One thing - I really really REALLY don't like Clement-Davies' writing. You might even come to say that I despise it with a fiery passion. But it seems like no matter what I do, I keep being drawn to his books. First The Sight, which I really despised. Then The Telling Pool, which was so boring that I seriously felt myself losing brain cells. WHY did I keep reading his books if i absolutely positively hated did not like them??? Well, I was browsing books, and I wandered over to the C's. I saw "Fire Bringer". Do not pick it up!, I told myself, No, no, NO!As you probably already guessed, I did pick it up (the cover is really pretty, btw... A certain shade of blue mixed with- Ok, I'm shutting up now). And I'm thanking my lucky stars that I did. Nowadays, all the books are about "dark" girls that are all, "Oh no! I can't choose between him and him! Ahhh this is torture!!!!" and lame love stories that make you wish you had a trashcan nearby. This was a fresh breath for me. I don't really like "old-recent" books, (this was published in 1999), and I am usually browsing the new releases to find a half decent book or some such. Point is, this isn't my typical book. So if I enjoyed it, I'm betting two thirds of you guys also will.This is about a deer. (Surprise, surprise. I'm sure you haven't guessed that from the cover.) And I'm not going to list all about this book because if you really want to know you'll read the synopsis. So, one big thing I really liked is that it wasn't lame. At least not for me. I have a big problem with talking animals. Animals. Do. Not. Talk! So if you are writing on a point of view about animals, make it believable and not lame. Please. Spare humanity and the trees that will die to publish your terrible book. Like his previous book, The Sight. It was about talking wolves. But it was lame and boring and all kinds of other things that make up a book with a title called: Do Not Read Me I Suck B- moooooving on...Thankfully, this book was believable most of the time. And while I'm sure deer don't contemplate in the way Clement-Davies wrote about, it was still slightly believable.Only bad thing- the book tends to focus on something boring, like the description of a herd gathering to attack, for a long period of time. It starts getting all icky and UGH. Nobody likes run-on descriptions. Especially Chuck Norris.I thought this book was agreeable and a lot of fun. It transported you into a way different world, but since you knew so much about that world from his descriptions, it was actually fun.The end (actually the very last sentence) made me sniffle... But that's life.
The only reason this book is not five stars, is because of all the bloodshed, I think. It was an excellent book. Nearly 500 pages long, it really delved into the nature and lives of red deer. Other than enjoying this book, I also gained a lot of knowledge on the nature of deer - how they live, how they feed, how they travel . . . it was amazing. The omniscient point of view was both surprising and intriguing - you would switch from following Rannoch and his friends straight into the mind of the evil master-mind, Sgorr, and his deadly armies. You would hear of things before the characters did, and have explained to you the knowledge they lacked. Usually I would have thought of the omniscient point of view unnatural and confusing, but somehow it added to the story's excitement and thrill. The only reason I was slightly uncomfortable with this book was the realism. The deer were both realistic and fictional - talking, thinking, feeling creatures, but also deer. Animals. The way the stags chose their hinds was utterly realistic . . . the hinds had more or less no choice in the matter, and though this is realistic . . . those hinds also spoke and felt and thought. They were essentially people, and yet they lived like animals. Then the bloodshed. The author went into glorious, gory detail of how the antlers tore into the deer's flesh, blood pooling on the ground, eyes glazing over . . . I'm okay with some gore, but wow. Lastly, I think, Sgorr. The only point in the book that I disliked - Sgorr's secret. Eurgh. Almost unnecessarily horrible? Or is that just me. Not something you expect to find in a story about deer, which Goodreads compares to Watership Down.
Do You like book Fire Bringer (2015)?
In the lands of Scotland lives a herd of deer. Among this herd is Rannoch, a special deer with a prophecy chasing him. On the night he was born, the head deer, Drail, and his second, Sgorr, were killing certain members of the herd called Outriders. Rannoch's father was killed forcing several other deer to leave in hopes to get away from all the trouble. As Rannoch grows he learns more about the prophecy and how he plans on stopping Drail and Sgorr. I chose to read this book because I read David Clement-Davies's The Sight and I loved it. I decided that I would give Fire Bringer a chance since it was written by the same author as The Sight. I liked how this book was about an animal that most people wouldn't read about. I never thought I'd find myself reading a book about deer. The good things about this book was that the first chapter had action in it. I felt like I needed to be convinced to read the book but the first chapter did the trick. I didn't like how Rannoch seemed to not have the mindset of the prophesied deer that everyone was waiting for. He did a lot of running away and avoiding things he should've had taken care of. My overall impression of the book was that it was just okay. It wasn't as good as The Sight, in my opinion. I think a little bit more action in the middle would've made the book better. I felt like it was a let down compared to The Sight. It was still a good book but it did it slow in the middle. I'd recommend this book to anyone who like reading about fantasy and animals that can talk. It has a good amount of action in it and it has a good story line but it does get a little dry in the middle. The only warnings I'd have for this book is that if you cant handle the fact that animals kill each other, you probably shouldn't read it. There is fights between the deer and the book does well with getting around that fact that these fights are bloody. To be honest, there's not much I would warn someone about.
—Lamonica Williams
I barely made it through the book. The author does not understand the storytelling concept of "don't tell me, show me." Instead of that he gives you "I will show you and THEN also tell you in case you missed it the first time. And while I'm telling you I'm going to explain the significance just in case you weren't paying attention to the story or are too dumb to follow along." It was arduous trying to make it through and completely distracted from the story, which wasn't a strong narrative to begin with. The characters were very one dimensional and the story predictable. I'm pretty sure this is a children's book.
—Mallory Shepherd
Certainly better than Clement-Davies' rather awful The Sight, but all in all a rather mediocre book. Still, in parts I had really fun reading this little deer epic.Its strongest point is the protagonists: deer. Yes! Finally! No more wolves! No more canines! Look at that! DEER! I don't think we've had those before? Good. What if the protagonists would have been wolves? I guess it would have been pretty damn boring. The species in this animal fiction really is the selling point to me.The world building ranges from okay to damn decent, and although a lot of people will compare anything with "talking animals" immediately to Watership Down, the parallels are strong in this one. Wouldn't exactly call it a carbon-copy, but there is a strong influence that has lead to very similar patterns that are uncanny. I still enjoyed the deer lore, although the tales of folk hero El-ahrairah... erm... I mean STARBUCK got lost in the plot. Established at the very beginning as a cute little genesis, it seemed that the author casually forgot about it for the rest of the book and we don't hear about it until the very last page or so.The deer behave fairly natural as far as I can tell (with very little exceptions that I didn't mind), the pacing was good and enjoyable, the characters were cliché cut-outs, but not the awful kinds as in "The Sight". I simply enjoyed the story as a whole, with its faults and shining parts.
—Azalea
