Pride of Carthage

Good but not great

Though I think some of the history is questionable, I enjoyed the story. My problem was with the flow and character development, of which there was very little. The novel moves from one front to the next and from the perspective of one character to another without much transition, making it difficult to follow at times.
It also seemed as if major characters in the novel were virtually unknown to the reader at times.

3 of 3 people found this review helpful

I wish I had listened to negative reviews

What disappointed you about Pride of Carthage?

I'm very disappointed on several levels. I LOVED "Acacia" and greatly enjoyed the other two novels of David Anthony Durham's "Otherlands" trilogy. I ignored the negative reviews (at my own peril, as it turned out) because I had looked forward to Durham's next major work for years and I love good historical fiction, especially about the ancient world, almost as much as the fantasy and science fiction genres. Plus, I wanted to learn more about Hannibal and the Punic Wars, while hoping to cheer for him and his efforts against the "evil empire" (Rome). Perhaps Hannibal was not cheer-worthy (even anachronistically from my modern perspective), but as created by Durham, he's as bombastic and one-dimensional as any mustache-twirling villain of early cinema. I had no real feel or true understanding for why he wanted to march on Rome, other than "I want to be more successful than Alexander the Great" and "I want to make daddy proud" while putting those ridiculous Greeks and Romans in their place. Even if his depiction of Hannibal was based on historical fact and he was a jerk with whom you can't empathize, the writing was sub-par. I'm fine with a good anti-hero when done well, like Angus Watson's fantastic (and very negative) depiction of Julius Caesar in his Iron Age trilogy or many of Martin's "Game of Throne" characters or Joe Abercrombie's characters in his "First Law" trilogy. I felt Durham was trying to create a modern ancient epic in the high epic style of "Gilgamesh," "The Iliad" or "Beowulf," but if so, he failed to make something that was either readable or easy to listen to.

Would you ever listen to anything by David Anthony Durham again?

Yes, if he returns to epic fantasy.

Who would you have cast as narrator instead of Dick Hill?

Tim Gerald Reynolds (but even a great narrator couldn't have saved this)

Any additional comments?

I've heard Dick Hill before, and he was fine. But with this book he was loud, bombastic, melodramatic, ugh. I felt like I was being yelled out, to add insult to injury.

3 of 5 people found this review helpful

Unseemly

What could have made this a 4 or 5-star listening experience for you?

Better research.

Would you ever listen to anything by David Anthony Durham again?

Perhaps, but I doubt it.

What do you think the narrator could have done better?

I thought the narrator was excellent. He certainly enunciates clearly.

You didn???t love this book... but did it have any redeeming qualities?

The Punic wars are an interesting period.

Any additional comments?

I have a fondness for historically accurate fiction, and particularly, well researched historically accurate fiction. This book seemed to be trying to give us a picture of Hannibal, and Carthaginians as sub-Saharan Africans. It's not accurate, and the author seemed to go out of his way to try to indicate that it is. If it were an occasional inference, it wouldn't matter, but after a while, it became evident that he was trying to make it an issue. I thought the narrative suffered from it.

9 of 16 people found this review helpful

must read

Absolutely a must read for any lover of ancient Rome. Fantastic narration and overall great book.

worth a listen

the story was great (granted, the original story is awesome so he doesn't have to add much ... personally want a fan of the reader

Bad voice casting ruined this, better to read it

This is a review of the audiobook version of this, not the book itself (which I really enjoyed)
I really hate to say this because Dick Hill always reads perfectly. He always gets the intent, meaning, and pronunciation right on whatever he's reading. Something even many excellent narrators struggle with.
But in this case, he chose to use a very, very enthusiastic Shakespearean British voice with long rolling Rs and tremulous vibrato. You almost picture him standing in tights, holding up a skull in the classic Shakespearean stereotype.
The result is that he sounds like the story is a comedic farce, and it completely ruins what is, at it's heart, a gritty, historical war story.
Don't take this as an insult to this award-winning narrator. But he was definitely miscast. Or at least, directed badly. Because he's actually American. So why THAT accent and voice?
I'm not sure who decided to go with that approach, but it came across as cartoonish.
In this case, I'll suggest the print version.
Skip this recording, for your own sake.

1 of 2 people found this review helpful

audible does allow me return

the voice is weird, and story dragging on in too much uninteresting details, and audible does not allow me to return.