Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
loquacius
Oct 21, 2008

Paddyo posted:

I never got the impression that Leo was ever supposed to be a complete rear end in a top hat - more that he was a super immature and naive teenager. He comes off to me as one of those "shades of grey" type of characters, and heck, those are always more interesting than the one-dimensional types. I think Abercrombie is setting up how easily he can be manipulated, which will probably play a big part in the direction that the rest of the series takes.

That's the thing, though -- accepting the duel without having any idea how good a fighter Stour was was really the only example I can think of of him doing anything that could be really considered a "bad idea" in the scheme of things, and that was most of the way through the book, after I had already been subjected to many chapters of everyone hating him for what seemed to be no good reason. Like, give me a chapter where he bites super hard on a feint and gets a whole bunch of people killed and barely escapes with his life or something to show how dumb he is, that wouldn't have been hard.

As it was, his first chapter essentially being him going to his mom with big doe eyes all like "look, Mommy, I won a victory, are you proud of me? Please please say a single solitary nice thing to me for the first time ever" and her responding with "jesus gently caress why am I saddled with this utter embarrassment failure of an idiot-child, sorry everyone, he's just, like, super dumb" kind of set the tone for the rest of his chapters for me. You're right that the Rikke examples are more explainable, and they wouldn't have felt the same way to me if it wasn't for the Finree ones.

I dunno it's entirely possible this is personal for me because near the end of the book, when he'd won the war and his only remaining parent finally DID give him a single sentence of praise and he thought something about how that was the first time in years he could remember her doing that, I was like "oof yeah I know that feel"

Really it's not that surprising he grew up to be fixated on the idea of glory and popularity, this poo poo is what happens when you're mean to your kids, everyone


e: yeah, upon reflection caused by this conversation I can definitely confirm that the core of my issue with Leo is bad parenting by Finree, which is probably due to trauma on HER part from the stuff that happened in The Heroes followed by however Leo's dad died

loquacius fucked around with this message at 14:06 on Nov 13, 2019

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

loquacius
Oct 21, 2008

theorycrafting: We know that the lamb is going to eat the lion, meaning that Orso is going to cause some kind of downfall for Leo. By the end of the book, Leo is friends with Stour and intensely resentful of the Union government because they were happy to use him as a propaganda device but declined to pay for the massive debt Angland racked up winning a war without their help. My theory is that at some point Leo is going to be manipulated by Stour into revolting against Midderland, possibly seceding and/or joining the North, and Orso is going to beat him. As for the owl that's going to eat the lamb, it's possible that's Weaver-Bayaz bringing his shadow government into the new age, although I'm speculating heavily there since nobody has actually been referred to in-narrative by any sort of owl comparison.

Collateral
Feb 17, 2010
I was very much amused by the homoerotic undercurrents of Leo and his chums. Which friend is super thirsty for him?

Affi
Dec 18, 2005

Break bread wit the enemy

X GON GIVE IT TO YA
All of them and he for them. Totally the best part of the book.

loquacius
Oct 21, 2008

Jurand specifically IIRC

Grand Prize Winner
Feb 19, 2007


Those bits where you're looking into his inner monologue and he's all like "yeah im a ladies man who loves the ladies, total poonhound right here" but he spends way more time thinkin about his bros is some good poo poo. Him and Jurand gonna hook up midway through book 2, calling it now.

Ainsley McTree
Feb 19, 2004


loquacius posted:

That's the thing, though -- accepting the duel without having any idea how good a fighter Stour was was really the only example I can think of of him doing anything that could be really considered a "bad idea" in the scheme of things, and that was most of the way through the book, after I had already been subjected to many chapters of everyone hating him for what seemed to be no good reason. Like, give me a chapter where he bites super hard on a feint and gets a whole bunch of people killed and barely escapes with his life or something to show how dumb he is, that wouldn't have been hard.

