My English "The Last Wish" review *Contains Spoilers*

+
My English "The Last Wish" review *Contains Spoilers*

The Last Wish….”The last time!”Firstly let me explain a bit about my background. I am a huge Fantasy fan, I read it, I role-play it (old school, yes with pencils) and I PC game it, its in my blood. So you can imagine my excitement when I discovered a whole new world, namely that of the ‘Witcher’. Not only I was told I could read about this dark character, I could soon PC game in his world too…..excellent.Well without any hesitation I rushed to Amazon, and saw that the Book “The Last Wish” was for sale and had only recently been translated into my beloved English. I read, was impressed by the readers reviews and clicked to buy. 2 days later, the book was on my doorstep. I admired the cover lovingly as it bears a strong resemblance to a gaming cover, mock ancient tome like, with tattered pages. Nice!Now comes the review and my overall impression…“A European Superstar” The book proudly proclaims “Delicious twists of originality” it goes on..“Unforgettable & unputdownable!”.....wellWell indeed….. *Spoiler, so dont read on if you want to read this book *To my utter dismay the book starts out with Geralt the main character entering a sleepy town, he sidles into a rundown bar (sound familiar?) orders a drink and is then singled out by some unruly patrons. Now at this stage I though….”Have I picked up a Western by mistake….surely an original writing genius wouldn’t use the trusted ‘Trouble in the Inn routine’ ” I read on.Yes you guessed it “We don’t like your sort here” the troublemakers exclaim. ”Oh no” I thought, “the oldest cliché in the world….wasn’t this in Star Wars too?”. Now I may be picky here but surely an original writer could come up with a better start to a book than this, I paused, shook my head and read on….It transpires quickly that Geralt kills all three with a swish, bang and fizz! The city Guard arrive to see the three locals writhing in a pool of their own blood and a white haired hippie with a huge sword. Groan, “here we go” I thought, “Come along with us sir!” sigh. The sad fact is this sequence of events has happened a million times, in a million books and in a million RPG games. Delicious twists of originality hah, my left foot! Oh did I tell you he gets of scot-free….reason? Unknown really I am still confused at that bit. I read on….Anyway this event brings me onto the next black mark against this book, namely the translation….its bloody awful. Whether the Polish version flows seamlessly or not, the English version is disjointed and on a few occasions the sentences are just plain wrong. Get a better translator next time….This now leads me onto the plots and characters, weak and poor… The plots are child like and the characterisation is amateur. Main characters that by rights should stand out, become an endless line of ranting, sometimes babbling fools (with attitude). Some attempt at being dark, full of intrigue but end up inevitably talking nonsense for 3 or 4 pages. Names, places and events fly from the page like machine gun bullets, and without a Map or any context it ends up being dribble, that sadly you have to trawl through to get to action. Action thats leads us nicely to Geralt our hero or anti-hero.Geralt, what a strange one he is….oh and yes, like all good cliched fantasy hero’s, he is the reluctant Hero. Nobody understands me; I don’t understand myself….why? why? Yawn. I have never met such a non-dark and non-mysterious, dark and mysterious hero ever before. His ability with the sword is without question, but his constant doubts and naivety at times is totally contrary to the impression I got from his fans. Two occasions in the book highlight his lack of any common sense and end up causing him problems. One with the Striga girl, after a right royal punch up he only attempts to lean over the still, batter body….yes you guess it “Shes pretending she’s out cold you bloody fool”. Guess what? Our seasoned, mutant, monster killing machine does lean over and gets his throat slit for the trouble (clever boy). “Who can we get to look down this barrel to see if this cannon is loaded….I know Geralt the wise” Another occasion that proves Geralt’s complete naivety is the incident with Shrike, the homicidal, gnome f**king, brigand princess who is out to kill this Wizard. Again in some ridiculous plot Geralt finds himself reluctantly defending a wizard (who hates him) and a town (that don’t like him) from this mad Bitch. After the classic love/hate conversation with her, she sneaks into his bedroom…a bit of flirting and again more rambling she agrees to leave. “Yeah right” I hear you saying, but hold on everyone, Geralt believes her, and it isn’t until his friend reminds him the next morning shes a mass murderer that it twigs, she may be dishonest too. This whole event then plays out with the classic punch up in a stall filled market, she dies and the Wizard is still bloody ungrateful.Groan…shakes head!Sadly I tried, with every will in my body to read on. I even got to the Dark knight with the Spiky armour, that refuses to take off his visor at the banquet but it got all too much, the book was closed for the last time…..I have read Tolkien, Feist, Moorcock, Brooks, Gemmell, Lawhead, Williams and many more….but I have never come across a book that was so disappointing in everyway. Its cliché’s, its unoriginality, its lack of depth or believability was so evident. The only element I got out of the book was the very real feeling that I had been robbed paying £9.99 for a book that is in essence empty.[Edited for clarity]
 
