Elantris

SPOILERS IN REVIEW (related to an interpretation that is really bothering me).

This book has barely left my side over the last couple of weeks, and once it got going I really couldn't put it down. The kind of book you want to know what happens next in. The kind of book where you care what happens to the characters. There is a lot to like in this book, a whole lot, but at the same time there were some tropes which kind of niggled me, that I put down to it being a 'first novel'. Then the more I thought about this I have an interpretation of the book which I may be way off base on, but nevertheless has harmed my enjoyment of the book.

At a really high-level, the premise of the book is that there is a city called Elantris. Elantrian's are created by some kind of transformation of ordinary people, and when this occurs they are close to immortal. They are at the highest point of arts, culture and science and there is no want. They feed and heal the local populace as peaceful, and benevolent masters. Then there is the Shaod. It is the fall of Elantris. They fall sick and die. Their once proud and beautiful city becomes slime ridden and rotten. Still some of the populace of the land of Arelon transform, but they transform into sickly pale creatures who are thrown into the city of Elantris with the doors locked behind them.

Our story starts with one of our heroes Raoden, a Prince of Arelon waking up transforming and thrown into the damned city. Meanwhile, his fiancé Sarene, (who he has never met in person) is travelling to Arelon for her wedding and as part of the marriage contract, should either die they are both considered still married. So she arrives in the city of Kae, finding out her husband is 'dead' and she is effectively married. Sarene is also a Princess of the kingdom of nearby Teod and the marriage is effectively a political alliance. Meanwhile a religious leader of the theocratic Empire of Fjorden, Hrathen is on his way to Arelon with a mission - to convert the populace to his religion of Shu-Dereth which follow a branch of the same parent religion. Shu-Dererth is characterised by obedience, a strict hierarchy and a single voice of God via the theocratic absolute ruler.

The book is largely about Sarene finding her place in court, trying to overthrow her new father King Iadon who is a bit of a tyrant whilst simultaneously trying to thwart Hrathen's plans for Arelon. Meanwhile, Raoden is trying to adjust to life in Elantris, trying to restore hope to the city which is characterised by violence, despair and misery.

At it's best, Elantris is a wonderfully weaved book of political intrigue, where the book is like a game of chess particularly between Sarene and Hrathen as they continue to outwit and surprise each other, often deploying tricks against each other. There are many moments in the book where I was genuinely surprised with where the book went or delighted when I thought something would happen and something else did instead. I'd originally picked the book as part of a grimdark challenge, remembering that a few years ago Sanderson was all the rage in grimdark circles so I did want to start with him with his first novel in this setting. For much of the book, the tone is rather light but there is political intrigue in spades, definitely a couple of morally ambiguous characters and plenty of gore and despair in equal measures but these elements of the book do not infuse it. There are places for lightness, and places to smile. The last third of the book really picks up the pace even though it kind of runs out of steam in the end.

I also loved the character of Hrathen. He's a religious fundamentalist, driven by logic and hierarchy rather than faith. He does horrible things, underhand things yet as a villain everything he does is understandable in the context of his world view. I love books like that. Books where you don't like characters, want them to fail but still understand why they act the way they do. Hrathen is complex, rather than cartoony. I also loved how he regularly meets his match in his scheming, with his subordinate Dilaf and the aforementioned Sarene. His crisis of faith and reconciling his actions to his religion, faith and conscience is genuinely one of the most interesting things in the book.

Likewise Sarene bumping into her 'dead but not really dead husband' Raoden and not knowing who he is, is at times fingers in the mouth cringe, and at other times so incredibly cute. It is the plot of most 1980's romantic comedies of boy meets girl, they don't like each other, try and upstage each other before falling in love (and of course because Raoden is a hairless zombie it just proves guys that 'looks don't matter' which was a bit on the nose!)

I also liked the lore around the religions and magic system and why they were how they were. Some thought had clearly gone into it, but as I will share later that troubles me a little. And the last thing I liked is that this was a politically complex fantasy novel wrapped up in a single book. Knowing I'll never finish series I start, I'm pretty pleased to read a complete story in a novel.

