# Prospero Burns by Dan Abnett - Review



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

_Commissar Ploss here with another book review. His first review for 2011, no less. Prospero Burns by Dan Abnett.
_​
_The Vlka Fenryka - Be it man, beast, xenos, daemon, or demigod, they will kill it. They are the Emperor's sanction.
-The Founding Fields​ _

So i've just finished reading _Prospero Burns_. I have to say, there was a lot of anticipation surrounding this novel. Lots of hype. I for one was one of those who couldn't wait to get their hands on it. 

So when i finally did (The folks at BL were nice enough to send me one), I was very eager to get going.

The novel's central character is a man by the name of Kasper Hawser. Founder of the Terran "Conservatory", he has been a driving force behind the compilation and collation of knowledge from Terra's past. A crazy turn of events has him leaving on a trip to Fenris to "observe" the Space Wolves on their home planet. It's nothing but trouble from then on through. 

I have to add here that Abnett has taken the name "Space Wolves" and almost struck it completely from the manuscript. Settling on something much more badass. _Vlka Fenryka_. The Rout. It is the name the space wolves give themselves in their own tongue of _Juvjk_, their "hearth-cant" language. With Juvjk comes another "language" of sorts that Abnett has added. _Wurgen_, is their war tongue, used to describe things associated with battle and war.

Getting back to Hawser and the main plot, Hawser does become an observer of sorts to the Vlka Fenryka. He becomes what is known as a _skjald_. The Rout's version of a remembrancer. Although instead of using recording devices in the classic sense, a skjald uses his memories to make accounts of battles and tell of the wondrous deeds of the Vlka Fenryka. Traveling with the men of _Tra_ (Third Company), Hawser makes accounts of the battles that he gets to witness with them. Recounting those tales in front of all the men usually after the battles or during times of rest.

The book is very flash-back heavy... very very very flash-back heavy... To the point where it really drags on you. Unlike Mr. Abnett's other books, i found it waaay too easy to put this story down and move onto other things. That's probably what took me so long to read it. I just couldn't read another recurring dream sequence anymore... it really got old after a while. 

Another thing. I mentioned up at the beginning of this review that there was a lot of hype and expectation surrounding this novel, and with a cover as grand as this, and a title just as tantalizing, i have to say, i was sorely disappointed for about 15/16th's of this book... If you're looking at this book thinking, "ooh, Russ is on the cover, there must be some awesome fighting in this book! It's gotta be about the battle of Prospero, just look at the title!," I'm sorry to say that you're wrong... Very little of this book has to do with Prospero burning... almost equally lacking are any scenes with the Wolf King. That's not saying he doesn't make an appearance, it's just that he's a minor character at best... Even the description from Black Library is a sad misrepresentation: 



> The Emperor is enraged. Primarch Magnus the Red of the Thousand Sons Legion has made a terrible mistake that endangers the very safety of Terra. With no other choice, the Emperor charges Leman Russ, Primarch of the Space Wolves, with the apprehension of his brother from the Thousand Sons home world of Prospero. This planet of sorcerers will not be easy to overcome, but Russ and his Space Wolves are not easily deterred. With wrath in his heart, Russ is determined to bring Magnus to justice and bring about the fall of Prospero.
> 
> -Black Library


 It felt like it isn't until the last 30-50 pages or so that Prospero is featured in the setting. I'm sorry to say, but it was frighteningly disappointing. My expectations were unnaturally high, and why wouldn't they be, just look at that description, cover, and title... It's like they threw a completely different story inside the wrapping of a different book. people picking up the book and looking at the cover get the idea it's a gritty battle novel, and then they open it up and get _Pride & Prejudice_...

Now, with all that said, the story does wrap up quite nicely. With all of the flashbacks coming together in a climactic conclusion that makes utterly no sense until those end pages. I was pleased with the way that things came out, even though i've just slagged the novel's preparation by it's publisher. lol In the end, you realize that this book was more of a psychological thriller than a gritty hardcore war novel. Which is fine! just...not what i was expecting. That being said, it was written quite well. Very well i might add. My disappointments were dulled some by the ending and the way that Mr. Abnett wrapped things up.

I have to unfortunately give this book a mediocre *6/10.*

Reason: with the way that BL hyped this thing up as a Wolves vs. 1k Sons book, it sure wasn't. This isn't meant to be a stab at Dan Abnett's character mind you, it's just my honest opinion. Had i expected something along the lines of a psych thriller i probably would have rated it higher. I just can't in good conscience give it anything more that 6. I did put it down a lot, it dragged along, and only at the end, was the story slightly redeemed. I had that "Is that it!?" feeling running through my gut, when i read the account of Prospero... perhaps 20 pages at most being dedicated to the subject plastered in the title.

