Rating: 
Summary: Sloppy and thin
Review: After reading others' glowing reviews, I was deeply disappointed in this book. For starters, it is so poorly edited as to be distracting. Numerous misspellings, omitted words, and apparent transcription errors (e.g., "formerly" instead of "formally") rise to the level of a distraction that takes away from one's enjoyment of the book. These occurred with disturbing frequency throughout the book. However, the author should not necessarily be blamed for poor proof reading and editing by his publisher. On the other hand, the flaws of the writing cannot be laid off on the publisher. First, real character development is almost non-existent. One can hardly tell the difference between the two most fully developed male Christian characters (Phillipe and Jean). Almost no time is spent trying to develop any of the major characters beyond thin stereotypes that are repeated with dulling frequency. I grew to dislike all of the characters about half way through the book, and had no sadness for the death of anyone other than the innocent little twins who were smothered by their mother. Second, there are glaring inconsistencies in the storytelling. The author apparently had trouble keeping track of what had already occurred, and who had done what, because discontinuities in the plot abounded. About the worst was when a very senior knight was captured as a spy, along with his aide. Although the aide is put to the rack, and the senior knight is spared, the story later talks of the pain suffered by the senior knight as a result of torture on the rack. But he was not put to the rack! Does the author not even notice this glaring inconsistency? Third, the lack of any subtle appreciation of the religious undertones and basic faith elements in this story is brought into stark relief throughout the book. About the worst example occurs near the very end, when the knight Grand Master, wondering where his Order will relocate after being expelled from Rhodes, states that only "God and Jesus" know for sure. Egad! Any 16th century knight steeped in Roman Catholic dogma and theology would never--let me repeat, never--make such a theologically incorrect statement. There is no "God and Jesus," as if one were separate from the other. Maybe a Muslim might make this mistake, but a devout Catholic (or even a not so devout Catholic) would know that Jesus is one of the three persons in the triune Christian God. Thus, Jesus is God, and the statement is theologically absurd. This final mistake was the straw that broke this camel's back. This may be a fascinating historical moment, but this book is not the way to explore it.
Rating: 
Summary: Historically gripping, philosophically anachronistic
Review: Anthony Goodman is, I would guess, either a Jewish doctor or married to a Jewish doctor. I really don't know this, but he obviously meant his readers of the historical novel The Shadow of God to look the most favorably and sympathetically upon the Jewish characters in his book in contrast to the Christian and Muslim characters in the book. The Jewish doctor in the story is above the fray, confidante of both Christian and Muslim, though unjustly persecuted by both, and clearly meant to be the most virtous person in the eyes of modern readers. His outlook on life is ridiculously 21st century in its philosophy: he bears a striking resemblance to Alan Alda's Hawkeye in M*A*S*H, a true humanist conscientious objector compelled to heal bodies bloodied by a 'senseless' war over arcane ideologies. The anachronism was pretty jarring even to a lowly math teacher like me.
The Christian characters, on the other hand, are painted as frustrated Don Quixotes, just waiting to be liberated from their "oppresive" religion with all its antiquated rules and hang-ups about sexual morality. Especially ridiculous is Goodman's placing a "girlfriend" in the arms of Phillipe, the Grand Knight, who historically we know was bound by a vow of celibacy. I grant him that vowed celibates have been known to be unfaithful to their vows, but the dialogue he puts in the mouth of a man who has sacrificed life and limb for this order of Knights is just barely above "if loving you is wrong, I don't wanna be right."
Don't get me wrong, I learned a great deal about medieval warfare, Muslim history and even Mediterranean geography reading this book. The level of historical, ballistic and especially medical detail obviously took painstaking research and was extremely fascinating to me. But I thought the purpose of a historical novel was to put a more human face, even to the point of somehow divining a personality for historical characters, whether famous or obscure, whether they actually existed or not. Goodman seems to have chosen Hollywood celebrities for the faces of his characters, but unfortunately he chose to insert the vapid, shallow personalities and nihilistic worldviews of Hollywood celebrities into his characters as well.
