|
I just reread through the books in series, and one thing that stuck out to me in doing that was Javre. No spoiler tags because none of this seems spoilery to me, but be warned. The Templars of Hoskeep have the only magic weapons we've seen in the world, and the only magical items you see in the series that i can recall with the exception of a magical McGuffin that is never really dwelt on in one of the Sharp Ends stories. That seems significant to me even though the Javre & Shev series of stories is mostly a comic take on Fafhred & the Grey Mouser. I can't figure out if Abercrombie included all the magic swords because that's he genre he was working in, or if he intentionally is suggesting that there's a lot more magic out in the world than the really limited witches & magi that show up in the main series. If so, there are potentially a lot of new directions the new trilogy could go in terms of upsetting the geopolitics we've seen so far.
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
They could be something the Maker made, so they just seem magical compared to other weapons (dunno, haven't read that collection in a while.) I didn't really like the Javre stories much, they felt too out of place for Abercrombie's world. Though he does like experimenting with other genres, it felt like it was breaking too much into parody of fantasy.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 03:23
|
|
|
Joe's real gift is dialogue so it doesn't matter what he wants to experiment. The books are still gonna be hilarious.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 04:41
|
|
|
Notahippie posted:I just reread through the books in series, and one thing that stuck out to me in doing that was Javre. No spoiler tags because none of this seems spoilery to me, but be warned. There was also the Divider in the Maker's house with one blade in the real world and one in the other or whatever, been a while since I read it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 13:20
|
|
|
Ccs posted:They could be something the Maker made, so they just seem magical compared to other weapons (dunno, haven't read that collection in a while.) I doubt they're the Maker's. He didn't like flashy things. He liked things that worked.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 01:44
|
|
|
Tofu Injection posted:I doubt they're the Maker's. He didn't like flashy things. He liked things that worked. That was my take - all his swords are specifically described as unornamented but marked with his mark, while the Templar's swords are extremely flashy and there's no mark on them mentioned. We know there are other magicians out in the world, like Caurib the witch from the original trilogy, but they're never really central or even particularly important in the other stories. It makes me wonder whether that's a bias of the original Magi and there's actually a lot more happening than they realize, or if all the other magicians and witches are just leagues behind the Magi.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
Notahippie posted:That was my take - all his swords are specifically described as unornamented but marked with his mark, while the Templar's swords are extremely flashy and there's no mark on them mentioned. We know there are other magicians out in the world, like Caurib the witch from the original trilogy, but they're never really central or even particularly important in the other stories. It makes me wonder whether that's a bias of the original Magi and there's actually a lot more happening than they realize, or if all the other magicians and witches are just leagues behind the Magi. Don’t the Maker’s swords not even look like they’re particularly sharp?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:54
|
|
|
Considering how weak the magi are I don't see how there could be a bunch of other wizards out there making magical artifacts. Bayaz sets some trees on fire and nearly faints, and he's the best of the bunch. The magic is leaking out of the world, and there's hardly any way to connect to the source except through the Seed, or by breaking the second law. So maybe the Templar swords were made by Glustrod or Euz. Leftovers from the great war that destroyed that city in the second book whose name I cant remember.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 03:05
|
|
|
The Templar swords made me wonder if there’s another source of magic in the world, completely separate from Euz and the demon world (that seems to be the source of all the other magic we’ve seen in one way or another). There’s not a hell of a lot to back that up, but the idea sticks with me somehow.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 03:45
|
|
|
Magic swords in fantasy? Really makes you think.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 07:38
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Magic swords in fantasy? Really makes you think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 06:08
|
|
|
So does anyone else think that the whole pseudo-Islamic monsters fighting an evil banker conspiracy plotline seems a bit... white supremacist?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
This is how you choose to use your ~week's worth of freedom before you get probated for a month again? Also you didn't even draw the obvious parallels between Monza and Washington/Talins and America / that one dude, the ex-apprentice and the Freemasons. Shamefully poor work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
Well that's a normal response.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:So does anyone else think that the whole pseudo-Islamic monsters fighting an evil banker conspiracy plotline seems a bit... white supremacist? It’s doing something with way more depth than “Islamic Hordes fighting Evil Jew Bankers”. The series lives in subverting your expectations and not giving you the whole picture. Just like the average Union citizen is shown to not be scheming for war in the Not Middle East, there’s no reason to think that the average Gurkish dude is tying to enact some kind of global caliphate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2018 19:13
|
|
|
That doesn't change the fact that the books still equate Islam with ghūls and that they hinge on banking conspiracy theory.
BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Jun 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2018 19:49
|
|
|
Also I was writing a review of the whole series, and I made a note about how proud fans are of the idea of it "subverting expectations," but I wasn't actually expecting someone to use the actual phrase lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Also I was writing a review of the whole series, and I made a note about how proud fans are of the idea of it "subverting expectations," but I wasn't actually expecting someone to use the actual phrase lol That’s exactly what it does, it sets up expectations based around your prior expectations, then twists them around to deliver something novel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2018 21:00
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:That’s exactly what it does, it sets up expectations based around your prior expectations, then twists them around to deliver something novel. What is this "novel" something then?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2018 21:06
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Well that's a normal response. You want people to only engage with you on your terms gently caress off back to your containment thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:What is this "novel" something then? Presenting the archetypes of a typical fantasy and then showing that those people are not what they seem. It's a tried and true narrative technique, sure, but it hadn't been done in the fantasy genre before Abercrombie. Though if you have other examples I'd like to read them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:You want people to only engage with you on your terms gently caress off back to your containment thread. A very normal thing to say. Ccs posted:Presenting the archetypes of a typical fantasy and then showing that those people are not what they seem. No character in the novels resembles an "archetype of a typical fantasy". The books are already so cynical that no one's expectations are subverted when it turns out that the good guys are not good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 09:31
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:No character in the novels resembles an "archetype of a typical fantasy". Serious question: did you even read these books?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 10:40
|
|
|
First one has to establish what a "typical fantasy" is. One would assume that it means genre fiction inspired by Tolkien and Dungeons & Dragons, with elves, dwarves, hobbits, and orcs - the "archetypes" of fantasy. The First Law features creatures similar to orcs, except orcs are talkative and have personalities, so there's not much resemblance. Conan the Barbarian would represent a typical archetype, as Conan has inspired more than a few characters, but Logen Ninefingers never resembles Conan very much. He's presented as a pitiable warrior, so no expectations about barbarian heroes are subverted. A pitiable warrior is not really an archetype of a typical fantasy. The subverted expectations come from the fact that he's also a monstrous berserker, not that he doesn't resemble some archetype. Jezal does recall an archetype of fiction, the secret heir, but that's not unique to fantasy fiction at all, and Jezal ultimately does not resemble the archetype very much. The idea behind a character like Esther Summerson is that their humble status belies their heritage, and Jezal is already a well-to-do aristocrat. Ferro is an avenger, but her motivations are shrouded in vagueness and her desire for vengeance is presented as incomprehensible, violent obstinacy. She's never presented as an archetypical avenger, since those types of characters tend to have clear goals and desires. Glokta is a member of a secret police, and thus a distinctly modern character rather than an archetype of Tolkienesque fiction. Now Bayaz would be the closest thing to an archetype of a typical fantasy.... but it's established right when they're introduced that they're nothing like a typical wizard: quote:An old, bald butcher in a stained apron had finished chopping up some animal and was washing his bloody forearms in a trough. Sure it subverts expectations, but the key thing is that Bayaz is still never represented as an archetype of Tolkienesque fiction. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 11:38 on Jun 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
I think you're way too focused on the superficial elements. It isn't who these characters are, but what they do and what happens to them that actually subverts expectations. Glokta for example is a wicked and amoral bastard who would eventually get his just desserts in the vast majority of fiction writing. He's also very amusing to read and has sympathetic elements, which is a superficial subversion, but the major thing is that his ultimate fortune is one that you'd much sooner expect from virtually any other of the story's protagonists. Look at the big "quest for the McGuffin" in the second book. Lots of things happen during the journey that are at least superficially quite different from your average fantasy novel, but you'd expect the heroes to acquire or at the very least interact with the object of their quest. That never happens. I think that at a meta level, having apparent archetypes tweaked in obvious ways helps to disarm readers who might otherwise be on their guard for the "real" fake-outs. If someone starts reading the series because he heard that it bucks expectations, he'd be much more likely to look at Bayaz skeptically if he appeared as Literally Gandalf. Having an intro like you quoted, and the prideful encounter with Bethod a few minutes after that, helps to subvert expectations with the reader without revealing any of the real twists. Magitek fucked around with this message at 14:55 on Jun 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 14:27
|
|
|
None of that "subverts expectations". The story is presented in such a cynical manner that nobody expects good to triumph and evil to be defeated. The reason fans are so insistent that the novels "subvert expectations" is because for them it represents the height of sophistication, akin how important "subverted tropes" are to TvTropes. Really, all the developments you mention are old hat. Lord Dunsany posted:And Arleon said: "My King, I know no longer the way to Carcassonne."
