Jump to content

The Farseer Trilogy


thenorthremembers74

Recommended Posts

I'm close to finishing up the Farseer trilogy too. I've enjoyed it a lot and plan to read the rest of the books in this world.



I like Fitz and usually sympathize with him, but in my mind his penchant for making impulsive/careless decisions makes him frustrating to deal with as a character sometimes.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really confused about these 'impulsive/careless decisions' that continually gets brought up in these threads. I ask because as I was reading the series I never thought that the decisions themselves were ever 'oh god, I can't believe he's doing that...' and more along the lines of 'well... that didn't turn out as expected', after the fact. In fact, it's one of the reasons I love this series.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really confused about these 'impulsive/careless decisions' that continually gets brought up in these threads. I ask because as I was reading the series I never thought that the decisions themselves were ever 'oh god, I can't believe he's doing that...' and more along the lines of 'well... that didn't turn out as expected', after the fact. In fact, it's one of the reasons I love this series.

I think that might be part of the love him hate him thing. Fitz is reckless and impulsive at times, and I think if you feel his actions are understandable you are more likely to love him, whereas if you just go "Oh Fitz" *facepalm* you are more likely to hate him. So, I think a part of it is personality. Maybe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that might be part of the love him hate him thing. Fitz is reckless and impulsive at times, and I think if you feel his actions are understandable you are more likely to love him, whereas if you just go "Oh Fitz" *facepalm* you are more likely to hate him. So, I think a part of it is personality. Maybe

Makes sense, I can be reckless and impulsive sometimes too, so it's an endearing part of his character to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't hate Fitz or find him to be a "whiny asshole" but reading his pov does become tiresome after a while. Wish Hobb used additional povs in the farseer and tawny man trilogies, like she did with liveship traders. For example, a Patience pov in Buckkeep in assassin's quest would have been great instead of the unnecessary travelogue.




Similarly, a Kettricken pov in fool's fate showing how she coped with the piebalds and old blood conflict would have been better than an Outislands travelogue.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fall in between the two.

Me too. I like reading his story, but I think if you say he is whiny and passive, you do have a point.

I do not have a problem that much with things Fitz does, but those he does not do, sometimes he just goes along with the flow and does not actively decide to change anything. I suppose I should identify with that because I do the same with my life, but reading about Fitz being passive makes me think badly of him.

Spoilers for Liveships and Soldier Son

I thought Wintrow and Nevare are somewhat similar to Fitz in that emo-ness and passivity, which is mostly why I liked Wintrow the least of the Liveships POVs and why I stopped reading Soldier Son after the 2nd book.

Similarly, a Kettricken pov in fool's fate showing how she coped with the piebalds and old blood conflict would have been better than an Outislands travelogue.

Kettricken's POV would be amazing there, she is a very interesting character to read about. I really like how she developed into a strong, independent queen by the time of Tawny Man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't we already have a thread for these? Yep, found it.



My opinion on Fitz is pretty favourable, but I feel Hobb writes him incredibly harshly. Most of his actions don't seem too stupid, but they almost all go far worse than anyone could reasonably expect, and then all the other characters beat Fitz over the head with it for the next few chapters until he makes another blunder.



I thought this was worth bringing up again in general discussion (as this is where it's going):




I feel like pointing out something I noticed in her trilogies. Fairly lucky deaths that the heroes don't have on their conscience.



Farseer Spoilers



Regal the pretender has been defeated and all is well. But he's still a anagging loose end, but Fitz can't kill him so: the psycho weasel kills him.




Liveship Spoilers



Kyle Haven after causing trouble is now free, but he's not going to stop causing trouble and whilst his family are sorting themselves out, he's a loose end in the narrative. So: he's killed by a stray arrow from another ship.




Tawny Man Spoilers



The Pale woman, it's all her fault she did terrible things, but in the end she is defeated. Fitz has been all noble and is just ignoring her, but she's clearly out to cause more damage: so I guess it's lucky she lost her hands and froze to death.