Should you buy this book?* No.
*
I feel horrible having to say no. But, if you are a fan of the 40k Universe and have read all the Horus Heresy books thus far, then you'll want to pick it up just for the sake of your collection. Otherwise, if all you've heard is the hype, don't do it. I'm sorry to say that like me, you'll probably be disappointed... And Abnett is my favorite author... So i'll always buy his books, i'm just shocked i wasn't enthralled by this manuscript...

CP


----------



## Bane_of_Kings (Oct 28, 2009)

Nice review CP, I personally thought that _Prospero Burns_ was my favourite HH book, but maybe that's because I like the Vlka Fenryka and Abnett so much .


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Bane_of_Kings said:


> Nice review CP, I personally thought that _Prospero Burns_ was my favourite HH book, but maybe that's because I like the Vlka Fenryka and Abnett so much .


thanks for the kind words Bane. 


Don't get me wrong, i reallllly like all of Abnett's work... and Space Wolves have always been one of my favorite Legions. it's just that, reading and reading hoping and praying and wondering where the fuck is the action? where the fuck is Russ? wondering whether or not i'm even going to hear of Prospero until the last pages? If this had come out this way as a duology, at the same time as 1k sons, this would have flopped. people were expecting an acount of the battle of Prospero from the view of the Vlka Fenryka, and this sadly didn't deliver. What were we supposed to expect!? especially from the descriptions and everything provided by BL... A title change would have been appropriate or perhaps even a summary change. Hawser isn't mentioned anywhere in any of the promo material provided by BL... i was just...disappointed...

i hate that fact, but i was indeed disappointed...

although my favorite Horus Heresy novel has hands down been The First Heretic. It actually beats this one. IMO

CP


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown (Nov 27, 2009)

Commissar Ploss said:


> although my favorite Horus Heresy novel has hands down been The First Heretic. It actually beats this one. IMO
> 
> CP


Thanks for the official revie-- OH WAIT.

(I'm priceless.)


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Commissar Ploss said:


> Although my favorite Horus Heresy novel has hands down been The First Heretic. It actually beats this one. IMO
> 
> CP


Yes, yes it does.

_Prospero Burns_ is a decent novel and really its like _Descent of Angels_. Its good but it just doesn't belong amongst the Heresy novels that have quite simply blown us away like _A Thousand Sons_ and _The First Heretic_. Though I agree that if this had come out alongside _A Thousand Sons_ it would have been crushed in comparison. Its just not what its advertised as and that is a huge letdown, hopefully Abnett's next book will be a return to the great work he did in _Horus Rising_ and not another story about someone caught up in events and who eventually becomes a warrior like his last two Heresy novels have been.

I gave _Prospero Burns_ an 8/10, I feel that its still decent enough despite its flaws and mis-representation, though im also being slightly generous since its Heresy and Abnett, so a 7/10 would be my minimum score. And I would recommend buying it even though its flawed its still a decent novel and fairly enjoyable to read.

Lord of the Night


----------



## Roninman (Jul 23, 2010)

Thanks for review, seems that most people dont like this book. Suprise, even Dan isnt perfect is he.

I didnt like even his Brothers of Snake book, this was just silly. But next week hopefully get finally this book so i can see if anything i read in reviews so far i can agree of. I dont mind at all, if theres not much action but was really hoping more Russ to be involved.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Nice review. I however would still suggest people buy it, not just for the sake of it being a Heresy book. Sure accept the fact that it isn't really a book about the battle of Prospero itself, but more of the events leading up to the battle and the things that set it in motion. It is a very very good read IMHO, a little disappointing that it isn't about Prospero or feature much of the Wolf King, but again once you can get over that fact, i think you will see it is an very good book and terrific insight into the real workings of the Vlka Fenryka.

And really i implore most people to read it simply so that you can do away with this illusion that the Vlak Fenryka are mindless barbarians, getting drunk all the time and were the bad guys for attacking Prospero. I didn't think that before anyway, but the book really does away with that common misonception people have of the Legion. You will find when you read it that they are arguably one of the smartest of the Legions in terms of warfare and that Russ truely did not want to raze Prospero like he did and would much rather of taken Magnus in alive.


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Lord of the Night said:


> Yes, yes it does.
> 
> _Prospero Burns_ is a decent novel and really its like _Descent of Angels_. Its good but it just doesn't belong amongst the Heresy novels that have quite simply blown us away like _A Thousand Sons_ and _The First Heretic_. Though I agree that if this had come out alongside _A Thousand Sons_ it would have been crushed in comparison. Its just not what its advertised as and that is a huge letdown, hopefully Abnett's next book will be a return to the great work he did in _Horus Rising_ and not another story about someone caught up in events and who eventually becomes a warrior like his last two Heresy novels have been.
> 
> ...


I did struggle getting through Prospero Burns, but Descent of angels I found a much better book overall. And Descent of angels sequel is one of the best books in the heresy and ties in with it perfectly. Thousand sons is also one of the best books in the series, but it makes prospero burns seem so much weaker due to A thousand sons strengths, rather than the two books complementing each other.


