Ich war nicht 100% einverstanden mit der Erzählfiktion (alte Frau erzählt jungem Mönch ihre Geschichte, der schreibt alles wortwörtlich auf, auch die Konversationsteile), aber sie wird auch an anderen Stellen ohne weitere Erklärung durchbrochen durch Sequenzen, die Erinnerungen der Frau oder Erklärungen eines allwissenden Erzählers sein könnten, also kommt es auf die Details wohl nicht so an. Und alles andere fand ich schön gemacht, auch sehr geschickter Gebrauch von Andeutungen späterer Ereignisse.
I enjoyed the story, and the story-telling followed a woman's thinking very well: circular. By the end, she had already told us of her life post-"trip out of the world of mortals." It was tempted to skim those parts, but with the reading of the previous journal entries, I know she would not be coming back. I think Gudrid told the story of her life like any of us might tell the story of ours: skipping around a bit even though we are trying to go chronologically, avoiding the tough portions and going on and on about the things that were good. I liked how the beginning prologue was written years after the ending epilogue and everything in between.
I was a little confused by the scenes that were depicted in 3rd person and italics. Were those taken from somewhere? Or are they just supposed to be setting? I don't …
I enjoyed the story, and the story-telling followed a woman's thinking very well: circular. By the end, she had already told us of her life post-"trip out of the world of mortals." It was tempted to skim those parts, but with the reading of the previous journal entries, I know she would not be coming back. I think Gudrid told the story of her life like any of us might tell the story of ours: skipping around a bit even though we are trying to go chronologically, avoiding the tough portions and going on and on about the things that were good. I liked how the beginning prologue was written years after the ending epilogue and everything in between.
I was a little confused by the scenes that were depicted in 3rd person and italics. Were those taken from somewhere? Or are they just supposed to be setting? I don't know. I think they clarified some scenes, but also were unnecessary in other places.
I found the parts where Gudrid and Agnar have a conversation to be also quite interesting. It helped me picture the story-telling place clearly, and I could envision Agnar writing with his head bowed every time Gudrid spoke, but looking up and his quill paused above the parchment or re-set in ink while he answered Gudrid or asked her questions.
I liked the tale. We studied what we know about the trips of Erik the Red and Leif Erikson quite a bit in elementary schoo.
