The Trouble With Peace by Joe Abercrombie [SPOILER THREAD]

[SeanF]

37 minutes ago, shortstark said:

Whoever said Stour Downfall up thread big up yourself. I was pissed at Joe for that last Clover Wonderful scene in A Little Hatred and the taking down of Stour has partly made amends.. lovely book, probably the best one yet, Joe is at the heights of his story telling powers. I have no nits to pick, everything worked for me Rikke is my new favorite character and Vick and Joppo.. u see where this is leading....

Stour Nightfall had it coming.  He has no redeeming features.

[Corvinus85]

16 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

FWIW, Joe mentioned in reddit's AMA that royal names are common in the Union ("You get a lot of folks named after famous kings, like Harod and Casamir").

Also, would Bayaz allow the glorification of Casamir (statue in the Kingsway, his banner at the front of the armies,...) if he had been a pupil who betrayed him? One would expect that he would have been victim to damnatio memoriae.

We know Bayaz has a low opinion of King Casamir, but maybe he couldn't do anything to stop people glorifying Casamir's accomplishments, and not allowing a statue would have been suspicious. 

16 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

I've thought of it, but who could be the culprit? Who could benefit from Jezal's death? Not Bayaz, who had completely tamed him. Not the Closed Council, who had nothing to gain with the ascension of a new young king. Not even the Breakers, I think, as they had no reason to believe that Orso would be more favorable to their interests.

Prior to reading this book, I had a small suspicion that maybe it was Terez. What if Jezal had decided to legitimize Savine and make her his heir, considering how inept everyone believed Orso would be as king? And Terez found out, had him killed. However, after reading that short Terez POV I'm not so sure anymore.

But who else? Bayaz's prime enemy, Khalul. (Or one of the other magi that he is apparently in conflict with)

16 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

It's mentioned that the reconstructed Lord's Round has a huge gilded dome. So in all likelyhood the two women would be Savine and Isolt, about to be married to Leo and Lord Isher.

I missed that. Because Rikke's vision started with two old men fighting in a Circle, I assumed the two women were also old.

[Corvinus85]

Last I checked the Union still had the most powerful navy in the Circle of the World. It's mentioned in the beginning that they were worried about the Styrians building warships, so they were probably keeping an eye on that. But still, with the ample warning Orso had about the rebellion, you think that at least a portion of the fleet was mobilized and sent to patrol the sea between Angland and Midderland. 

[Dez]

2 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

 

Prior to reading this book, I had a small suspicion that maybe it was Terez. What if Jezal had decided to legitimize Savine and make her his heir, considering how inept everyone believed Orso would be as king? And Terez found out, had him killed. However, after reading that short Terez POV I'm not so sure anymore.

But who else? Bayaz's prime enemy, Khalul. (Or one of the other magi that he is apparently in conflict with)

I thought it was heavily implied that Bayaz killed Jezal. I know it’s been argued above that it wouldn’t have been in Bayaz’s interests to dump a stable king. But if Bayaz’s interests are a strong and stable Union, why is he single handedly the cause of its biggest weakness in the form of the crown’s money problems? The implication of the fact that the crown’s debts to Valint and Balk are hamstringing the Closed Council’s ability to address problems like Stour and the Breakers is that Bayaz doesn’t want those problems addressed. I know mega-rich capitalists are famously stingy, but this takes it too far since Bayaz is on both sides of the transaction. I have to think when Bayaz tightens the Union’s purse strings he does it for reasons beyond how much extra profit his other entity is making.

If you accept that Bayaz is purposely fomenting the Union’s current weakness it makes total sense that Jezal dies right when his already unpopular son has just made his reputation worse by entering the public stage for virtually the first time by hanging a bunch of starving revolutionaries. That Bayaz was literally present at Jezal’s death underscores this, knowing what we do about him.

It can be argued that Bayaz (and Bayaz through Sulfur) acted to bolster Orso’s regime in the Trouble With Peace and this weighs against Orso being set up as a Fall Guy. But moving to stop Leo’s rebellion isn’t the same thing as making Orso’s position totally secure since we know that the Breakers and Burners are still poised to bring about their own regime threatening rebellion.

[unJon]

5 minutes ago, Dez said:

I thought it was heavily implied that Bayaz killed Jezal. I know it’s been argued above that it wouldn’t have been in Bayaz’s interests to dump a stable king. But if Bayaz’s interests are a strong and stable Union, why is he single handedly the cause of its biggest weakness in the form of the crown’s money problems? The implication of the fact that the crown’s debts to Valint and Balk are hamstringing the Closed Council’s ability to address problems like Stour and the Breakers is that Bayaz doesn’t want those problems addressed. I know mega-rich capitalists are famously stingy, but this takes it too far since Bayaz is on both sides of the transaction. I have to think when Bayaz tightens the Union’s purse strings he does it for reasons beyond how much extra profit his other entity is making.