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> Thanks for the official revie-- OH WAIT.
> 
> (I'm priceless.)


lol you kill me mate...you really kill me...

CP


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Just because i feel shamed now. for not having reviewed Aaron's _The First Heretic_. (Thanks in no part to his constant nagging and undercut jabs at my moral standing through tiny knifing posts meant to whittle away at my subconscious, see above. lol) I've added it to the top of my list for new reviews. This can be proved/backed up if you look at the right sidebar of my website TheFoundingFields under site news. Top of the list. I'll be giving it a good reread and then a solid review. lets see if i catch errors this time. 

CP


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> Thanks for the official revie-- OH WAIT.
> 
> (I'm priceless.)


Don't worry ploss is just somewhat insane....he will do something sooner or later. Watch out he bit me last time i reminded him of anything......*Insert bandaged hand dripping blood here*
:victory:

Anyhow, i have to say Prospero burns is the worst book in the Horus Heresy so far! Yet locally everyone seems to love it and hate First Heretic.....I really Don't understand why.......First heretic was Great, Propsero burns was crap.......maybe the wolfs atract the local emo\goth players for some reason? (No really they are the ones that love it)


----------



## Unknown Primarch (Feb 25, 2008)

kinda makes me realise why PB was only £4 on play.com months before release.


----------



## Phil73805 (Feb 28, 2010)

Commissar Ploss said:


> Just because i feel shamed now. for not having reviewed Aaron's _The First Heretic_. (Thanks in no part to his constant nagging and undercut jabs at my moral standing through tiny knifing posts meant to whittle away at my subconscious, see above. lol) I've added it to the top of my list for new reviews. This can be proved/backed up if you look at the right sidebar of my website TheFoundingFields under site news. Top of the list. I'll be giving it a good reread and then a solid review. lets see if i catch errors this time.
> 
> CP


to be brutally honest, I didn't review it because after it hit the New York Times bestseller list I figured no help was required. Added to the fact that I've made very clear that everything the man writes is awesome combined with my currently ludicrous timetable and I decided to leave it. I really LOVED it though...maybe I should write one...damn you Plossy and your conscience!


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Phil73805 said:


> to be brutally honest, I didn't review it because after it hit the New York Times bestseller list I figured no help was required. Added to the fact that I've made very clear that everything the man writes is awesome combined with my currently ludicrous timetable and I decided to leave it. I really LOVED it though...maybe I should write one...damn you Plossy and your conscience!


that was in part the reason i didn't do it either. NYT bestseller for a reason. He already knows how good it was. but, nonetheless, i will do it. but only because he still owes me the voiceovers for those gamer-inspired workout videos we had planned to to together!!! perhaps this will provide leverage.  Pro-gravity sit-ups, anyone?

CP


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown (Nov 27, 2009)

Phil73805 said:


> to be brutally honest, I didn't review it because after it hit the New York Times bestseller list I figured no help was required. Added to the fact that I've made very clear that everything the man writes is awesome combined with my currently ludicrous timetable and I decided to leave it. I really LOVED it though...maybe I should write one...damn you Plossy and your conscience!


Not that I'm complaining, but yours (and the good commissar's) were probably the two reviews I was waiting most keenly for. Not for sales, but just because your reviews are always professional and extensive. 

So that's what I meant when I was mentioning that above. Sales weren't really a factor, and it didn't need help in that sense, but _Prospero Burns_ was Dan Abnett + The Most Popular Space Marines, and was going to be literally the most ultra-bestselling HH novel (and indeed BL novel) no matter what, so it hardly needed "help". And you reviewed that, both of you, you whores.

EDIT: No one mentioned in this post is really a whore.

EDIT 2: At least, not that I know of.

EDIT 3: And I'm not really angry.


----------



## Mob (Nov 14, 2010)

This is well-considered review (but trying to avoid repeating my statements from the other thread), I think recommending against it is a bit far; while it's understandable and valid to think negatively of it because of the lack of Prospero burning and scenes that show the flipside of A Thousand Sons' plot, I think the story the book actually presents is fantastic and the construction of it is masterful.

And they're totally a duology, they're thematically and metaphorically linked as well as being set up in opposition to each other in the way they're actually written.


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> Not that I'm complaining, but yours (and the good commissar's) were probably the two reviews I was waiting most keenly for. Not for sales, but just because your reviews are always professional and extensive.
> 
> So that's what I meant when I was mentioning that above. Sales weren't really a factor, and it didn't need help in that sense, but _Prospero Burns_ was Dan Abnett + The Most Popular Space Marines, and was going to be literally the most ultra-bestselling HH novel (and indeed BL novel) no matter what, so it hardly needed "help". And you reviewed that, both of you, you whores.
> 
> ...


