|
I kind of assumed he wasn't B9 for any of the duels in which he left the other person alive, but I guess he had to have been to fight with the spear through him. Anyone have the passage handy where he describes that?
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:22 |
|
|
Jeffrey posted:I kind of assumed he wasn't B9 for any of the duels in which he left the other person alive, but I guess he had to have been to fight with the spear through him. Anyone have the passage handy where he describes that? From about two thirds through Before They Are Hanged: "Just as well they dropped a rock on me. At least I’ve still got my teeth. Spent two months squealing on my back while they laid siege to the city. I only just healed in time for the fight with Threetrees, when I got the whole lot broken again, and more besides.” Logen winced at the memory, curling up the fingers of his right hand and straightening them out, remembering the pain of it, all smashed up. “Now that really did hurt. Not as much as this, though,” and he dug his hand under his belt and pulled his shirt up. They all peered across the fire to see what he was pointing at. A small scar, really, just under his bottom rib, in the hollow beside his stomach. “Doesn’t look like much,” said Luthar. Logen shuffled round to show them his back. “There’s the rest of it,” he said, jerking his thumb at what he knew was a much bigger mark beside his backbone. There was a long silence while they took that in. “Right through?” murmured Longfoot. “Right through, with a spear. In a duel, with a man called Harding Grim. drat lucky to live, and that’s a fact.” “If it was in a duel,” murmured Bayaz, “how did you come out alive?” Logen licked his lips. His mouth tasted bitter. “I beat him.” “With a spear through you?” “I didn’t know about it until afterwards.” Longfoot and Luthar frowned at each other. “That would seem a difficult detail to overlook,” said the Navigator. “You’d think so.” Logen hesitated, trying to think of a good way to put it, but there was no good way. “There are times… well… I don’t really know what I’m doing.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 11:45
|
|
|
Greenlit posted:Friendly having a POV keeps the reader close to Cosca without ruining his character by actually explaining his antics. What is this line? It's been awhile since I read bsc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Thanks for the quote! It seems really bizarre that Harding Grimm(or anyone he dueled as B9, presumably Threetrees also at least) was still alive after that but okay, text is the text.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
Xenix posted:Just curious, where do you see him in control of the Bloody Nine? I always considered Logen in control of the Bloody Nine in the sense that he knows what will trigger him coming out. This is also why I think he is still responsible for his actions when he is possessed by the Bloody Nine, despite not being physically in control. He knows what will happen, but still chooses to put himself in situations where he will come out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
Chance II posted:What is this line? It's been awhile since I read bsc. I have to assume he means "Apologise to my loving dice!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Suxpool posted:I have to assume he means "Apologise to my loving dice!" Yeah, that was it. There were lots of other great and memorable lines in that book, but Friendly took the cake.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
gninjagnome posted:I always considered Logen in control of the Bloody Nine in the sense that he knows what will trigger him coming out. This is also why I think he is still responsible for his actions when he is possessed by the Bloody Nine, despite not being physically in control. He knows what will happen, but still chooses to put himself in situations where he will come out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
Above Our Own posted:Maybe at one time during his history but by the time of Red Country he actually goes to absurd lengths to keep himself out of situations that would encourage violence, to the point of changing his entire identity to a hapless cowardly farmhand. Well, yeah - that's the point. By the end of Red Country he has re-embraced the violence. If he never wants be the Bloody Nine again he could, but he's choosing that life because unpossessed him likes it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
I finished BSC and I'll admit Friendly grew on me. Please tell me Shenkt shows up in later books.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
gninjagnome posted:I always considered Logen in control of the Bloody Nine in the sense that he knows what will trigger him coming out. This is also why I think he is still responsible for his actions when he is possessed by the Bloody Nine, despite not being physically in control. He knows what will happen, but still chooses to put himself in situations where he will come out. I'm in agreement here in terms of him knowing what will bring the Bloody Nine out, but I always saw this as him not understanding how to leave the life he professes to hate behind. It always looked to me like someone in an abusive relationship. He's miserable, he knows he needs a change because it will destroy him, he's seen how life can be outside his normal routines, but he doesn't understand how to bring about that change because he doesn't know how not to fall back on the familiar (which seems to stem from living his life by quasi-philosophical sayings). To me, his story in The First