Devices and Desires

[salinea]

>> Regarding

I know mate, I think I just hoped there'd be one last bastion of innocence left. If she did what she did - which seems to be the case - I find it to be almost hilariously brutal.

SPOILER: evil for evil

I think the last innocent person got killed in Evil for Evil for being such adiot. Anyway, the woman never loved Zianni, never had much choice as to whom to marry. I don't blame her for seeking love in her own place.

hilariously brutal is a great way to describe the mood of the books

On KJ's gender... On her website, when it was still up, it said she was a woman. I see no reason to have any conspiracy theory on the subjet o_o;;

[Muttering Bill]

Just about finished, and this no anger business that Sheep brought to my attention is really starting to piss me off. Some pretty nasty things have gone down, but the characters are all so apathetic about it.

And thanks for clearing up the confusion on her being a woman. I, naturally, tried her site, but it was already gone by the time.

[Caligula_K]

I'd say the characters (at least one or two) do begin to get angrier in Evil For Evil- one is at least incredibly angry at himself for nearly the whole book. And I have to admit that I do enjoy the sense of irony each character has, even if its not great characterization.

[Jaxom 1974]

Having only read the first one so far, I can understand some of what you all are saying about the anger and such, but that isn't the little bit that bothered me. It was the concept of technology and that the Mezzanites had it, and somehow the other nations didn't. Not only did they not have it, they didn't seem to have a concept of it, let alone the basic math and science that would lead to such advances. Shouldn't some of that have been inevitable in terms of simple evolution...?

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Yeah, I'd believe the website too. I can understand the conflation, or the confusion, especially when so much of KJ Parker's other biographical stuff seemed to deliberately leave out gendered pronouns (i.e., his/her).

I'm kind of surprised so many people (on other sites, not so much here) actually refuse to believe the author's a woman because of the writing.

I may see if I can pick up Devices and Desires -- I liked the Scavenger Trilogy reasonably well, and I'm interested to see what other sorts of styles she uses. (Or if the other novels have the same sorts of conceits.)

[Caligula_K]

Huzzah! Just got The Escapement (and the Blade Itself finally too, for that matter). I'll start it tonight.

[Muttering Bill]

The lack of advancement of everyone but the Mezentines was one of the first things I noticed. It didn't bother me much though; the plot was dependant on Ziani being able to teach the Eremian's these technologies. I can understand a the Mezentines being protective and secretive about their processes, but... if they're selling most of these products, surely someone else can take them apart and figure out how they work, and how to duplicate them. But nobody else seemed to care.

I thought that there was an over-reliance on the scorpions. I'd have liked to see some of the bigger engines get more use. And maybe bring in something new while she was at it.

I can understand where some people might refuse to think Parker is a woman based on the text. It's all very detailed and technical, which is something that I wouldn't expect from a female author. I'd expect something more emotional. Which is partly why I was confused - added to the Wikipedia entry. I think that she comes off as being comparable to R. Scott Bakker.

EDIT - I finished the book and put up a review. Not that it says anything I haven't already covered here. I've started Evil for Evil.

[Caligula_K]

While the technological disparity is slightly overdone, I think it is plausible. The Romans and the Germanic tribes interacted extensively, but the Germans would generally remain technologically inferior to the Romans throughout history. That being said, Germanic-Roman interaction did have effects on the Germans- they became better organized, for example. But they still never understood Roman technology, and as a result, in the post Roman days, Roman architecture and engineering was seen as almost mythical.

I also agree with Muttering Bill that Parker is very comparable to Bakker- there are some very common themes (they become even more clear beginning in Evil For Evil and now The Escapement), particularly the lack of choice of human beings (determinism). I also see Vaatzes as a less superpowered version of Kellhus.

[Sheep the Evicted]

Yeah, I'd believe the website too. I can understand the conflation, or the confusion, especially when so much of KJ Parker's other biographical stuff seemed to deliberately leave out gendered pronouns (i.e., his/her).

I'm kind of surprised so many people (on other sites, not so much here) actually refuse to believe the author's a woman because of the writing.

Its funny that. The more i read of Parkers work the more convinced i become that she is a woman. Why ?

Many reasons but there is one that stands out. Someone over at Wotmania mentioned it but the more i have thought about it the more true it seems.

The theory goes something like this; generally a women won't have a single badass character. The key word in that sentence is badass.

Look at the Lies of Locke Lamora. Locke has a very slight build and is actually quite weak, but he never, ever gets all emo and gives up and meditates on the nature of strength and weakness. Instead he goes out and outsmarts and defeats every enemy one way or another. Thats the nature of badass. You can find out more about it here.

Then compare that to characters like Harry Potter or Valens (he is the closest Parker gets to making a badass), and you can see the difference. They have emo moments and doubts and weakness. The only real badass in the whole trilogy is Darenja but he is a monster, so that doesn't really count.