As it was, his first chapter essentially being him going to his mom with big doe eyes all like "look, Mommy, I won a victory, are you proud of me? Please please say a single solitary nice thing to me for the first time ever" and her responding with "jesus gently caress why am I saddled with this utter embarrassment failure of an idiot-child, sorry everyone, he's just, like, super dumb" kind of set the tone for the rest of his chapters for me. You're right that the Rikke examples are more explainable, and they wouldn't have felt the same way to me if it wasn't for the Finree ones.

I dunno it's entirely possible this is personal for me because near the end of the book, when he'd won the war and his only remaining parent finally DID give him a single sentence of praise and he thought something about how that was the first time in years he could remember her doing that, I was like "oof yeah I know that feel"

Really it's not that surprising he grew up to be fixated on the idea of glory and popularity, this poo poo is what happens when you're mean to your kids, everyone


e: yeah, upon reflection caused by this conversation I can definitely confirm that the core of my issue with Leo is bad parenting by Finree, which is probably due to trauma on HER part from the stuff that happened in The Heroes followed by however Leo's dad died

Maybe I misread his chapters but that’s not quite the vibe I got; i took it that finree really does love Leo, but he’s surrounded by bad influences and wants him to be smart, goddamn it. Plus he stands to inherit an important position of power and she wants to groom him to do it correctly before she loses her power to keep everything from falling apart.

Maybe she doesn’t parent him in the most supportive way but she’s also balancing having a demanding job (while also being a woman, which the author mentions once or twice makes the job harder) and being the wife of someone who was executed for treason (Brock was one of the traitors, right?). I didn’t get the sense that she hates Leo, just that she’s frustrated with the ideas people have been filling his head with; that good leaders charge headlong into every danger they can find without hesitation or planning.

Grand Prize Winner
Feb 19, 2007


Ainsley McTree posted:

... and being the wife of someone who was executed for treason (Brock was one of the traitors, right?).

Nah, her husband was that guy's son and got promoted from lieutenant or something to lord governor thanks to Finree in one of the earlier books.

Not a spoiler for the new book so I'm not tagging it.

Ainsley McTree
Feb 19, 2004


Grand Prize Winner posted:

Nah, her husband was that guy's son and got promoted from lieutenant or something to lord governor thanks to Finree in one of the earlier books.

Not a spoiler for the new book so I'm not tagging it.

Ohh...I did not remember that, thank you

In retrospect, that makes sense; the union doesn’t seem like a “execute someone for treason but give his powerful job to the wife” kind of country

Ainsley McTree fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Nov 13, 2019

Grand Prize Winner
Feb 19, 2007


Yeah, him and I think one other big character from The Heroes (Rikke's mother, I think?) died of Offscreen Disease between books.

loquacius
Oct 21, 2008

Ainsley McTree posted:

Maybe I misread his chapters but that’s not quite the vibe I got; i took it that finree really does love Leo, but he’s surrounded by bad influences and wants him to be smart, goddamn it. Plus he stands to inherit an important position of power and she wants to groom him to do it correctly before she loses her power to keep everything from falling apart.

Maybe she doesn’t parent him in the most supportive way but she’s also balancing having a demanding job (while also being a woman, which the author mentions once or twice makes the job harder) and being the wife of someone who was executed for treason (Brock was one of the traitors, right?). I didn’t get the sense that she hates Leo, just that she’s frustrated with the ideas people have been filling his head with; that good leaders charge headlong into every danger they can find without hesitation or planning.


Apologies for all the redacted text but if you haven't finished the books get out of the thread honestly :colbert:

Characters from fiction who are really lovely parents because of their demanding jobs don't usually have very good showings, and in most cases it's a more benign sort of "I'm sorry champ, I'll make it to your NEXT baseball game" kind of neglect than an active "make sure to break your child's spirit whenever they're happy about something and make a big show of being careful never to appear supportive of them in front of other people" type. King Triton from The Little Mermaid had a tough job too, but he still didn't have to throw away all his daughter's collectibles.

