I don't know if it's my computer, but your formatting seems to have gone as haywire as a very haywire thing.
As for the Gemmell books... I first read "Wolf in Shadow" years ago and the library's copy dated back to when it was a stand-alone novel. I quite enjoyed it. Then a while later I read the two Arthur books (which I found rather tedious, but at the time I read them - say 1990-ish - it must have been "trendy" to chuck Arthurian stuff in random books and I'd got quite burnt out on all the Guineveres and Lancelots and crap. Then I read "The Last Guardian" which I thought was horrible, horrible, horrible, just for the first chapters where it totally wrecked the ending of "Wolf in Shadow". The editions the library had at the time numbered them as a series in publication order ("Wolf in Shadow" first, then the two Arthurian ones, then the last one.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2006-09-11 06:33 am (UTC)As for the Gemmell books... I first read "Wolf in Shadow" years ago and the library's copy dated back to when it was a stand-alone novel. I quite enjoyed it. Then a while later I read the two Arthur books (which I found rather tedious, but at the time I read them - say 1990-ish - it must have been "trendy" to chuck Arthurian stuff in random books and I'd got quite burnt out on all the Guineveres and Lancelots and crap. Then I read "The Last Guardian" which I thought was horrible, horrible, horrible, just for the first chapters where it totally wrecked the ending of "Wolf in Shadow". The editions the library had at the time numbered them as a series in publication order ("Wolf in Shadow" first, then the two Arthurian ones, then the last one.)