Reviews

A Voyage to Arcturus by David Lindsay

misanthrope's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark mysterious fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? No

1.0

Not much story.   Mostly a series of descriptions of a journey.  Probably was meant to be profound, but it fails in that pursuit. Does not feel dated in spite of the time period it was written. I would not read more from this author.

sophw1's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark mysterious reflective fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

5.0

wtfwtfwtf 

biblio_ione's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark mysterious reflective tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

4.0

karp76's review against another edition

Go to review page

2.0

A story, a narrative, is like cooking. It is a blending of characters, setting, plot, feelings, intellect, purpose and an assortment of all manner of flavorings. Metaphor, analogy, allegory and the like are the seasoning, the spice. Used in the right proportions, the meal, the story, is only enhanced. Not used at all, the story can be flat. Used too much, and the story is drowned out by the message by the "zing" of illusion. Here there is no story, no meal. It is all flavoring. It is all allegory. And, it is a mess. Employing the standard early 20th century trope of a "voyage to mysterious world," we are bombarded by a heavy-handed, clunky, poor rendition of the world of the Gnostics, the doctrine of Demiurge. Whole sections are given over to vague conversations that speak "to larger mysteries" but, by and large, speak to nothing at all. The narrative is episodic and meandering, and though the world is fantastic and surreal, it is not memorable in the slightest. My greatest wonder is why such praise is heaped upon this flawed work. It is beyond me. The meal is not good and tastes worse than it should. Send it back.

mc_j_ho's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

I don't know what to make of this book other than that it was a difficult read but not without elements that were worthwhile to persist for.

mattygroves's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

This isn't your average everyday weirdness. This is advanced weirdness. A treatise on metaphysics in the form of an allegorical journey through surreal landscapes. A Pilgrim's Progress in a Gnostic cosmos. A work of eccentric imagination, unconcerned with reception. If it were any more fantastical it would be incomprehensible.

mudcrab_v2's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging reflective medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? No

5.0

k_camrn's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous

3.5

fermentedsorcerer's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark mysterious reflective medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? Yes
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

windhover's review against another edition

Go to review page

2.0

OK, this a philosophic allegory with a surface story of a science fiction-y travelogue. So far, so good. Unfortunately, either I didn't pay enough attention or the philosophy was buried too deep, but I didn't get a lot out of it philosophically. There is some stuff that is interesting but nothing that rocked my world.

Unfortunately, it's not really a fun story on its own merits: the protagonist is a horrible person, most of the other characters are worse, and everybody is pretty flat. The action often seems arbitrary or contrived. I can only presume it is generally serving some symbolic purpose that I couldn't be bothered to notice. Maybe I just wasn't in the mood.

On the other hand, it reminds me a lot of books I do love. It has the same wandering structure as George Macdonald's wonderfully disjointed adult fantasy novels Lilith and Phantastes. C. S. Lewis liked it and borrowed large elements of its plot for Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra. I confirmed this with Wikipedia, but I was pretty sure before; the similarities are pretty obvious. It's distasteful, naive, but strangely mysterious protagonist reminded me strongly of Gene Wolfe's heroes, especially Severian from Book of the New Sun and Able from The Wizard Knight. Maybe I'll have to re-read this one sometime when I'm willing to spend the work to really parse out exactly what Lindsay is trying to say.

One last thing: This book has a lot to say about gender and love and power. If discussions of gender from the 1920's sound like something that might make you angry, maybe pass this one by.