Jump to content

Assassin's Fate, Robin Hobb


HexMachina

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, SeanF said:

The dragons are very few in number. They could kill a lot of humans, in a fight, but they'd likely be overwhelmed in the end, which was why Mercor wanted them not to take indiscriminate revenge against Chalced.

I think Mercor called for caution because they're few in number now, just starting out from near-extinction, temporarily crippled from lack of memories, have only recently learned to fly. Even in that state, they destroyed the Chalcedeans easily. Their numbers will grow, not to millions (they're large predators limited by access to Silver) but certainly into the thousands within a century. Meanwhile, technologically, humans are medieval, in no position to overwhelm large groups of dragons.

This is a GRRM site, so imagine hundreds of Dany's dragons, all intelligent, most megalomaniacal, with little if any empathy for humans, all capable of taking concerted action, capable of fire/poison/glamor, occasionally aided and abetted by a powerful, warlike, long-lived humanoid race in love with them, beholden to them for power and long lives. This is a human extinction event waiting to happen. I can see why the Chalcedeans would look for ways to kill them, why Chade would not want them back, why Clerres would try to wipe them out. The Liveship dragons do have some empathy for humans, but as real human history shows, empathy is not enough to stop wars.

Dragons do not need large numbers of humans or thriving human empires for survival. Humans in large numbers are an annoyance to them, and they have no motivation to control their urge to kill off the annoyance. Sadly, ditto for the elderlings. OK, they like their human servants, and they need the raw materials humans can provide...but that's what slaves are for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kimim said:

I think Mercor called for caution because they're few in number now, just starting out from near-extinction, temporarily crippled from lack of memories, have only recently learned to fly. Even in that state, they destroyed the Chalcedeans easily. Their numbers will grow, not to millions (they're large predators limited by access to Silver) but certainly into the thousands within a century. Meanwhile, technologically, humans are medieval, in no position to overwhelm large groups of dragons.

This is a GRRM site, so imagine hundreds of Dany's dragons, all intelligent, most megalomaniacal, with little if any empathy for humans, all capable of taking concerted action, capable of fire/poison/glamor, occasionally aided and abetted by a powerful, warlike, long-lived humanoid race in love with them, beholden to them for power and long lives. This is a human extinction event waiting to happen. I can see why the Chalcedeans would look for ways to kill them, why Chade would not want them back, why Clerres would try to wipe them out. The Liveship dragons do have some empathy for humans, but as real human history shows, empathy is not enough to stop wars.

Dragons do not need large numbers of humans or thriving human empires for survival. Humans in large numbers are an annoyance to them, and they have no motivation to control their urge to kill off the annoyance. Sadly, ditto for the elderlings. OK, they like their human servants, and they need the raw materials humans can provide...but that's what slaves are for.

Was thinking about this too. I think that Hobb overpowered dragons, and also she isn't that good with numbers. I mean, in the first book, it is just a legend that an old Farseer King went to Elderlings to ask for help (and when Fitz and co. go there, they see that even then, they made stone dragons so if was after the destruction of the dragons) so surely it would have been a few hundred years before. And some years before that for the Farseers to become kings. Which makes the dragon extinction happening many hundreds if not more than a thousand years ago. But then you have the likes of Prilok who look just a few hundred years ago, or some dragon mentioning that the new generation of dragons were something like 3 (or was it 6) human generations as serpents, when in truth, it should have been 20-50 generations.

Anyway, the dragons seem not malignant, and as long as you don't do bad things to them, they seem okayish. The most they would do is eat your cows. The problem though (which is actually the entire premise of the books) is why Fitz and Fool returning the dragons was actually a good thing. Bar them being beautiful, they seem not that awesome creatures. Arrogant, treat others with total disrespect when they don't ignore them, and extremely powerful so they can destroy everything. Why the Path was to return them.

I still think that the entire premise of the books makes absolutely no sense and Hobb started things without having any idea where they will go. I wouldn't surprised if she decided for the 'real' dragons only during the Liveships. Still, I enjoyed the books for their individual stories, but the mission of Fitz and Fool was quite bad IMO. At best, they created some arrogant Gods and relegating humans as second order citizens of the world, at worst, total destruction for humanity.

I want the next trilogy to be about Stone Dragons vs Real Dragons. That stone dragon at the end of the second trilogy almost defeated Tintaglia and Icefire combined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheRevanchist said:

I still think that the entire premise of the books makes absolutely no sense and Hobb started things without having any idea where they will go.

That's possible. I love this series, so I've started a reread of the entire thing. Human vs animal thing goes back to the beginning of the series. Fool isn't trying to bring back the dragons out of his deep love for the human race or for dragons; he has some contempt for both:

Quote

"Dragons are no better than humans...They will hold up a mirror to humanity's selfishness. They will remind you that all your talk of owning this and claiming that is no more than the snarling of a chained dog or a sparrow's challenge song. The reality of those claims lasts but for the instant of its sounding. Name it as you will, claim it as you will, the world does not belong to men. Men belong to the world."