Point well made, good sir.  You won't have to wait much longer for mine then. I'm reading as we speak. (well, not quite right this minute... i had to put the book down to type this. But you get the idea.) I appreciate the comments though, I always wondered what you thought of my reviews, never had the egocentric gonads to ask the question however. So cheers for that anyways. And as a future note, i'll be sure to not skip another of yours. :wink: I'll get on with reading now.

after this:



Mob said:


> This is well-considered review (but trying to avoid repeating my statements from the other thread), I think recommending against it is a bit far; while it's understandable and valid to think negatively of it because of the lack of Prospero burning and scenes that show the flipside of A Thousand Sons' plot, I think the story the book actually presents is fantastic and the construction of it is masterful.
> 
> And they're totally a duology, they're thematically and metaphorically linked as well as being set up in opposition to each other in the way they're actually written.


I really did feel hesitant to recommend against purchase. But i did think long and hard about it. At it's essence, it's a warning. I wanted to warn people that it's not what you're expecting. Which isn't exactly a bad thing, far from it. It's just that one should be wary about what they hear. The build-up Black Library prepared for this novel was completely left field compared to what was actually in the novel. I mean, you've seen the short web videos, and even read the description i've quoted in my review. It was so far gone, that my head was in a different state when i picked the book up, and then my brains were blown out the back when i realized what was actually in it... It was just so far out from what i was lead to believe i was in store for. I hope that makes sense.

CP


----------



## Chaosveteran (Aug 29, 2010)

Commissar Ploss said:


> I really did feel hesitant to recommend against purchase. But i did think long and hard about it. At it's essence, it's a warning. I wanted to warn people that it's not what you're expecting. Which isn't exactly a bad thing, far from it. It's just that one should be wary about what they hear. The build-up Black Library prepared for this novel was completely left field compared to what was actually in the novel. I mean, you've seen the short web videos, and even read the description i've quoted in my review. It was so far gone, that my head was in a different state when i picked the book up, and then my brains were blown out the back when i realized what was actually in it... It was just so far out from what i was lead to believe i was in store for. I hope that makes sense.
> 
> CP


I really should have read the review before reading the book. Not that it would dissuade me from buying it, just then I'd have been forewarned that it's not what the cover, title and BL description suggests! Would have been a lot less head scratching and page flipping, wondering when the SW would come to Prospero...

Nice review CP!

PS: one thing that did really annoy me: how many times was the phrase "wet leopard growl" used...I mean c'mon!


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I didn't really notice the extensive use of the "wet leopard growl" and in a flipside i'm getting annoyed at everyones constant mentioning of it, no real reason to be annoyed with a book, i'm fairly certain you could find other such phrases used too much in other novels if you looked.


----------



## RuneGuard (Jan 10, 2011)

The battle for Prospero was done so well in *Thousand Sons *it didnt need to be rehashed all over again, besides we got to see a very different kind of fight going on elswhere in the city, which by the way was one heck of a fight scene.

However i do find myself agreeing in part with everyone else about there being a misconception as to what the novel was actually about. My biggest dissapointment was that we didn't get to see Russ kicking some ass!


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

RuneGuard said:


> My biggest dissapointment was that we didn't get to see Russ kicking some ass!


very true, i was really looking forward to that...

CP


----------



## Unknown Primarch (Feb 25, 2008)

is there any feedback from abnett on the feedback he may have heard about prospero burns? id like to hear his explaination on why he took the angle he has with PB and why he has left out the key thing we wanted to see in this book ie russ going apeshit in battle!


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Unknown Primarch said:


> is there any feedback from abnett on the feedback he may have heard about prospero burns? id like to hear his explaination on why he took the angle he has with PB and why he has left out the key thing we wanted to see in this book ie russ going apeshit in battle!


I'm fairly certain he doesn't frequent forums. rightly so, he'd be depressed to hear what we've said. lol

CP


----------



## Unknown Primarch (Feb 25, 2008)

yeah i actually wouldnt expect him to go on forums but im sure he would like to hear about his works from somewhere. wasnt sure if he had realised a press about any feedback he may have heard.


----------



## nate187 (Feb 2, 2009)

Nice review mate 

the Vlka Fenryka are my fav space marines as the profile shows . It was a decent book but it was not the best and in fact I all most feel like saying I hated it. 

I think I always knew that the space wolves were how Dan described. Hence the viking like persona. I really wanted more action out of this book with all the flash backs it seemed to me a little confusing in fact plain boring but Now that book is out there what does it mean to the Ragnar series fluff wise?

I have a semi sour taste in my mouth about this novel. I think its just a bad case of false advertising on BL behalf

P.S I firmly believe Commissar Ploss nailed it in this review


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

nate187 said:


> Nice review mate
> 
> the Vlka Fenryka are my fav space marines as the profile show but in reading this book. It was a decent book but it was not the best and in fact I all most feel like saying I hated it.
> 
> ...


thanks for the props mate. 

the issue with this book, for me, really came down to the synopsis, and the complete deviation from it. 