Despite the fact, that it's a matter of taste, you simply don't get the whole idea of the book. I won't ask, which other characters of short stories have a so called "depth" (hell yeah, Geralt, as a character, is plain and simple :D), as well as I won't question, why you are not able to call one single positive aspect of the book. You even didn't finished it, so I suppose it's a total crap, right? ;)Those stories were created nearly 20 years ago, and were just a introduction to a much larger story, assembled in five books. Sapkowski created a large scape, gathered many characters. "The witcher" the first of stories, was also a first writing of Sapkowski. You think that Feist or Gemmell's writing style started already from the highest level?You say, characters are straight as a flail. Either you were expecting too much (I suppose you would like to see Bergman's Geralt playing a chess game with death? :>) or you don't see a subtle difference between novels and stories. Especially in a fantasy genre.Oh, one more thing, too bad you were not completely aware of the story. Why Geralt (in "The lesser evil") don't despise Renfri (aka Shrike)? Say, we are all mutants, you know? By the way, if all stories were just a babbling and nonsense crap, then perhaps you weren't reading them too carefuly. Which is more likely...Still, even if it looks to me like a elaborately created provocation, everyone has a right to has his own opinion. So do you, but don't expect too much praise here :).
 
OUCH! :eek:Though, I would disagree with most of what you type (do not take that personally, I am a disagreeable person ;D), you DO write well. ;)I felt the same with the "Shanara" series/saga/over-kill. Everyone I know who had read them, LOVED them, and I loathed them...with a passion (at least the first two books, I could read no more!).But, I digress. In my opinion, what makes the Witcher stories enjoyable (to me) ARE those qliches and how they are handled by the author. Everything had a very "ambiguous" feel. Again, in my opinion, I think that is what Sapkowski was doing...taking "tried and true" plot elements and forcing the reader to look at them in another way. I am a stickler for "Perception bending," so I may be biased. Again, as I only have "The Last Wish" to judge from (as English is the only language I am proficient in enough to enjoy a book), I could be missing the point as well...As far as the "bar" scene in the story "The Witcher." I see that as a "set up." It was the first appearance of the character (I believe), the "Old west" device being a tool to show how Witchers are generally percieved by the populace at large."Oh did I tell you he gets of scot-free….reason? Unknown really I am still confused at that bit."The "signs"...the "signs." ;) He manipulated them with one of the "Witcher signs." This also is a "set up," as Geralt was more than capable of handeling these two "cardboard ruffians" without resorting to murder; he killed in order to make a point to the King. Once it was established who and what Geralt was, his services were much more important to the "authorities" than it was to persecute him for murder (again, in my perception of it).I DO have to agree with you on Geralt's naivety at some points. I too felt at certain times I was watching a horror movie and wanted to yell, "Do NOT open that door, dolt!" Not sure if you read any Robert E. Howard, but he often did that with his "Kull" character as well. I mean, a talking cat, man...you are going to listen to a talking CAT, O' great King of Valusia, exile of Atlantis, survivor of a thousand battles!?!?. I had that same feeling where Renfi (Shrike) was concerned. But, who among us has not lost their head over a little tail? (a thousand pardons if that reads "sexist"...but it is still a truth ;D). Also, I am still not exactly sure as to the whole "neck biting" thing when the Striga did revert to back to the princess (I do have a few theories though). Eh, what can we do? There are not many perfect authors out there. Even the master Moorcock got sloppy now and again (and by the bye, I am a GREAT admirer of Mr. Moorcock's work. Particularly the "Eternal Champion" series. I thought, though not part of the "Champion" stories, "Behold the man," for such a short novella was a masterpiece! I am a little "iffy" on the "End of time" tales" though). In closing, and to no longer run the risk of reading like a Sapkowski apologist; sorry you did not enjoy the book. Again, though I disagree, it was an enjoyable critique. Art, books, music...REALITY, usually comes down to perception, "eye of the beholder" and all that. This has just been this "brown haired hippie's" ;D
 
