Scott Lynch’s The Republic of Thieves.. SPOILERS

[Frank Fitzpatrick]

My thoughts exactly. It was like a prequel and sequel squeezed together for page count and to introduce us to Sabetha more - that is the extent of the two stories' relationship - I kept expecting the past to have some important ramifications on the present elections but nothing happened. I got pissed at Pat for his review of this book but I just finished this morning and am completely underwhelmed and in agreement with his assessment. Fuck it, on to Blood Song..

It definitely felt like Lynch was squeezing in as much information as possible. I couldn't help but feel the last two have been building towards Locke's past identity and that we'll know why that was important when the fourth is released.

[Isis]

I don't get how people were annoyed with Pat for his review BEFORE they'd even read the book for themselves. Ridiculous. How can you have an opinion about it until you've experienced it yourself?

*goes off to read Pat's review*

[Stubby]

I found the whole love story unsatisfying on many levels. In this book it ends in the same position that it starts. It's like Take This Waltz but with far worse acting by the leads.

I agree. And one of the things that shits me to tears is a character that has hung out for ages with one person (or even a group of people) and hears one bad word about them - from a protagonist with a known agenda against the group - and accepts it as truth without without any attempt to investigate it. These guys (Locke & Sabetha) should have better bullshit detectors given their training.

ETA; on the whole is Sabetha Locke's daughter thing - it's a plausible possibility for sure. But I definitely feel like, while there was a lot of truth and facts in Patience's story, she was either deliberately leaving parts out, or outright lying in others. I think there's a LOT more to the Lamor Acanthus story than weve been told so far.

I pretty much agree with all you said, Braids. I still think Patience could have been working a con on the GB's - and now the GBs are unlikely to discover the misdirection. If Locke & Sabetha keep up with the lack of trust then they might nevere find out it was all bullshit all along (if it is). That outcome would not actually surprise me as SL seems to like chucking a bit of classic Tragedy into a story.

[Corvinus85]

More than two weeks to finish it. Really sub-par from Lies, and I would say even more boring than Red Seas. The interlude parts, especially, were pretty boring and quite irrelevant. I have no idea what relevance the whole play part had to the present day story. And just like in Red Seas, where Lynch put that clever bit at the beginning of the story, to make me keep going and not give up halfway through, he did similar things with this book, here and there. Really, the epilogue was probably the most interesting part of the book, but I'm not sure if it was enough to make me want to continue reading the series.

[Calibandar]

A lot of people seem to feel that way. This book has received mixed reviews, to be sure.

Red Seas actually had a lot of that as well, but not quite as much as RoT.

Which begs some questions with regards to book 4, whenever that will come out. For me the writing style is still there, the skill with which he writes dialogue, the wit. He has a way with characters. But like Martin with AFFC and ADWD, it's what he chooses to write about, the plot itself, which is no longer compelling. Because the basics are still there, you can always hope that the next book will be a return to form, but again as with Martin, it will require the author to re-direct himself and focus more on what works, and try to be more concise as well.

[henderson]

I finished reading REPUBLIC OF THIEVES a few days ago.

I don't want to think that the six years between this book and RED SEAS UNDER RED SKIES heightened my expectations, but I thought REPUBLIC OF THIEVES was a step down from RED SEAS UNDER RED SKIES. Unfortunately, I thought RED SEAS UNDER RED SKIES was a couple of steps down from LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA.

I think Scott did an amazing job of getting me very interested in reading about Sabetha, and when she finally appeared in REPUBIC OF THIEVES, I was underwhelmed. I guess as a whole, I thought REPUBLIC OF THIEVES was underwhelming and lacking the same punch that I got in the gut while reading LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA.

I enjoy a good political story as the next person, and when I read the blurb for the electioneering plot in REPUBLIC OF THIEVES, I looked forward to reading this story line. I was really wrong. The characters were flat and uninteresting. The electioneering story was dull.

The flashback storyline featuring the Moncraine Company as the backdrop of featuring Sabetha and Locke was very boring.

I am glad I checked this book out of the library, and not bought this book.

I think what Scott had going for him was LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA, which I think is one of the best first fantasy novel I have read. Fantasy readers are pretty loyal bunch once we like an author. I think we enjoyed LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA, and we will continue to read the GENTELMEN BASTARDS sequence to the benefit of Scott and his publishers.

[Merentha]

I think Scott did an amazing job of getting me very interested in reading about Sabetha, and when she finally appeared in REPUBIC OF THIEVES, I was underwhelmed. I guess as a whole, I thought REPUBLIC OF THIEVES was underwhelming and lacking the same punch that I got in the gut while reading LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA.