Rating: 
Summary: Moving Tale of Horrific Siege
Review: Anthony Goodman's "The Shadow of God: A Novel of War and Faith," is a "new classic" of historical fiction that alternately charms and shocks the reader.
Essentially the tale of the Muslim siege of the Knights of St. John at Rhodes in 1520, the subtitle of the novel could be "A Novel of War, Love, and Faith." It is undeniably a novel about war -- Goodman writes in a straightforward, riveting style that calls to mind the best work of Bernard Cornwell (the Sharpe series, the Grail Quest series, etc.) without going over-the-top. And the siege of Rhodes gave Goodman many opportunities for excess. One of the longest sieges in history, disease, famine, and misery plagued both sides. Further, the Knights' fortress in Rhodes was the best-defended site in the world, and the few hundred knights in the fortress easily had a kill ratio of over twenty to one as the Islamic forces marched endlessly into certain death. Goodman captures the horrors of a war fought with cannon, broadsword, scimitar, musket, crossbow, and even subterranean mining and counter-mining with great effect.
Thankfully, Goodman also spends a great deal of time with the players on both sides, and we see the humans on both sides, including the Ottoman Sultan Sulieman, leader of the Islamic forces, and Phillipe, leader of the Knights. Sulieman, a young sultan, is the "Shadow of God," whose words have the power of life and death over his subjects. Sulieman is willing to throw thousands of lives away to rid Rhodes of the Knights, and he is not above executing those he sees fit, but Sulieman always comes across as a vivid character, not a cardboard cutout villain that he could have been in a lesser book.
The same applies to Phillipe, who commands the Knights with an apparent fanaticism. But Goodman allows us to see the human side of Phillipe's rigidity -- not only is Phillipe well-acquainted with the treachery of past Sultans and the slaughter of Christian forces following their surrender, Phillipe is also tortured by his oath of obedience. As he agonizes over his decisions, Phillipe also lives with his heart in his throat for the safety of his beloved Helene who has risked everything to journey to France to be with him.
This love story elevates the novel, as does the other major love story, between the Knight Jean, the Rhodian beauty Melina, and their twin infant girls. Goodman, who is so well-versed in writing of battles, also knows how to tell a romance. That these romances occur on such a horrific stage, well, only makes them more moving.
A well-balanced novel that neither demonizes nor excuses the leaders and creates several characters for the ages, "The Shadow of God" is a highly recommended addition to the library of all fans of historical fiction. And the author implies that he's got a sequel on his mind -- the conflict between East and West on the Island of Malta, where the Knights once again face their Islamic foes. We can only hope that Goodman has another novel in store!
Rating:
Summary: Sloppy
Review: As a regular reader of historical fiction I was excited by the prospect of this book, which covers a period of time of which I know quite little. The prologue certainly whet my appetite for the tale ahead. Yet, by the middle of the book my keenness had been a bit dulled. I found myself erectng barriers to force my attention back to the story and ignore the author, who kept peeking out from behind the prose as if to see if his audience were still there. The actual story is indeed compelling and certainly the author has done substantial research regarding the events. The detail was sweeping and precise, yet beyond the historical accuracy, the tale itself was simply untenable. Aside from a few characters, Piri Pasha being the most notable, everyone sounded as if they'd stepped out of an episode of 'The West Wing'. Despite some poignant scenes, the moral fabric of the story, its ethical ambience, if you will, seemed utterly 21st century in its sensibilities. The language was often modern and the relationships flimsy. I found the Jean;Melina;Renato trio to be almost offensive in their completely cardboard aspect. The author also included several scenes which added little to the story and seemed contrived to demonstrate his mastery of the subject. This book conveyed only a fraction of the drama of this great siege, and to which it ostensibly aspired. Add to this the numerous grammatical and spelling errors and I would say this manuscript might have done well with a few more revisions. This book was certainly published before its time.In the end I must say the author was simply too ambitious. I think the book he intended to write would have been twice or perhaps three times as long. As it was, I had no connection to any of the characters; there was simply not enough time to develop one. The chapters which might have allowed this seemed rushed and forced, as if the author were staring at his watch waiting for empathy to appear so he could move on. An alternative would have been to focus strictly on the adventure aspect of the story and make no real attempt at character development. Both approaches may have yielded a great read. Sadly, the author chose neither tack in this work. Nonetheless, I will look for other books by Mr. Goodman. His subject matter is replete with possibility and he's bound to improve.