Law was him struggling with figuring out how to change and then being given a chance to do so at the very end when he jumps out the window. We know he won't die (see the chapter name, versus the beginning of the story) but we, as the readers, are out of time when it comes to viewing Logen's life to see if he makes those changes. Come Red Country, we ultimately see he has changed somewhat, but still falls back on the familiar (the Old Empire, the only place, other than the North and Adua, that he has been) and is ultimately dragged back into violence. This time, it doesn't take him 3 books to realize he needs to leave what he knows to stop the violence or he will again destroy the people and things he loves. In fact, due to the Bloody Nine, he's already destroyed the one thing he seems to cherish: his relationship with Shy and her siblings. He does some quick risk assessment and puts their needs, specifically the need to not be used by someone to settle a grudge against Logen and to not be murdered by the Bloody Nine during a potential confrontation, ahead of his and leaves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Jeffrey posted:I kind of assumed he wasn't B9 for any of the duels in which he left the other person alive, but I guess he had to have been to fight with the spear through him. Anyone have the passage handy where he describes that? One explanation could be that the hold of the B9 over Logen gets weaker as each period of "posession" drags on and the B9 slakes some of his thirst for violence. So when a fight goes on long enough Logen can regain control from the B9 if he chooses to. During the duels, Logen's opponents like Three-Trees or Grim who hurt Logen to the point of bringing out the B9 were also skilled enough to stay alive long enough for Logen to regain some semblance of control and spare them once he won. Sometimes, like when Logen kills Tul-Duru the person in question just happens to be unlucky enough to get within the B9's reach before Logen becomes himself gain. gninjagnome posted:Well, yeah - that's the point. By the end of Red Country he has re-embraced the violence. If he never wants be the Bloody Nine again he could, but he's choosing that life because unpossessed him likes it. Well he returns to violence only after being forced to (the kidnapping of the kids). Him saying he missed it and such is just an indication of his ongoing addiction to violence, but the steps he took to avoid it leading up to the events of Red Country are certainly praiseworthy, and show that he not only wants to, but is capable of changing. If his kids werent kidnapped he would have gone on living as the peaceful, cowardly Lamb, regardless of his inner turmoil. Mr.48 fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Feb 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
Clearly the only logical explanation is that Logen is an rear end in a top hat with some weird fantasy novel interpretation of a mental illness who occasionally goes batshit insane ignoring all the physical limitations of the human body and going kill-crazy who coincidentally happens to be possessed by a batshit insane spirit who likes going killcrazy, and the times where Logen is just extremely strong instead of supernaturally strong is when the Bloody Nine is off out somewhere, like, say, eating all the other spirits in the world while hiding in the baddest motherfucker alive. While I liked the mental illness interpretation more (mostly cause I've not read the trilogy in years and also aren't up to date on modern mental healthcare) the fact that Logen continues to put himself into situations where he'll feel 'pressured' into killing everything because of how much he directly gets off on it isn't affected by either theory so gently caress it, everyone's right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
Mr.48 posted:Well he returns to violence only after being forced to (the kidnapping of the kids). Him saying he missed it and such is just an indication of his ongoing addiction to violence, but the steps he took to avoid it leading up to the events of Red Country are certainly praiseworthy, and show that he not only wants to, but is capable of changing. If his kids werent kidnapped he would have gone on living as the peaceful, cowardly Lamb, regardless of his inner turmoil. I thought his big turning point was after that whole long quest where he takes Jezal under his wing, has a thing with Ferro, starts thinking maybe he doesn't have to be the Bloody Nine... then gets back to the city and promptly heads back to war again. I don't remember the entire context of that decision, but I don't think there was anything forcing him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 10:01
|
|
|
Chomposaur posted:I thought his big turning point was after that whole long quest where he takes Jezal under his wing, has a thing with Ferro, starts thinking maybe he doesn't have to be the Bloody Nine... then gets back to the city and promptly heads back to war again. I don't remember the entire context of that decision, but I don't think there was anything forcing him. I think that was entirely due to him and Ferro being too stubborn to say anything more than "bye!" to each other when they step off the ship in Adua. Ferro stays with Bayaz and he goes North again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