Hmm, that was an interesting and articulate review...far, far from the incoherent hate reviews boards like these (maybe not *this* one) usually get. However I disagree. I'm also a huge fantasy fan (Howard, Martin, Lynch, Leiber, Erikson, etc), and I personally got a huge kick out of this collection of stories. What I really liked about them though was the simple, straightforward adventure aspect (plus the wryly subversive versions of all the old-school fairy tales). And while the translation was rough, it struck me as being quite readable and direct. Popular fiction from foreign countries always seems to be less polished or rougher than the classics, which makes sense.Anyway, I really enjoyed the stories as solid adventure stories. I don't feel like I understand the world particularly, but I felt that Geralt was a decent hero. He got pushed around enough that he was sympathetic, despite being a mutated killing machine, and his interaction with Dandilion in the later stories was one of the highlights IMHO.I've actually considered picking up the later books in French (I don't read Polish..alas) so I can continue the story.
 
Firstly, thank you all for not ripping my head off, I know in some forums I would have been “Burnt as Witch, tarred and feathered”. I think it’s a testament to these boards that I can express my feeling (however blunt) and still get feedback….positive feedback to boot!@Brysiu
Those stories were created nearly 20 years ago, and were just a introduction to a much larger story, assembled in five books. Sapkowski created a large scape, gathered many characters. "The witcher" the first of stories, was also a first writing of Sapkowski. You think that Feist or Gemmell's writing style started already from the highest level?
That would explain the poor content of this book to some degree, and yes especially in Feist's case, as you read the series you see his style improving. In any case though, it’s the fault of the publisher then for not enticing us the readers with a the best of Sapkowski…..I feel like a dog being thrown the off cut.
By the way, if all stories were just a babbling and nonsense crap, then perhaps you weren't reading them too carefuly. Which is more likely...
Or perhaps they never engaged me. You have admitted that this is his early work, combine that with poor translation and bang, you have an awful mix.@Wiedzmin93
As far as the "bar" scene in the story "The Witcher." I see that as a "set up." It was the first appearance of the character (I believe), the "Old west" device being a tool to show how Witchers are generally percieved by the populace at large.
Ok I see your point and its valid, but my point was for a book that proclaimed originality….this introduction was amateur.
 
No need for "thanks," friend...everyone has a right to express an opinion (and you know what is said about those.. ;))As one of the posters pointed out above, they were early stories, look at "The Dreaming city" compared to anything in "Stormbringer." As a writer (not sure if I will ever share my stuff with YOU to be ripped apart! (I jest, I jest...), I can tell you, forsooth, the short story medium can be extremely challenging...much information, in little space. But, either here or there...the stories were quite enjoyable for me. 'Tis a shame we will have to wait until 2008 to see what the novels are like (for us English readers, that is).I would reply to a fuller extent, but it is 8 AM here and I have yet to sleep..! Be well!93 93/93Alexander
 
I'm not going to try to defend the English translation, since I haven't had the chance to read it (I did read some of the English translation of "Lesser Evil", though I haven't had the chance to finish it) but I'd like to comment on Sapkowski's originality, or lack thereof.The whole point of his stories - especially the early ones is, as Wiedzmin93 writes, that he intentionally uses fantasy cliches - some of them really worn out - and then has fun examining what happens when those horribly cliched fantasy characters suddenly start acting like real people. Some of it is also intentionally humorous, and can't be taken too seriously. While there certainly are serious moments, how can you not crack up when you realize that the protagonist just slaughtered a revenge-bent Snow White and her band of murderous thugs?Another issue is that I can absolutely see how this book would suffer greatly in translation. Sapkowski writes really great dialogue, in no small measure because he's very good at making the language sound both slightly archaic and effortlessly colloquial. Given what he uses as background for his stories, his use of language often makes all the difference between a great line and a tired cliche. I'm fluent and fairly well read in both Polish and English, and I couldn't even begin to figure out how to translate Sapkowski's books into English without losing what makes his writing so good in the process. The idiom and many of the subtleties of the language are hard to work with - a trained translator should be able to do something with it, but it wouldn't be easy, by any stretch of imagination.Finally, like others have said, "The Last Wish" is just Sapkowski beginning to explore the world, and while I actually think it's good - in the original, anway - the later ones are better.
 
