Hamlet, the Magician

Thoughts Be Bloody by Auden Patrick

Pages: 368 Genre: fantasy retelling

Rating: 4 Star

Horatio Bithersea takes his place at Elsinore, one of the most prestigious universities in the secretive magical world, very seriously, even though he's never really gotten a handle on controlling his magic or fitting in with his peers. In the summer before sophomore year, he stumbles in on Carson Hamlett cradling his father's dead, bloody body, but he tries to keep his head down and move forward. Then, a year later, he sees the ghost of Hamlett's father, who places a curse on them to destroy Elsinore or lost their minds. Horatio doesn't want to lose Elsinore, but he doesn't want to destroy his newfound connection with a deeply hurting Hamlett either.

This was a really interesting take on Hamlet. I didn't agree with every interpretation, but I thought the book did a good job justifying the character and story decisions.

I really enjoyed this version of Horatio. It was a compelling choice to make him a very angry and jealous character. It's different, for the man primarily characterized by his loyalty, but I liked it. Horatio is an outsider at Elsinore other than his connection to Hamlet, which translates well to Magical-Horatio being an outsider at Elsinore the School until he connects with Hamlett and holds some resentment over that. It was a choice that made Horatio feel like a unique character written by someone who still understands the original play.

I don't want to spoil something that is technically a plot point, but I also appreciated that this book did ultimately put Horatio as a peer to Hamlett. Their relationship was fascinating, actually, and I liked how it was written. Seeing Hamlett through Horatio's very biased point of view and piecing together the truth was an engaging experience. More than anything, I appreciated that it never felt like the author wanted me to just blindly hate Hamlett (or any other character, for that matter). I had to form an opinion on these characters, not coast on what the author feels about the play characters while still being able to feel the roots of them present.

It was a shame that everyone other than these two was sidelined. Lia was fairly present, but most of her characterization came secondhand. Regis (Gertrude), Edric (Claudius), Nius (Polonius — hilarious name choice, by the way), and Laertes all has important roles but were only present a handful of times. It's hard to care as much about their fates when I don't actually know them outside of what Horatio is telling me to care about them. Ross and Gil were the same. We get more moments with them, but I felt like Horatio kept telling me things about them that didn't mesh with what was happening on the page, leaving me ultimately very confused about how I was supposed to feel.

This isn't the longest book in the world, but it's not the shortest either. The problem for me was that the author had this grand plan for a story (the framing of why Horatio is telling us everything) that was interesting but very different from the rest of the book. Things just sort of went off the rails at the 80% mark — which is not an exact percentage because I was reading a physical copy — where it was clear we were finally realizing the author's vision, but we leaned into it so hard that it just felt like a different story. The transition from a Hamlet retelling to a dark fantasy, almost. It's hard to describe without spoilers, but the point is that there is a clear "before" and "after" point.

That being said, I was actually really into the story. It was almost very well executed. Right before the payoff, all of the quirks started to get old. The book almost could've been, like, 40 pages shorter by just getting rid of some of the repetition. If you think Hamlet and Polonius talk a lot, just wait until you meet this version of Horatio. He's got stuff to say. Everything he is telling you is true. Hamlett is the strongest magician in two centuries. Has he mentioned that his parents were abusive? Intentional repetition is not a bad thing and, as I said, was mostly an effective choice, but definitely passed the line from intentional to irritating. Horatio's going to tell you exactly what he's thinking and he's going to tell it to you another 400 times too.

I will also say that there were many moments with logistical issues. For example, it would mention Horatio "propping himself up" when he's standing. Or the characters would be described in an office and then in the next paragraph they're in the library. Given the intentionally-confusing style here, I couldn't tell if I was missing something, Horatio was missing something, or if the book simply needed more editing. If it was intentional, it needed to be a little bit more clear.

This book was a battle between intention and execution. It had good ideas that worked but were either taken too far or not far enough. Characters were written with interesting personalities and then never included. Emotional depth got lost in the writing's repetition gimmick without ever being elaborated or built upon. I enjoyed the book and had a good time reading it, mostly, but everything I liked was also something that got on my nerves.

I don't know. Maybe I have Hamlet blinders and it was worse than I thought. Despite the problems, it worked enough that I had a good time reading it. And, most importantly, I felt the spirit of the play and was still able to be surprised by the changes. It wasn't perfect, but it was a solid book and a solid retelling.