"Death of the Necromancer," Martha Wells, 1998

Initially, I chose this book because of its age.  I first encountered Martha Wells through her award-winning series of novellas, “The Murderbot Diaries,” which I enjoyed a lot (and reviewed in September of 2019).  Death of the Necromancer was published nearly twenty years before “Diaries.”  A lot can change in that amount of time, and I wanted to see how a popular and successful author like Martha Wells evolved.  

First off, a caveat: the genres of these books are very different — essentially disjoint, but I don’t think this necessarily dictates changes in writing technique or use of language.  Further, I didn’t see much in the way of story-specific style.  In other words, the genre didn’t seem to dictate Wells’ writing style.  Of course that, like most everything else in this review, is only my opinion.  YMMV.  Here are some details regarding genre:

Death of the Necromancer, though part of a series, “works” as a substantial, standalone novel.  It fits naturally into the Swords and Sorcery category.  Most of the action takes place in an ancient land.  There are palaces, ghouls, catacombs, evil wizards, and lots of magic.  There are firearms and explosives, but nothing we’d consider “high tech.”  Lighting, for example, consists of gaslight, candles, and torches. 

“The Murderbot Diaries,” on the other hand, is definitely “hard” science fiction.  It’s a series of four novellas (at the time of this writing, a fifth volume — allegedly a “full-length” novel —  is in development).  In “Diaries” we encounter AIs and cyborgs of various types.  Advanced space travel and and amazing weaponry are presented as “a given.”  There is no magic (Arthur C. Clarke’s postulate notwithstanding).

But I wasn’t focused on differences in genres.  I wanted to examine differences in writing technique.  Here goes:

I was able to detect big differences in mechanics.  The prose in the newer books is tighter and (for me) gets deeper and more seamlessly into the main character’s head.  The narrative and scene-making were stronger and more crisp too.  I suppose that’s to be expected from a hard-working writer: you practice, you polish, and you improve.

On the other hand, I found the plot of the older book to be satisfyingly complex.  I especially liked how the actions of various characters wove through the story.  Also, despite Death of the Necromancer’s “age,” it didn’t feel dated.  The story seemed fresh, and the attitudes, feelings, etc, expressed by the characters felt relevant.  In addition to the action-filled story arc, the main character had a believable “personal development arc.”

So, even though my initial interest in this book was fairly academic, I was drawn into the story.  It held my interest from start to finish, and I think it’s worth your while.

My review is based on the e-book version of Death of the Necromancer, which I checked out from my local library.