I went into this book knowing very little about it, other than the reference to Shardik the Bear in one of Stephen King's books in the Dark Tower series. I did have some prior experience with Richard Adams, having read/enjoyed/been impressed with Watership Down and The Plague Dogs. In fact, while reading Plague Dogs, I noticed that Adams manages to keep me reading right on through something I cannot stand in most books: lengthy description of setting, particularly landscapes. So much of The Plague Dogs is the setting, and not only did I read all that stuff about the Lake District, it actually made me want to find out more about the area, and even, possibly, to visit there one day.Anyway, Shardik. I didn't expect Shardik to be the exact type of fantasy novel I usually hate and refuse to finish -- or, not so much refuse, as just be physically unable to due to falling asleep. Adams did a lot of very elaborate, almost Tolkien-quality world-building for Shardik, and this particular brand of detail usually turns me right off. Give me a book that takes place in a world full of people and places with ridiculous-sounding names (Deelguy? Bel-ka-Trazet? Ta-Kominion? General Zelda? BWAH HA HA HA HA!) and I will fling that book across the room before long. However, I did not fling this book. The world Adams has created for the book coheres very well, stupid names aside. And once again, the descriptions of setting/landscape (which are so important to the story) are so beautifully written, they held my interest as they did in The Plague Dogs.Some reviews of this book complain about its "preachy" tone, and I can sympathize. The tone is oddly stiff, and Adams sometimes spells things out too blatantly where he really could have afforded to trust the reader. I didn't feel it was anywhere near as axe-grindy as The Plague Dogs (which I enjoyed, if that word could be applied to such a book!), and the unfolding of the story was so engaging, I felt the sometimes-stilted tone took a back seat to the story. I don't think anyone could call Richard Adams subtle -- he definitely has "messages" he wants to put across about large ideas. But there's also no denying that his writing is powerful and moving.Shardik is not a fast read. It's epic and takes a bit of dedication, but it's worth it. Nearly every character undergoes a change of almost cataclysmic proportions. Nearly everyone is redeemed. The point of the book is that redemption -- where does it come from? Via whose actions? Is it always deserved?And then, of course, there's the question of the bear. Is he the ursine embodiment of the Power of God? Or is he just a beast that's been made subject to human superstitions and human greed?I recommend this book to anyone who enjoys heavy-duty fantasy, or discussions of philosophy/religion. Adams can dazzle you with beautiful writing one moment, and make you question the way you live your life in the next moment. Good stuff either way.
I knew the title from a Stephen King reference ( The Waste Lands) and picked it up because of my interest in predator worship myths. Shardik, a great bear revered as the power of the divine, is very much a Monster of God in the sense that David Quammen writes of in his book by that title. Unlike real bears, who nosh whoever happens to get in their way, Shardik never eats someone who doesn’t deserve it (though I daresay he may have snacked on some innocent cattle.) The religion Adams creates is neither ancient a la Clan of the Cave Bear nor quite Christian, but something of both. God manifests himself in the chaos of nature, replete with Old Testament-style smitings.Taken on its own terms, though, the book has a lot to say – in particular, about the folly of believing the desires of man to be the will of God. There’s a disturbing poignancy in Adams’ imagery of the beast-god caged and drugged senseless by people who claim to be his worshippers. By ‘divine’ will (and the pressure of an ambitious baron), the hunter Kelderek helps overthrow a government, rises to kingship, and legalizes a slave trade to pay soldiers to further the conquests. When a dissident frees Shardik, Kelderek sets off to recapture him and plunges into a hell of his own making. The Streels of Urtah, in particular, captured my attention.A few random things got in the way. The names frequently struck me as odd, particularly the city-state Ortelga, which to me sounded too much like that brand of canned pseudo-Mexican food. Adams of lapses into extended similes that not only detract from the story but often seem inappropriate for the world he’s created. The weirdest device was Adams’ references to real-world history and myths in his made-up universe. I suppose he intended to bring his own myth into parallel with those of our world – ‘yes, this really happened,’ with a wink. But most of the time I just scratched my head.Just the same, critics called Shardik better than Watership Down. I read Watership over ten years ago and can’t make a fair comparison. But I am surprised that Shardik hasn’t had the staying power of Adams’ first novel.
