The First Law by Joe Abercrombie Vx (spoilers through LAOK for now)

[Toblakai]

The B9 Logen cross over: I generally think they are separate but there are occasion where the two seem to mix:

Spoilers for standalones:

He has been seen to act fairly lucidly whilst still being badshit crazy, but importantly we never see it from inside his head.

He hacked up Shivers body, which doesn't seem something that Logen by himself would do. And he says he had a winter(maybe summer, I can't recall specifically) that he can barely remember he was so out of control. But he can't have been the B9 we see in the first books, who just fights all the time regardless who it's against.

We also see in Red Country, when he has the bar fight. He's in control enough to question and attempt to hang the kid, but is out of control enough to seriously consider killing Shy.

Spoilers for the stand alones.

Shiver isn't killed. But I do agree that the personalities blur in Red Country.

[The BlackBear]

Spoilers for the stand alones.

Shiver isn't killed. But I do agree that the personalities blur in Red Country.

I mistyped, I meant shivers brother. Will edit.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Can we not call Logen "B9"? He's much more of a Gb m7, or a diminished. B9 isn't dark enough.

[Shryke]

What time period are we discussing, though?

The First Law begins with Logen getting a chance to start over again, and deciding to be a new man. Before that, though, he does appear to have been a pretty bad guy. You can't blame that on the Bloody-Nine - there are no 'months/years he doesn't remember'. Read that chapter again: Bethod lists all the things Logen did, the times he picked war over peace, and Logen says

All of that was Logen Ninefingers. Not the Bloody-Nine. He remembers it. Some of what Bethod accuses him of might have been the B9 going over the score, to be fair, but most of it is stuff that took place off the battlefield, choices Logen made to fight when he could have made peace. Logen was the one who chose to fight Threetrees, though it may have been the Bloody-Nine who defeated him. And from what Bayaz was saying, that was just one time amongst many that pre-First Law Logen picked a fight, knowing the B9 would come out if his life was threatened.

Red Country picked up that thread: Logen as Lamb is trying to be a good man, but once he stops - it's Logen that's in charge. It's not the Bloody-Nine who slaughters the Ghosts, is it?

The series does set up the B9 as this out-of-control possession experience, it's true. But it then subverts that, showing us that for all his protestations, there's a part of Logen that is more akin to the B9 than he wants to believe.

Firstly, there are months/years he doesn't remember. He states it somewhere in the 3rd book. It's like a whole winter or something at least.

And yes, this is very much about what time period we are discussing. And that's the basic problem. Logen as he's presented in the book does not match Logen as he's described from the past. We get these descriptions of the terrible guy he used to be, which is supposed to be a flip on how we've viewed the character up to this point. But the whole way the B9 is described undermines this by very harshly separating the two aspects of his behaviour. We can believe the B9 would do all that crazy shit but it the portrayal of the B9 and how it manifests and how Logen reacts to that makes any attempt to pin that behaviour on Logen really really weak.

Red Country does a much better job of showcasing the violent aspects of Logen's personality. In part, I think, because we don't see it from inside Logen's head. But also because Abercrombie I think does a much better job of characterizing the violent aspects of Logen's own personality. But I was referring only to TFL trilogy because, well, that's what the thread is about.

[mormont]

Firstly, there are months/years he doesn't remember. He states it somewhere in the 3rd book. It's like a whole winter or something at least.

I'm blanking on that, sorry - no idea where it is referenced. At no point in any of the books do we see an episode of the Bloody-Nine last longer than the immediate danger, so maybe this was not a case of possession, but something else? Hard to say without the reference.

The point I was making, though, is that it doesn't explain what Bethod alleges about Logen being the one who kept pushing for more, who wanted the big name, who fought when he could have had peace. Logen denies that outwardly (with decreasing force), but inwardly admits it. It was him. That was who he was, back then. A fitting host for the Bloody-Nine, if host he is.

And yes, this is very much about what time period we are discussing. And that's the basic problem. Logen as he's presented in the book does not match Logen as he's described from the past.

Nor should we expect him to, given that he clearly is making a conscious effort to be a very different man.

We get these descriptions of the terrible guy he used to be, which is supposed to be a flip on how we've viewed the character up to this point. But the whole way the B9 is described undermines this by very harshly separating the two aspects of his behaviour. We can believe the B9 would do all that crazy shit but it the portrayal of the B9 and how it manifests and how Logen reacts to that makes any attempt to pin that behaviour on Logen really really weak.