If i was submitting a story for consideration, and i had given the synopsis that was posted on the BL website, and then had proceeded to turn in something that was completely anathema to the previously submitted synopsis, my editor/publisher would have thrown a stink! not only that, but they'd be asking a myriad of questions pertaining to why i chose to deviate from the initial synopsis (which in all likelyhood, i would have been changing along the way anyways). More than likely, changes would have ensued, or a retype of at least the synopsis would be in order. Especially if the story was was so much better/different than the initial theme/idea.

However, in this case, there were two fuckups on BL's part. (and i love BL, don't get me wrong, this is just an unfettered opinion. besides, they know i love them.)

1. Heavily marketing a provided synopsis with no backing material, whilst still claiming it as a duology with A Thousand Sons. poor choice. 

2. Upon receiving the finished manuscript, didn't change the previously marketed synopsis in an attempt to better elude to the density and depth of the story. We weren't lead to believe that we were going to be reading a lengthy psychological thriller, we were lead to think we were getting a lighter read of battles and glory. Neither of which were pronounced in any exceptional way. Poor choice number 2.

Instead, (and i'm sure i'm making this too black and white, but without an inside opinion, i'm just talking of what it seems from an outside perspective) BL takes the story without question, knowing it will gross past bounds only dreamed of by other books/authors, and gets an "auto-NYT-bestseller". boom, done. no apologies for the shitty work up, no explanation from Dan, nothing. 

needless to say i feel a bit let down, and it's just something of a rookie mistake by a still quite new publisher. Lets face it, they haven't been around as long as some of the other big name publishers, it's a learning process. I'll be bringing it to the attention of the powers that be, as it's something they will want to improve upon. 

All it takes is one small blunder to make someone wonder about everything else they've read. especially from a marketed synopsis. How am i to know that what i'm reading about future books in the provided paragraph synopsis' is actually an accurate representation? It's hard to after something like this. (once again, a little black and white, but hell, that's how i, and many others feel.)

Commissar Ploss


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown (Nov 27, 2009)

Commissar Ploss said:


> All it takes is one small blunder to make someone wonder about everything else they've read. especially from a marketed synopsis. How am i to know that what i'm reading about future books in the provided paragraph synopsis' is actually an accurate representation? It's hard to after something like this. (once again, a little black and white, but hell, that's how i, and many others feel.)
> 
> Commissar Ploss


I sort of worry the same thing (though less so with _PeeBee_, as I really enjoyed it). But _Blood Reaver_'s synopsis has a sentence about the destruction of the Marines Errant fortress-monastery, and while that does happen, the novel's "real" conflict is stealing a Red Corsair warship, because it used to be a Night Lords Heresy-era cruiser. 

I have cold sweats and nightmares of people saying "THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE FORTRESS-MONASTERY", when that was never the novel's main thrust. I like the traitors betraying other traitors. It's supposed to happen all the time (the Chaos Marines fight each other much, much more than they fight the Imperium), yet we barely ever see it in novels.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> I sort of worry the same thing (though less so with _PeeBee_, as I really enjoyed it). But _Blood Reaver_'s synopsis has a sentence about the destruction of the Marines Errant fortress-monastery, and while that does happen, the novel's "real" conflict is stealing a Red Corsair warship, because it used to be a Night Lords Heresy-era cruiser.
> 
> I have cold sweats and nightmares of people saying "THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE FORTRESS-MONASTERY", when that was never the novel's main thrust. I like the traitors betraying other traitors. It's supposed to happen all the time (the Chaos Marines fight each other much, much more than they fight the Imperium), yet we barely ever see it in novels.


I think that things would be different for any who have read your books before. When you wrote _Soul Hunter_ you were clear that it wasn't about the battle but about the Night Lords, and its the same with _Blood Reaver_. The battles play an environment role in your Night Lords series, they are vehicles for the story itself which is character-driven and about more than just Astartes killing each other, both traitor and loyalist. Some new readers might complain but those who have read _Soul Hunter_ will know not to expect a play-by-play recollection of Vilamus, we'll see what we need to see and it'll be enough.


----------



## Unknown Primarch (Feb 25, 2008)

gotta agree with this. i hate when you read a novel about a certain group of warriors and you just get alot of descriptive about the battle and very little dialogue and descriptive of the actual people who are in it. some books ive read it seems that they go overboard with it to sort of fill space before the final (which ends up short) ending and you feel short changed. i think if NL novels didnt have alot of the actual charcters in it and was dominated by mass battles it would take away that feel of the complexities of the NL and just end up being like any standard space marines in combat type book. the NL are a psychological legion so you need that more than just boler and chainsword action. 

to adb - i must admit that the NL series has been probably the only other series in 40k that has got my 100% attention besides gaunts ghosts and weither its a trilogy or more im am really excited by the series and ive only read soul hunter. good work man, good work!


