Book Review: The Wicked Day

[osprey_archer]

littlerhymes and I have finished Mary Stewart's The Wicked Day! To my surprise, this was my favorite book of the quartet, because I got deeply invested in Mordred the lonely watchful child who would rather die than hurt Arthur, and also has to ride herd on all his horrible Orkney half-brothers.

(Side note about the Orkney boys: Gareth is, as usual, the sweetheart of the gang. Indeed, Stewart notes that as long as he stayed on Orkney, where he was his mother's pet, he was "in danger of effeminacy" - which is perhaps why he escapes the toxic masculinity that destroys the rest of them. Usually Gawain is the second-best Orkney boy, but here he's just as vengeful and hotheaded as Gaheris and Agrivaine. Sometimes you see a decent Gaheris, but no one in the entire world of Arthurian adaptations seems to like Agrivaine.)

Unfortunately, the book falls apart in the third section, I think because Stewart also got invested in Mordred, Basically a Good Kid Which Is Impressive Considering His Life. Her heart is not in Mordred's destruction of Camelot, but unfortunately she's written herself in a corner where she has to write it, as in the Merlin trilogy she firmly established a) Merlin's prophecy that Mordred would destroy Arthur, and b) Merlin's infallibility as a prophet.

She tries to soften the blow: Mordred's final confrontation with Arthur takes place as a result of a series of misunderstandings. Mordred is Arthur's heir, so when he hears that Arthur is dead he naturally takes over the kingdom, but Arthur is not dead, and when he comes back to England a storm forces him to land on Saxon ground... which leads to a battle with the Saxons, with whom Mordred unfortunately just made an alliance... which ends with Mordred and Arthur facing off in battle.

And then they have a final parlay, which Stewart doesn't show us (they died right after! no one knows what they said! YOU COULD TELL US ANYWAY), and reach an agreement... and then an adder bites a knight and the knight draws his sword to kill it and the soldiers take that as a sign for battle to begin and THAT IS THAT.

In the afterword she notes that the only historical information we have about Mordred is that he died at Camlann with Arthur, in a context where he might just as easily have been fighting on Arthur's side as against him, and she might have followed that route if she hadn't locked herself with all those prophecies. I think the book would have been stronger for it if she had - or else if she had Mordred betray Arthur at least a little. It feels too easy, too much letting the characters off the hook, for it to all be just a misunderstanding.

***

Also I am 99% convinced that Elizabeth Wein read this book to absolute shreds when she was young, because her Medraut so feels like a darkfic version of Stewart's (in particular, an expansion of the scene where Morgause kisses Mordred, when he is not yet aware that he's her son but she definitely knows. How did you expect that to pan out, Morgause! Did you assume he would never know!), and also a fix-it where Medraut doesn't cause the fall of Camelot after all - although Camelot still falls.

Comments

[osprey_archer]

It definitely could have worked with an author who was relishing the Inevitable Tragedy of it all, and in fact Stewart does seem to be relishing it earlier in the book - the high drama of Mordred's visit to Nimue when he says he'll kill himself rather than hurt Arthur! And Nimue tells him that would only bring about Arthur's downfall in some different and perhaps swifter fashion!

But once we actually reach the Inevitable Tragedy it feels like she's rushing through it - wants to be done because she'd really rather be writing a book where Mordred and Arthur make amends and die gloriously fighting off the Saxons together, or something like that. Which would still make Mordred technically Arthur's downfall, right? If the Saxons are attacking because they thought Mordred and Arthur were irretrievably at odds and thought the divided kingdom would make easy pickings? Hmmmm....

ETA: Yes, the series covers the May Babies, although in this case Morgause goads Lot into it and then pins the blame of Arthur by claiming Arthur ordered it done.

[troisoiseaux]

the high drama of Mordred's visit to Nimue when he says he'll kill himself rather than hurt Arthur! And Nimue tells him that would only bring about Arthur's downfall in some different and perhaps swifter fashion!

Now I want a time loop novel where Mordred keeps trying again and again to avoid causing the fall of Camelot until he finally snaps and throws himself into bringing it about because he gives up!! Clearly its fate!! He can't reject fate!!!

Yes, the series covers the May Babies, although in this case Morgause goads Lot into it and then pins the blame of Arthur by claiming Arthur ordered it done.

Hmm. So, the vibe I'm getting here is that she doesn't like making her Favorites make Bad Decisions?

[skygiants]

I ALSO DESPERATELY WANT TIME LOOP MORDRED. I made a joke about "everything everywhere all at once and future king" on Twitter a while ago but I do actually think that is the natural endpoint of the cyclical Arthurian tragedy and I'm shocked nobody yet has done it (that I'm aware of)!

[osprey_archer]

Yes, I think Stewart balks at having her faves make evil decisions. They can make decisions that are foolish or have poor consequences, but NOT decisions as straight up Biblical villain as "I am going to kill ALL THE BABIES born in this one month."