The First Law Vx2 (spoilers through BSC)

[Pilusmagnus]

Continuing the thread about Joe Abercrombie's First Law series and the "standalone" novels set in the same world. And yeah, it's Vx2 because I don't know how much versions of the thread existed before, but since it's the unknown thread number two of this kind, then it's Vx2. Besides it's funny.

We were speaking about Best Served Cold when the previous topic was locked.

Link to the previous topic : http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/117059-the-first-law-by-joe-abercrombie-vx-spoilers-through-laok-for-now/

[Pilusmagnus]

I've just written an article about the battle of Adua in the wiki. Battle articles are my favourite things about wikis, and this one greatly lacks thereof. Tell me what you think about it : http://firstlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_of_Adua?venotify=created

I don't remember if precise numbers of troops are given, so if you have them, please feel free to correct my vague informations.

[The BlackBear]

As for Shivers, I really considered him the only likeable person of the book at first, but in the end he turns really bad, traitorous and I don't even know why he does what he does. Killing Foscar, the only decent person of the book? Betraying Monza right when she's about to make the country better? And for what? Only because she fucked her one-year dead brother? Really? Well, it's true he lost an eye, but why wait so long then?

Vague carry on from the previous thread.

He kills because he's good at it. He doesn't know how to do anything else, and his apathy to the pain of others is very similar to Glokta. He's very similar to Logen in that regard, but Logen denies himself much like Shivers did at the start of the book, by the end Shovers has made peace with his violent nature. He killed Foscar because he was hired to do that, and thought it would please Monza. After that he grows resentful of Monza because after he lost his eye and endured all that pain for her, she pretty much spurns him for Rogont. It took him so long because he still is infatuated with her, it took a while for the anger to outweigh his loyalty to her.

When he's just turned on her he says: 'I saved you how many times? I gave up my eye! So you could sneer at me with that empty bastard Rogont.' And she accepts it as true, it's both jealousy and a feeling of being betrayed by her. It's very important to him she knows it was him and why. Then he hesitates killing her, he stretches the moment out. After that he keeps the ring, pretty much the only sentimental thing about him.

[Pilusmagnus]

Ok, I understand more his reasons. Doesn't mean I like him more though.

EDIT : I just realized that General Ganmark was actually one of the least evil of the lot too.

[The BlackBear]

Ok, I understand more his reasons. Doesn't mean I like him more though.

EDIT : I just realized that General Ganmark was actually one of the least evil of the lot too.

Most of them aren't really all that bad. Even Orso.

Gobba was a brute, but he did his job.

Mauthis was just there.

Ario was a prick, but just doing his fathers bidding.

Ganmark, was just doing his job and tried to be professional about it.

Carpi had to choose which of his employers to betray. Monza had already betrayed another of his employers.

Foscar was just there.

Orso was protecting himself from a threat to his Duchy.

[Pilusmagnus]

I wonder if Joe was accused of homophobia on behalf of Ganmark being called a cocksucker. There are always people capable of doing that.

[Yersinia]

I wonder if Joe was accused of homophobia on behalf of Ganmark being called a cocksucker. There are always people capable of doing that.

Surely people understand that portrayal of homophobia is not necessarily an endorsement of it.

[Shryke]

re: Shivers

It goes even further then what is mentioned above.

As a person, Shivers hates Monza because she destroys him. She brings him along, tears away his humanity and then when she's disgusted by the result, she throws him away. And while Shivers may have come semi-willingly along for the ride, she also knew exactly what she was doing when she destroyed him and ultimately didn't care. Why wouldn't he hate her? That's why she accepts it at the end.

And in that sense, the two are in many ways the same character. They are both reflections of Monza. We know from the start that this is gonna be a classic "Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves" story. The difference here is that Shivers is thematically a manisfestation of Monza's better qualities and we observe how the journey destroys them. And ultimately she accepts that the part of her that demands vengeance is ugly and rejects it. He hates her because she hates herself.

And of course, Shivers himself is essentially like Logen. A man intent on starting anew but who keeps returning to the same kind of behaviour and so ends up in the same spot.

[Pilusmagnus]

Surely people understand that portrayal of homophobia is not necessarily an endorsement of it.

Surely people understand that portrayal of homophobia is not necessarily an endorsement of it.

After I've seen George R.R. Martin being called a sexist because women can't be Lords in ASOIAF, nothing would surprise me. Actually if Joe reads this, I'd be happy to know all the stupid things he's been called.

Thanks for the highlight on Shivers. I hate him less now, rather than liking him more.

EDIT :

I started the Heroes and I'm definitely getting much more easily into it. The POVs are more vivid. Characterization is more straight to the point. Characters are more likeable. I happily welcome back the italic inner thoughts in Gorst's chapters. And I laugh as much as when I started TBI, finally!!!

And Tunny. Is that possible? Lord Grimdark has answered my prayers!!! A GOOD MORAL DECENT character in a First Law novel!!!

Well, I guess I should not cheer so soon though...

[The BlackBear]

And Tunny. Is that possible? Lord Grimdark has answered my prayers!!! A GOOD MORAL DECENT character in a First Law novel!!!