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Aaron, if you have a problem with the marketed synopsis, i think you should bring it up with someone who can change it, or at least you editor. It would be worth tweaking it to your satisfaction. At least, that's what i would do. Like i said, it only takes one burble in the primordial marketing soup for most of us to take a second thought for future purchases... heaven knows i'll be rethinking all of my Abnett purchases. don't make me rethink yours. :wink:

CP


----------



## Shogun_Nate (Aug 2, 2008)

Eh, I found the novel to be a disappointment, though readable. I don't know why, but after Necropolis, I've found most novels by Mr. Abnett to follow my above sentiment. It's as though he's lost something. I liked the angle taken. It's nice to see a novel that gives a little more than just the standard blood and guts but the repitition of the same flashbacks started to annoy me. It seemed to me as if he couldn't find a better way to bring the plot to fruition and instead, fell back to repeating the dream sequence over and over to build some sense of foreboding/intrigue. Personally, I'd give it a 4/10. However, I think you did a damn fine job of reviewing it bud!

Good luck and good gaming,

Nate


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

thanks for the kind words Nate.  I'm glad you enjoyed the review.

CP


----------



## donskar (Apr 8, 2010)

Commissar Ploss, forgive the late response: your effort deserves more. However, (uh-oh, here it comes!) I am totally opposed to your review and especially to its recommendation that readers NOT buy the book. Very nice swing, but you (IMHO) missed.

Pls correct me if I am wrong, but you (and many others) seem to have based your analysis, response and grade to a large extent NOT on the book Abnett wrote, but on what you EXPECTED he would write. I urge you (and others) to respect and analyze what Abnett wrote, not what you wanted him to write. PB is (in my considered opinion) one of the finest pieces of literature in the BL canon. Perhaps that is not saying much. Abnett is no Faulkner, Proust or James, but in PB he attempted (I believe) to write a piece of lterature as opposed to mere entertainment. Entertainment is good, but literature is different.

I urge you to reconsider the novel with this question in mind: how many passages in PB are accidents? Love him or hate him, Abnett is a professional writer. His frequent flashbacks, multyiple story lines, and recurrent use of specific images (regicide, wooden horse, etc, etc) are most likely NOT accidental. If you accept that he wrote the book the way he wanted to, then it might be worth the time to examine WHY?


----------



## Brother Emund (Apr 17, 2009)

Good review by-the-way *Ploss*, I actually liked the book! It wetted my appetite for the Space W.. Sorry, I should not call them that! Now I want to read more about them. Shame about the fate of 

Kaspar Hawser, the skjald. Not really fair how he was treated by the wolves in my opinion.. and I wanted to see The Russ cracking a few more heads


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Personally, I would give it an 8/10. Of course, I was looking at it as a source of knowledge on the Rout so that might be why I rate it so much higher than CP. However, I will admit I did want to shoot myself for the first few pages or so.


----------



## Kickback (May 9, 2008)

I've currently been reading it for the last few weeks (normally only takes a day or so at least to get through one).
I cant put my finger on it, theres just something about it I cant quite warm too, maybe its the wet leopard growling that happens every other page >.<
I really, really dont like the name Vlka Fynraka or w.e its spelt, The Rout is fine, it fits, I just cant picture the wolves as Vlka Fsomethingsomething.
Nice review though, think you nailed it


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

donskar said:


> Commissar Ploss, forgive the late response: your effort deserves more. However, (uh-oh, here it comes!) I am totally opposed to your review and especially to its recommendation that readers NOT buy the book. Very nice swing, but you (IMHO) missed.
> 
> Pls correct me if I am wrong, but you (and many others) seem to have based your analysis, response and grade to a large extent NOT on the book Abnett wrote, but on what you EXPECTED he would write. I urge you (and others) to respect and analyze what Abnett wrote, not what you wanted him to write. PB is (in my considered opinion) one of the finest pieces of literature in the BL canon. Perhaps that is not saying much. Abnett is no Faulkner, Proust or James, but in PB he attempted (I believe) to write a piece of lterature as opposed to mere entertainment. Entertainment is good, but literature is different.
> 
> I urge you to reconsider the novel with this question in mind: how many passages in PB are accidents? Love him or hate him, Abnett is a professional writer. His frequent flashbacks, multyiple story lines, and recurrent use of specific images (regicide, wooden horse, etc, etc) are most likely NOT accidental. If you accept that he wrote the book the way he wanted to, then it might be worth the time to examine WHY?


you are very right in what you say here. However, i stand by my rating. It fit the book at the time i reviewed it. As, like i have stated quite a few times now, it was marketed horribly. The book in it's own right, as a stand-alone literary achievement, was great, and i thoroughly enjoyed it. However, rarely do i simply analyze the story itself. My reviews, generally contain all aspects of the published work. I'm sure this simply stems from the fact that i have my finger on the pulse of the publishing circles in a sense. I'm aware of the marketing, and the build-up for each book. And marketing does play a determining role on what i choose to read and review. Were i simply a review-monkey sequestered in a room with no windows, and slipped books under the door to review, i'm sure i would have rated the story higher, not having witnessed the marketing campaign firsthand. Alas, this is not the case, and as such, having read the book, i felt cheated. That's basically what it comes down to, i just felt cheated. being told i was going to be given one thing, and then being gobsmacked with something else! The narrative with which i was gobsmacked wasn't a badly written tale, far from it! However, i had to dock it points for the act of "gobsmacking"... although some would say that i was too quick to judge, this took a fair bit of courage (along with the balls to tell people not to buy it.) for me to do, as i'm a huge fan of Abnett's work. 