Rating:
Summary: Poorly done
Review: I was hoping for a good historical novel about an event that had great inpact on the history of the region. This is not the novel to read if you hope for historical accuracy! There are many inaccuracies which not even literary license can allow. Also, his style shows that this is a first novel. Perhaps he'll get better in the future or perhaps he'll stick to the practice of medicine!
Rating: 
Summary: A contradictory reading experience....
Review: In 1522, Suleiman the Magnificent, the Shadow of God, ruler of the Ottoman empire, fulfilled his grandfather's quest to subdue the Knights of St. John on the island of Rhodes. Fresh from victory in the Balkans, Suleiman flung the might of his armies at a fortress defended by 500 knights and assorted mercenaries. The arduous siege was to last for months. This is a tale of the Ottoman's victory. The first half of Anthony Goodman's book meets with some obvious problems. Characters are wooden, shallow, and untested. Chronology lurches and sputters as Goodman seems unable to provide the perception of smooth transitions in time. Indeed, I was listlessly committing myself to a mere 20 pages a day convinced I was in the midst of a 3-star effort. But, then, as the latter half of this account opens, the siege begins. The pace quickens, suspense builds, shaky character formation and timelines fade to the background as Goodman's mastery at describing the inconceivably bloody, tortuous conflict sweeps to the fore. My 20-page patience level blossomed to the point where only much needed sleep interrupted. I was now in the midst of an excellent historical novel. The dichotomy was startling. As this is Anthony Goodman's first published attempt, one hopes that his ability to build protagonists some day matches his skill at portraying events. Should he achieve this parity of crucial ingredients, he may rightfully be considered a historical novelist of note. Until then, the best he may warrant, as with Shadow of God, is a rating of 4 stars.
Rating:
Summary: Entertaining History, Brilliantly Written
Review: Shadow of God achieves the balance that so many other historical novels fail to comprehend. Good historical fiction is just what the words say, well written plot centered around real history. The story suffers if either side is lacking or is unrealistic. Shadow of God is a fine example of the education and entertainment so many historical stories can offer if written well and faithfully portrayed. The story revolves around the siege of Rhodes in 1522. At the time, the Ottoman Empire was the most powerful in the world, whose provinces spanned three continents. Money and tons of other resources poured into the imperial coffers. The new sultan, Suleiman, was determined to prove himself the equal of his ancestors. To this end, he organized a massive army and armada to deal with the 500 Christian knights that held the fortress of Rhodes. The descriptions of the Ottoman court and the functions of the state are extremely interesting and enlightening. The Janissaries, the Pashas, the Viziers, are all fascinating subjects that are described very well. Garrisoning the small island of Rhodes are the Knights of St. John, an order of Christian warriors. From the island, the multinational group of soldiers leads pirate raids on nearby Ottoman ports and ships. The new grandmaster, Phillipe, comes to the fortress as news of the Sultans arrival begins to leak out of Istanbul. The stage is set for one of the most brutal sieges in human history. The mechanics and tactics of siege warfare are complex but are intriguing when written in a fictitious style. Greek fire, cannons, arquebusiers, muskets, tunnels and underground mines are all detailed and drawn in an entertaining light, never losing their connection to real history. The battle is something to really enjoy. The unbelievable amount of violence and death is written in a horrific narrative. Thousands of Janissaries slipping on their comrades blood is an image that is pressed into your memory throughout the story. The tunnels are the worst part, where thousands of Ottoman slaves are buried alive in an effort to enter the city. The back story is also very interesting and does not compromise the history of the battle. Both sides of the conflict are characterized as what they were. The Ottoman Empire was a very progressive empire intellectually, but it still captured thousands of slaves from Europe and was built for conquest. The Knights of St. John are courageous and honorable, but they were also somewhat motivated by piracy and the accumulation of wealth. A great historical story made accessible to all lovers of fiction and history.
Rating:
Summary: Goodman Very Successfully Balances Thrills and Tragedy
Review: Shadow of God is a terrific read. Goodman's story-telling balances well between the larger-than-life characters of history and legend, and the human decisions, romance and tragedy behind them. At its heart this book is simply a fantastic story. From lighting striking the Grand Master's sword, to Rhodes' 40-foot-thick walls swallowing cannon balls - again and again I found myself amazed, asking, "This really happened?" Goodman's writing shows an appreciation of this, an eagerness to tell the story with all its thrills, all its surprises and all its dark moments. The research is superb, with dazzling historical detail. My knowledge of the siege of Rhodes and the cultures surrounding it was very limited, but Goodman's detail paints a vivid and consistently gripping picture. This book is very successful at being both a dark historical exploration and a rousing adventure.
Rating:
Summary: Balanced Viewpoint, Immature Writing
Review: The Shadow of God deals with a fascinating a little-known conflict between the Knights Hospitaler of St. John and the Ottoman Turks. By all rights, the siege of Rhodes should be a gripping and action-filled historical account. And so it is. Better still, the author alternates with a fairly balanced eye between the two sides, never falling into the historical cliche of "the evil empire" against the "hopelessly outnumbered knights"; nor the reverse dimension of "violent Christian zealots" to be deposed by the "philosophic and benevolent Eastern civilzation". For eluding this trap, Goodman has my applause.
The difficulty I found with the book was that the writting style itself, particularly in the dialogue. The characters often communicated information to the reader redundantly, useless unless whole months elapsed between the time the reader could find time to complete a chapter; and much of what was said doesn't ring true to conversation, however formalized. The best parts to read were action accounts, particularly descriptions of medical scenarios (Goodman's medical background serves him in good stead here), but his characterization falls flat, robbing the whole tale of any personal involvement.
Based on earlier reviews, I hoped the book would pick up the pace towards the end. Alas, I felt that the end of the siege, with emotions high and hopes in tatters, real humanity would finally shine through his characters. Instead, Goodman narrates a "legend" concerning one of the knight's lovers, while another illicit love affair concerning the Grand Master ends with a whimper. Much more was possible within the confines of the historical outcome. Ultimately, I appreciated The Shadow of God for its attention to historical detail, but could not enjoy the book itself because of the immature writing style. I only recommend this book to someone especially interested in the era and the event concerned.
Rating: 
Summary: 3 stars with a caveat
Review: This book gives the impression that it was written by someone who loves history, loves the subject, but unfortunately is not a gifted writer. This makes the book rather difficult to review. On the one hand, I found the history aspect fascinating. I did not really know much about the siege at Rhodes and was continually amazed at the different things I learned, from medieval warfare and tactics to culture and customs. This aspect of the book is very well done and highly enjoyable. However, this is not a history book, but historical fiction, and it is in the fiction aspect that the author truly fumbles. Characters are shallow and underdeveloped. Conversations are unnatural. The relationships between characters are contrived. Everything that makes this a work of fiction is very poorly handled. Read this for the history aspect. You will learn much and the author is very good in that regard. Force yourself through the fiction and just keep telling yourself that the man is doing his best. Next time I hope he just writes a nonfiction historical account.
|