Do You like book Shardik (2004)?
Shardik tells an interesting story, but it is dragged down by some bloated writing. That made it… difficult for me to enjoy.The story centers around a more or less honest and straightforward man named Kelderek. He's a hunter in a fictional land called Ortelga. One day while hunting he stumbles upon a gigantic bear. Apparently, in the religion of Ortelga, this bear is the embodiment of their god, Shardik, and Kelderek reports this to his fellows. What follows is the rise of Kelderek as an Ortelgan prophet, the rise of Ortelga, then the fall of both Kelderek and Ortelga. The story is mostly interesting and unconventional, and brought to light some intriguing ideas related to religion as an idea and religion as a practice among men. But the good aspects of this book are very much obscured by the writing, which really could have used some pruning. The author spends a lot of time expounding upon metaphors on situations occurring within the story, rather than just telling the story. It's really a pretty aggravating practice, and sapped a lot of my enjoyment. That, combined with some strange aspects of the story that didn't really make very much sense, makes me hesitant to recommend this book to others. Read Watership Down, another book by Richard Adams, but you should probably walk past Shardik.
—Scott Lichtor
I think I'd give this one about 3.5 stars. I absolutely love Watership Down and I've tried to read Shardik in the past but I don't think I had the maturity to appreciate it at the time. It was still difficult for me to get into it now (15 years later), and I wouldn't say I enjoyed it until about 3/5 of the way in. What bothered me the most was not having any idea where he was leading us, and not being sure that he really knew for awhile. I didn't feel like my time was being well spent. However, when the plot finally seemed to develop a purpose I started to really get caught up in the story and ultimately felt satisfied with the conclusion. It's a long one and a time commitment, so I don't know if I'll ever get around to re-reading it, but I'm glad to have finished it once.
—Jenny
Ever since I've read Watership Down I've been a big Richard Adams fan. This book makes for pretty heavy reading, and I won't deny it took me a while to get through it. The pacing could be quite slow at times, but I think it is well worth sticking through. Shardik is epic fantasy, and nothing at all like what he created in Watership Down. You could argue that the book isn't even about the bear, but the events that surround it. One thing I first noticed about the book was how original the storyline seemed. Shardik tells the story of the giant eponymous bear that the Ortelgans (a tribe of the Beklan empire) believe to be the divine Power of God. He's discovered by a simple hunter, Kelderek (later the priest-king of Shardik) who declares that Shardik was sent to lead the Ortelgans to greatness and "reclaim" the empire's seat at Bekla. Unlike Adams's other books Watership Down and The Plague Dogs, the bear's perspective is only seen in the initial two chapters and for the remainder of the story he is a powerful and often antagonistic force that merely serves to set the wheels turning in the story. What I loved in particular about this book was the imagery Adams is able to come up with. The first few paragraphs alone in chapter one has some of the most beautiful prose I've ever read. He does a wonderful and very plausible job of building up this world. There's something very ancient about Adams's world, even prehistoric. I recently learned that Shardik was the work Adams was most happy with, and I think I understand why. It's clear he's spent a lot of time creating his world, along with its geography and its flora and fauna. For the duration of the book, I got the feeling that this world wasn't just some fantasy world, but a world that might have been our own thousands of years ago.While most of the characters are flawed and their actions evil, you don't find it hard to retain a certain sense of sympathy for their plight even as the novel progresses and the reality of Kelderek's crimes are made clearer and clearer. While the tone of the book can border along the preachy, what I enjoyed most about the story was that it was never made clear if Shardik really were a divine personification of some higher power or if it was superstition and just a twist of fate. Adams leaves us to decide ourselves as we like. The story has strong themes of redemption, suffering and mankind's spiritual search for God in the world.I would recommend Shardik to anyone who really loves Adams's previous works, animal-lovers or anyone who appreciates the details that come with epic high fantasy.
—Elizabeth