My read on it is that she was terrified of Leo getting hurt, possibly because of her adventures with Stranger-Come-Knocking in The Heroes or because of however his dad died, and allowed that to influence her judgment to the point of undermining him constantly to keep him from entering dangerous situations. The two times in the book he manages to actually go into battle, one of them resulted in her yelling at him both in public and in private, and the other she had to be basically forced into by Calder outmaneuvering her and Leo himself pretty much begging for it. Regardless of the fact that Stour was a much better swordsman than they realized, Leo is an asset for the army's morale, and allowing him to be seen killing Northmen with very strict orders regarding exactly how would probably have been a better strategy than keeping him cowed and out of action because that morale was in a pretty sad state.

I don't really buy that she was madder at other people putting ideas in his head than she was at him for wanting to fight all the time, because she had ample opportunities to show anger at other people instead of him and absolutely did not do so. If it was all about teaching him lessons about ruling, that moment I mentioned where he noticed she hadn't praised him in years and years wouldn't have happened.


e: Everybody blamed Leo for taking the duel, but honestly, as he pointed out once, at that point they didn't really have any other options and could not have won that war conventionally. She probably would have approved of the plan if it were someone else's head on the line.

loquacius
Oct 21, 2008

Really if Finree had taken Calder's approach when dealing with Leo (send around smart people to give him advice and try to rein him in a little), and Calder had taken Finree's approach when dealing with Stour (just tell him to sit down and shut up and let Daddy handle everything) things would have turned out much better for everyone involved. Dealing with a child who is headstrong and reckless requires a different strategy than dealing with a child who is literally Hitler.

Affi
Dec 18, 2005

Break bread wit the enemy

X GON GIVE IT TO YA
Such bullshit. It’s not obvious but Leo is totally dumber then a sack of bricks.

He doesn’t understand strategy at all and just wants to charge at the enemy and win glory and he also overestimates himself a lot because he’s just fighting his friends.

And Finree did surround him with smart people. He had two friends who were clever and reserved and one of them died.

loquacius
Oct 21, 2008

Scale is dumb as a sack of bricks too and Calder managed to be supportive of him :colbert:

I guess I don't have to keep hammering on this point, honestly I'm glad I got the opportunity to talk through this a little bit and track it to me being touchy about my parents never saying anything nice to or about me

Notahippie
Feb 4, 2003

Kids, it's not cool to have Shane MacGowan teeth

Xenix posted:

It's never said, but the thought that it may be Bayaz crossed my mind as well. In one of her fits, Rikke sees a bald weaver with a bottomless purse. Sure sounds like one First of the Magi everyone knows.

I feel like there's two options: One is that it's Bayaz, which means he's done with feudalism and capitalism as tools for social control and sees more potential in some kind of communism (probably closer to Stalin than Kropotkin). In this case, Sulfer is setting up the Union to go full accelerationist through atrocities spurring greater rebellion. The argument against this is that Valint & Balk currently completely run the Union and there's no reason to think that there are any cracks in their control - basically they've never had any major setback that we see that would undermine their control. The other option is that it's another player who is directly attacking the capitalist system that Bayaz is using for control as a way of outmaneuvering him. IMO this option is more likely, because if you were an opponent of Bayaz it's one of the only plays you have available to you - otherwise you could topple the Union but still end up with him in control if you didn't change the underlying system. The question is who would be behind it, though, and to me that's most likely the eater from Best Served Cold. He's both a formal opponent of Bayaz's and also somebody who has demonstrated that he's aware of the political currents in the world and willing to use them to block Bayaz's goals.

Chef Boyardeez Nuts
Sep 9, 2011

The more you kick against the pricks, the more you suffer.
I'm really disappointed that Gorst didn't go native in the North. They'd have given him a name like "Squeaky" and still made him king.

loquacius
Oct 21, 2008

Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:

I'm really disappointed that Gorst didn't go native in the North. They'd have given him a name like "Squeaky" and still made him king.

This would have made Gorst infinitely happier than continuing to base his entire identity around serving the Union government did, so of course he didn't do it and instead did the other thing

e: AU fanfic that is just Caul Shivers and Northman!Gorst in a madcap buddy action-comedy

Ainsley McTree
Feb 19, 2004


loquacius posted:

This would have made Gorst infinitely happier than continuing to base his entire identity around serving the Union government did, so of course he didn't do it and instead did the other thing

e: AU fanfic that is just Caul Shivers and Northman!Gorst in a madcap buddy action-comedy

(Big spoilers for end of most recent book) loyalty to Jezal was his strongest tie to the union wasn’t it? Now that he’s kicked it, maybe gorst will run off to the woods to live the murderhobo lifestyle he deserves

Neurosis
Jun 10, 2003
Fallen Rib

Affi posted:

Isn’t Brint the only one who doesn’t get overpromoted?

West wasn't overpromoted. Putting him in charge may have been the only effectual and independent decision Jezal made as king.

Khizan
Jul 30, 2013


Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:

I'm really disappointed that Gorst didn't go native in the North. They'd have given him a name like "Squeaky" and still made him king.

I always wanted to see this just so there would be lists of feared/famous Named Men that read like "The Bloody-Nine, Threetrees, Black Dow, Caul Shivers, Tul Duru Thunderhead, Shama Heartless, and Mr Squeakers".

Patrat
Feb 14, 2012

Neurosis posted:

West wasn't overpromoted. Putting him in charge may have been the only effectual and independent decision Jezal made as king.

But this is Joe Ambercrombie Land and nobody can have things work out well for them, so we know how that turned out.

ZekeNY
Jun 13, 2013

Probably AFK

Patrat posted:

But this is Joe Ambercrombie Land and nobody can have things work out well for them, so we know how that turned out.

He doesn't call himself Lord Grimdark for nothing...

Chef Boyardeez Nuts
Sep 9, 2011

The more you kick against the pricks, the more you suffer.
I was trying to think about characters that had "good" endings. The old king of the Union maybe? He died old, fat, and oblivious. Vitale and her kids seemed pretty good.

Hemp Knight
Sep 26, 2004
Shy South and Temple are the obvious ones.
Monza maybe. Unites Styria, gets her revenge, but her brother gets killed and she’s permanently injured and in some pain.

Ainsley McTree
Feb 19, 2004


Ardee could have done worse, I guess? Not a great life but better than most.

Dog man landed on his feet too, figured a certain way; of course his story isn’t over and level-headed people in positions of power don’t seem to fare well in this series

Ainsley McTree fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Nov 15, 2019

Chef Boyardeez Nuts
Sep 9, 2011

The more you kick against the pricks, the more you suffer.
Yeah I didn't think to include anyone who is still alive because Abercrombie could still throw them stage 4 magic cancer at any time.

Ardee certainly could have done worse for herself though the various deceits required have landed her in a Greek tragedy.

Chef Boyardeez Nuts fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Nov 15, 2019

Andrast
Apr 21, 2010


Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:

I was trying to think about characters that had "good" endings.

Bayaz

ZekeNY
Jun 13, 2013

Probably AFK

Oh he has an ending coming, I expect, and I’d bet on it being a long way from good

DeadFatDuckFat
Oct 29, 2012

This avatar brought to you by the 'save our dead gay forums' foundation.


ZekeNY posted:

Oh he has an ending coming, I expect, and I’d bet on it being a long way from good

"He is dancing, dancing. He says that he will never die."

Suxpool
Nov 20, 2002
I want something good to die for...to make it beautiful to live

ZekeNY posted:

Oh he has an ending coming, I expect, and I’d bet on it being a long way from good

I think I'd be a little disappointed if Bayaz ever got his just desserts. I've always felt Abercrombie's so good because his books seem so true to life from a cynic's point of view. The truly powerful never get their comeuppance. It's relatable.