Chomposaur posted:I thought his big turning point was after that whole long quest where he takes Jezal under his wing, has a thing with Ferro, starts thinking maybe he doesn't have to be the Bloody Nine... then gets back to the city and promptly heads back to war again. I don't remember the entire context of that decision, but I don't think there was anything forcing him. I was talking the events of Red Country, because thats when we see him make a real effort to become a peaceful man by sacrificing his ego. During the main trilogy Logen tries to be a good person, but learns that for him thats impossible to do while remaining involved in violent affairs. Its only in Red Country that Logen actually tries to distance himself from violence, which works pretty well up to the point of the kidnapping.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
Logen's convictions are a little hollow up until the events of Red Country where he really does go to absurd lengths to redefine himself as a man of peace.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
So I read most of Abercrombie's books quite a while back and am currently getting through Red Country. I'm enjoying it plenty and it's definitely showing a bit more nuance than I remember from the First Law trilogy (although that could also be due to memory simplifying things down). I've not read through the whole thread yet but reading Red Country got me thinking about two things. Firstly Abercrombie seems to be becoming a very dark form of Pratchett with the slow creation of modern bourgeosie and capitalism creeping into the world and eclipsing the fantastical elements, the slow strangling of a glorious past with drudgery (although as Abercrombie makes clear the glorious history and epic events were full of equally evil and petty indiviudals that were just able to do far more damage) The second thing is a problem I have with Abercrombie, that seems to be improving so I guess more with the First Law trilogy, that he seems to lay into fantasy tropes with a Hammer +4 vs. Hope. Everyone is just a bastard and basically irredeemable. My main problem in this case is Bayaz's character. It seemed to me a really interesting opportunity to subvert the immortal, benevolent, guiding figure trope in Fantasy. I could see the possibility for exploring a man who starts out with a positive vision of the future trying to guide humanity to a better world and just gradually loses touch. It seemed an opportunity for knocking the fantasy trope of immortal beings that actually give a gently caress about humanity or the capacity to shape the fate of nations and retain a sense of humanity. Instead it just turned out he was a bastard from the beginning and hasn't really ever changed. gently caress I didn't get the impression he ever acted out of good intentions. It was just all, everyone's a reprehensible bastard, all the time. I think that he misses the chance for some better stories because he seems to purposefully reject character development (whether improving or degenerating) for the sake of showing how circumstances and character mean no-one ever really changes. Which I don't think makes for rewarding stories, even if they are really, really well written. I should add that any problems I have with the characters really are overshadowed by Abercrombie's writing. Even when I don't like people I still find myself getting suckered into caring about them and their fates.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
MrNemo posted:My main problem in this case is Bayaz's character. It seemed to me a really interesting opportunity to subvert the immortal, benevolent, guiding figure trope in Fantasy. I could see the possibility for exploring a man who starts out with a positive vision of the future trying to guide humanity to a better world and just gradually loses touch. It seemed an opportunity for knocking the fantasy trope of immortal beings that actually give a gently caress about humanity or the capacity to shape the fate of nations and retain a sense of humanity. Instead it just turned out he was a bastard from the beginning and hasn't really ever changed. gently caress I didn't get the impression he ever acted out of good intentions. It was just all, everyone's a reprehensible bastard, all the time. I think that he misses the chance for some better stories because he seems to purposefully reject character development (whether improving or degenerating) for the sake of showing how circumstances and character mean no-one ever really changes. Which I don't think makes for rewarding stories, even if they are really, really well written. Well Abercrombie tells you exactly what Bayaz is in the first two lines when he is introduced: "'I am Bayaz,' came a voice from behind. The butcher was walking slowly toward them, wiping his hands on a cloth." Even Bayaz's mannerisms are ominous. Can you really hold it against Abercrombie when he warns you from line beginning? That being said we don't know anything about Bayaz from before he killed Juvens and threw the Master Maker from his tower. We can't know, at this point, about Bayaz's motivations other than he felt like his opinions were not taken into consideration. If I had to guess, Bayaz was an apprentice for centuries and none of Juvens' apprentices were allowed to move on from that stage. They would never become masters, or perhaps would never become even journeymen, at their trade. I'd also guess that we learn quite a bit more about Bayaz from before Juvens' death in the next trilogy. With regard to no one ever changing, I'd go ahead and argue that the three main POV characters are fundamentally different people at the end of The First Law and the three minor POV characters are at the very least given the chance to change. Additionally, their lots in life are generally quite different, for better or for worse.
I guess I don't expect much more change in people over the course of about two years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
It's almost like these are complex characters that can be interpreted multiple ways.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 04:54
|
|
|
Juaguocio posted:It's almost like these are complex characters that can be interpreted multiple ways. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Jeffrey posted:and you sir have discovered the thread for discussing them Oh, sorry, I thought I was posting in the "books that aren't awful" megathread. My bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Xenix you make some good points, there is character development along the way for several characters but it seems like Abercrombie is determined to ensure that anyone who changes for the better is forced into a situation where they are unable to exercise their better nature. Likewise many characters undergo improvement only to ultimately return to their nasty ways as soon as things get tough (and things always get tough). Bayaz we don't know the initial motivations for but it seems a lot like he basically had a hissy fit over not being in charge/sufficiently valued and orchestrated a coup. It just seems ultimately his entire character is based on wanting to push people around and shaping the world to his own whims via any form of manipulation that will work. Maybe this is some meta-point being made by Abercrombie regarding the character of anyone likely to actually devote themselves to shaping humanity over this kind of time period but it comes off more as just slowly pulling away each and every likeable/understandable part of the character. There's not even anything tragic about him, he's just a bastard all the way though. Of course I say all of that and it may well be that Abercrombie is going after something I ultimately think is less interesting. I've read a lot more of the thread and seen that there's a good amount of discussion around whether he leaves the whole provenance of 'grey' fantasy and is just outright writing 'black' fantasy where everyone's pretty nasty and ultimately the worst stuff happens to the best people without bothering with nuance. In that case I'm left with the position that he could be writing more rewarding and interesting books with a bit less grimness and throwing some more likeable elements into some of his characters. However I also find his writing to be goddamn addictive and kind of wish someone with the sort of ideas Bakker has could also capture the kind of sharp and directed writing Abercrombie manages.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
Why are we spoilering stuff from six books ago?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
Eh, I know they're from a ways back but was just being on the safe side. The OP talked about spoilering plot points and I figured better safe than sorry. On thinking about it, it does seem a little unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
So you're pissed of because Bayaz isn't Saruman?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
I finished the main 3 book series and it was pretty good but the tail end of it left an extremely bad taste in my mouth. I'm okay with dark and gritty but loving over most of the cast in the last 100 pages didn't work for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
When I think abstractly about what happened to the characters it does feel a bit that way, but when reading it it didn't bother me. I think it was because the books felt to me very sardonic in tone, so even the extremely bleak passages felt vaguely humorous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
There's definitely some black humor in the books (At one point I realized someone was about to die because Dogman had to piss), none of that really come across in the ending. At one point near the end Jezal stands up to Bayaz and gives the speech we all want him to give but then he's just effortlessly slapped down and it's like 'Well, okay then...' The only endings I was okay with were Ferro's and Logen's, and they weren't particularly poignant or anything, just fitting for their characters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
Hey, at least immortal wizard Josef Stalin had a happy ending. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:I finished the main 3 book series and it was pretty good but the tail end of it left an extremely bad taste in my mouth. I'm okay with dark and gritty but loving over most of the cast in the last 100 pages didn't work for me. A number of characters got shafted, but for the most part it seemed to flow naturally from the narrative. The only one that seemed really out of nowhere was West getting magic radiation poisoning.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:I finished the main 3 book series and it was pretty good but the tail end of it left an extremely bad taste in my mouth. I'm okay with dark and gritty but loving over most of the cast in the last 100 pages didn't work for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
The best thing about it is that without context and if you were told about it at the beginning of the first book, the characters appear to have had classic fantasy happy endings for almost everybody:Jezal becomes a picture perfect king and marries a beautiful princess, Bayaz triumphs against the evil foreign empire and its cannibal wizards, Glotka becomes the right hand of the king and the most powerful man in the Union while winning the hand of his best friend's sister, Ferro gains magical powers that grant her a real chance at fulfilling her all important dreams of vengeance, Logen is the new king of the northmen after killing his nemesis, the Dogman is the ambassador of the North to the Union, even Gorst becomes first bodyguard to the king and a hero of the Battle of Adua. It's only if you know what's behind all this that it is far from a happy ending.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