See, I thought the opposite. After two books of buildup and no particularly major female characters, I was bracing myself for a truly cringeworthy character. Sabetha could easily have fallen into either being Locke-with-tits or way too much of a Mary Sue. It might have been a little unfair of me to think that given how well Jean and Locke are written, but I was prepared to be very, very disappointed. The Sabetha character we got made perfect sense and was very well written. Clever, but not perfect, but not Locke either.

That said, while I was slightly disappointed with RoT, it was mostly because there was no central caper or con. There was no real focus and the book felt like it was doing too many things at once. That said, Lynch was pretty clearly trying to shift gears a little with this book, and I'm willing to cut it a lot of slack for being essentially the middle piece of a series. I'm hoping the next book picks up a little (and doesn't have yet another intro of Locke recuperating from injuries or poisoning. I like how Locke gets beat up a lot, but his whining irritates me as much as it does Jean)

[williamjm]

I finished reading this yesterday. Like a lot of people in this thread I had a mixed reaction to it, overall I enjoyed reading and liked many of the things that happened in it but there were some things that I think didn't work and some things I'm still not quite sure how I feel about them.

I think the flashback part of the story was fine. I saw some complaints earlier in the thread that not enough happened in it to justify the number of pages spent on it, and they may have a point but I enjoyed seeing the full complement of the GBs working together and it was a good introduction to Sabetha.

Before reading the book I was a bit nervous that Sabetha might turn out to be a disappointment when she finally appeared after being repeatedly mentioned during the previous two books, but I think Lynch did a good job of making her the equal of Locke and Jean even if it might have been nice to see more of the story from her point-of-view. I wasn't too keen on the "romance" between Locke and her, while Locke's behaviour in the flashbacks may have been typical teenaged foolishness it's a bit irritating when he was still behaving the same way towards her in the 'present day' part of the story. Having a potential romance as one of the central parts of a book can be a problem when it seems that they would be better off apart, I'm not sure that I really wanted to see them ending up together. In the book's defence I think the awkwardness of this romance was part of the point of the story, and Locke does at least seem to be showing a bit more maturity when deciding to leave Sabetha alone to decide whether she wants to be with him.

I thought the first part of the present day story in Lashain was a bit dull. We're told repeatedly that Locke is fatally ill and on the verge of dying but since it seems unlikely that he will die there's little tension here, although at least it does provide a good explanation for why he ends up working for the Bondsmagi. The story picks up a bit when it gets to Karthain and their unexpected sea voyage courtesy of Sabetha was amusing. I thought it did a decent job of portraying the Bondsmagi and explaining why they're not dominating the world in the way they should be able to given their powers. The explanation about too much magic drawing unwanted attention did make sense. I did wonder if it was meant to be a homage to Feist's Riftwar books where a similar explanation is given for avoiding certain types of magic - Lynch has in the past said that he was influenced by Feist's books and there have been other homages in earlier books.

However, I thought that plotline started to develop some flaws. Locke and Jean's attempts to win the Five Year Game don't seem as well described as some of their earlier heists, and while the last-minute switch of allegiance to tie the votes is explained it never seems to explain how they got so close that it would make the difference given that the general impression is that they were heading for a heavy defeat. There's also a bit of a problem spending so much time on a contest where nobody really cares about the outcome and there's not significant stake in them winning or losing.

I think maybe the most contentious part of the book is Patience's revelations about Locke's background, since I'm still not quite sure how much to believe. I did initially attribute Sabetha's reaction to the painting as just being her realising that she bore a strong resemblance to the Lamor's lost wife. I've now read the theories suggesting that she could either be Lamor's daughter or that his attempts to reincarnate his wife had to some extent succeeded. I'm not convinced about them, particularly the former. It would seem a huge coincidence that she would end up as one of Chains' proteges alongside Locke if that were the case and there's no explanation for how she would end up on Shades Hill. Also, Locke and Jean do seem to be considering the possibility that she might relent and come back in time, which wouldn't be very likely.

I think there must be at least some truth in Patience's story, since we see the reaction of the other Bondsmagi to Locke's 'real' name. If so, it does seem slightly odd that it suddenly appears out of nowhere towards the end of the third book in the series. I think such a big revelation should maybe have a bit more foreshadowing in earlier books, and I don't see much there other than the suggestion that Locke's true name might be significant.

Overall, I'd say this was some way behind TLOLL and probably also inferior to RSURS (although that book had different flaws, so it's not straightforward to compare them). It was still a fairly good read and hopefully future books in the series can return to form.

[Fredward]

I finished reading REPUBLIC OF THIEVES a few days ago.

I don't want to think that the six years between this book and RED SEAS UNDER RED SKIES heightened my expectations, but I thought REPUBLIC OF THIEVES was a step down from RED SEAS UNDER RED SKIES. Unfortunately, I thought RED SEAS UNDER RED SKIES was a couple of steps down from LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA.

