Toll the Hounds by Steven Erikson

[Trencher]

I hear this a lot, but for some reason, that's never been a problem for me. Quite contrarily, I get a strong sense of the different characters, and I think Erikson is especially adept at conveying the sense of comradeship that exists between friends. Both one-on-one and group interactions seem very natural and realistic to me. I think the fact that Erikson doesn't give each character some easily discernible defining trait (pull braid, smooth skirts, huff about men), which Martin, for instance, is wont to do, that people assume there is little in the way of characterization.

That to me sounds more like Jordan who overdoes it in some areas, but not Martin. What I liked about Martin is that I didn't feel like I was reading any fluff or filler. Jordan tended to pile it on in the later books.

To me, the "price" of magic lies in the fact that there are many contesting powers, none of whom would shed a tear if one of them were to be eliminated.

Unfortunately that's how I feel as the reader about just about all of the characters.

Thus, to use your power is to make yourself visible, which is making yourself vulnerable. I also think he explores how such unbridled power affects people (meaning both human and non-human)

That is a good point and at least shows some cost.

I think one of Erikson's main points is that they (the main "standard human" characters (or we, depending on how allegorically you want to read)) are all basically powerless in the face of greater forces such as fate, luck and supernatural entities. That there is little one can do in the way of shaping ones own life, apart from trying to live a quiet life, undetected by the powers that be. And that no one cares for the little guy except the little guy himself. They are merely pawns in the big players' games. On the other hand, you have those few who are able to turn the game on their betters, as it were.

And that turning of the tables is what would interest me in continuing.

[Trencher]

Limits and price are two different things. Price is having to sacrifice 12 children to kill 12 soldiers. Malazan does not have that. Limits, yes. If Sorbo had no limits on his power then he would simply have won the war for them, wouldn't he?

Yes and when both limits and price are defined it becomes interesting for me. Malazan really has no price? Say the magic words and either kill a fly or an entire continent? I would like still to have an answer to what Sormo is capable of and how he got there. Can he really just summon a spirit at will to destroy legions? Why was the spirit under his control (or allowed to kill) the archers by his permission? What is the link there?

[Gigei]

There is no big price. Mages simply need the talent, brains and study for it. They do get exhausted just like using any other physical or mental abilities though and they are hardly invulnerable while doing their magic.

IIRC one very powerful guy got a spear in his back and it killed him without any problems although his enemy's magic could not.

There is one special type of magic that twists its users, I suppose that would be a price but that is the exception rather than the rule. Quick Ben, for example, has to be able to use the warrens and keep control of it. Seems simple but apparently most mages have only small talents. *shrugs*

[beniowa]

MT has an anti-capitalist theme?

Yup, and so does Reaper's Gale to a lesser extent. Basically, Erikson presents the Letherii Empire as the worst example of capitalism.

[Trencher]

Meh, it seems obvious to me. There's another mage in BB that has little talent and is often referred to as "he's no Quick Ben." Only the genius level people get the power, you know. Not every little grunt in the army can blast people to pieces.

I am sure (as in D&D) Erikson has his different levels. And I am glad everyone is not overpowered.

Why wouldn't I be interested in such a book? Only people with no imagination would be scared of fantasy books that don't follow the convention. In such a world where power is so easy then only the people's ethics would matter. I could easily read a book about the ethics of power, no problem.

Scared? I am so frightened to read anything non-conventional! Not following convention does not make a good book. I think the magic is so frequent and unbridled that it becomes boring and leaves you with little else in this series since the characters are not that interesting (yet, maybe later?). If I continue to read I hope there is more development so that I actually care what happens to any of them. I believe it's fine for there to be very powerful beings and their interaction can be fascinating if the characters are done well and not just names and ranks with 700,000 hit points and the ability to destroy planets.

[Cuchulain]

Kallor, I think readers know this from as early as GotM, isn't even a god yet he destroyed an entire continent.

I was wondering how he actually managed that. I'm about 900 pages into MoI, yet I've found no indication that Kallor is a powerful mage. How did he torch that continent ?

[Gigei]

Knowing Kallor he probably had A-bombs all over the continent from when he ruled it then when they rose up/were going to be taken from him, he detonated it.

Ok, so not A-bombs but some sort of pre-setup thing is what I am thinking. I doubt he simply snapped his fingers and devastated his empire that way, there had to be something already there for him to use. *imagines a nifty magical red self-destruct button* Kallor built up his empire and power over a period of time. He has a bad rep now and if he were to try building up his power that way again, I don't doubt that the big powers in Malazan would take note of it and slap him down before he got too powerful again. We will see in future books.

Gothos did also freeze an entire continent with Omtrose Pellack as well so Kallor isn't the only one.

What I think is, mostly ascendants/gods/uber mages do have that much power (although not every single one, like the very highest/most powerful/genius level mages) BUT they tend not to do things that crazy. If they did, there are others as powerful as them who would then make it a priority to take them out... which is exactly what happened to Kallor. 'Course he struck back. Kinda cool, really.

[Veilside]

I was wondering how he actually managed that. I'm about 900 pages into MoI, yet I've found no indication that Kallor is a powerful mage. How did he torch that continent ?

K'chain Chemalle (sp?) technology.

[Mme Erzulie]

That to me sounds more like Jordan who overdoes it in some areas, but not Martin. What I liked about Martin is that I didn't feel like I was reading any fluff or filler. Jordan tended to pile it on in the later books.

Well, my parenthesis was clearly a jab at Jordan, but Martin definitely does this, quite consciously too, I think, albeit to a much lesser degree, and much more elegant than Jordan. If you read Martin, you'll notice that most every time a lesser character is described, he'll weave in his most easily discernible trait. I'm not saying this is inherently a bad thing, and Martin does it so well, in my opinion, that it never becomes obtrusive to the reading experience. It's basically a literary technique that Martin employs and Erikson doesn't.

Unfortunately that's how I feel as the reader about just about all of the characters.

I must say I can relate and sympathize with a number of characters. Take GoTM; the young and still somewhat starry-eyed Crokus, who hopelessly falls in love with the nobleman's daughter, the contrastingly dis-illusioned assasin Rallick Nom, a killer through and through, but still obviously caring for his friends, enough that he plans to avenge his broken-hearted friend Coll. The detatched inamorato Murillio, the deceptively harebrained linguistic equilibrist Kruppe, just to name a few.

It might be worth bearing in mind that GoTM, at least, was originally a screenplay, but one continually turned down because of its scope and complexity. And I, for one, have little difficulty picturing the people, the cities or the landscapes.

And that turning of the tables is what would interest me in continuing.

Then I suggest you continue reading. Reading this series, I am continually reminded of the fable of the fly that kills the wolf (bear?) by sitting on its nose and having it beat itself to death.

As to your ongoing discussion with Gigei, I completely see your point, and if I could be so bold, I would suggest that some sort of internal consistency is what you're looking for. The human mind can suspend disbelief, but it still demands logical interaction within that imaginary world. It might not answer to our natural laws, but it should still have some of its own that can't be flouted at will or convenience.

Thus, what you're looking for, projected by yours truly, is that such a transferring of energy/magic needs to leave a vacuum/void somewhere, proportionate to the magnitude of magic involved.

I think an illuminating parallel can be drawn to our world's nuclear powers. I think I've read that one US nuclear submarine carries enough power to lay waste to our planet 72 times over. That might be inaccurate, but we are still talking about ridiculous amounts of power at the hands of different people. Now, what is the price for using that power? Pressing the red button, so to speak, won't take much out of them. It is rather the consequences of using it that keeps people at bay (devastation, indiscriminate effect, repercussions from other powers).

It is far from a perfect analogy, but I still think it has some merit.

For what it's worth, Erikson has said in interviews that if you don't like über-powerful characters, his world is probably not for you.

[Gigei]

I think an illuminating parallel can be drawn to our world's nuclear powers. I think I've read that one US nuclear submarine carries enough power to lay waste to our planet 72 times over. That might be inaccurate, but we are still talking about ridiculous amounts of power at the hands of different people. Now, what is the price for using that power? Pressing the red button, so to speak, won't take much out of them. It is rather the consequences of using it that keeps people at bay (devastation, indiscriminate effect, repercussions from other powers).

It is far from a perfect analogy, but I still think it has some merit.

Uh-huh, like I said more than one of the uber characters in Malazan probably *could* cause such devastation...the question is, who would be so crazy? Likewise irl if you A-bombed someone, it's not something to do so lightly and they would bomb you back.

Why, it would take some sort of insane megalomanical fiend! *giggles*

It would simply be easier to hire Apsalar or some such rather than to pull out "the big guns" magically speaking. The convergance factor would also screw you up big time.

For what it's worth, Erikson has said in interviews that if you don't like über-powerful characters, his world is probably not for you.

Agreed.

[Cuchulain]

A small off-topic question about the expression 'shaved knuckle in the hole'. I vaguely remember Erikson explaining the origin of this expression somewhere in GotM. Does anyone remember the explanation or passage?

[Veilside]

A small off-topic question about the expression 'shaved knuckle in the hole'. I vaguely remember Erikson explaining the origin of this expression somewhere in GotM. Does anyone remember the explanation or passage?

Something along the line of "knuckles" being a popular gambling game and some gamblers having shaved knuckles they use to cheat the other players.

[Cuchulain]

I see, thanks.

[Mme Erzulie]

I'm pretty sure he's just saying that to avoid the stigma attached to being a fister. Everyone knows it's easier if you shave your knuckles. Less friction.

[pat5150]

For fans of the series, I posted three additional Komarck sketches from the Subpress limited edition of GotM on the blog.

Enjoy!

[Gigei]

kalam and quick ben in the first pic? Sweet.

o0o0o0o Rake's red dragon girlfriend!

[Joanna vander Poele]

Hope you don't mind me saying so Pat, but the second picture seems rather... well, improper. Who knew Tool was so freaky. We should all be looking out for Toc the Younger... :blush:

[Gigei]

I wasn't going to mention it but that second cover looked like some kind of undead porn gone wrong.

[Larry.]

I decided to write a short, theme-heavy review of it for my blog. I found it to be mostly satisfying and hopefully this review will address issues that haven't been covered much already.

[Gormenghast]

Well, not too short.

I had to skip most of the central part to avoid spoilers (I'm only at the second book read and halfway through the novellas), but I got what I was curious about: a different perspective.

Every review about the book seems to describe a completely different reaction. Since what I like the most is the thematic developments and the subtleties in the writing I think I can expect to enjoy the next books and, hopefully, even a worthy, not washed out conclusion to a so long series.