanks. More people liked it than not, apparently, perhaps because they love Stewart, so they get touchy about it. But it's noteworthy that almost everyone who didn't like it and rated it low complained about nearly the exact same things. Movement is important to me as a reader, just as it is a writer. This was, to use the old phrase, like watching paint dry. The fact that the picture is so superficially lovely once it dries can't hide the fact that it's empty, and wasn't worth my time to watch it dry.
Thanks. More people liked it than not, apparently, perhaps because they love Stewart, so they get touchy about it. But it's noteworthy that almost everyone who didn't like it and rated it low complained about nearly the exact same things. Movement is important to me as a reader, just as it is a writer. This was, to use the old phrase, like watching paint dry. The fact that the picture is so superficially lovely once it dries can't hide the fact that it's empty, and wasn't worth my time to watch it dry.
Deanna wrote: "Sorry it didn't work out , Bobby. I appreciate your honest review :)"
Thanks. Just too gossamer for me. And boring. Elaborate frills, deftly painted, but that's all it was, with not enough of a real story to build around. A terrible lack of movement in the narrative for my reading tastes. It wasn't even that slow but gently involving gothic style that Phyllis Whitney used to be so adept at. It was just slow, period. Dreadfully so.
Thanks. Just too gossamer for me. And boring. Elaborate frills, deftly painted, but that's all it was, with not enough of a real story to build around. A terrible lack of movement in the narrative for my reading tastes. It wasn't even that slow but gently involving gothic style that Phyllis Whitney used to be so adept at. It was just slow, period. Dreadfully so.
I loved this book when I read it many years ago, not so much this time. Not necessarily for the reasons you've given, but because I found Christy a bit smug and entitled, so I was put off from the start.
I haven't heard of Martha Albrand and wondered which book of hers you were comparing to this one. I'd like to give that one a go. I'm always happy to discover a new-to-me author.
I haven't heard of Martha Albrand and wondered which book of hers you were comparing to this one. I'd like to give that one a go. I'm always happy to discover a new-to-me author.
Yes, privileged and shallow is how I'd describe her. I was comparing it in a genre sense to an older book, A Day in Monte Carlo, but After Midnight is also a good one by Albrand, as is No Surrender.
Bobby wrote: "Yes, privileged and shallow is how I'd describe her. I was comparing it in a genre sense to an older book, A Day in Monte Carlo, but After Midnight is also a good one by Albrand, as is No Surrender."
Thanks Bobby. Looks like they're not available in Kindle, and are hard to find in Australia. I checked Abe books, and will think about buying one, but unfortunately it looks like there are only very old paper back versions available. I sometimes find these hard to read, as they have tiny writing, and the binding doesn't always age well.
Thanks Bobby. Looks like they're not available in Kindle, and are hard to find in Australia. I checked Abe books, and will think about buying one, but unfortunately it looks like there are only very old paper back versions available. I sometimes find these hard to read, as they have tiny writing, and the binding doesn't always age well.
Aussie54 wrote: "Bobby wrote: "Yes, privileged and shallow is how I'd describe her. I was comparing it in a genre sense to an older book, A Day in Monte Carlo, but After Midnight is also a good one by Albrand, as i..."
Yeah, it's hard to get stuff here, and costs a fortune when you can. None of Albrand's once popular work is available on Kindle. One of those writers who've gone out of vogue, unfortunately, since she was very good at this genre.
Yeah, it's hard to get stuff here, and costs a fortune when you can. None of Albrand's once popular work is available on Kindle. One of those writers who've gone out of vogue, unfortunately, since she was very good at this genre.
I pretty much agree with your review, but still ended up giving the book a 4 because of the beautiful writing. I often feel like I could read Mary Stewart describe a phone book. But, I've definitely read better books by her.
Nichole wrote: "Can we please stop calling places "exotic." It's so colonial."
Good grief. Can we please stop this uber-sensitive, PC "cancel" culture nonsense where well-established words are concerned ? Exotic has never meant colonialism in any dictionary. New York or London probably seem exotic to someone from a small rural town in America or England. Most people will probably think the setting here colorful and exotic.
"I believe that political correctness can be a form of linguistic fascism, and it sends shivers down the spine of my generation who went to war against fascism." — P.D. James
Good grief. Can we please stop this uber-sensitive, PC "cancel" culture nonsense where well-established words are concerned ? Exotic has never meant colonialism in any dictionary. New York or London probably seem exotic to someone from a small rural town in America or England. Most people will probably think the setting here colorful and exotic.
"I believe that political correctness can be a form of linguistic fascism, and it sends shivers down the spine of my generation who went to war against fascism." — P.D. James
Nichole wrote: "Can we please stop calling places "exotic." It's so colonial."
The definition of exotic:
originating in or characteristic of a distant foreign country.
Nope. Nothing offensive about that.
The definition of exotic:
originating in or characteristic of a distant foreign country.
Nope. Nothing offensive about that.
Joe wrote: "Nice call, Bobby. You can only eat so much spice without any meat!"
Yeah, this was definitely all vegan for me. Looked pretty on the plate, but nothing there of interest or substance beyond the lovely-written descriptions. Like getting into a gorgeous sports car and discovering once you get going that someone put a Yugo engine under the hood. Phyllis Whitney's slowly involving stories with enough substance to keep it interesting, and Martha Albrand's more economical and exciting style in this genre are far better reads, in my opinion. Pretty but dull.
Yeah, this was definitely all vegan for me. Looked pretty on the plate, but nothing there of interest or substance beyond the lovely-written descriptions. Like getting into a gorgeous sports car and discovering once you get going that someone put a Yugo engine under the hood. Phyllis Whitney's slowly involving stories with enough substance to keep it interesting, and Martha Albrand's more economical and exciting style in this genre are far better reads, in my opinion. Pretty but dull.
Loved that P.D. James quote!!
Empty heads snipe about the silliest things… I’m guessing they swear a lot as well.. F…. etc fills some of those empty spaces ??
Empty heads snipe about the silliest things… I’m guessing they swear a lot as well.. F…. etc fills some of those empty spaces ??