CP


----------



## increaso (Jun 5, 2010)

I guess you (Ploss) are saying 'don't buy this book if you want to read about the events detailed on the back cover'. That's fair. That's just the same as saying don't listen to abridged Horus Rising if you want the full story or don't read Nemesis if you only want to read about the core HH: Collected Visions events.

Personally I will read the lot, because they all either add to the story as a whole, develop characters (new and old), provide little or big Easter Eggs, have a decent plot or a combo of the above. PB does all of the above. BFTA was poor and is considered so (IMO), because it does little to none of the above.


----------



## Major Strombardt (Feb 22, 2009)

Was this a review?...Or an opinion?

There is a difference of course.

The book was supposed to tell the story of the destruction of Prospero from another point of view. It did what it said on the tin. If anyone is disapointed as to the telling...that is another thing...usually called opinion.

Everyone is entitled to opinion and my opinion is this:

I read this book in two sittings. Less then 24 hours. I could not put it down as I felt it was the best book since Horus Rising...and there have been MANY good books since then!

When it finished I was disappointed. Sad even. Not at the quality of the book but that it was over. What can I say but this was a very romantic novel (in a warhammer way!) and very much put the Wolves and their place in the Galaxy into perspective. In my opinion very much more then any other chapter so far.

Cheers.


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Major Strombardt said:


> Was this a review?...Or an opinion?
> 
> There is a difference of course.


actually, no. there isn't. 

A book review is an individuals chance to give their honest OPINION on a book, then subsequently give it a rating. If you don't like my opinion, write your own review. It's fine that you posted your opinion in the post, i don't have a problem with that at all. In fact, i welcome it. But if you ever want to write reviews successfully, you have to understand that it will contain your opinion. That's what keeps people coming back to read your reviews. "I'm not sure i want to buy this yet... i don't know if i'll like it... I wonder what Commissar Ploss' opinion of this book is? Oh, i know, lets look at his review!" 

a true "review" as you define it, would be what the author submits to the publisher as his chapter-by-chapter synopsis. It's bland and straightforward. summarizing what happened throughout the book. It's spoiler filled, and is a veritable Cliff Notes on the book. In other words, it's what you've submitted to many English classes over the years as a "Book Report". It never does well in the public eye.

a Book Review, in it's actual sense, as it should be defined, is a brief summation of the plot, with the individual reviewers opinion on the different aspects of the story, characters and other various general assessments. It's meant to not give important parts of the story away (although many amateur reviewers do this... to much wincing from me), and it's mean't to sway those prospective readers who are "on the fence" to either buy the book, or not. 

Book Reviews are in fact, HIGHLY opinionated. That's what makes them book reviews. Each reviewer feels differently about each book, and therefor will write different reviews. Some things appeal differently to different people. So, long story short, get your definitions right before bashing my review.

CP


----------



## Unknown Primarch (Feb 25, 2008)

i sent dan abnett a message a few weeks ago to see if the story evolved from what was said on the back to what we got in the end. i kinda thought he would have had a few rewrites for different reasons ive mentioned before. heres his response, take it as you please.




'Books always evolve as you write them, but PB is what it was always going to be: an account of the REASONS the Prospero happens, from a Space Wolf POV. Getting ill during the writing of it (which caused the delay) did not change the book.

By synopsis, do you mean what’s written on the back cover? This kind of text is prepared by Black Library long in advance, as a general guide to the content. Quite often you’ll find they bear a general rather than literal comparison to the plot. The back cover synopsizes the Prospero event, historically. 

Basically, I wasn’t going to write a battle report - that’s what White Dwarf and colour text is for. I wanted to write a revealing book about motives and reasons.

best

Dan'


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

Unknown Primarch said:


> i sent dan abnett a message a few weeks ago to see if the story evolved from what was said on the back to what we got in the end. i kinda thought he would have had a few rewrites for different reasons ive mentioned before. heres his response, take it as you please.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


well, i'm glad he's engaged in the discussion. I don't fault him for writing it, not at all. I"m glad he stuck to his guns. I've since read the book again, and it's grown a little on me. I still enjoyed the book, and i probably always will. 

Perhaps i should reword my "don't buy it" statement. Don't buy the book based on what BL has prepared via marketing. Buy it instead, knowing that it is a novel about the REASONs Prospero burned. Basically, consider your frame of reference, because if you go in with the same notions that i did, you're going to be disappointed. 