If you accept that Bayaz is purposely fomenting the Union’s current weakness it makes total sense that Jezal dies right when his already unpopular son has just made his reputation worse by entering the public stage for virtually the first time by hanging a bunch of starving revolutionaries. That Bayaz was literally present at Jezal’s death underscores this, knowing what we do about him.

It can be argued that Bayaz (and Bayaz through Sulfur) acted to bolster Orso’s regime in the Trouble With Peace and this weighs against Orso being set up as a Fall Guy. But moving to stop Leo’s rebellion isn’t the same thing as making Orso’s position totally secure since we know that the Breakers and Burners are still poised to bring about their own regime threatening rebellion.

The above agrees with my take. I think Bayaz is behind the Breaker Revolution. 

[BigFatCoward]

Holy fucking shit. I dragged it out as long as I could, but the last 30% was relentless and I couldnt stop. I'm starting it again tomorrow.  A Truly remarkable work.

[The hairy bear]

18 hours ago, Dez said:

But if Bayaz’s interests are a strong and stable Union, why is he single handedly the cause of its biggest weakness in the form of the crown’s money problems? The implication of the fact that the crown’s debts to Valint and Balk are hamstringing the Closed Council’s ability to address problems like Stour and the Breakers is that Bayaz doesn’t want those problems addressed.

Bayaz said that he gave permission to Black Calder to invade the Protectorate (it makes plenty of sense: he controls both the Union and the North, but not the Protectorate). And he seems to underestimate the Breakers. But V&B is happy to lend money to the crown once a problem appears that Bayaz wants addressed, as with Leo's revolt.

Having the Union owe a huge debt to V&B is a way to control it. The fact that financial load render the king or the Closed Council unable to pursue their desired policies is a good thing, on Bayaz's book. That way, they'll only be able to finance whatever Bayaz is willing to let them. It's not very different to how the IMF controls some developing countries in the real world, loaning them money in exchange to the submission to their will.

18 hours ago, Dez said:

If you accept that Bayaz is purposely fomenting the Union’s current weakness

Why would he do that? If the Breakers get the power, the very first thing they'll do is default the Crown's debt to V&B. From Bayaz's perspective, any pseudo-democratic reform will make the Union much harder to control than a monarchy. And although the Gurkish Empire has crumbledd down, both Styria and the Old Empire are growing stronger and are controlled by rivals. I fail to see what Bayaz could gain by debilitating the Union.

[unJon]

41 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:Why would he do that? If the Breakers get the power, the very first thing they'll do is default the Crown's debt to V&B. From Bayaz's perspective, any pseudo-democratic reform will make the Union much harder to control than a monarchy. And although the Gurkish Empire has crumbledd down, both Styria and the Old Empire are growing stronger and are controlled by rivals. I fail to see what Bayaz could gain by debilitating the Union.

Bayaz knee the unrest of the commoners was growing. War of some sort was inevitable. So better if he’s behind the Breakers so he can guide it and betray it at the right time. He didn’t think it would come this soon because he didn’t foresee Leo’s rebellion, which would both weaken the Union army, remove a natural ally in Angland mostly from the board, and accelerate the timing of the Breaker Revolution.

 

[Dez]

3 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Having the Union owe a huge debt to V&B is a way to control it. The fact that financial load render the king or the Closed Council unable to pursue their desired policies is a good thing, on Bayaz's book. That way, they'll only be able to finance whatever Bayaz is willing to let them. It's not very different to how the IMF controls some developing countries in the real world, loaning them money in exchange to the submission to their will.

I agree with the debt as leverage point, but I disagree that the text supports that this is just business as usual or a general policy of using the debt to tie the king and council’s hands. Instead, I think the circumstances indicate that as of the start of this trilogy the spigot on the bank’s money has only recently run dry and that strikes me as suspicious. Between the end of the first Trilogy and this one, Bayaz has bankrolled at least four wars for the Union, three of them offensive wars in Styria. We have no reason to think that Jezal and the Council were ever going rogue or needed to be restrained through more debt. The bottom line is that the restraint on the Union’s ability to act has never been tighter, but it can be loosened at any time and Bayaz chooses not to intervene until a moment that bleeds the establishment (meaning both the closed and open councils) dry right at the moment Pike is poised to make his big push.

3 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

Why would he do that? If the Breakers get the power, the very first thing they'll do is default the Crown's debt to V&B. From Bayaz's perspective, any pseudo-democratic reform will make the Union much harder to control than a monarchy. And although the Gurkish Empire has crumbledd down, both Styria and the Old Empire are growing stronger and are controlled by rivals. I fail to see what Bayaz could gain by debilitating the Union.