Rainwilds Spoilers



Hest, Alice and Sedric have freed themselves of him and he's no longer a part of their arcs, but he's still got power and is in no way planning to take this lying down, so: he gets eaten by Kalo.







Worse than any of those examples for me was


Tawny Man Spoiler


Burrich. Because of the absurdity of the circumstances surrounding it. Hobb really had to stretch to get him on that island in the first place, and so that everything could work out afterwards.





On the new trilogy, I've finally got round to getting the one that is out from the library.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

BBExMachina, on Rain Wilds:


I thought you were going to mention Greft there, his is the only death that bothered me in that way you describe. I very much need to reread Farseer to even remember Regal's end (which probably means it was not a big moment anyway). I do remember that Kyle's death was a bit of a letdown though. But not as much as let-conveniently-row-off-to-a-swamp-and-die-because-I-annoy-all-the-other-characters-Greft.



So I just got spoiled on Hest by my own stupidity. :blushing:


Link to comment
Share on other sites

BBExMachina, on Rain Wilds:

I thought you were going to mention Greft there, his is the only death that bothered me in that way you describe. I very much need to reread Farseer to even remember Regal's end (which probably means it was not a big moment anyway). I do remember that Kyle's death was a bit of a letdown though. But not as much as let-conveniently-row-off-to-a-swamp-and-die-because-I-annoy-all-the-other-characters-Greft.

So I just got spoiled on Hest by my own stupidity. :blushing:

Sorry kiddo.

Nothing more than you know spoilers.

Greft was set up though, we know people as transformed as the keepers don't live long, and Greft is the eldest. Plus Kalo refused to help him because of his arrogance (a double standard which as I've said before is a reason I hate the dragons.)

Why can't you buy the third book btw? Not even in English?

Hey, Helena. Did you and BlackBear get married or something? :P

She's the host of Pictionary, they were all teasing me in the last game by copying my avatar so I thought I'd get my slight revenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry kiddo.

Nothing more than you know spoilers.

Greft was set up though, we know people as transformed as the keepers don't live long, and Greft is the eldest. Plus Kalo refused to help him because of his arrogance (a double standard which as I've said before is a reason I hate the dragons.)

I don't think the dragons are supposed to be especially likeable. Though, they have their moments. [/spoiler{

Hey, Helena. Did you and BlackBear get married or something? :P

It was a dull affair, with only two deaths. *sigh*
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rainwilds theme spoilers



They don't have moments though, they're bastards from start to finish. Who are at first compensating for their failings, and later overly satisfied with themselves.



I have a real problem with the idea that humans are meant to attain some form of enlightenment by enslaving themselves to the will of these vain and selfish creatures. Who themselves clearly have no intention of elevating themselves beyond preening and receiving flattery.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rainwilds theme spoilers

They don't have moments though, they're bastards from start to finish. Who are at first compensating for their failings, and later overly satisfied with themselves.

I have a real problem with the idea that humans are meant to attain some form of enlightenment by enslaving themselves to the will of these vain and selfish creatures. Who themselves clearly have no intention of elevating themselves beyond preening and receiving flattery.

And I don't think that is how Hobb played it, personally. Through Thymara, and to a lesser extent Alise, we see the Keepers coming to the realisation that no, they have to take a stand and not allow themselves to be commanded by these creatures. Sure, Thymara still comes under the Dragon Glamour at times, but she does realise it. I actually quite like the way Hobb has her dragons. I think it fitting that such awesome, powerful creatures should be so haughty and arrogant. Something so huge that can kill a crowd of "two legs" with their acidic breath, has memories stretching back into the depths of time, guzzles The Skill River like water can fly, can walk, can swim...I think it fitting they are as they are portrayed. The dragons we see (barring Tintaglia and Icefyre) are not proper Dragons because they are malformed. But they have the memories of fully formed dragons, and that shapes them into the arrogant beings they are.