CP


----------



## nate187 (Feb 2, 2009)

I think I may read this book again after what dans response was but I dont think I will be changing my opinion

will keep you posted lol


----------



## polynike (Aug 23, 2008)

Being 170 pages in I have to agree with the reviewer. Seems my hunch about this book not having Prospero burning as its central theme is correct. Seems that TS and TFH will not be knocked off the top spot! But if you are fan of HH you'll need this one on the shelf along with its brothers.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I respect your review Commissar Ploss. You put a lot and time and effort into it. 

Unfortunately I'm going to go with what a few others have said. I actually kind of liked the book. Sure I did not like the title. The cover was fine. But the title could have been a lot more interesting and involved with what it really was. 

As for the story, I did like how it correlated with the rest of the Heresy. It has a lot of explanation about the Wolves and Thousand Sons and their conflict instead of the straight up hatred and coincidences of the legions.


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

ckcrawford said:


> I respect your review Commissar Ploss. You put a lot and time and effort into it.
> 
> Unfortunately I'm going to go with what a few others have said. I actually kind of liked the book. Sure I did not like the title. The cover was fine. But the title could have been a lot more interesting and involved with what it really was.
> 
> As for the story, I did like how it correlated with the rest of the Heresy. It has a lot of explanation about the Wolves and Thousand Sons and their conflict instead of the straight up hatred and coincidences of the legions.


thanks for the reply.  I did however, enjoy the overall story, it was the fact that the preparation left such a bad taste in my mouth is what did it in for me... Within the arc of the Horus Heresy, Dan did a bang-up job! and the story in and of itself as a standalone was very well done. I'm in agreement with you there. There are always improvements that can be made, and it's my hope that through these reviews, we can all pinpoint the highs and lows and work to overcome them. 

cheers

CP


----------



## polynike (Aug 23, 2008)

The last two chapters save the book. The most intriguing sentence is the one uttered by the Wolf King, '...its not unprecedented!'

I wonder what plans BL has afoot!!!!!!!!


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

polynike said:


> The last two chapters save the book. The most intriguing sentence is the one uttered by the Wolf King, '...its not unprecedented!'
> 
> I wonder what plans BL has afoot!!!!!!!!


it's another trademark whopper of a cliffhanger mate. BL is famous for them. The implications are immense, yet i hate to say it, but i don't think we'll ever see them follow through with it. It's just a tease. One of the mysteries that will forever be left unexplored for the sake of fan speculation and interest. 

CP


----------



## Azkaellon (Jun 23, 2009)

Commissar Ploss said:


> it's another trademark whopper of a cliffhanger mate. BL is famous for them. The implications are immense, yet i hate to say it, but i don't think we'll ever see them follow through with it. It's just a tease. One of the mysteries that will forever be left unexplored for the sake of fan speculation and interest.
> 
> CP


What you don't know is Leman Russ has converted to chaos, khorne lets him run around naked with an axe, Thus why he has not left the eye of terror! Hell he would fit right in and is probably drinking a few brews with Skulltaker.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

Witch King of Angmar said:


> What you don't know is Leman Russ has converted to chaos, khorne lets him run around naked with an axe, Thus why he has not left the eye of terror! Hell he would fit right in and is probably drinking a few brews with Skulltaker.


:shok: BLAHHHH! 

(goes into a SW fanboy nerd rage and starts running around room screaming like a madman with his cock on fire)

EDIT: No, you're correct, I have nothing productive to say at this time.


----------



## Commissar Ploss (Feb 29, 2008)

at this point, anything is game.

CP


----------



## nestersan (Apr 3, 2010)

I liked it, it was well written, and I barely read the blurb. Aside from the initial "hmm ok, this is not what I expected", I warmed to the tale.

I realise that they have started this kinda disturbing trend of showing the story through someone else's eyes, instead of basically a normal 3rd person narrative. I think this is done so the tale sounds like the re-telling of what is basically 40K mythology, but it is ANNOYING at times, because these people are incidental to the events unfolding, and we miss great swaths of discourse between the 'Dramatis Personae".

Anyhow, as a book it was enjoyable, finished it in 3 days, bathroom, driving, eating, at work (Aldiko on Android Phone), and I really loved how it made the Wolves into much more than the red-rage vikings people usually make them out to be.

But guess what, for my more intimate knowledge, I have gained some measure of respect for them, but as a whole I despise them the more. 
I never have and never cared for the Wolves, and while this book is a MUST read for any Wolf fan, as a Wolf disliker, it just gave me more fodder for my hatred.

I don't know if I missed it, but was there any mention of the Wolfen till the final battle?

Also another thing I amnot liking, is the pat way they are doing things in the series.

(censored for those who haven't read) commenting on his dislike of becoming a Dreadnaught, then losing his arm, seemed just to "we have a checklist of shit that has to happen"-ness, to it, it didn't feel organic at all, very contrived.

Short of that, and the GOD'S awfulamount of dream flashbacks, I really enjoyed it.

Final Verdict ?

Awesome book, though the Wolves still are still hypocrite mutant mongrels needing extinction.


----------