I think the question of why Bayaz is fostering a Great Change is the big question of this trilogy. To me it comes down to Bayaz (and the things his character symbolizes- the First Law, might makes right, tyranny) being adaptable as a core part of his nature. Magic is going out of the world, but Bayaz fully intends to stay in it. Fantasy magic is fading but Bayaz is up to his eyes in every new “magic” the modernizing world reveals. And I don’t think politics is immune to this. Tyranny can still exist outside of traditional monarchies and within purportedly more democratic regimes. I’m a bit rusty on my history, but I’m pretty sure historians have spent a lot of ink on how industrialization contributed to the nightmare scale of modern authoritarian regimes, many of which at least began under democratic auspices. Even the ones that purport to break free of Bayaz’s current levers of banks and finance can’t completely divorce themselves from them, and that is often offset by the greater degree of government control such regimes exercise over the lives of the populace. My point is that tyranny is as adaptable and resilient as Bayaz is and I think that might be what JA has in mind.

[BigFatCoward]

Orso and Rikke back together? Would put an end to the repetitive wars between north and south. 

[Corvinus85]

Is it me, or is there a message in this book that pertains to our currently worldly situation? People like Leo, Savine, and Stour are brought low due to their behavior. Sure, not without plenty of pain and suffering felt by others, but at the end of the second book of this trilogy, such people are almost out of the picture, and could probably only rise back through the benevolence (or complacency) of others. We might have have to no longer call Joe Lord Grimdark, but Lord GrimHope. 

[Lightsnake]

I just hope Orso ends up by this alright, whoever the Owl may be,

[unJon]

1 hour ago, Lightsnake said:

I just hope Orso ends up by this alright, whoever the Owl may be,

Maybe Rikke (rhymes with pricker) is the Owl and swallows him through marriage. Maybe. But you have to be realistic about things . . . 
 

 

[shortstark]

I had a thought about Orso and Rikke too, she is well on her way to being the King in the North she and Orso getting to getting together would make the Union immeasurably stronger, but that might be too tidy a resolution for our Joe.

The first two installments of this trilogy has been pretty self contained, story arcs concluding satisfactorily, however I can't see the whole story concluding in one more book though..

I have read this book twice now.. that's a record..

[jurble]

Can anyone check what the Maker's mark on Logen's sword looked like?  Maybe it's an owl.

[Gaston de Foix]

16 minutes ago, jurble said:

Can anyone check what the Maker's mark on Logen's sword looked like?  Maybe it's an owl.

I think it was the letter 'K'.  But someone with a kindle should search all the First Law books for "owl".  Please and thank you!

[The hairy bear]

1 hour ago, Gaston de Foix said:

But someone with a kindle should search all the First Law books for "owl".  Please and thank you!

There are six references to owls in the previous books. Three in the Last Argument of Kings, two in Best Served Cold, and one in A Little Hatred.

• Dogman: "Shivers, you and your boys are keeping a watch on the town square" // Shivers: "like the owl watches, chief."
• Crummock: "The moon whispered to me. In the forest, in the trees, and in the voices of the owls in the trees."
• Crummock: "I'm mad as a sack of owls, and everyone says so!"
• Shenkt: "I do not kneel" // Orso's chamberlain's head "rotated towards him like an affronted owl"
• Monza: her legs ached, her arse was chafed raw from riding, her shoulder had stiffened up again so she was constantly twisting her head to one side like a demented owl.
• Rikke: "he [Crummock] was mad as a sack of owls, you're always saying so!"

[unJon]

20 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

There are six references to owls in the previous books. Three in the Last Argument of Kings, two in Best Served Cold, and one in A Little Hatred.

• Dogman: "Shivers, you and your boys are keeping a watch on the town square" // Shivers: "like the owl watches, chief."
• Crummock: "The moon whispered to me. In the forest, in the trees, and in the voices of the owls in the trees."
• Crummock: "I'm mad as a sack of owls, and everyone says so!"
• Shenkt: "I do not kneel" // Orso's chamberlain's head "rotated towards him like an affronted owl"
• Monza: her legs ached, her arse was chafed raw from riding, her shoulder had stiffened up again so she was constantly twisting her head to one side like a demented owl.
• Rikke: "he [Crummock] was mad as a sack of owls, you're always saying so!"

Nice touch on the Crummock lines between LAoK and ALH. 

[Gaston de Foix]

31 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

There are six references to owls in the previous books. Three in the Last Argument of Kings, two in Best Served Cold, and one in A Little Hatred.

• Dogman: "Shivers, you and your boys are keeping a watch on the town square" // Shivers: "like the owl watches, chief."
• Crummock: "The moon whispered to me. In the forest, in the trees, and in the voices of the owls in the trees."
• Crummock: "I'm mad as a sack of owls, and everyone says so!"
• Shenkt: "I do not kneel" // Orso's chamberlain's head "rotated towards him like an affronted owl"
• Monza: her legs ached, her arse was chafed raw from riding, her shoulder had stiffened up again so she was constantly twisting her head to one side like a demented owl.
• Rikke: "he [Crummock] was mad as a sack of owls, you're always saying so!"

Interesting, but inconclusive.  It must be a new character.  

[jurble]

Clearly it's Shivers.  He's going to be King of the Union.