|
Yeah, "dan" is exactly like the "van" you get in Flemish/Dutch. It denotes nobility. I am pretty sure Bremer dan Gorst isn't a commoner.
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 12:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 20:38 |
|
|
He wasn't a commoner, but if I remember the Contest scene, most people saw him as brutish and unfit for nobility or something like that. Regardless, he's hateable because of his entitlement issues, but he's drat interesting to read about. Plus, he never actually commits any heinous crimes beyond the attempted murder of Lord Brock. That's one thing Abercrombie has always been good at writing: making a totally unlikeable shithead into someone sympathetic and why I was disappointed w/r/t Temple. Jezal, at his absolute worst was still willing to do the hard thing. That fight where he gets the poo poo knocked out of him was one of the most awesome writing points in the entire series because, in spite of being an arrogant rear end in a top hat, he still shows courage. Then there's the part where he mounts a suicidal charge, with him at the front, against oncoming Gurkhish. Sure it was stupid and should have by all rights killed him, but it shows he's grown as a character. He cares about his friends, he cares about his people, he genuinely believes Logen is the greatest hero he's ever met. And he keeps making completely stupid decisions because of his growth as a character and because he cares. And he has military training so you know he's going to fight. Same with Calder: total coward, less-stupid than Jezal but makes stupid decisions nonetheless. And he grows! He totally loving grows as a character throughout The Heros. He actually ends up being less-stupid as a result of his growth and kills his treacherous father-in-law and blames it on Glama or something. Temple is a lawyer and has no combat training so you know from the get-go he's going to be the coward. And he stays the coward to the very end. No real growth aside from throwing himself in front of Cosca while he holds the Buckhorm family hostage for which he suffers no consequence. Never changes his philosophy. Stays a self-aware coward the entire time. And it's not that that's a bad thing or unrealistic, it's just boring to read about for me. Contra Calculus fucked around with this message at 17:44 on May 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2013 17:28
|
|
|
Neurosis posted:I don't recall Gorst displaying a mastery of tactics. He seems conversant with tactics and strategy, but we don't see him do any leading. I also don't recall him saying anything about his common birth. At one stage in the trilogy it's mentioned 'dan' implies nobility in the blood at some stage. I don't recall Gorst giving much of his story pre-trilogy other than having an emotionally abusive dad. Gorst is set up as a clear foil to Jezal. Jezal is handsome, high born, and despite being extremely lazy he's literally handed everything on a silver platter; Gorst is an ugly, uncharismatic minor nobleman who works like a machine and earns his station by his merit as a warrior. Even his character arc foils Jezal's, because as the narrative goes on we see Jezal becoming a genuinely noble and compassionate character while Gorst ends up loving everything up and becoming increasingly murderous and self-entitled in The Heroes.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 00:14
|
|
|
Just finished reading Last Argument of Kings. This man is a worker of miracles; I was captivated start to finish. From the overarching plot to the tiniest details, the trilogy was a masterwork. Abercrombie makes my own attempts at writing look like dog poo poo. I need to read everything he's ever written in his life.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 14:53
|
|
|
Contra Calculus posted:How in the gently caress did Eider migrate across the entire world and end up mayor of a dead-end town like Crease? Why the gently caress would she do that? Best Served Cold gave the impression she was still rich. She could have hid from the Union practically anywhere, couldn't she? She defected from the Union and went to Crease to stop the Union's occupation of it, which Papa Ring was vying for. Zacharus was there so I assume he's working to stop Bayaz spreading his influence even further (Carlot is just his tool)
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
edit: ^^^ Oh that's right. I forgot Zachurus was there. Hell, probably the rest of the magi are planning on taking Bayaz down from the looks of it. Some other thoughts on Red Country. Cosca's downfall is some of the worst writing I have ever seen of Joe's. The instant Shy and Temple steal the wagon from him, his entire character decays to that of a frustrated cartoon character not unlike that of Daffy Duck whenever Bugs Bunny outsmarts him. At that point the whole Company of the Gracious Hand turn into Indiana Jones bad guys and proceed to get their asses stylistically kicked by Shy, Lamb, and Temple only it's dumber because this isn't supposed to be loving Indiana Jones, this is supposed to be the same world as The First Law Trilogy. You know? The one where anyone can die at any minute and both the "bad guys" and "good guys" are both equally vile and equally sympathetic? And the one that didn't glorify brutal violence and instead deconstructed it viscously? Anyway, Cosca's shift from old, traitorous, drunk mercenary (but still has moments of humanity) to... Daffy Duck is straight-up bad writing and character derailment in my opinion. Cosca deserved a better death than that. I get he's a shitheel and I knew he was going to eat it one way or another, but it'd be like if Murcatto turned into loving Cersei Lannister in one of his later books. Something else of note: Sworbruck seemed like he was a self-insert for Joe albeit one of the more clever I've seen. (At least he's given the same treatment as his other characters). Contra Calculus fucked around with this message at 21:52 on May 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:36
|
|
|
It's been a while since I've read Red Country. Sworbruck is the writer, right? I think he's an homage to the writer guy from Unforgiven.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:It's been a while since I've read Red Country. Sworbruck is the writer, right? I think he's an homage to the writer guy from Unforgiven.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
I guess that's another thing: I don't think this specific fantasy world meshes very well with Westereners like Unforgiven or Deadwood or Fistful of Dollars or Good Bad and Ugly. Sure, some of the core concepts might work: violent pasts, gun/ edit: I don't even know why I went on this rant all of a sudden. I just don't want Abercrombie repeating the same mistakes GURM did. He's the only other dark fantasy author I feel really nails the genre down well. Contra Calculus fucked around with this message at 23:19 on May 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
I did not feel enthused at any of the action in Red Country. At all. And I'm not going to get into what a person should or is supposed to feel while reading but I really suspect that you weren't meant to enjoy any of the violence. Logen vs Glama felt like a really unpleasant mirror held up to Logen vs Fenris, the assault by the mercenaries on the Dragon Enclave was literally heart-breaking, and even Savian's last stand was nothing noble or heroic, he literally dies thinking "man I hope that girl doesn't do this poo poo like me-" and is then blown ingloriously to pieces from afar. The euphoric bits of the book were when Temple finds Pitt, or when Logen stops Ro running off. In terms of Cosca becoming cartoonish, the guy has been larger than life ever since Dagoska was besieged. Obvs if it didn't work for you, it didn't work, but it was a very different book to his others.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 12:41
|
|
|
Evfedu posted:I did not feel enthused at any of the action in Red Country. At all. And I'm not going to get into what a person should or is supposed to feel while reading but I really suspect that you weren't meant to enjoy any of the violence. It's true Cosca was always eccentric, but that's something I really enjoyed about him. When I say cartoonish I mean he goes on a massive freakout when he loses gold. He's never lost his cool in the entirety of any of the books he was in even when in the absolute worst situation. About to die after fighting Ganmark? He didn't give a poo poo, he just wanted a drink. Siege of Dogoska happening with bloody heads and bodies flying all around? He stood at the parapet and screamed at the Gurkish that they were cocksuckers while laughing or something (that's how I remember it anyway). The Arch Lector and his goons in the middle of a satanic ritual of some kind that if screwed up could kill everyone? He didn't give a poo poo and threw the knife at the guy doing the summoning and that was literally one of the funniest parts of the whole Trilogy. That's why I liked him so much: he was a crazy old drunk who didn't give a gently caress when the whole world was crumbling around him. Sure he took revenge on the people who deposed him as the original Captain General of the Thousand Swords, but he was calm about it and didn't became a raving idiot who didn't think about what he was doing. What you say is true about most the violence portrayed in the book. You feel just awful when the Ghosts are being horrifically massacred. And the Logen vs. Glama fight is definitely not glorified especially given how nice Glama is in his scene with Shy and his POV. But I was mainly referring to the mercenaries and union inquisitors. Granted, they are vile and their actions are meant to mirror the atrocities the US government committed against Native Americans among other things, but even then the only one that is given real characterization is Lorsen. Jubair is a religious zealot who murders on a whim because he believes god wills it, Dimbik is... Dimbik, and Brachio is a fat guy who's just following orders BUT HE STILL LOVES HIS FAMILY (literally the laziest way to garner sympathy for an antagonist). When Logen goes in and massacres them, Joe makes it very clear you're supposed to be rooting for him being a psycho at this point. And even after all that he never really suffers any consequence for any of the violence he commits. He gets spooked by Shivers and runs off and that's the entire extent of his punishment for his brutality. Shy still loves him, Ro and Pitt still love him. It's nice that he got kind of a happy resolve with them, but it's one I feel he really didn't deserve.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
