Vaughan did not make any attempt to create a dialogue based on the individual challenges and experiences of being a lion, he just stuck simplistic human characters in lion bodies.Īt that point, it's not even an allegory, it's just a cartoon. The animal dialogue was also rather jarring, indicating that lions understood what a 'brain' is, that they measured time in seconds and integers, and that they felt their keepers were beneficent protectors. So I guess it's just extraneous to the plot? I'll beg off debating which is worse. One thoughtful commentator pointed out that the rape scene never actually comes to the attention of the protagonist, meaning it couldn't be an attempt to build his character. Like in his 'Y the Last Man', Vaughan is interested in rape and gender inequality only because they give his male protagonist motivation, not because of how they affect his characters or story in general.
Not only because it misrepresented animal sexual behavior (particularly that of lions), but because as a thinly-veiled analogy of human sexual behavior, it was both simplistic and chauvinistic.
The overt and sensationalized sexism amongst the lions was insulting. If they could just fly off, why didn't they do it before? These small errors are negligible but typical of the thoughtlessness with which the plot, characters, and dialogue are treated. Start with some factual errors, such as antelopes being kept within sight of lions, sea turtles living in the Tigris, and zoo birds (which would have had flight feathers clipped) simply flying to escape their cages. His predictable plot, thoughtless characterization, awkward dialogue and overpowering allegory drained this book of any strength or beauty it might have had. Despite the originality of the idea, and the wealth of symbolism and meaning such a story might have held, Vaughan did little with this book.
0 kommentar(er)