Really? I think that any attempt to excuse it by pinning it on the Bloody-Nine is really weak. For a start, it's not at all consistent with how we see the Bloody-Nine actually operate - it requires a far higher level of social functioning than he ever displays, and a concern with things he shows absolutely no concern for (ie anything but fighting and killing). Meanwhile, the claim that it doesn't fit Logen is based on... well, I'm not quite sure what. The idea that Logen's fresh start is actually a continuation of the man he's been all along? The assumption that his frequent admission that he used to be a complete shit is just him being overly self-critical?

[brentendo]

So I'm just about finished The Heroes, but I have a random question about The First Law trilogy.

What is the difference between Lord Marshall Burr and Varuz? They are both Lord Marshals on the Closed Council, but I'm confused as to which role they play. My current assumption is that Varuz is the Marshall for just the Army portion, while Burr is the Marshall for the whole Army/Navy forces combined? Can anyone clarify?

[Pilusmagnus]

No, the navy is under control of Lord Admiral Reutzer. Both Marshals are just here because the army is most of the time not something you want to confer upon one individual. There are two of them so if one is killed or attempts to use the army for an insurrection, the other one can stop him or replace him.

[brentendo]

No, the navy is under control of Lord Admiral Reutzer. Both Marshals are just here because the army is most of the time not something you want to confer upon one individual. There are two of them so if one is killed or attempts to use the army for an insurrection, the other one can stop him or replace him.

I'm not sure they'd both have the same position though... LAOK spoilers

Spoiler

When Burr dies in LAOK, the Army has to wait for the closed council to decide a new Lord Marshal. If both Varuz and Burr were the same position, then Varuz would automatically take over for him. This isn't the case in the book though as West takes over Marshal Burr's command.

[Pilusmagnus]

That's because a new marshal has to be appointed either way. Since the majority of the candidates are already in the North, they just elect one who already knows the terrain and the campaign, instead of sending Varuz and electing a new Marshal for Midderland.

[mormont]

I may be mistaken, but I always assumed Varuz was retired as Lord Marshal, and retained his place because he still had something to offer the Council (and his title out of respect).

[Pilusmagnus]

Well, there was two consuls in Rome, it seems logical that, being the most powerful position in the Union, there would be two Lord Marshals in Adua.

[Night's_King]

Since when is the position of the Lord Marshal the most powerful position in the Union?

[SeanF]

My impression is that Burr is Supreme Commander in the field, while Varuz is Chief of Staff or Minister of Defence.

[Toblakai]

@pilusmagnus You will appreciate Tough Times All Over more if you read Best Served Cold first due to character cameos.

Some Desperado stars Shy South from Red Country but takes place in her past so I guess it doesn't matter.

[Toblakai]

There are a lot of other good stories in those anthologies. Some of the best ones aren't even fantasy, although Sanderson's story from Dangerous Women is fantastic, as is Rothfuss's in Rogues (but you really should read his two novels first to appreciate it). Sanderson's is standalone.

[Pilusmagnus]

I was specifically speaking about Dangerous Women and Rogues. If Some Desperado is available for free then all is cool.

Also, where can I find The Fool's Job, Yesterday Near a Village Named barden and Freedom, and can I read them before the standalones as well?

[Night's_King]

Joe Abercrombie:

The Fool Jobs – in Swords and Dark Magic, edited by Jonathan Strahan and Lou Anders
Yesterday, Near a Village Called Barden – in the Waterstones hardcover edition of the Heroes (I think these two are also with the enhanced ebook of the Heroes)
Freedom! – in the Waterstones hardcover edition of Red Country
Some Desperado – forthcoming in Dangerous Women
Tough Times all Over – forthcoming (probably not soon)

Source

[Pilusmagnus]

Is Desperado the only one available for free?

And can I read the prequels for The Heroes before Best Served Cold?

[Night's_King]

Is Desperado the only one available for free?

And can I read the prequels for The Heroes before Best Served Cold?

I don't really know.

[Night's_King]

So I wrote Mr. Abercombie an email yesterday and he answered! I asked about the two Lord-Marshals-thing. Here is his answer:

Hey,

Yes there are two. One is junior, and expected to go on campaign if called upon. The other is senior, and expected to manage the logistics of the army, and defend the Union if called upon while the other is away.

Best,
Joe A