I do quite like how the dragons are eventually encouraged to fly into Kelsingra though. They rely on their Keeprs for so long, and when they finally reach their destination they realise they must finally do something for themselves.

Also, I'd add that not all of them are as bad as you say. Sintara is the worst (even more so for being a POV) and her foolish changes she made to Thymara were incredibly selfish, but you also have Mercor (who seems to be the dragon form of Maulkin) and he has his more agreeable moments. You also get the "simple" dragons like Replda and Heeby. Heeby in particular is an odd one, who seems very different to her brethren.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'd argue Mercor is only more realistic about his situation, no less arrogant. Relpda and Heeby are basically dragons with learning difficulties, they're not portrayed favourably, we're clearly meant to see them as broken.



I don't care how powerful they are. What annoys me is that at no point are we really shown the conflict of giving up control of your own destiny for a creature that truly doesn't care about you. The closest they come is the brief mention of the folk who used to live across the river from the city, and even then they're described almost like Luddites.



The glamour only worsens the situation. If anyone hypnotises me into doing anything, I'm going to feel pissed of regardless of how pretty, or self aggrandising they are.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I expressed myself poorly. I like how the dragons are presented (arrogant, entitled, selfish etc.) because I think it fits with how powerful they are. But I do not like the concept of basically being enslaved to such a creature as that. But enslaved in such a way as to have no free will at all, at times. So, we partially agree.

I would need to re-read the series to find specific examples, but I seem to recall one or two moments where Mercor is shown more favourably, rather than just being more realistic about their situation.

I'm not sure I agree that the dragons care nothing at all for their Keepers though. Sintara is very arrogant, but Tintaglia, though she seems reluctant to admit it even to herself, seems to miss Malta, Reyn and Selden throughout her chapters. Though again, it presents the problem of the possessive relationship. Malta Reyn and Selden are "hers", as though they are property to be owned rather than human beings with their own path in life...and then the fact that the Elderlings are reliant on the dragons for their continued survival once their changes start...

Okay, talking myself round more and more into disliking the dragons...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry kiddo.

Nothing more than you know spoilers.

Greft was set up though, we know people as transformed as the keepers don't live long, and Greft is the eldest. Plus Kalo refused to help him because of his arrogance (a double standard which as I've said before is a reason I hate the dragons.)

Why can't you buy the third book btw? Not even in English?

I do not think it was particularly well set up. And I do think it was out of character. Greft might be a selfish, controlling and commanding bastard, but he is not stupid enough to go row off by himself when he knows it is dangerous and he would probably never reach Cassarick on his own. The whole thing read to me like a suicide that Hobb did not know how to justify.

I cannot find it in any bookshop. I ordered both the 2nd and 3rd through my local bookshop a few months ago - the 2nd arrived, the 3rd did not for whatever reason. I will probably order it online when I get back home if I do not find it in any bookshop here (I do not want to order anything to the student dorm address).

And I read all the Hobb books in English, only Farseer was translated and pretty badly at that, so I do not want to read it in Slovene.

It was a dull affair, with only two deaths. *sigh*

I do wish you all the happiness though. :P

Who died and why was I not invited? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I agree with what Helena has mentioned. I too found that the portrayal of the dragons was quite fitting. One would expect such long-lived and powerful creatures with memories stretching back eons to be arrogant and self-entitled. What bugged me a bit was how readily the keepers accepted their subservient roles but on further reflection, I found that this is also fitting. These keepers where the rejects and outcasts of the Rain Wilds so being changed into Elderlings and being servants/companions/keepers to the dragons is a better life than they could have hoped for in the Rain Wilds. Also, I got the impression that the dragon-elderling relationship is more mutually beneficial than what has been portrayed. Dragons need Elderlings for their survival and vice versa. I think that the true relationship is more 'companion' than 'servant'. The glimpse of Kelsingra that we get through the memory stones gives the impression of a happy and prosperous society rather than one oppressed by dragons.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...