Somehow, a dictator from a small middle eastern country has taken over the world. And, while traveling through America, he decides to make a small town in Illinois his base of operations. There, he makes his first introduction with shocking, abhorrent acts, but over the course of the years and decades, many sides of Arslan are seen.This is a strange book, and difficult to review. On the whole, it's not especially believable... but there are parts that ring incredibly true, and the majority of the rest of it are told in a matter-of-fact way that lets you suspend your disbelief, mostly. It's not an especially enjoyable read, considering some of what happens, but it's strangely compelling. I'm not sure I liked it, and at times I violently disagreed with it, but I think it was worth reading.Let's move on to the premise. I mentioned that the book's not especially believable, and this is part of the why. When they finally get around to explaining how Arslan took power, it sounds almost silly. But I think the author realizes that, and that's why she keeps it off-screen and only mentioned by second- or third-hand stories which might be wrong. It matters less about how Arslan did it than that his control is almost total. This isn't a story in which a town resists a Dictator until they're rescued, although to be sure, there are some efforts at resistance. Moreover, though, it's of a town conquered, and doing it's best to survive while conquered, because to resist too much means certain death. And moreover, it's an examination of power, the types of people who can command respect even without being entirely worthy of it, and how power can warp the victims it is used against into strange, sometimes co-dependent relationships. Before I go any further, I think it should be point out that this book deals fairly extensively with ongoing and repeated sexual assault, often against children. In fact, one of the first acts in the book, after Arslan secures the school, is to rape two students, a boy and a girl... the boy is one of the two viewpoint characters (the girl is, as far as I could tell, never mentioned again, which seemed a somewhat bizarre omission). And it doesn't end there. The event is not told in lurid detail, but it doesn't shy away and be cagey about what is happening, either. And moreover, part of the story involves one of the characters coming to feel love for his rapist. Either of these might cause people not to want to touch this book, and I won't argue with that reaction, although I should point out that I think it's pretty clear that the "love" was not a romantic ending the author was building towards, but rather treated as an additional horror, that a character has become so completely reshaped by such a violation, not just by the act but by society's reactions, that their feelings turn this way is a tragedy. In some ways this is the most powerful part of the book. Less successful is the transformation of the rest of the town, although the early parts of that were much more interesting to read.The story is told from two major points of view. There is Franklin Bond, the principal of the school who is forced to share his house with Arslan, and becomes something of the local leader of government... not quite a collaborator, because everybody must collaborate, but over the years seems to do more to protect Arslan than he needs to, for reasons even he doesn't seem to be entirely sure of. The other POV is Hunt Morgan, the young boy Arslan raped the first day, who Arslan keeps with him and trains and educates. I have to give the author credit here, both POVs read very differently, they have completely different styles of expressing themselves, with Bond being more matter-of-fact and Morgan using a lot more literary references and poetic language, as well as drifting back and forth in time. However, Bond's POV was more interesting.As for Arslan himself? He's a strange character, with the megalomaniac goals of a supervillain, the willingness to be cruel but at the same time a bizarre sense of honor, and a strange charisma despite knowing what he's done. The boldest thing Engh does is attempt to make you sympathize with him, at times, not so much to make him a hero but to raise the question of whether a monster might, in certain circumstances, become redeemable, or at least make us to acknowledge that there is honor and humanity in monsters, and perhaps aspects of monsters in the most honorable among us. I think she goes too far with this, myself, but until she does it's interesting to walk that tightrope.The book begins to fail towards the end when (view spoiler)[the book has Arslan return to town, much diminished in power, but, now reasonably free of the fear of retribution, the town doesn't take revenge on him, because... I don't know. One character advances the bizarre argument that everything he did to the town qualifies as War Crimes, for which they don't have the authority to try him, and he hasn't committed any crimes they can. But that doesn't ring true because with crimes against humanity, any community could declare itself with the authority. I can understand a few individual characters, like Bond, being unwilling to kill a man, even a monster, or turn him over to a group that would, but it goes way beyond that apparently because the author wants to give Arslan another heroic turn. (hide spoiler)]
Interesting, liked the idea and premise, Arslan was complete and three dimensional, a brilliantly described character of both good and evil. It was realistic because men are both cowardly, brave, degenerate and full of compassion but all told I found it hard to suspend my disbelief. Arslan is a rapist and paedophile, primarily for sport and recreation, there is no moral come back for the character's actions, to be 'forgiven/tolerated' is very hard to swallow. As for the capitulation of the world's military forces and landslide victory with minor 'mopping up', difficult. The book is perhaps the best example I have come across of asking the reader "does the end justify the means ?". It is generally accepted that the greatest threat to humanity is simply numbers and in 1976 Engh was asking what brutal utilitarian methods will come to pass to 'save us'. Just because I didn't really enjoy the book doesn't mean that I cannot appreciate the questions raised and asked not only of the characters but also the reader, it is layered and complex and intricate (as clichéd as that may be it does apply) but what turned me off was Morgan's narration, it did it's job, adding another perspective - a different viewpoint of the same thing, again asking us what and who's 'truth' can you believe ? Morgan's narration was the antithesis of Bond's steady, mature and 'reliable' narration, it was rampant, exaggerated, poetic and self indulgent and probably spot on for the character's trials, tortures and upbringing and with the author's craft and skill there is no doubt this is deliberate but it is still painful to read. All Engh needed to do was pull back a little with Morgan and let her natural and quite wonderful poetry shine through. In cooking restraint is one of the most important skills to master, I think it might also apply to writing, on occasion, maybe...
Do You like book Arslan (2001)?
"Arslan" one of my top 10 favorite books of all time, is a taut, extremely polished novel by an author with a very short list of published works. I have tried a couple of other books by M.J. Engh, but, (with the exception of an excellent but very hard-to-find story by the name of "The Oracle"), have found her other works unremarkable and at times unreadable. Which makes "Arslan" a bit of an enigma, in my eyes. It's written in the first person and narrated by 2 of the main protagonists, skipping back and forth between two viewpoints.Arslan, a ruthless and charismatic world conqueror at the height of his power, is at the center of the story. Suddenly and without advance notice the town of Kraftsville Illinois finds itself overrun by Arslan and his troops. They immediately take possession of the local high school. The night they arrive, Arslan, in a public ceremony with his soldiers cheering him on, forcefully rapes a young man, a high school student named Hunt. With an unerring eye for recognizing capability, he assigns to Franklin Bond, the High School principal, the job of administering his orders to the town. Arslan quickly and efficiently strips them of all modern conveniences, forcefully cordons them off, cutting their contact with anyone outside the town's perimeter's, and plunges them back in time to a pre-industrial, agrarian lifestyle. We gradually learn, through Arslan's interactions with the two narrators, that Arslan and his armies have conquered the world.The first portion of the book is written in the voice of Franklin Bond, and centers on post-Arslan life in one small American town. The second portion takes us seamlessly and elegantly into the mind of Hunt. Forced to accompany Arslan as he journeys between Turkey and America, Hunt provides us with a vastly different viewpoint, and deeper insight into the motivation and behavior of Arslan.My synopsis sounds farfetched, but in truth the story is extremely well-though out, brilliantly executed, and, as written by Engh, utterly believable. I've read the book several times and find myself completely lost in it each time.This is a story about individuals and the way they think and behave towards others. What to call it? Social Fiction, perhaps? I wouldn't call it future-fiction; technology is described at times, (as skillfully as all of the elements of the story), but is peripheral to the characters. Their behavior is by turns brutal, heartrending, and compassionate, and always utterly believable. If asked to sum up Engh's talent I would say that it lies in her ability to create some of the most fully developed and three-dimensional characters I have ever encountered in print. I can't think of anyone else to compare her to; "Arslan" is, in my opinion, unique. Read it, and if you like it, find and read her other outstanding novella, "The Oracle"; I believe it was included in an SF anthology titled "Edges". I'm hoping for new works by MJ; "Arslan" is brilliant.
—Mea Artist
I read Arslan the first time when I was reasonably young. I was shocked and disturbed and enthralled. The implausible back story aside, the book is about the strange charisma of a brutal and fanatic tyrant and his effect on a small American town.I found the book less effective this time through. The beginning was just as powerful, even knowing what was coming. But the latter half of the novel was weaker than I remembered. The story is told (in two alternations) from the viewpoints of Franklin Bond, the school principal, and Hunt Morgan, a boy severely affected by the arrival of Arslan and his soldiers. On this re-read, I found that while Bond's sections are still effective, Morgan's portion is not. Engh tries to get into Hunt's head, and to show his turbulent ambivalence, but it's not as convincing as when I first read it. She gets at Hunt more effectively from Bond's limited viewpoint than she does from within Hunt's head. In part, that's because she never really gets very far into his head. Bond is far more introspective about his, Hunt's, and the town's situations than Hunt is about his own. It's a shame, because I think Hunt is a credible character. Engh never really gives us a chance to see him as he sees himself. Instead, we're given mostly the top level of his thoughts, and not the deeper dive that seems called for.The book also weakens toward its end. While I thought the plot itself was reasonable, the eventual resolution was less than I had hoped for. In large part, this is because of the role of Arslan's son. He's like a character actor offered a starring role, but only going through the motions. In the end, his role, while offering some nice literary balance, simply doesn't carry the weight that it needs to, leaving the book to trail off into a vague cloud of metaphor. It could be a nice counterpoint to the book's sharp beginning, but in fact it's just a disappointment.Despite all that, I still think this is a great book. It's surprising and unusual, and it does make you think, which is always good. I downgraded it to a strong 4 stars, but in some ways I still think of it as a star book for its initial and memorable impact.
—Metaphorosis
Preposterous idea but gripping writing at times. I wanted to like it, but in the end I simply couldn't suspend my disbelief for either plot or character. A new Tamerlaine gains world domination through a ridiculous nuclear bluff and invades the USA to set up headquarters in Kraftsville, IL. The docile Illinoisans (along with the rest of the world) then come to respect and even love their captor who has raped women and children and committed mass genocide? Wh-at?The only things I appreciated were the imposition of an ancient mentality (conquest, rulership) and set of ancient values (violence, slavery, torture) on present day America, for which the author seems to have held a deep contempt and hatred. She is a Roman scholar as well as SF author. I'm not sure this is the way to make whatever point the novel was looking to make, America is decadent Rome and should be destroyed by a conqueror from the old world? The human race is spent and needs a thorough cleanse?P.S. I felt a little bit scooped by Ms. Engh on one score only. I was going to suggest the USA declare war on some advanced Scandinavian country like Denmark, then surrender the next day, let them occupy us and reorganize our country for us.
—Erik