This is from the end of the second trilogy, and in that trilogy, Fitz notes that the Six Duchies is in the midst of a population explosion. Humans are expanding, taking over places where the wolves used to hunt. There are hints of this in the first trilogy, where Fitz and Nighteyes talk about the human need to rule beasts, to treat them as if they were inferior. The Fool wants the dragons to return as they can remind humans that they're not alone at the top of the food chain, that other beings have value, that no one owns the earth.

What I think is ill considered is that, as you say, Hobb's dragons are overpowered. They might be morally similar, but human vs dragon interaction would not be a meeting of equals. Dragons would remind humans that they're not the sole powerful species on earth, but I don't see how humans can do the same for the dragons :/

Now that she's done with Fitz and the Fool, I'd love for Hobb to come up with a history of this world. I agree it's confusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TheRevanchist said:

Was thinking about this too. I think that Hobb overpowered dragons, and also she isn't that good with numbers. I mean, in the first book, it is just a legend that an old Farseer King went to Elderlings to ask for help (and when Fitz and co. go there, they see that even then, they made stone dragons so if was after the destruction of the dragons) so surely it would have been a few hundred years before. And some years before that for the Farseers to become kings. Which makes the dragon extinction happening many hundreds if not more than a thousand years ago. But then you have the likes of Prilok who look just a few hundred years ago, or some dragon mentioning that the new generation of dragons were something like 3 (or was it 6) human generations as serpents, when in truth, it should have been 20-50 generations.

Anyway, the dragons seem not malignant, and as long as you don't do bad things to them, they seem okayish. The most they would do is eat your cows. The problem though (which is actually the entire premise of the books) is why Fitz and Fool returning the dragons was actually a good thing. Bar them being beautiful, they seem not that awesome creatures. Arrogant, treat others with total disrespect when they don't ignore them, and extremely powerful so they can destroy everything. Why the Path was to return them.

I still think that the entire premise of the books makes absolutely no sense and Hobb started things without having any idea where they will go. I wouldn't surprised if she decided for the 'real' dragons only during the Liveships. Still, I enjoyed the books for their individual stories, but the mission of Fitz and Fool was quite bad IMO. At best, they created some arrogant Gods and relegating humans as second order citizens of the world, at worst, total destruction for humanity.

I want the next trilogy to be about Stone Dragons vs Real Dragons. That stone dragon at the end of the second trilogy almost defeated Tintaglia and Icefire combined.

Stone Dragons were a thing even during the time dragons were alive though, so that isn't necessarily true. I think it might be Malta sees a memory in Liveships when Tintaglia is trying to get her to set her free. Someone sees a memory of the Elderlings carving memory stone and pouring themselves into it though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, kimim said:

That's possible. I love this series, so I've started a reread of the entire thing. Human vs animal thing goes back to the beginning of the series. Fool isn't trying to bring back the dragons out of his deep love for the human race or for dragons; he has some contempt for both:

This is from the end of the second trilogy, and in that trilogy, Fitz notes that the Six Duchies is in the midst of a population explosion. Humans are expanding, taking over places where the wolves used to hunt. There are hints of this in the first trilogy, where Fitz and Nighteyes talk about the human need to rule beasts, to treat them as if they were inferior. The Fool wants the dragons to return as they can remind humans that they're not alone at the top of the food chain, that other beings have value, that no one owns the earth.

What I think is ill considered is that, as you say, Hobb's dragons are overpowered. They might be morally similar, but human vs dragon interaction would not be a meeting of equals. Dragons would remind humans that they're not the sole powerful species on earth, but I don't see how humans can do the same for the dragons :/

Now that she's done with Fitz and the Fool, I'd love for Hobb to come up with a history of this world. I agree it's confusing.

By the time of the second Fitz trilogy, I think that it was obvious that she wanted to return the dragons, but not in the first trilogy.

Agree with everything you said.

 

18 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Stone Dragons were a thing even during the time dragons were alive though, so that isn't necessarily true. I think it might be Malta sees a memory in Liveships when Tintaglia is trying to get her to set her free. Someone sees a memory of the Elderlings carving memory stone and pouring themselves into it though

I might be wrong, but my interpretation was that Elderlings made stone Dragons after the cataclysm, a way of remembering the real dragons. Making them during the same time the dragons existed doesn't make a lot of sense, right?

At the same time, it seems that the Servants kind of killed the Elderlings almost immediately after the cataclysm. 

Really, the world's story is very shallow and she hasn't thought things well. It doesn't make the books less enjoyable though, which is kind of good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheRevanchist said:

By the time of the second Fitz trilogy, I think that it was obvious that she wanted to return the dragons, but not in the first trilogy.

Agree with everything you said.

 

I might be wrong, but my interpretation was that Elderlings made stone Dragons after the cataclysm, a way of remembering the real dragons. Making them during the same time the dragons existed doesn't make a lot of sense, right?

At the same time, it seems that the Servants kind of killed the Elderlings almost immediately after the cataclysm. 

Really, the world's story is very shallow and she hasn't thought things well. It doesn't make the books less enjoyable though, which is kind of good.

