I read this as part of my 2026 Hugo nominee list. WARNING: the betrayals in the book aren't the only betrayal on offer. That first chapter pulls you in with a whole setup around Yanara and Ruko, then abandons them: an 8-year gap gets explained in drips across the remaining 650 pages. I expected the twins to be the emotional core; instead, Ruko's psychological reckoning with condemning his sister to an exile death march tour might have been the most interesting character study in the book but is skipped entirely.
The book layers overcomplicated twists onto YA-style romance: essentially Miss Scarlett and the Duke meets Tehanu (Nisthala's transformation is asserted, not earned). It reads like a clash of recognizable templates (Hunger Games, Harry Potter, Survivor, Jerry Springer) and stacking templates doesn't create synthesis, it creates noise. Sex is mentioned; nothing about it is sexy. The humor (Sol and the chicken gambit are charming) reinforces the YA register rather than complicating it. Adult fantasy humor tends to be darker and more ironic; here it's a distancing mechanism, not a depth one. Games swing from unnecessarily brutal to actively boring (Neema tidies an office for the Ox challenge).
Hodgson keeps choosing "what would make a good Netflix episode" over the genuinely interesting material — Ruko and Nisthala's arcs left on the table for tournament spectacle.
"Raven Scholar" features too many subplots and minor characters – this results in characters competing for space and not getting quite enough to develop properly. Backstory and world-building are info dumps and frequently repeated, a common YA tic. This could have been a trilogy: the court intrigue, the tournament, and the dragons island -- each deserved its own book. Nine Guardian Animals are promised; Dragon, Raven, and Fox carry the actual weight. Nine palaces on the map; the narrative inhabits three or four. The map's "Grand Canal" is geographically a lagoon, and its "richly utilized" spaces (Menagerie, Tombs, Library, no Crow Palace despite the Solitary Crow's importance) go mostly unvisited — right labels on the wrong things, an inadvertent metaphor for the book. The map's own infrastructure (roads, farms, a monastery) also undercuts Yanara's forest exile and reminds me of people being lost in the woods in “Blair Witch Project.”
Worst trope offenders: Neema learning to fight from books commits to neither comedy nor cost; the Andren Valit plot stacks implausibilities (16-year appearance-stealing impersonation + imprisoning his own son to steal another 24 years) until it's accumulation, not construction; the magic system has no legible constraints and functions as a plot-convenience dispenser; the villain is flat-diabolical with a lover accomplice, straight YA shorthand.
The book’s best ideas are the possession plot lines. The Solitary Raven ("Sol") inhabiting Neema's ribcage, the Solitary Crow vs. the flock, the Fox in Cain — this gestures at something genuinely compelling about identity destabilization when a divine presence shares your body, in line with a broader current SFF pattern (Witch King, Murderbot, Old Man's War): what makes identity stable when the container is unstable or shared? Nisthala's branding literalizes this — "Upon this turn of the Eternal Path, you are mine" (p. 304) is ownership inscribed on skin. The Andren Valit plot is the same theme again, just too implausible to carry weight. Raven Scholar raises this question across a strong ballot and then walks away from it. A book centered on what Raven/Dragon possession costs its hosts would have been stronger than the games structure around it.
Sometimes, we want to root for the author’s characters -- Benna and Fenn are the most genuinely human characters. The Raven fragment narration (Borg-like collective consciousness) is fun and underused. Sol in Neema's ribcage is a strong formal/emotional device, as is the all-caps different-font DRAGON/Raven internal communication. These moments show what Hodgson can do outside the tournament's service — which makes the structural bloat more frustrating, not less. There's a good book (arguably three) visible inside this one.
The Neema/Cain romance runs on template rather than earned chemistry; the book ironically builds a more convincing pull toward Ruko, then discards him. Compare The Everlasting, where Una and Owen's tension is earned because the time loop makes every connection carry its own impermanence. When interiority is thin, the book compensates by dressing people elaborately (gems, rose oils, the amethyst-hidden Raven crown) -- the same move it makes with borrowed culture: dress it in fantasy fabric and hope the renaming reads as invention.
The world map of Orrun visually tracks East Asia: northern mountains as Himalaya/steppe, central heartlands as imperial China, Helia occupying the position of a colonized periphery ("Dragon Mouth Bay" is not subtle). The cultural sourcing blends the Chinese zodiac (Ox, Tiger, Monkey, Dragon's supremacy, a cyclical cosmology) with North American vision-quest traditions and generic fantasy signifiers. These are sources never designed to fit together, producing incoherence rather than synthesis. Fox works better than the rest precisely because trickster figures are archetypal across many traditions rather than lifted wholesale from one. Most Guardian Animals do no imaginative work at all: Tiger is feline, Bear is bearish, the name tells you everything and the book just confirms it. Contrast Pratchett's Nac Mac Feegle or the Auditors of Reality: genuinely invented, hard to visualize precisely, philosophically load-bearing because they're invented. With nine animals and a whole empire to build, the opportunity was new cosmology. Instead we get raided mythology.
The in-world plot compounds this: Helia functions as a reservation, its people dragged into imperial succession politics against their will; Dragon food is toxic to outsiders, marking biological otherness; Dragon Scale, a sacred substance, gets extracted and sold to the empire's wealthy as a recreational drug, mixing vision-quest framing with MDMA-style effects in a way that's pharmacologically incoherent and reveals the borrowing as aesthetic rather than considered. Nisthala's branding (see above) is colonial branding on a child from a sovereign people, literalized. The full extraction loop reads as unreflective reproduction, not critique — appropriation without coherence is still appropriation.
Magic & dragons: Le Guin did the chosen child, the dragon island, the exile with stronger characters, no games, and the interior journey fully shown. The court intrigue alone could have carried this book; the tournament was a concession, not a strength. Nisthala's arc from burning, isolated child to someone who can face down a god is asserted, not shown. Hodgson gives you the branding imagery and cuts to the destination.
“The Raven Scholar” is more worthy than a surprising number of other candidates as a Hugo nominee. The book that it could have been -- centered on Raven and Dragon, on Helia's relationship to empire, on Nisthala's real interior journey and Ruko's psychological haunting, with invented cosmology instead of borrowed and blended signifiers -- would have been something. Good bones, buried under too many costumes. This lands with 3-stars -- could have been 4-stars but I don’t really care about the characters and dislike unnecessarily abusing characters, RIP Yanara.
REVIEW: The Raven Scholar by Antonia Hodgson
RATING: 3-stars
No comments:
Post a Comment