This is Red Country related for those who aren't up to it/haven't finished it yet, so don't click the spoiler. I found Cosca's death really annoying. He had gone even further off the deep end in Red Country and was a total write off as a human, I understand this. I just wished it wasn't so. The guy that walked up to the keep doors and announced "My name is Nicomo Cosca, famed soldier of fortune, and I am here for dinner" deserved better. I don't know, I thought he might have been entitled to a little redemption arc and the right to just drink himself to death.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
I think Cosca's death is perfect, it's easy to forget considering how affable it is but he really is a horrible person. I found it really fitting how such a vainglorious man died wishing he could do things again, better, and dying before he could even muster some valiant last words.Contra Calculus posted:It's nice that he got kind of a happy resolve with them, but it's one I feel he really didn't deserve. "Nobody gets what they deserve." Sex Beef 2.0 fucked around with this message at 20:29 on May 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
No question that he's a horrible human being. It's the fact that he went out completely out of character that bothered me. Edit: good point w/r/t that quote I suppose. Contra Calculus fucked around with this message at 20:35 on May 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
edit: never mind. This was stupid.
Contra Calculus fucked around with this message at 16:55 on May 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
The blog article is probably poorly written but Abercrombie has already admitted that he didn't write Terez very well.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Requires Only That You Hate is probably the only place I've ever been online that actually justifies a tone argument.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
Contra Calculus posted:http://requireshate.wordpress.com/2011/12/08/joe-abercrombies-the-last-argument-of-kings-and-the-rape-of-lesbians/ A rant disguised as a book review, as is increasingly common on the internet. Mind you, I kind of agree with the writer (and with Abercrombie), that Terez isn't a great character, and her arc isn't a great arc. (I disagree that subjecting her to the horrific situation she ends up in makes Abercrombie into some kind of monster, though.)
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
Oh no, I don't disagree about how poorly Terez was handled, I just didn't expect this much bile I guess. And skimming through her posts, her own recommendations are pretty lovely. Elemental Logic series? That's like as trashy as you can get. I don't know where she gets off saying First Law characters are lovely and then recommends garbage like that but whatever. Then there's also this godawful thing she put in her own post: quote:I’ve no idea if he is straight but he’s very certainly a man, which makes this about a thousand times more repulsive and disgusting than the worst M/M rape fetishization can ever hope to be. Contra Calculus fucked around with this message at 19:40 on May 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
docbeard posted:A rant disguised as a book review, as is increasingly common on the internet. Literally the first sentence of the post: quote:This isn’t a review.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:Literally the first sentence of the post: I stand by my characterization. Death of the author, and all that. I don't know if the writer is affecting a persona, or if she really feels that strongly (my gut is telling me 60%-40%), but I think what bothers me the most about it isn't the tone, it's the all-too-common failure to distinguish between a bad person and a bad character. Glotka, for all his occasional nobility, is a lovely, lovely human being, consumed with bitterness, who does terrible and vile things, and I'm not even sure that the fate he creates for Terez is the worst of his sins. (Actually, on reflection, it probably is, but it has plenty of competition). He's also a fantastic, well-realized character.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
docbeard posted:I stand by my characterization. Death of the author, and all that. It's basically the Peggy Hill Dilemma, really - The character is an awful person so that means they're an awful character.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
docbeard posted:I stand by my characterization. Death of the author, and all that. After going through more of her blog and the comments in the very post I linked, it's pretty clear it's a persona used to annoy MRA dipshits and hardcore mainstream fantasy and sci-fi nerds. She recommends bottom-of-the-barrel scifi published at god-knows what criterion and lesbian anime porn games while demolishing popular authors like Jim Butcher for sexism in their books. Granted, I've never read any books by Jim Butcher so I don't know whether it's justified or not. Either way, 90% sure it's a persona. I'm just amazed she hasn't gone after Martin for ASOIAF beyond that one short story of his. Also, the thing about her bringing up Terez I realized is that I'm guessing this thread would probably look very different if it had been a male blackmailed and forced into a male relationship. But really, now I just feel stupid for caring about this poo poo in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