@mk1
Finally, like others have said, "The Last Wish" is just Sapkowski beginning to explore the world, and while I actually think it's good - in the original, anway - the later ones are better.
Indeed, both books consisting of stories "The last wish" and "Sword of destiny" are just a prelude to much more sophisticated and complicated series. I've also noticed how Sapkowski was evolving, still he remained consistent in creating a solid, coherent world, which can be only seen after reading all the books. In my first-time "The last wish" I was absorbed by the main character, followed later by Sapkowski's style (sadly not fully adaptable to english) and the whole story.@Gilshard
Again friend its signs of an author that is not quite a master of his craft.....yet! Geralt is a hero of constant, painful contradiction. A naïve, insecure fool at times and then with a turn of a page, a honed, lean, slightly moist fighting machine…. Its difficult to relate to somebody that’s just so inconsistent throughout.
Perhaps that makes him more human, in spite of his mutant's traits. He fights in a constant battle of remaining neutral in contradiction to choosing one side of the conflict. That is also why he is so inconsistent, sometimes it is difficult to perceive black or white ones. Was Renfri evil? Was she born as a bad person or was it the world around her that forced her to use a blade as a tool? Sapkowski, the longer you're reading him, the easier it is to perceive, created a world of greyness shades. And when it comes to Geralt inconsistency, later he becomes very consistent in some aspects... :)Regards
 
Well sorry to hear you tought it was that bad but some well written criticism.For me the short stories were the best, i liked them even more then the following books.Me personally what I look for in fantasy books first is a breathing universe that I get swept into.And those short stories made it for me , i was swept in.I dont mind at all cliches as they are part of life, i dont see a point in originality for the sake of originality.A book for me should tell a story, move me ina way, make me feel something, make me feel there is a real world out there.Also i dont know if you noticed but Sapkowski often uses the cliches and plays with them.( the princess and the seven dwarfs :) or for example when he describes the wizard..).I think in a way we all even want cliches, look at the fantasy/sci fi books /movies , i think George Lucas even brought up a few times that poeple want to hear the same story over and over.Tough i disagree with that strong a sentiment.The sad fact is this sequence of events has happened a million times, in a million books and in a million RPG games. Delicious twists of originality hah, my left foot! Oh did I tell you he gets of scot-free….reason?You failed to notice he used one of his signs to enchant them and he went with them out of his free will. What makes this accident interesting is one of the latter discussions with thethe prince, when the prince accuses him he could have stopped the brawlers without blood easily , that he only did it to draw attention. And it kind of sounds reasonable, making you look at that accident in tottaly another angle as a calculated move to draw attentiona nd to gain fame of a cold killer.One with the Striga girl, after a right royal punch up he only attempts to lean over the still, batter body….yes you guess it “Shes pretending she’s out cold you bloody fool”. Guess what? Our seasoned, mutant, monster killing machine does lean over and gets his throat slit for the trouble (clever boy).Actually imho she wasnt pretending.She was in the process of reverting, feeling bad and not much strengh left, not knowing whats going on. At the moment Geralt leaned the remaining strenght and instinct took over , as she had a target in her reach without moving, wich she was unable to.Again in some ridiculous plot Geralt finds himself reluctantly defending a wizard (who hates him) and a town (that don’t like him) from this mad Bitch.The wizard imho doesnt really hate him. They had a fall out in past because the wizard denounced him before a king as a "mindless killing machine" and the king chased Geralt.But imho it wasnt something personall, it was a stupid pride filled move of a person how thinks that knows everything better.Look at the way they chat it isnt hate between them. The town doesnt like him, but then again nearly every common folk hates his guts so he is used.The xenofobia/racism theme imho is a important part in Sapkowski's books so if you dont feel it , it may be hard to understand some events.The town doesnt like him as ignorant common folks fear an dhate evertyhing that is uncommon , different.We live in 21 century and we still got racists who thing that someone should be hated cause he is black , jew, or got some weird beliefs or because he is from another part of town or country...Imagine middle ages against a person who looks like Geralt a mutant, got a big sword, and talks like a quite educated person...[i]this mad Bitch[/I]Come on have you read the chat between Geralt and her? She is not a mad bitch thats one of the important points is she really a monster or not. She acts like a normal person , poeple has wronged her and she had reasons to seek vengeance.Then again there is this supernatural element.So is she what she is because the wizard and company , because of their theory, has wronged her and chased or was she from start a monster?Come on you have missed all the chat between wizard and Geralt, imho its fascinating , looking at same events from 2 tottaly different perspectives , both reasonable in a way.----I could go on but i dont think its needed.I wanted to show how i read the book, quite differently from you.But in the end it doesnt matter cause you read it and didnt like and thats it , all arguments in the world wont make you like it:).I just hope it isnt the translation that caused it....Would be such a shame.
 