[Alaerien]

You think Locke Lamora has no "emo moments and doubst and weakness"? Have you read Red Seas under Red Skies?

[salinea]

Oh boy, you guys are hilarious. Do keep on telling us how womenfolk write

I'd compare Parker to Abercrombie myself. Grittiness and dark humour.

[Teri]

I'm kind of surprised so many people (on other sites, not so much here) actually refuse to believe the author's a woman because of the writing.

I can understand where some people might refuse to think Parker is a woman based on the text. It's all very detailed and technical, which is something that I wouldn't expect from a female author. I'd expect something more emotional.

I think Aoife's point was that she was surprised that so many people still think of "detailed and technical" as being strongly uncharacteristic of women.

The world's first example of a computer program was, after all, written by a woman.

It may not be a quality of the majority of female writers, but then, it isn't a characteristic of the majority of male writers either. It's certainly not so uncommon as to make it "hard to believe". At most, not one's first guess.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Thanks, Teri. That's what I was getting at.

[sparky]

Not that being one hundred pages into a trilogy means much of anything, but I'm loving D&D so far. Love the humor.

[Caligula_K]

Just finished Devices and Desires. An excellent ending installment, despite the previously noted weaknesses (ie: Characters are too similar at points, overuse of exposition, and things fit together just a bit too neatly, and its didactic). While it ended strongly plotwise, however, I found that it ends at quite a scary place thematically, and I have no idea how someone can believe a lot of this stuff. Her mindset is insanely cynical. So:

SPOILER: Plot and themes in The Escapement

We're supposed to agree that although Ziani's actions were evil, all actions are essentially equal; as such, since evil was done to Ziani (ie: He was manipulated into committing a crime by a person he loved, almost executed, and manipulated by the head of state) its okay for him to have committed his evil by say, killing hundreds of thousands of people for his own ends. Sorry, not buying that one. Particularly striking was Psellus' comment: Something like, "I wouldn't have done what you did, because I don't have the strength, and I therefore admire you". Some scary stuff. Now, I could be mis-reading Parker: Perhaps these are only intended to be the characters views, and not her own. But I doubt it, considering that nearly everyone reaches similar conclusions to each other, and it seems to me that a lot of authorial voice comes through. Anyone else agree/disagree?

[Jaxom 1974]

Got my copies from winning Pat's drawing today. I can finally finish reading the series! WOOT!

[Muttering Bill]

I also see Vaatzes as a less superpowered version of Kellhus.

Vaatzes and Khellus are very similar. They're both super-intelligent characters who manipulate trust from everyone they meet. They're both foreigners who are using everyone to accomplish their own ends (highjacking a nation/army). Different methods, sure, but it all comes out to the same reliance either way.

I felt that many of the characters were similar those in PoN (whether by role or personality). Valens to Conphas - Miel to Achamien - Orsea to Xerius - Veatriz to Serwe. Not identical, but there was an echo.

Oh boy, you guys are hilarious. Do keep on telling us how womenfolk write

It's all about my own ignorant perceptions of how women write (not that I've read that many to be able accurately generalize). I wouldn't have expected this from a female author, but I'm also not going to argue that it couldn't have been. If not for that Wiki entry I probably would have kept my original assumption of her gender.

I'd compare Parker to Abercrombie myself. Grittiness and dark humour.

Love the humor.

I didn't find it to be all that funny. There were a few moments, but nowhere approaching Abercrombie. Maybe I just didn't get the jokes.

[Caligula_K]

I didn't find it to be all that funny. There were a few moments, but nowhere approaching Abercrombie. Maybe I just didn't get the jokes.

I agree. There's a sense of British irony throughout, and there are a few genuinely funny moments (I do love that first line), but in general, I didn't find the series to be that funny; by book three, I found it to be completely depressing, in a way that even Bakker isn't.

[sparky]

I agree. There's a sense of British irony throughout, and there are a few genuinely funny moments (I do love that first line), but in general, I didn't find the series to be that funny; by book three, I found it to be completely depressing, in a way that even Bakker isn't.

Well, the humor is dry and subtle, not characters cracking on each other via snappy dialog. It feels very 'English' to me in a way that even Abercrombie doesn't.

[Sheep the Evicted]

I agree. There's a sense of British irony throughout, and there are a few genuinely funny moments (I do love that first line), but in general, I didn't find the series to be that funny; by book three, I found it to be completely depressing, in a way that even Bakker isn't.

You read all of book three, what did you think of it, except for just depressing of course ?

I finished it about two weeks ago and i still have no idea what to make of it. I can say it started of slow and repetitive then it got quite interesting in the middle with all the machinations in full swing and it end...ridiculously. So ridiculously infact that i think i went and missed something maybe its the humor that you are talking about because i didn't find it in the slightest bit funny.