So what was turning this likely five star book into a four star one? It's a first novel and it shows. At times Sanderson's dialogue is clunky. The world building is limited. We carry on hearing about the threat to Arelon and we know it has districts but all the action occurs in the cities of Kae and Elantris which are a stone's throw from each other. Kae is a capital city and trading port but it seems the size of a postage stamp and the populace are invisible. In this novel, despite often referencing 'the people' the only folk in the book who matter are nobles and their families. I'd have loved to see Kae develop further.

I also didn't like how some major plot points are just glossed over. The fate of King Iadon is little more than, 'and then he did this and then he died...the end'. It's almost as though that section of the book was rushed and trimmed because it should have been treated far more important than it should have. Likewise, the true nature of King Eventoe's brother (and Sarene's uncle) is just glossed over and the explanation is really important and is just waved away. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Unless this plot was planned for a sequel or prequel?

The characterisation is off. Raoden is Mary Poppins, practically perfect in every way. He never fails at anything and automatically inspires everyone around him. As a character he stinks of the 'god given right of King's to rule'. I found I never cared for him at all, kind of knowing he would survive all adversity.

Sarene is also Mary Poppins. Her singular character flaw is that she's not very good at drawing. I suppose some of her chess moves in the book are counterbalanced but the whole book is her metaphorically fencing with Raoden and Hrathen which is just as well because she's brilliant at fencing too. I didn't find her quite so grating as Raoden, but at times I was finding her getting on my nerves.

And this is where I struggle most with Sanderson. His ethics are to on the nose. The nobility are treating the populace as slaves but are still depicted as 'not so bad really'. Even when the 'evil' of King Iadon falls the hierarchy and the people who oppressed the populace are still in place because 'that's what the people want'. The Elantrians are suffering because they sit around doing nothing all day eating (fatshaming is real in this book) and all they need to do to cheer up and forget their pain, imprisonment and starvation is to get a list of jobs to do by a leader. All I can read is an indictment on the sick and underemployed on the behalf of bosses and an attack on 'welfare' because apparently feeding the hungry leads to dependency. It's hard not to unsee this. Similarly, racial differences are depicted as almost comedy with brown skinned people with funny accents and behaviours. I'd really like to think Sanderson isn't a bigot (though in the past he has made homophobic comments). I'm also aware sections of his fanbase are frustrated at his 'wokeness' in later novels which suggests he has grown as an author.

So what turns this book from a four star to a three star book?

This may be a hot take from me. I haven't seen this referenced in any other review but on my way to work I was thinking about how the book felt a little racist and every little theme I thought of led to something else in the book which made me draw a few more dots before I reached a conclusion. Elantris is really a book about Christian Zionism.

Arelon is a tiny country where the adherents follow one version of a faith whereas to the East a huge Empire of fundamentalist followers of a theocratic religion threaten to overwhelm innocent little Arelon. The East's religion is dogmatic, violent, fervent where nations are subservient to religion. It isn't explicit if the people of Fjordel are darker skinned, but every other culture to the East of little Arelon seem to be brown people. It's really hard not to see this as a parallel to Israel and the Islamic countries that surround it and this little offshoot of the Abrahamic base is struggling against the tide of conversion from the 'east'. It reads problematic as fuck.

Meanwhile Raoden is a Prince who 'dies'. The Elantrian's are depicted in their true form as angelic. Very white skin, white hair. It reads like 'the peaceful white people provide for their subjects' whilst the evil hordes to the East threaten to overthrow them. It's bad enough that 'whiteness' is treated as good whilst darker skin is consistently 'othered'. Raoden is universally loved by the subjects of Arelon and the story of the book is really his rising from the dead, you know like a Second Coming to ascend his throne. When he does this, the tone and language is almost rapturous at times. Is Raoden the 'return of the Messiah'? Likewise, if Arelon is Israel, Raoden is Jesus there is a really unpleasant anti-semitic trope because Arelon's nobility is based on the merchant's wealth. Really??? And before that the Arelon's were effectively a 'kept and cared for' people by Elantris (Christianity) and the fall of Elantris is when the Arelon's lose their way turning to greed. God's chosen people losing their true faith? It was only after this really sunk in that I learnt more about Sanderson's personal faith as a Mormon that this notion of Christian Zionism has stuck.

I really hope I am wrong, but having joined these dots it has really soured my enjoyment of a book that I thought was very good with some questionable ethics. I don't think I am ready to give up on Sanderson but I'm not sure how I feel about this book now.