Death's Head

Death's Head by David Gunn reviewed by Military Science Fiction World

So for my second review, I figured I would pick a book that I had a contrasting experience to Heinlein's Starship Troopers with.

So before I begin let me reiterate the statement I made in my introduction/bio: everything written here represents my opinion about a particular work of fiction. Everyone's tastes are different, so just because I did not enjoy a book does not mean you won't either. I am merely giving my honest evaluation of a novel, the decision to read or not read rests solely with you.

So after a preface like that, I bet you can imagine the flavor of the forthcoming review: I hated it.

On the cover, Kirkus Reviews (whoever they are) calls it: "Enthralling: the finest military-science fiction debut in years." So that statement, plus the tagline from the back cover: "Sven is 98.2 percent human and 1.8 percent… something else" were what drew me in. I remember I purchased several books at the same time and picked Death's Head as the first one to read, having great expectations for it.

So why didn't I like it? Oh let me count the ways:

1) The perspective is first person which can be a challenge to write, I know. How much do you stick with what is currently going on, and how much do you backtrack to set the stage of the story? Gunn apparently chose to keep things more in the moment, which in one sense makes it more realistic. I mean how often in real life do we think back and describe our appearance or think about why we joined the military? But on the other hand what we get is thrown into the middle of a man's mind with hardly any backstory. We are in the middle of some unknown desert, fighting an unknown enemy for unknown reasons. And as the story progresses it doesn't get better. There is no background given about the conflict. Who are the Uplifted, and why is our main character fighting them? What is a three braid, seven braid? WTF is a batwing and other than small and fast, what does it look like? None of this is explained. We are just thrown into the mind of the narrator, who naturally knows all of this. And fitting with the staying in the moment style the author has chosen, our wonderful narrator doesn't explain any backstory. For me I found this endlessly frustrating, and it really ruined the whole book for me.

2) No doubt the author was going for a complete badass in his main character and narrator. To me I found Sven's arrogance annoying and off-putting.

3) I am a very detail oriented person, and as such when small but important details are wrong it can ruin a whole book. A pivotal moment for me came with one simple line. During a hot combat drop, fighting all around, the author writes this: "Remembering his training he snaps me a salute." Anyone see a problem with that line? Saluting in a combat zone!? I mean anyone who has seen Saving Private Ryan or Forrest Gump knows saluting in a combat zone is a no no. Reading that line made me lose what little remaining respect I had for the author as a military writer.

4) A big ongoing theme in the book is the relationship between officers and NCOs, particularly sergeants. The narrator makes it abundantly clear that he hates sergeants. The constant barrage of digs at sergeants and NCOs in general got tiresome for me. Every time one would come up I found myself thinking, "We get it already, new material please.

5) I find that when reading the works of an author who has military service, some bit of their own experience seems to bleed into their writing. I do have to preface this by saying that the following is pure speculation on my part. I don’t know any of this for sure, and am just putting on paper my impressions from what I read. In addition to the above comments about the digs at NCOs, there was another event that I felt some of the author’s own personality might have bled through. That was when Sven thrust his weapon into one of his subordinate’s arms and says: “Clean it, check the power and fill any clips that need filling, but remember who owns it. Understand?” Now personally, I can’t have respect for someone, even an officer, who doesn’t take care of their own weapon. And I can’t help but wonder if our good friend Mr. Gunn was the type of officer who would abuse his power and have subordinates do things for him that he should take care of himself. As I said, this is pure speculation, but with this latest development and the above mentioned saluting comment, I have absolutely no respect for Mr. Gunn as a military writer.

6) So my last point is about the talking gun. I’m not giving away any storyline stuff because the talking gun made an appearance on the back cover description and one of the reviewers before the story began commented that it was one of the things that hooked him on the story. Perhaps it was this build up that ruined it, because the gun wasn’t really a huge part of the story. I expected this awesomely witty, intelligent gun that was pivotal to the whole story. The “illegal symbiont” mentioned right next to the intelligent gun on the back cover plays a much larger role. I suppose it isn’t entirely fair to blame the author for the buildup, and ensuing letdown that the intelligent gun was. I guess in my opinion, if you are going to use something that has been featured in many other works, you need to do something that really stands out and differentiates your work from the rest of the herd.

So there you have it. Six reasons why I disliked Death’s Head. I always like to give the benefit of the doubt, and always try and finish a novel, even one I dislike. So I did make it all the way through the story, but I certainly won’t be reading it again, nor will I continue on in the series.

If being thrust into the mind of an arrogant, cocky, jerk who hates sergeants while he runs around in a war that you have no background on, sounds good, then this is your book. If it doesn’t, then stay away from this one.

Until next time, keep the comments and suggestions coming.