The Fool’s Tale is a book which is set in a mediaeval Welsh kingdom called Maelienydd in a time where borders were constantly under threat and the keeping of lands involved bargaining, truces, marriage pacts and inevitably, war.
The main characters in Galland’s book are Noble, the familiar name for King Maelgwyn; Isabel, his young wife, a match made politically with the rival Mortimer dynasty; and Gwirion, childhood friend of Maelgwyn and loyal subject, who is also the court’s unofficial fool.
The book starts well enough, in fact, quite starkly with Maelgwyn’s father, King Cadwallon returning from a meeting with Henry II, only to be cut down by Mortimer. Maelgwyn is not only witness to this but also the violence which is meted out on his friend, Gwirion, by Mortimer in a bid to find out where Maelgwyn is hiding. Gwirion proves himself brave, loyal and plucky despite the danger presented to himself and the tone for Noble and Gwirion’s relationship is set.
Theirs is a strange friendship: Maelgwyn is King and so, must be shown a certain deference but Gwirion often disregards this. He holds, for the king, a special place and is aware of this. However, Gwirion also feels his position like a vice from which he can never be free: Gwirion is the most important person to the king because of his self-sacrifice at a time when it was most needed. Maelgwyn and Gwirion were both just boys when Cadwallon was killed in front of them.
And then, Isabel enters the mix, Mortimer’s niece and Galland shows how a young girl is used to cement bonds between rival factions whose enmity barely stops simmering throughout the book. Gwirion despises Isabel and Noble sees her as a brood mare, but could her presence result in a change, not only in the dynamic between the men but also in the way that Mortimer views Noble and the acquisition of his lands?
That is basically where the book takes us. The dialogue is good and the sense of the Welsh court and the tensions that plague it are vividly evoked. The drawback for me, despite my enjoyment of the book, is that there were times where passion should have been palpable and I don’t think I ever really felt it. As a book whose second part is built on this, it should have been firing off the pages but alas, not for me.
Also, the use of “Period” used at the end of a statement, to draw a line under what was said, threw me out of the text as an Americanism that was misplaced. Likewise, talk of a “butler” also seemed wrong as this would not have been a position held in a noble house until many centuries later.
That being said, it was still a good read, but ultimately, just not quite stirring enough for me.
Scuffed Granny 