I think Scott did an amazing job of getting me very interested in reading about Sabetha, and when she finally appeared in REPUBIC OF THIEVES, I was underwhelmed. I guess as a whole, I thought REPUBLIC OF THIEVES was underwhelming and lacking the same punch that I got in the gut while reading LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA.

I enjoy a good political story as the next person, and when I read the blurb for the electioneering plot in REPUBLIC OF THIEVES, I looked forward to reading this story line. I was really wrong. The characters were flat and uninteresting. The electioneering story was dull.

The flashback storyline featuring the Moncraine Company as the backdrop of featuring Sabetha and Locke was very boring.

I am glad I checked this book out of the library, and not bought this book.

I think what Scott had going for him was LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA, which I think is one of the best first fantasy novel I have read. Fantasy readers are pretty loyal bunch once we like an author. I think we enjoyed LIES OF LOCKE LAMORRA, and we will continue to read the GENTELMEN BASTARDS sequence to the benefit of Scott and his publishers.

The caps make me imagine you shouting. It's a funny mental picture.

[Plessiez]

Finished this a week or so ago. I liked it a lot more than most people on this thread, I think. Impressions after first reading were definitely higher than after first reading RSURS (though I liked that book better on a re-read). But then again, I didn't like TLOLL as much as many people on the board, so perhaps I had lower expectations going in.

Lynch tries some ideas that probably don't quite work as executed [having the Five Year Game and Locke's role in it just be a way for Patience's faction of the Bondsmagi to distract Foresight, for instance -- it's a nice idea, but the actual events that happen during the election campaign aren't entertaining or convincing enough to justify it] and Locke's origin [if true] had me rolling my eyes a bit, but the problems with the world-building aren't anything new to the series. A lot of the lack of closure/resolution seems deliberate, too, and it's hard to judge if that works or not without knowing where the series is going.

1. The stakes are simply too low: no-one cares about the election. Also, Locke, Jean, and Sabetha make a pretty poor job of electioneering - where's the canvassing? Then there's the missed opportunities. It's (presumably) too late to gerrymander, but they could have relocated voters from safe seats to marginals. They could have used their extensive funds to sign up new voters, or "voted" on behalf of dead voters still on the roll. They could have found ways of getting opponents ballots struck off (via fake double-voting). They could have sent out false messages to Black Iris areas about the vote being delayed. They never even considered the maxim that "what matters is not the vote, but he who counts the vote" - yes, we're fobbed off at the end with the idea that the bondsmagi ensure safe elections, but they could at least have investigated the possibilities. Instead of actual decent election-rigging, we're treated to a series of pranks.

Yeah, this was the big disappointment. Might have been more tension if Locke/Jean/Sabetha actually had to win (or not-lose) the election -- as it was, there was no way they could seriously fail so there was no real tension.

And the actual scheming was pretty dull, especially after Locke and Jean got back from the boat. I'd probably have been happier if Locke and Jean's unplanned sea voyage had lasted longer -- perhaps forcing them back to Lashain? -- if that gave them less time to do things in Karthain and more focus on the flashback plotline (which I thought was the stronger part of the book, really; the ending could have been fleshed out a little though.) That way at least there'd be more justification for the fact that neither Locke or Jean seem to spend time working out anything particularly clever until (perhaps) the end.

4. We (largely) know the reason for Locke's single interest sexuality, but surely someone should have pointed out to him how unhealthy/creepy it seems?

5. "Storeys" drove me nuts every time I found it.

Agree with both of these. (Well, one is presumably going to be fixed in reprints; the other is more serious.)

If we're putting forward ideas to improve the trilogy I would have loved to have seen;

Lies of Locke Lamora - Told from Locke's perspective, essentially as written

Red Seas Under Red Skies - Told from Jeans perspective, he was the most important character anyway, it would have fleshed him out more and given the story much more emotional depth

Republic of Thieves - Shown from Sabbetha's perspective, would have made the character much more real rather than defined by Locke (love interest/rival). Change the structure to the main story with flashbacks to her place in the Bastards (how she joined, why she left, why she eventually fell for/left Locke etc.) with interludes to her time outside the gang.

This would make the story more about the Gentleman's Bastards rather than the Chronicles of Locke which it is at the minute.

Changing the POVs like this is a very nice idea. (I'd have actually had most of ROT told as flashbacks, since the main point seems to be introducing Sabetha. The present day plot should have been a lot shorter, if there wasn't going to be any serious focus on the electioneering.)

I thought the first part of the present day story in Lashain was a bit dull. We're told repeatedly that Locke is fatally ill and on the verge of dying but since it seems unlikely that he will die there's little tension here, although at least it does provide a good explanation for why he ends up working for the Bondsmagi.

Yeah, true. But this is more a problem from RSURS, I think? Once you have the "Locke has been poisoned" plot thread in place, you have to spend some time taking it seriously (even if the readers know he must survive), otherwise what was the point of introducing it in the first place? Perhaps the Archon could have been revealed to have simply fabricated the story of the poison, but I'm not sure people would have liked that either.

I think maybe the most contentious part of the book is Patience's revelations about Locke's background, since I'm still not quite sure how much to believe.

I'm still hoping most of the "revelations" aren't true (or at least, aren't built on any further). I don't think they quite came out of nowhere (there was always a bit of mystery about Locke's origin and his true name) but I'm not sure I'm happy with it being the subject of this much focus so early in the series.

[Werthead]

It's worth remembering that Lynch originally planned for The Thorn of Emberlain to be the first book in the series, and the first three books are therefore extended backstory he wrote to put the 'main' series (which will now be Books 4-7) in a better context. On that basis, I assume the plot revelations from #3 were always intended to be part of the background material for the series overall.

[Stubby]

It's worth remembering that Lynch originally planned for The Thorn of Emberlain to be the first book in the series, and the first three books are therefore extended backstory he wrote to put the 'main' series (which will now be Books 4-7) in a better context. On that basis, I assume the plot revelations from #3 were always intended to be part of the background material for the series overall.

Well, you learn something every day.

Some nerd I am :rolleyes: .

[Alytha]

Does that mean that he has The Thorn of Emberlain already written? ;)

My review on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/275172833

[williamjm]

Yeah, true. But this is more a problem from RSURS, I think? Once you have the "Locke has been poisoned" plot thread in place, you have to spend some time taking it seriously (even if the readers know he must survive), otherwise what was the point of introducing it in the first place? Perhaps the Archon could have been revealed to have simply fabricated the story of the poison, but I'm not sure people would have liked that either.

You're right that he did have to address it somehow. An alternative way of doing the plotline would be if the poison hadn't been quite as fast to make him critically ill and Locke just slowly got worse over the course of the book. The stakes in Karthain might have felt higher if Patience's deal was only to heal him once the election was over. It would probably have changed the book too much, since it would have changed the dynamic of the relationship between Locke and Sabetha if Locke was ill.

[aidan]

"Storeys" is gramatically correct when referring to floors of a building.

[MinDonner]

"Storeys" is gramatically correct when referring to floors of a building.

WE KNOW. Do you really think that several members of a board dedicated to a lengthy fantasy series, in the Literature forum no less, would be illiterate enough to be complaining about it otherwise? FFS.

[john]

Usually there's no 'e' in American english, however. So both uses of the word were likely changed by an idiot british publisher, unless Lynch for some reason likes to write in british english.

Also, did you know the word stories/storeys is a middle english corruption of the latin historia denoting a tier of paintings or sculptures along the facade of a building? Well it is. So thanks, RoT for bringing me that little tidbit in a roundabout way.

[aidan]

WE KNOW. Do you really think that several members of a board dedicated to a lengthy fantasy series, in the Literature forum no less, would be illiterate enough to be complaining about it otherwise? FFS.

Considering at least two participants in this thread are complaining about the usage of the word (one of whom has called for a 'fix' in reprints), and another has referred to Lynch's British publishers as 'idiots' for sticking an 'e' in there, yes.

From my understanding, Gollancz, Lynch's British publisher, holds first rights to the books and does the major edits. Del Rey purchases those edits from Gollancz. Perhaps Wert can shed some light on this?

[Plessiez]

Considering at least two participants in this thread are complaining about the usage of the word (one of whom has called for a 'fix' in reprints), and another has referred to Lynch's British publishers as 'idiots' for sticking an 'e' in there, yes.

... you have more than slightly missed the point.

The use of the word "storeys" in itself isn't the problem. I suspect every single person posting on this thread knows what the word means. The problem is that (because of some sort of global find-and-replace mistake, presumably), every single intended use of "stories" (as in "works of fiction", not "levels of a building") is rendered as "storeys". It is certainly a mistake (and an embarrassing one) and it will certainly be fixed.

ETA: Oh, look, this has already been mentioned.

If you look at Lynch's twitter feed, he said, "oh, that's a problem" and that he'd alert his publishers. Couple that with it not being a thing in the American version... seems pretty clear that someone did a late "replace-all" of 'storeys' for 'stories' in the versions for all non-American English-speaking countries. I'm sure it'll be fixed in the next edition.

Speaking of illiterates...

[aidan]

My apologies. :dunce: