Review: "Over Sea, Under Stone" by Susan Cooper


I was recently reminded of this series, which I read when I was probably nine or ten, and I decided to revisit it. It was definitely different than I remembered, but other than some fairly serious philosophical quibbles, I enjoyed rereading this one. :)

On holiday in Cornwall, the three Drew children discover an ancient map in the attic of the house that they are staying in. They know immediately that it is special. It is even more than that -- the key to finding a grail, a source of power to fight the forces of evil known as the Dark. And in searching for it themselves, the Drews put their very lives in peril.

Worldbuilding/Writing Style
The book is set in Cornwall, which is such a lovely place. Cliffs, the sea, green swards, standing stones. Very immersive. 
There's also a whiff of Arthurian legend wove in, which is fun and adds depth. The writing style is a bit older, definitely British kidlit from the 20th century than from the 21st, but I like that style, so I enjoyed it. 
The thing about the worldbuilding, though, is that the premise is that the Drew children and their Great-Uncle Merry are fighting the Dark, which is, as the name of the series suggests, rising. But when GU Merry explains this fight, he makes it sound like this is a huge battle which ebbs and flows. In other words, he makes it sound like sometimes the Dark wins, and sometimes the Light. This philosophy is not a new thing--it's called Manicheism. Aka, the heresy that St. Thomas Aquinas devoted a fair bit of his life to fighting. While, as a Catholic, I do believe in a battle between light and darkness, I believe that the Light will always win. Because Good is stronger. The thing about this book, though, is that it could almost be interpreted either way. The things GU Merry says...they almost sound right, in the Catholic worldview. But not quite. (And isn't that what heresy is? Removing one tiny little problem, to try to make religion easier...and by doing so, rendering it incorrect). So, go in warned.

Plot
This is more-or-less a treasure hunt plot, only, while deciphering clues, the MCs also have to avoid the forces of darkness. The plot starts off rather slowly, but ultimately becomes very gripping, with narrow escape after narrow escape. Or sometimes narrow not-escapes, as the case may be. It's not quite as twisty as some books, but still enjoyable in a National Treasure sort of way. I like how the treasure hunt is interwoven with the Arthurian thread. Philosophical issues notwithstanding, the battle between Good and Evil is extremely compelling. And so the plot is compelling--the stakes are high, the puzzles are hard, and the action is fairly nonstop. 

Characters
I'm a little on the fence about the children...because on the one hand, they did seem a little flat. But at the same time, that's kind of the style of the period. And there are differences between them--Simon feels very responsible for his siblings, Barney is rather immature, and Jane is very different from either of the boys.
Jane is interesting because she seems like the classic girly-girl of British kidlit, who is careful with her clothes, concerned about her brothers, a little bit afraid, and doesn't do well with ships. And obviously, some people would object to this about her--because she always lets the boys do the dangerous things, she worries about problems, and she can be a bit naïve. But look guys, just because she's not a kick-A heroine doesn't mean this isn't realistic. Because sometimes women don't want to be the ones who do the scary things. Sometimes we just want to keep our brothers safe and watch from afar, and solve puzzles rather than explore partially submerged caves or get seasick on a boat trip. Idk, I thought she was pretty realistic, myself. 
And Great Uncle Merry! He is so cool, and mysterious, and awesome, and GAH. Love his character.

Romance
None. :) I feel like I'm saying that a lot this month. 

Content
Kidnapping, and it feels a bit silly to say this but "creepy people". Because the "other side" is quite creepy. 

Overall Rating
I really, really enjoyed this reread, but the subtle Manicheism bothers me, so for that I think I'm going to have to knock it down to three stars. 

Reminds me of...
The Arthurian legend hearkened back to Le Morte D'Arthur, which is a fun classic read, if you, like me, would like to read ALL the Arthurian legends in one place. 

Do you have any recommendations for books with epic good-vs.-evil battles that aren't Manichean? XD Have you ever had a similar experience with realizing that a book you liked as a kid had problematic philosophy? What's your favorite book that riffs on Arthurian legend?

Comments

  1. I'm always down for stories with quests, especially treasure hunt ones! Something about them always makes me feel adventurous. :) I'll have to look into this one. Is it a series, you said? If you keep reading let us know what you think of the other books!