It can't be after the Cataclysm, as Malta has the vision of the carving being done at Cassarick (which was buried in the Cataclysm). Iirc it's speculated that the dragons were a form of art for the Elderlings, which they used to preserve their life and also show their reverence of dragons. 

The Servants had the Elderlings who fled through the Skill-pillars killed yes. But there was no need to hunt down the others. Elderlings can't exist without dragons, so their dying off would eventually happen naturally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kettricken smiled.

Oh, Robin, thank you. Thank you, that was beautiful ! The final chapters brought many tears to my eyes, it couldnt have finished any other way and it was glorious and both heart-wrenching and warming.

I really hope she will further explore the world with the new generations, and oh, I'm so glad Althea survived, she had me convinced of her death for a while (as well as Lant, but truthfully, I was less invested in Lant than in Althea).

May you hunt forever Dream Wolf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2017 at 4:00 PM, HelenaExMachina said:

It can't be after the Cataclysm, as Malta has the vision of the carving being done at Cassarick (which was buried in the Cataclysm). Iirc it's speculated that the dragons were a form of art for the Elderlings, which they used to preserve their life and also show their reverence of dragons. 

The Servants had the Elderlings who fled through the Skill-pillars killed yes. But there was no need to hunt down the others. Elderlings can't exist without dragons, so their dying off would eventually happen naturally

I totally missed this. Are the people doing the carving humans or elderlings or both? If elderlings were doing the carving, when did humans start doing the same thing?

Also, lucky Six Duchies, the only kingdom on earth where the ruler educates and uses Skilled folk, and also the only kingdom on earth where there are Witted folk running around.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, the lack of Wit anywhere but in the 6D (or 7 now) has puzzled me sometimes, no one else seem to know anything about it in the rest of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/28/2017 at 6:51 AM, Arkash said:

I agree, the lack of Wit anywhere but in the 6D (or 7 now) has puzzled me sometimes, no one else seem to know anything about it in the rest of the world.

No one seems to know a fucking thing about the Skill anywhere else either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I went on a wild speculation rumble where I proposed that the Skill was just inherited in the 7D regions from some Elderlings ancestors (or one common ancestor if that guy was Attila or Gengis Khan's like), as a recessive/dormant gene that just manifests randomly through theirs (his/hers) descendants... which would explain why only people over there seem to manifest some signs (and for whatever reason it could be even stronger in the Farseer bloodline)...

But the forum swallowed it so there you have the short version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got the feeling that people everywhere can have the "Skill", but the Seven Duchies are the only ones at the moment who have identified it, refined it, and trained for it (and call it that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2017 at 0:06 PM, Starkess said:

I got the feeling that people everywhere can have the "Skill", but the Seven Duchies are the only ones at the moment who have identified it, refined it, and trained for it (and call it that).

Is Six Duchies also the only place where the Wit has been identified and refined? It's the only place with Witted communities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I think the premise of Beloved's path is quite well founded. Yes dragons can wreak a lot of havoc, but they actually depend on humans for their welfare and longevity and they wouldn't be able to sustain large numbers without humans growing food for them. The continuance of their species is very precarious and cannot be achieved without human cooperation at all. Don't forget that the serpents can't make it to Cassarick without human help. On the other hand, the Elderling's magic and longevity are a basis through which knowledge and culture can be maintained and expanded. So there is the challenge of the two species learning to coexist to mutual benefit, or destroy each other.

That said, I think Beloved had more than a little personal stake on this last endevor and that it was well within his ability to anticipate that Bee would be the pebble that started the avalanche that fell on Clerres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was so excited to read this book, and I wasn't disappointed. I was looking forward to discussing it and (presumably) crying with others who loved this world as much as I did. I devoured it, but didn't feel like talking about it right away. I still find that I don't care to talk about it. I'm not sure if it's because I'm still a bit drained from it, or if it's that it's over now and we know the fate of Fitz and the Fool that it doesn't seem worth discussing. I'm kind of sad about this attitude I have. Anyone else kind of feel like this book shut a door somehow?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Gertrude said:

I was so excited to read this book, and I wasn't disappointed. I was looking forward to discussing it and (presumably) crying with others who loved this world as much as I did. I devoured it, but didn't feel like talking about it right away. I still find that I don't care to talk about it. I'm not sure if it's because I'm still a bit drained from it, or if it's that it's over now and we know the fate of Fitz and the Fool that it doesn't seem worth discussing. I'm kind of sad about this attitude I have. Anyone else kind of feel like this book shut a door somehow?

I think thats why i enjoyed making posts as i was reading because i got my thoughts down as i experienced the book. However, i don't feel that its not worth discussing things now or that its shut a door. We know F&F's fate but its still good discussing their complicated and turbulent relationship, their actions and consequences throughout the book, etc. And i also think there are interesting things to be said about other things in the series, like the Liveships, new relationships between human and dragon kind, the other characters fates and so on.

But the thread has already discussed some of these points so if you've read through the thread maybe thats why it feels more final and not worth discussing? :dunno:

There is still scope for more stories set in this world imo and i hope Hobb writes them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...