Really?

[Pilusmagnus]

Well, Tunny is cool, he cares about his boys, finds war is stupid, which it is. That's being moral to me, way more than being loyal by murdering all your friends. But I've only read one chapter of him so I'm striving on hope here.

[Maithanet]

Tunny seems like a very strange pick for a good, decent, moral character. I wouldn't even rate him first amongst POV characters in Heroes.

If you are interested, you could check out the Abercrombie and Women thread. It is from 2011, so I don't think any spoilers will be a problem. You could also check out the second "rape in fiction" thread, also from 2011, which Joe posted in pretty extensively (his first post is #6 on page 1). In it, he talks a lot about the problems he's seen in his own writing, criticisms he's gotten, etc.

From page 1, Abercrombie said:

Where I think I failed pretty badly is that Terez is really not a good character. She’s one-noted, shrill, icy, bitchy, and just doesn’t come across as a particularly convincing or well-rounded real person. It stretches credibility that she wouldn’t behave more cannily and carefully in this situation. That’s shoddy writing by any standard, but worse yet it plays into a really ugly stereotype of shrill man-hating (possibly quite thick) lesbian, and that badly undermines any attempt to do something interesting with this situation. If Terez is a much more convincing, multi-faceted, less stereotyped character with an authentic voice and a more believable motivation I’m sure many people would still have their problems with this scene but from my point of view at least it would be much improved. The Wire I think is a very good example because the reason it (for me at least) succeeds so well in its depiction of black criminals is that it makes each individual a powerful portrayal with their own voices and motivations. It doesn’t help at all that the female characters in the First Law ain’t that great across the board, really. Ferro is the only female point of view and for various reasons probably outside the scope of this particular thread I think I could have done a whole lot better with her too. I actually think the other (almost) rape in the series, in the second book, is worse, because it’s handled more or less completely disposably and the female character in that case, Cathil, is still more absent of personality than Terez and pretty much exists to elicit certain responses in the men. Which is kind of sexist writing 101, sadly. There’s also a rather ugly pattern, so obvious to me now that I can hardly believe I failed to notice it at the time, of pretty much all the central female characters having been the victims of abuse of one kind or another. I suppose you could say a fair few of the central male characters have been as well but that’s pretty weak sauce as a defence.

He goes further in many subsequent posts, and overall it is a good discussion.

EDIT:

OK, so apparently Heroes was published in Jan 2011, so there could be spoilers for that book. I doubt they'd be too serious, but you've been warned.

[Pilusmagnus]

Jesus. Lesbian rape. It goes forever beyond my expectations.

[Crowjack]

I wonder if Joe was accused of homophobia on behalf of Ganmark being called a cocksucker. There are always people capable of doing that.

No...it's undoubtedly meant to be crude. These are not enlightened 21st century beings. These are brutish people living in a harsh, medieval type era.

[Crowjack]

I find myself in a bit of a different relationship to Abercrombie's works than many here.

I discovered TFL trilogy before I discovered ASOIAF. In fact, the bookstore (yes, a mortar and brick store) employee recommended

GRRM to me after I expressed a deep appreciation for Abercrombie.

Joe was the first Fantasy trope busting author I read. And, for better or worse, I see everything else filtered through that experience.

[Pilusmagnus]

I would like to read the short story Yesterday Near a Village called Barden before I actually go through with the book. I like chronological order.

It says on wikipedia that it appeared in the Waterstones edition of the book, and I don't know if it's mine. And if it's mine, where is the story?

My cover is this one : https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-cOoT1AIrnt0/Tl6ebbHWEJI/AAAAAAAABAs/AIZ8Zx7H6j4/The-Heroes-HB_jacket-1024x425.jpg

[unJon]

Did you read Fools Job also? It is also just before the start of Heroes chronologically.

I think Joe may have posted some or all of his short stories in his website.

[Pilusmagnus]

I found The Fool Jobs and Will read it. But I don't know where the other one is.

EDIT : I wrote an article about Poulder and Kroy, my favorite secondary characters, in the Wiki. Take a look : http://firstlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Kroy

[williamjm]

I would like to read the short story Yesterday Near a Village called Barden before I actually go through with the book. I like chronological order.

It says on wikipedia that it appeared in the Waterstones edition of the book, and I don't know if it's mine. And if it's mine, where is the story?

My cover is this one : https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-cOoT1AIrnt0/Tl6ebbHWEJI/AAAAAAAABAs/AIZ8Zx7H6j4/The-Heroes-HB_jacket-1024x425.jpg

It's at the back of the Waterstone's edition. It does seem slightly odd having a prequel story after the main story, they did the same for their edition of Ben Aaronovitch's Broken Homes. The edition was exclusive to Waterstone's bookshop and I'm guessing that's not where you bought your copy since you're not British.

It's not a very important story (it's shorter and less eventful than The Fool Jobs, for example) so I wouldn't worry too much about missing it.

[Pilusmagnus]

So It's at the end of my book? So I have to turn the pages carefully to not get spoiled?