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
I like the part where Logen talks about how you can never have too many knives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 16:12
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:None of that "subverts expectations". The story is presented in such a cynical manner that nobody expects good to triumph and evil to be defeated. Your trolling has become tiresome. Goodbye.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
Hmm yes, the terrible trolling that is.... claiming that some novels don't really subvert expectations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 17:46
|
|
|
I dunno, we've got over 100 pages of people generally agreeing and liking these books. Then you come stumbling on in with some weird white nationalist theory and telling us that our expectations weren't actually subverted so maybe you're the problem?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
The banking conspiracy and Islamic cannibal monsters are a bit suspect storytelling devices in my opinion. e: Also I love the implication that I single-handedly introduced is disagreement and dislike into the thread. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Jun 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
I think it has more to do with you can't come in here and tell us what we were expecting when we read the books the first time. You say it doesn't subvert our expectations and we're sitting here telling you that these books did.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:None of that "subverts expectations". The story is presented in such a cynical manner that nobody expects good to triumph and evil to be defeated. I think a minority of people are meta enough to realise what you're saying. At least as far as the end of the first trilogy is concerned where I think a lot of people legit expected (or dared hope for) a happy ending. Although lots of people read Logen as a heroic figure because of his initial characterisation as the world-weary killer who wants to leave his violent life behind, but in spite of everything else that was ever established about him after. So maybe some bookreaders are just dim.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
Beastie posted:You say it doesn't subvert our expectations and we're sitting here telling you that these books did. VagueRant posted:So maybe some bookreaders are just dim. Exactly. For readers to expect that good will triumph in the story, "good" must first exist in the first place. The closest thing to "good" in these books is the desire of some characters to improve themselves, but anyone who pays attention notice that the story is about the worst possible thing that still keeps the story moving happening over and over again. This pattern consists of things getting worse but stopping and changing course before annihilation. Anyone or anyplace getting better is grimly pleasant simply because of how rare and precarious it is. This makes Abercrombie's writing about on par with Warhammer fluff. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Jun 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
I don't think I hoped for a happy ending at all. I think by book 2 I was just hoping that my favorite characters would make it out of the terrible loving situations they were in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 19:30
|
|
|
My memory is a little fuzzy here, but stopping annihilation from the Ghurkish invasion, Jezal being the good heroic king, West initially surviving, Logen going home with his men and the nations in allied peace - sure there was a lot of grimdark murder and bad times along the way, Bayaz's reaction was a bit unsettling - but that's relatively par for the course. It definitely wraps up like a traditional happy ending narrative, so the reveal that everyone was a pawn in a chess game played by two magical bastards and gets reduced back to what they started as (or worse) is unquestionably a rugpull. Call me dim, I didn't see it coming. Inevitable unhappy endings are certainly an established pattern in every one of the preceding books though. BravestOfTheLamps posted:So does anyone else think that the whole pseudo-Islamic monsters fighting an evil banker conspiracy plotline seems a bit... white supremacist? Abercrombie could probably do with fleshing out the non-occupied Ghurkish a bit more though. He definitely has their representative characters as creepy mysterious monsters who ardently follow a prophet which gets a bit...weird. But a thing I like about him is that when he the gross presentation of the lesbian Queen being forced into having Jezal's babies was pointed out to him - he put his hands up, acknowledged the criticism and learned from it. Hopefully something similar happens here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
I just read Abercrombie because he can write an entertaining story with memorable characters, maybe he's not the smartest writer out there but then again I'm not the smartest reader.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:None of that "subverts expectations". The story is presented in such a cynical manner that nobody expects good to triumph and evil to be defeated. I did. I really liked Bayaz up until the last book. I thought he was a bit flawed and tempermental but was generally heroic, and that maybe he had abandoned the Union because of how corrupt it was getting. I didn't see the Valint and Balk twist coming until late in the 2nd book. Maybe I'm just slow. But I think part of why Bayaz's reveal is so satisfying is because he does subvert expectations. He doesn't truly cross the pale until he leaves Yulwei to die and then it's like "Oh, okay this guy is actually an awful bastard."
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:The banking conspiracy and Islamic cannibal monsters are a bit suspect storytelling devices in my opinion. What are your thoughts on the books tie-ins to real life lizard people and the Zionist agenda?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
In case you haven’t encountered BotL before, the only reason to reply to him is to wind him up and watch him 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 00:38
|
|