    My favorite book that uses Arthurian legends is one that I read last December (and is now my favorites EVER) is The Metropolitans by Carol Goodman! It's so amazing that I'm currently without words to describe how good it is, but I hope to review it soon. Once I get my mind back in working order. ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know, me too! It is a series--I remember really enjoying the second one as a kid, but I never read past the third or fourth one. Given the philosophical issues, I'm not sure if I'm going to read further...but I kind of want to. We'll see. :)

      Ooh, I shall absolutely have to check that one out! I am always down for Arthurian awesomeness--and I'll look forward to seeing your review!

      Delete
  2. I think I have the first one of this, I should read it sounds like fun.
    Great review!

    ReplyDelete
  3. man I've always intended to read this series some day since I read a few pages of "The Grey King" in a bookstore as a tiny child...and I really will one of these days. I shall certainly keep my eye out for the Manicheism. Manicheism is...a very odd philosophy. Although I admit that what you said didn't sound like Manicheism, necessarily? I believe you that it's in the book, of course, but it did remind me of things like Soviet Russia or North Korea. Like, Light has the ultimate victory and darkness never has a complete victory, but also, sometimes darkness really does win. For a while. I dunno. I'm going to have to think about this, actually...Does light always win, or does it just ultimately win?

    Ooh, I didn't know these books riffed on Arthurian legends, and that makes me even more curious. :) Also made me curious, what do you think of Lewis's That Hideous Strength?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I honestly really like the book, so I would recommend it, with that philosophical note. Manicheism is indeed very strange...and that's what's tricky about the book is that it's not entirely clear if they really *mean* Manicheism, or if it's just edging close...it's kind of blurry. (Fun times. XD) But it did make it sound like what *side* you were on was really a matter of personal preference, and didn't...matter that much in the long term? And that there were an equal number of victories on each side? Idk. Not quite right. :) It's true that light doesn't always win every small "battle" (though it will win the "war", of course!), but really every battle *matters*. (Not sure if that makes sense. But I mean, that's my take.)

      They do! It's really fun! (I like Arthurian legend. :D)
      I liked That Hideous Strength, but not quite as much as some of Lewis's other works...I'm not sure that Arthurian legend is meant to be mixed with that particular trilogy? I mean, I obviously don't have anything against the legend itself, but it doesn't quite make sense with the rest of the space trilogy. I'm going with Tolkien in the opinion that Charles Williams rubbed off on Lewis a bit too much for that one. :) That said, there are absolutely GORGEOUS bits that I love, and the caution of not trying to get into the "inner circle" is just as pertinent now as it ever was. (And now that you mention it, I should reread it one of these days. :))

      Delete
    2. Okay but yes THAT'S what MAKES Manicheism so weird. That there's like...not a distinction between you SHOULD be on this side versus that side? (Did that make sense) Which, I guess there couldn't be a distinction like that if "good" and "bad" truly were equal and original but...man, it's just weird.
      I like the way you said that, that light doesn't always win every small battle but every battle matters. *approving nod* XD

      YESSS the inner circle part is...so good. So timeless. So scary. A cool example, too, of how sometimes fiction conveys things even better than nonfiction. Lewis has a great essay in "The Weight of Glory" (...have you read it?) on that concept of the inner ring, and the WHOLE time he was describing the allure of it, I was like, "but don't! it's a trap! That Hideous Strength!" XD Lewis is...a really impressive author. (And I agree that the Arthurian legend feels a little...weird. That Hideous Strength contains some of my absolute favorite Lewis moments while also being probably my least favorite Lewis book. Weird how that works.)

      Delete
    3. Yes, totally! I mean, within the philosophy, the view that it doesn't matter which side you should be on makes sense, but in real life...boy it's strange. (And yes, that totally made sense. :))

      SO TRUE! There are things that fiction can convey better, and that is one of them. (You've sparked a post idea, methinks. I need to think about more things that fiction can convey better than nonfiction.) I haven't read "The Weight of Glory" yet, but I've heard it's excellent! There's still so much Lewis I need to read...he's so amazing. And also prolific. XD (I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks it's weird, then. :))

      Delete

Post a Comment

Hi! I'm so glad you are here and taking the time to comment. I love all comments, even ones on old posts! I just ask that you are respectful and keep the comments section clean. Thank you!