Hipsy's View: Eaters of the Dead (or the 13th Warrior)
With this being the second book I have read from Michael Crichton, I have learned that -- at least, for me -- his works are what I would consider time killers. The films based on his novels are amazing, but it seems that the novels are pieces of works that should either be read slowly or one should make time to read them. With Eaters of the Dead, I put my other reads on hold because I have always wanted to read it ever since I found out one of my favorite movies was based on it. The film was the 13th Warrior. Perhaps now that I have read the book, I will rewatch and review the film.
SPOILER ALERT: the following review will have content of both the novel and film discussed within its contents. If you have plans to read and/or watch this story, you have been warned that there are spoilers. If not concerned, then please proceed reading below.
Eaters of the Dead is, plain and simple, the story of Beowulf. It is told through
the eyes of a foreigner and a member of Beowulf's -- or rather Buliwyf in the novel -- party of warriors. Fun fact is that Crichton originally wrote this novel as a bet to make the epic poem entertaining. The story goes -- and this is discussed at the end of the novel, at least the version I read -- that while having lunch with one of his old friends, who was an English professor, they were discussing English bores; they were basically talking about what are the most boring pieces of English Literature. To prove his professor wrong and that Beowulf could be interesting and intriguing, Crichton wrote this novel.
I must admit that I read this novel hoping it was close to the movie; I grew up watching it and still have a copy of it to this day. Now the film is very close to the novel, but there were things I wished were part of it. I was actually bummed that Ibn Fadlan did not learn the Northman language as quickly as he did in the movie and that the death verse was not said the same. Of course, I had to keep reminding myself that Hollywood does change things to make stories play out a certain amount of time; I don't think many people would have been intrigued to have Ibn have a translator throughout the film and learn that he only knew a little bit of the language after spending a long time with the Northman. Also, the death verse sounds more catchy in the film, whereas it sounds more dry in the novel. I did enjoy, though, how the "sea monsters" were described, revealing that they weren't monsters at all but a natural being in the sea; I'll give you a hint, the creatures are monstrous (wink, wink). Though the novel was a slow read for me and I found it to be decent, I still enjoyed the movie more.
The story of Beowulf is a well-known poem. A young warrior travels to distant lands to face and defeat destructive monsters, the first being Grendel when he was in his youth and the last being a dragon in his old age. In Eaters of the Dead, a story full of known traditions and beliefs are seen through the eyes and described by a foreigner who deconstructs local suspicions for possible realities (I say possible because even to this day, there are speculations on what Grendel was and that dragons are still an up-in-the-air topic, no pun intended). In this case, the fire-worm mentioned in the novel can represent the dragon, and Wendol -- the race of people behind the mystery of attacks Buliwyf and his men have come to investigate -- represent Grendel and his mother. Truly, an interesting way to view an epic poem.