# Descent of Angels pleasantly surprised



## jasonpittman (May 17, 2010)

I finally got round to reading Descent of Angels after having it on my bookshelf for ages. I tried before but got bored after a couple of chapters and moved onto something else. After reading good things about Fallen Angels I decided to give Descent of Angels another try. This time I went further than a couple of chapters and by he end of it I couldn't believe I had waited so long to read it. 

In my opinion it's alot better than what I had been led to believe maybe it was because I read it expecting it to be bad, since I was only reading it so I could read Fallen Angels. 

Straight after that I read Fallen Angels which is now one of my favourite HH novels. I hope they go into as much details with other chapters as they have with the Dark Angels.

Thats my two pence worth I'm sure plenty of people will disagree with me but if you haven't read it give it a go.


----------



## Grendelrt (Feb 9, 2011)

I really enjoyed both Angels books. I thought the first one was a breath of fresh air, going all medieval.


----------



## theurge33 (Apr 4, 2012)

Yea, im a huge medieval fan as well...and I liked the break Decent offered. I was a HUGE fan of Fallen Angels...I loved teh every other chapter format and found myself not being able to stop because I liked each plotline equally.


----------



## Roninman (Jul 23, 2010)

Actually i liked Descent of Angels much more than its sequel Fallen Angels. Sequel had more action and more Great Crusade feel to it, but it lacked in way characters and dialogue were portrayed.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

I like the book as well, it slowly builds up the society which will form the Dark Angels and despite that people think its unnecessary, I do not. It is needed. How else are we to see the crack between the Lion and Luthor from the start? How are we to see the dividing of Legion and stuff like it? The only thing I disliked abotu the 2nd book was the mix up of characters.


----------



## Captain_Daerys_Arrun (Jan 9, 2012)

The two DA books are probably the ones I enjoyed the least, can't exactly say why.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Hated it,bored me to tears, plus it was set far too far back to be classed as a HH book


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

My take...

I think they're decent books. Where they fail is in trying too hard to maintain a level of secrecy regarding the Lion, Luther, and what happened to Caliban. The cost of staying true to the themes that kept the early fluff mysterious was the quality of the story itself. We lose out on the true protagonists (the Lion and Luther) and instead get leading characters with no real insight on what's going on. As such, there's never any real understanding of motivations, any real resolution, etc.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Xisor (Oct 1, 2011)

In principle, they're decent books. In practice, only _Fallen Angels_ stands up to scrutiny, for me.

The only serious 'breath of life' for _Descent_ was in the chapter in which Zahariel chats to the White Scar.

The rest of it, whilst it was intriguing... simply lacked.

It hadn't the charm of a BL's decent fiction sporting teenagers (think _Survivor_ in Hammer & Bolter Year 1, or _Blood of Aenarion_ by Bill King) whilst it also managed to make a really lacklustre Deathworld out of Caliban.

That said, it's still not an awful read for my money, it just sits far below _Battle of the Abyss_, which had more interesting characters and interactions more consistently throughout. The principle of the Dark Angels as both knightly, clandestine and highly (if esoterically) ordered enamoured me. It was developed better in _Fallen Angels_, certainly.

Whilst _Descent_ is in my esteem the least of all the HH books, I also think it's _not that bad_, it just doesn't shine. It's certainly capable of being enjoyed though! _Fallen Angels_ was a big step up in my esteem. Slightly lacking in the polish and ambition of the better HH novels, but it was also a lot more thorough and less gimmicky, for my tastes, than a lot of the others. A mixed bag, certainly, but definitely a step up.


----------



## Richdog (Dec 19, 2009)

Grendelrt said:


> I really enjoyed both Angels books. I thought the first one was a breath of fresh air, going all medieval.


Ironically, I thought that both books were two of the worst i've ever read. In the first one the prose was risible, and the story so weakly spun that it was an effort of mammoth proportions just struggling to the end of it. Each character was written in a near-identical way, from the protagonist to The Lion. The second one equally bored me, and I skim-read.

Those two books, along with Fulgrim (I made it almost halfway before giving up in disgust), are the only books in the HH I genuinely couldn't bear to read. All the others i've devoured like a rabid beast.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I think the problem with Descent of Angels is that people compare it to a Horus Heresy book. Fair enough its part of the series however.

My thoughts are that it is a very poor Heresy novel but the book itself IS a rather good/passable Dark Angels novel.


----------



## Worldkiller (Jun 16, 2010)

I think this book would have been better received if BL had started a series about the Great Crusade before going in the Heresy. Descent of Angels would have fitted rather nicely into that in my opinion.


----------



## Vociferous Noun (Aug 5, 2012)

Descent of Angels has certainly polarised the HH readership more than most books of the series, so far. 

More often than not we are inclined to be in the same camp on whether a HH novel is generally good or bad. Evidently, not this time. Which is intriguing in itself.

Speaking for myself (I can't speak for anyone else anyway), I enjoyed certain elements of the book and was deeply frustrated by others. 

I liked how the culture of the knightly orders was explored, in their recruitment and training regimen. With a nice sprinkling of almost Templar mysticism. I saw a few nods to Rosicrucianism aswell.

I enjoyed seeing the dawning realisation on the Calibanites of what the Lion's quest and then Imperium truly represented, and how it would impact their society in the most fundamental of ways. Literally destroying their way of life.

All in all I think that aspect of the novel was handled really well. My only gripe is that because of the slow, deliberate pace of the first three quarters of the book, the last quarter seemed hastily penned and suffered a little for it. Not quite the climax I was anticipating. It was almost anti-climatic if I'm honest.

Overall though, it was a well written book. Just didn't add a huge amount to the Heresy at large.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

i did like how the knightly/warrior monks feel came through however the rest of it i found hard going and was relieved to have finished it tbh.


----------



## Vitarus (Apr 9, 2012)

Half way through this. It may as well be a WF book so far. Not that there's anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld would say. Surprising not only because of that, but also because Lion El'Jonson has barely been in it. Heh. It's a lot of fun so far, though.

Just about to start Book Three - Imperium.


----------



## Agarwaen (Oct 8, 2011)

Phoebus said:


> My take...
> 
> I think they're decent books. Where they fail is in trying too hard to maintain a level of secrecy regarding the Lion, Luther, and what happened to Caliban. The cost of staying true to the themes that kept the early fluff mysterious was the quality of the story itself. We lose out on the true protagonists (the Lion and Luther) and instead get leading characters with no real insight on what's going on. As such, there's never any real understanding of motivations, any real resolution, etc.
> 
> ...


I agree with this, would have liked something more from Luther's point of view.


----------



## Vitarus (Apr 9, 2012)

Well, all the setup on Caliban was cool. Got a good feel for the characters. Not much impressed by the Sorash stuff. Nothing bad, but I'd hoped for more. I'll just view the book as setup, and hope for more from Fallen Angels.


----------



## Paceyjg (May 12, 2011)

Richdog said:


> Ironically, I thought that both books were two of the worst i've ever read. In the first one the prose was risible, and the story so weakly spun that it was an effort of mammoth proportions just struggling to the end of it. Each character was written in a near-identical way, from the protagonist to The Lion. The second one equally bored me, and I skim-read.
> 
> Those two books, along with Fulgrim (I made it almost halfway before giving up in disgust), are the only books in the HH I genuinely couldn't bear to read. All the others i've devoured like a rabid beast.


Strange that I also detested them both but I really enjoyed Fulgrim and is one of my faves of the series.


----------