It's been brought up before in the thread - Abercrombie was aware of the debate surrounding that and wrote a lengthy and very self-critical post or two about it. He's said that the character of Terez and how he handled that entire plot is one thing he would change on a rewrite of the book. edit: Found the post of Abercrombie's. There's more after that one. John Charity Spring fucked around with this message at 00:02 on May 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
Yeah, as has already been sated numerous times, Abercrombie admits he handled it poorly and wishes he could redo it. I've said it before, but I hated Terez up until that review because she just seemed to be always going out of her way to be such a massive bitch. Then you have that reveal and realize why. She has a pretty lovely deal in life. You totally get why she is the way she is and it kind of even justifies it. I had a total turn around on her and felt awful for her. And her fate upset me too. But I kind of assumed it was supposed to upset you. I thought you were supposed to understand her and feel what was happening was cruel. I didn't think you were supposed to think, "Haha, take that you stupid bitch." So yeah, Abercrombie handled her poorly. But at the same time, I never for one second thought he handled her with any malice.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
I think that Abercrombie's response is about as good as you're going to see from the author of a book, though it shouldn't excused. Realizing that you made a huge mistake and wrote an entire gender poorly in your 3 book series doesn't make it less bad that you made the mistake. However, I'm glad he has stated he made a conscious effort to be better in later books, and I think he has a bit.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I think that Abercrombie's response is about as good as you're going to see from the author of a book, though it shouldn't excused. Realizing that you made a huge mistake and wrote an entire gender poorly in your 3 book series doesn't make it less bad that you made the mistake. However, I'm glad he has stated he made a conscious effort to be better in later books, and I think he has a bit. Other than Terez, I don't think he wrote his women characters all that badly in the first three books (though possibly he does, we're all our own worst critics, and so forth). In any event, given the improvements (in characterization in general, and characterization of women in particular) he did make in subsequent books, I'm perfectly content to...maybe not excuse it, but chalk it all up as part of the learning-to-write process.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I think that Abercrombie's response is about as good as you're going to see from the author of a book, though it shouldn't excused. Realizing that you made a huge mistake and wrote an entire gender poorly in your 3 book series doesn't make it less bad that you made the mistake. However, I'm glad he has stated he made a conscious effort to be better in later books, and I think he has a bit.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
docbeard posted:Other than Terez, I don't think he wrote his women characters all that badly in the first three books (though possibly he does, we're all our own worst critics, and so forth). In the author's own words, they were pretty 1 dimensional, embodied negative stereotypes, and generally were all victims of abuse. Not a single one was even as remotely fleshed out as the whiny spoiled noble, the torturer, or the insane killer. I mean, the author himself has said that all the women characters were bad, I'm not sure how many people could agree with it. Evfedu posted:What do you mean by "it shouldn't be excused?" I think it should be recognized that he made mistakes, rather than saying "well he got better in later books so that's OK". Not that anyone here is saying that, I'm just saying it's something I've seen done and shouldn't happen. I commend that Joe recognized the problem and took steps, that's far beyond most fantasy authors. But there's a reason why he made that mistake in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
docbeard posted:I'm not even sure that the fate he creates for Terez is the worst of his sins. (Actually, on reflection, it probably is, but it has plenty of competition). He wrote some mediocre characters. Accusing him of anything more contemptuous of that is just witch hunting. Above Our Own fucked around with this message at 08:59 on May 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2013 08:57
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:I think it should be recognized that he made mistakes, rather than saying "well he got better in later books so that's OK". Not that anyone here is saying that, I'm just saying it's something I've seen done and shouldn't happen. I commend that Joe recognized the problem and took steps, that's far beyond most fantasy authors. But there's a reason why he made that mistake in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2013 10:48
|
|
|
Evfedu posted:I realise I've made all of 100 posts tops during my six year tenure so you've no idea if I'm trying to engage in good faith or not, but when you say "there's a reason he made that mistake in the first place" what are you trying to get at? I'm not Zeitguesit but I am fairly sure he's talking about rape culture (which, yeah, is doubtless why anyone would have considered that an acceptable plot device at all - I mean, the failure here is systemic since neither the author, the proofreaders or the editors stopped long enough to go "this is lovely, we should probably not do this"). With that said, it's great that Abercrombie eventually apologised for doing this, even if the circumstances that allowed it to happen in the first place haven't gone anywhere. At least he recognises his mistake, which is more than what can be said for a lot of people. Above Our Own posted:I think anyone who thinks that what amounts to rape is somehow worse than murder and severe torture (as in, irreversible mutilation of major organs) has probably read too many loving tumblers or something. Please stop digging that hole. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 14:13 on May 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2013 14:09
|
|
|
Evfedu posted:I realise I've made all of 100 posts tops during my six year tenure so you've no idea if I'm trying to engage in good faith or not, but when you say "there's a reason he made that mistake in the first place" what are you trying to get at? Sorry if I'm being slow, I read the feminism thread and consider myself pretty forward thinking on this kind of stuff but I honestly think Abercrombie's response to his writing of Terez is literally how every author should aspire to respond to that sort of a mistake. I'm pretty sure he was writing Best Served Cold before that particular storm even broke, wasn't he? The word excused is loaded as gently caress, but I think the point is to recognize the misogynistic influences that led to the female characters being written as they were. It was a gut wrenching scene, so that was really good. The real problem is that Terez had to act out of character and in service to the plot to bring it about.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:I'm not Zeitguesit but I am fairly sure he's talking about rape culture (which, yeah, is doubtless why anyone would have considered that an acceptable plot device at all - I mean, the failure here is systemic since neither the author, the proofreaders or the editors stopped long enough to go "this is lovely, we should probably not do this").
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
No one believes brutal torture and removal of vital organs is not as bad as rape. It's that rape is seen as more acceptable in our current culture than torture and removal of vital organs. And it's also not that you can't have objectionable material in writing, it's just important to handle it correctly. The main beef here is that the whole handling of Terez being forced to have sex with Jezal was just apathetic at best. Anyway, if your only experience with learning about rape culture and feminism is from self-righteous idiots on LiveJournal, wordpress, tumblr, and other sites of that ilk, then you should probably take a look at the SA feminist thread in E/N. (Yeah, I know. It's E/N. But it's a thousand times better than any of those lovely sjw hives.)
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
Contra Calculus posted:No one believes brutal torture and removal of vital organs is not as bad as rape. It's that rape is seen as more acceptable in our current culture than torture and removal of vital organs. And it's also not that you can't have objectionable material in writing, it's just important to handle it correctly. The main beef here is that the whole handling of Terez being forced to have sex with Jezal was just apathetic at best. My opinion is that even though RAPE CULTURE is a legitimate social issue and choppin off finggers isn't, the author shouldn't have to dance around the topic. Especially since he's writing specifically to subvert fantasy tropes that pretend like repression of sexuality and spousal rape weren't a huge part of medieval life. Above Our Own fucked around with this message at 23:28 on May 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
It's treated badly as in we don't see get a view from Terez' side, how she suffers, etc. She's just treated as a prop piece and not an actual human being. GRRM has this same problem in his books. An author can still write about this stuff, but it needs to be handled better than the way either of those two authors do. Contra Calculus fucked around with this message at 00:54 on May 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
Contra Calculus posted:It's treated badly as in we don't see get a view from Terez' side, how she suffers, etc. She's just treated as a prop piece and not an actual human being. I think that was partly the intention. It was supposed to show how she isn't really considered a person, just a bargaining chip, but it was written pretty poorly.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
TheWorldIsSquare posted:I think that was partly the intention. It was supposed to show how she isn't really considered a person, just a bargaining chip, but it was written pretty poorly. I meant it from a narrative perspective, but yeah. That too.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2013 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 20:38 |
|
|
Contra Calculus posted:It's treated badly as in we don't see get a view from Terez' side, how she suffers, etc. She's just treated as a prop piece and not an actual human being. GRRM has this same problem in his books. But as far as I see it, it's just a characterization issue and I think it's ridiculous to infer that the author has any misogynistic views or anything like that.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2013 03:58
|
|