Ainsley McTree
Feb 19, 2004


Suxpool posted:

I think I'd be a little disappointed if Bayaz ever got his just desserts. I've always felt Abercrombie's so good because his books seem so true to life from a cynic's point of view. The truly powerful never get their comeuppance. It's relatable.

Yeah given the tone of the series and the arc of the first trilogy (and why people liked it, or at least why I did), my prediction is that bayaz will either win forever because he has made himself untouchable and nobody else ever really truly had a chance to take him down, or he’ll be usurped by something much worse

Justice is a pretty foreign concept in this universe

Xenix
Feb 21, 2003
I'm 99% sure that Joe said on his blog or on twitter that Bayaz's conflicts are the backdrop to the stories he wants to tell and as a result will almost certainly never be resolved.

PopetasticPerson
Jun 18, 2006
I think the best evidence Bayaz was involved with the whole Weaver thing is that Glokta and co are clearly not interested in finding out who it actually is. That implies to me that they've been told not to look too deeply into it.

Also, in a blog post or something Joe talked about how he wanted to subvert the magic leaking away trope. I'm thinking it's going to come roaring back in a big way, probably in a most decidedly anti-Bayaz manner.

ZekeNY
Jun 13, 2013

Probably AFK

Suxpool posted:

I think I'd be a little disappointed if Bayaz ever got his just desserts. I've always felt Abercrombie's so good because his books seem so true to life from a cynic's point of view. The truly powerful never get their comeuppance. It's relatable.

I’m not expecting Bayaz to be utterly defeated and locked away in a magic prison somewhere or anything like that, more like he gets what he always wanted and finds it’s more of a curse than what his enemies could have wished for him. But we’ll see.

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004
He's the richest man in the world, CEO of the union and first of the magi but he works 5a-9p and is alienated from the product of his labor

Neurosis
Jun 10, 2003
Fallen Rib

Nevvy Z posted:

He's the richest man in the world, CEO of the union and first of the magi but he works 5a-9p and is alienated from the product of his labor

When you put it like that, Karl, I have to pity him, and it'll only be in his best interest when he's brought back to Earth, even if he can't see it.

Also re Weaver I agree it sounded suspiciously like Bayaz; the broad physical description we got of him matched, the financial resource backing fits, and having a controlled opposition is his MO. Although the first series did have Joe deliberately undermining common fantasy cliches, he doesn't seem like the kind of author who gives you all the pieces and then at the end tries to shock the reader by having something totally different merely to surprise.

loquacius
Oct 21, 2008

Now that Khalul is essentially out of action I'd be interested in Zacharus/Cawneil filling his niche and becoming some sort of actual threat to Bayaz's order rather than just plotting on the edges of it, whether that manifests in them actually moving on the Union itself (Starikland maybe?) or doing the thing I said earlier where they're having proxy battles in Gurkhul

because the alternative is yet more Bayaz vs Bayaz

although Stour and Leo teaming up to go rogue against the advice of literally everyone would be fun too

Paddyo
Aug 3, 2007
Regarding Khalul / Bayaz: I find it hard to believe that they would just get rid of Khalul off-screen since he plays such a foil to Bayaz in the earlier books. After re-reading the original trilogy, there is a lot of depth to their relationship with Juvans and with each other. It would be a shame if we never got any resolution or at least more color added to those plot points.

Asgerd
May 6, 2012

I worked up a powerful loneliness in my massive bed, in the massive dark.
Grimey Drawer

Suxpool posted:

I think I'd be a little disappointed if Bayaz ever got his just desserts. I've always felt Abercrombie's so good because his books seem so true to life from a cynic's point of view. The truly powerful never get their comeuppance. It's relatable.

I feel like the most Abercrombie thing to do would be to kill off Bayaz, but in such a way that makes the overall situation much worse. I have confidence in his ability to somehow deny us any possible catharsis that might be had.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Chef Boyardeez Nuts
Sep 9, 2011

The more you kick against the pricks, the more you suffer.
Bayez as the Weaver has gotten bored with his SimUnion game and is now just exploring the diaster tab.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply