Review of Baptism of Fire by Andrzej Sapkowski

Note: This review of Baptism of Fire (1996), third volume in the Witcher series, assumes the reader has read the prior two books.

If there is anything Andrzej Sapkowski’s Witcher series does well, it’s maintain internal consistency. The writing can at times go off on unnecessary tangents, issues with narrative flow pop up, and there isn’t a strong, overarching sense of social setting/place for the reader to relate to, but Sapkowski is at least consistent with these inconsistencies. What then does Baptism of Fire, the bridge book of the series, do to carry forward the Witcher torch?

If anything, Baptism of Fire is the most linear of the Witcher novels—an almost literal bridge from the second to fourth novel. Where the two prior Witcher novels shift in time and place, from this group of characters to that, from this castle to that forest, Baptism of Fire follows Geralt almost entirely throughout. And it’s toward the building of a merry band of men. Like an 80s novel, Geralt and company go from place to place, slowly accumulating a motley crew of elves, dwarves, vampires, and others. There are occasional scenes thrown in here and there to catch up on what is happening in other places in the land (Ciri, the emperor, the magicians, etc.), but by and large the novel is an extended cut-scene of Geralt as team leader.

The result is that Baptism of Fire flows smoother than the prior two novels. Focus on Geralt’s plot is high, and as a result the reader gets closer to Geralt et al. The (big) minus to that plus, however, is that little of real significance happens in the journey. Sure, action takes place here and there, but it feels gratuitous, tacked on, as if Sapkowski knew the plot was lacking conflict—and fantasy needs battles, yes? So, he threw in scenes here and there to try to keep the fire burning.

I continue to be unconvinced of Sapkowski’s world. I understand that to some degree it is intentional—a grimdark view where there are no purely good or bad guys. Nevertheless, the variety of cultures Sapkowski presents never feel singular. They have names, for example the Nilfgardians, but those names do not evoke anything when mentioned. And when you combine a myriad of faceless cultures, you have a semi-faceless world. Geralt and some of his friends are the manner in which readers think of the Witcher. This in its own right is not something negative, it's only that such fantasy requires something of a world, and readers don't get a clearly defined one.

There are opinions and rumor about fantasy series’ bridge books, up to and including they can be entirely skipped without missing anything critical. With the benefit of hindsight (i.e. having completed the Witcher series and looking back), it’s possible to say Baptism of Fire, for as smooth as it flows, is not critical to the series. It could have been an opening chapter or a flashback in the next volume without the overall series missing a beat. Undoubtedly diehard Witcher fans can identify plot points that relate to the overarching storyline of Ciri and Geralt, but again, there is little that could not have been offered in a cut scene somewhere in the next book, The Tower of Swallows.