Brysiu said:
@mk1
Again friend its signs of an author that is not quite a master of his craft.....yet! Geralt is a hero of constant, painful contradiction. A naïve, insecure fool at times and then with a turn of a page, a honed, lean, slightly moist fighting machine…. Its difficult to relate to somebody that’s just so inconsistent throughout.
Perhaps that makes him more human, in spite of his mutant's traits. He fights in a constant battle of remaining neutral in contradiction to choosing one side of the conflict. That is also why he is so inconsistent, sometimes it is difficult to perceive black or white ones. Was Renfri evil? Was she born as a bad person or was it the world around her that forced her to use a blade as a tool? Sapkowski, the longer you're reading him, the easier it is to perceive, created a world of greyness shades. And when it comes to Geralt inconsistency, later he becomes very consistent in some aspects... :)Regards
I agree , for me Geralt is a person I can tottaly relate to, feels so real, because he is such a bag of mixed feelings.I dont think a tottaly consistent person is a realisitc thing, havent met.:)Then also think of the background : Geralt was trained in a secluded place for years, mutated, learned that his mission is to dfend poeple from monsters.He is brought up in a way like amonk , in a closed place.Then he is set free into the world...
 
If you didn't like The Last Wish, don't bother, you're not gonna like anything that has Sapkowski's name on the cover. AS has some flaws but you can't criticise him for being unoriginal - he deliberately builds his stories on very well known motifs. He also takes some characters and situations from our reality and time and puts them on this stage with little, fi any, camouflage. He doesn't pretend anything. Either youy like it or not. And no, it's no 'dark fantasy', such advertising may only cause damage to the book and readers.
 
Yes I am resigned to the fact that AS is not the writer for me. He writes like a childrens author but with occasional adult themes. Add to that poor translation and you have one very poor book. I'll waste no more time & money on this man.... :(
 
To me his books are quite original. Many o the reasons are mentioned in the posts before mine. The Witcher is not a fairytale in which elves are a noble race, the dwarves save the princess and eveything has a happy ending. The elves are facing extinction, being chased out to mountains, where they eat pinecones. The dwarves rape the princess and make a slave out of her, and the ending... well it's a masterpiece.I read a couple stories in english, and well... they are good, but it will never be the same.And the first story was written for a contest, to earn money. Sapkowski didn't have an idea, that he would continue something with this character.
 
Read in the original the first two are hands down the best fantasy books I've had the pleasure to read.
 
I think it's hard to understand true potential of AS's books for Americans. It depends on traslation... And there are mane links to polish legends from middle-ages, and so on...
 
Funny "review". First of all - how can you give a justice to The Witcher if you have read just half of a first book? You didin't even understund that couple of stories. It's like giving a score to Godfather after watching 15 minutes of a first part and saying "Hey, look at me. I'm a big fan of this stuff, yeah, and I'm so adult. I saw Casino, Goodfellas, Scarface and Soprano's family and I thought Godfather is so childish and generic, lol ". Waiting for more
 
Huner said:
I think it's hard to understand true potential of AS's books for Americans. It depends on traslation... And there are mane links to polish legends from middle-ages, and so on...
I think that is only partially correct. Luckily, I know a bit of Slavic folklore, so it was not that bad (though, I did miss a few, such as "Where the Devil says good-night"). But, I think the meat of the stories DO stand on their own (I read the English trans. from Gollancz) even in English.Meaning; the stories as stories are quite good. I would certainly say they are as good (if not better) as A LOT of fantasy stories currently in print...(but, I already stated that earlier in this thread).I am looking forward to the rest of the books (I am curious to see what Sapkowski does with the Arthurian legends). Unfortunately, we do not get another one in English until Sept. 2008!
 
Top Bottom