You might like it if Lord of the Rings had never been written...
I had mixed feelings while I was reading this book. The first couple of chapters into the story introduces a boy named Nab whose progressing story initially follows a "Jungle Book" theme. He's raised by animals, first viewed as their enemy and later regarded as the "the one from the prophecy who would save them all." Rather typical, but I could buy into it for the sake of the story. The first third of the book resembles Watership Down in style and the relationship the animals share with mankind (except Nab...).
Then things get worse. Half way through the story, you are involved in this modern-day England-like world where almost all the humans despise animals and commit random acts of cruelty just because they feel like it. After a particularly violent scene with the animals being hunted, BAM! Here comes the elves!
This "quest for the faradawn" (which you don't even learn of until the middle of the story) begins at a random point. Nab and his ragtag band of misfit animals visit the first of three elflords to hear him dump out the entire history of the world which VERY closely mirrors Tolkien's Silmarillion (without even stopping for breath).
Which brings me to my main point: the similarities between Tolkien's history of Middle Earth and the Quest for the Faradawn are too close to be considered a coincidence! Take the "Eldron," or humans who are friends to the animals...I was explaining this to my sister and she said, "What about Elrond?" And there is another term in the book called the "Elrondin" which I don't need to point out is awfully close to Elrond, one of the chief elf characters in The Lord of the Rings.
Then there's Saurelon, which sounds a lot like Saruman and Sauron. Not to mention, that the "urkku" (or evil humans constantly chasing Nab and co.) sound like the evil "uruk-hai" of Middle Earth. What really had me in stitches was Nab's confrontation with the "Dark Lord" inside the mountain where he relied on a trusty companion named Sam to help him battle the darkness. Hmm...why does that sound so familiar? Where have I heard the name Sam before?
There are countless other examples that I have recorded while reading, but I don't have the time to post them all here. Now, when it comes to the characters, they leave much to be desired. Not only is Nab flawlessly beautiful, but he never does anything wrong or acts out of those "sudden rages" that overcome him when he witnesses an injustice.
And Beth, his "girlfriend" who was filled with love at first sight, is a very shallow companion. It is boring to read about characters with no flaws or difficulties except suppressing their outrage at some wrongdoing and never doing anything about it. Beth is called a "pretty, studious, diligent, polite, cheerful little girl." Isn't that overdoing it a bit? Not to mention completely narrative. The whole story lacks of present action, besides some brutal slaughters that occur all-too-frequently.
Yes...and returning to the Tolkien-issue. Why does Nab give Beth a "precious golden ring?" I can't exactly put my finger on it, but I know I've heard that line somewhere.
Now for the literal problems. Beth is wearing five or so coats when they travel in the snow and is still freezing. And Nab walks along beside her, completely comfortable in his birch-bark loincloth and his bare toes. And he conveniently locates sufficient stashes of berries and mushrooms in the dead of winter. I thought this was meant to be a realistic, naturalistic story where at least the environmental factors are accurate. The animals, which appear to be very natural in the beginning, follow illogical behavior. Example: Mr. Fox or whatever he was named would eat the rabbit. The dog would eat the rabbit and attack the badger. The owl would eat the rabbit....and so on.
Another similarity to Richard Adams (author of Watership Down) is the rumor of a plague that the animals supposedly were responsible for. Hence, The Plague Dogs.
I could literally go on forever. Even if I were to ignore the examples I already listed and just "accept" the story for what it is in the name of fantasy, it was still unstructured. The "quest" began too late and shifted the whole theme of the book. The definition of "faradawn" is lengthy and lost in the long-winded information dump that the first elflord relays to Nab. Also, the characters were personality-less and contradictory.
For instance, Nab was kidnapped by the ururk-hai--I mean urkku! He was taken to their house and locked in a room, and four square walls totally freaked him out. But when Nab, Beth, and the animals come to a convenient cottage inhabited by friendly elderly people more than eager to give up their lives to assist a boy in underwear and his strange companions, Nab is not only excited to enter the house but completely entranced by everything that he previously could not tolerate.
And if anyone has read the author's note at the end of the story, they will find a very interesting anecdote relating how the author met up spontaneously with an old man who told him this story bit by bit over a stretch of time....
...and he thought it was true. He thought the world literally opened up, all the animals went inside, and the elves helped reshape everything and destroy all the urkku while Nab and the others were "frozen in time." Wow.
...and the old man told him that he himself was Nab....oh boy.
So, in conclusion, I found "Quest for the Faradawn" to be redundant and unoriginal. Any story where the fate of the universe is tied into the success of the mission is cliche, but many stories are still able to run with it. However, there is no balance to be found to smooth over the abrupt shift between reality and fantasy. I found the story to be difficult to read, even when I tried to receive it in spite of the flaws.
Someone who has never heard of Watership Down, The Plague Dogs, and anything to do with Tolkien would probably like it, but I would not recommend it to anyone.