Mr.48 posted:A number of characters got shafted, but for the most part it seemed to flow naturally from the narrative. The only one that seemed really out of nowhere was West getting magic radiation poisoning. Yeah, I really didn't like that. He was a flawed but generally upstanding man. He was an angry person and beat his sister on one occasion, which is almost unforgivable, but he'd suffered for it and saved a lot of men's lives in the end. Of the five characters focused on most he seemed the least broken and to be in a position where he might actually find some happiness as he aged and grew into the military role he'd found himself in - hell, after the way the battle went even the noble born military officers probably would have treated him with a measure of respect. His death was the only part of the ending that really bothered me. Jezal had grown but it was hard for me to distance him in my mind from the poo poo he was before, Logen had shown himself to be beastial beneath the genial guy he'd been in the Empire, Glokta had become a pretty horrible person so either way it was a bit hard to feel bad about his ending, given he was probably on the whole better off than he'd been before since he was at less risk of being done away with by a capricious boss - Bayaz, while sure as hell capable of murdering him, can probably recognise a capable servant - and Ferro... Well, who gives a gently caress about Ferro? Yeah, it sucks West bit it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
I will never forgive the Coward joe abercrombie for the death of my favorite character hadring grim,
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
I finished everything up through Red Country, and I really hope we get some more explanation about the robot dragon the Dragon People had in a future book. Was it just idol worship toward Kanedias or could that thing actually have woken up? Beyond that, the next book better have more Shenkt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 09:09
|
|
|
The weird poo poo Kanedias was doing and what he was up against magic-wise? Pretty sure that thing would've flown.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 10:04
|
|
|
Hoill Brillan! posted:So you're pissed of because Bayaz isn't Saruman? Nah, the corruption trope is fairly tired. I preferred the idea of a character who starts off as a well intentioned human that's just grown cold and distant and turned into an Architect of Fate who no longer gives a gently caress about mortals. Questioning the very possibility of those who live for centuries even feeling any connection to normal people rather than acting as benevolent sheperds. Hell it would have been better if they'd even painted Bayaz as someone ultimately trying to do the best thing but who just can't feel empathy for individuals anymore (so immortality eventually turns you into a sociopath). Instead he's a controlling bastard/sociopath the whole time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 12:41
|
|
|
There are three other immortals we encounter. None are as malevolent or sociopathic as Bayaz. There are other ends to that path, we don't know how any of them developed. We just have two monsters pitted against each other, and where 'right' is between them is loving murky. I tend to support Bayaz's kingdom a little bit more because I think a plutocracy is ever so slightly better than a theocracy. At least people have the idea they could be rich. And frankly financial systems have done more for humanity than religion ever has. Edit: actually, religion has provided stability and society, especially in primitive times. I'm exaggerating there. But at least at the 16th or 17th century point this world seems to be at. Neurosis fucked around with this message at 13:14 on Feb 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 13:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:22 |
|
|
That's the thing I get the feeling that Bayaz set this whole thing off. He's using plutocracy and echoes of modern finance systems not because it's in any way better but just because it's a more effective means of control than religion. I don't think Abercrombie's created a traditional fantasy divide, if we accept that the immortals are directing humanity then really we're looking at two opponents that have just chosen different tactics to direct the energies of their empires. It's the equivalent of preferring one Civ player because they chose democracy over feudalism but they only did that because of the tech bonuses and they figure they can adjust economic policies to cover the unrest penalties. I think the Old Empire is an interesting player in the world setting. I've actually finished Red Country now and I take back some of the comments about things being relentlessly dark. It's dark but it's not as ridiculous as Best Served Cold was. We really don't see much of them beyond the fact that they're not what they were and the Byzantine feeling I get about them is pretty cool. I'm almost scared to see them actually get featured just because I know I'll be disappointed by the feet of clay (Oh wait for half a chapter being about Legate Sarmis, scourge of the Known World, suffering with piles, etc.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 18:44
|
|