First Law vs. Prince of Nothing

[Rhadamanth]

I thought Cil-Aujas was a source for nimil, which would be one reason to build a city there. It could also be something built for reasons that weren't really logical, witness the pyramids and any skyscraper not in a large city. Perhaps they just wanted to prove they could. Plus, there were mentions of a central screw and other things like that which would be some engineering for you.

Also, the Nonmen has a culture, which we catch glimpses of in the four books. I'm guessing we will see more as the books continue. They also had languages, one of which the Gnosis is based on as well as all the sorcerous tongues, if more debased versions.

Oh yeah, they had plenty of water, the mansion where Kellhus meets Moenghus had a great big waterfall It doesn't seem that far off to imagine them being able to find ways to get food quickly. If you are looking for a good reason to build underground, at least the mansions not under mountains like Cil-Aujas, then try climate control. People build houses underground now to save energy because the ground remains a nice temperature unless you are at really high latitudes.

Heh, ramming would be one way to kill a dragon.

[Shryke]

Tolkiens Dwarves were not minimally developed. They had a language, a culture and everything that one would need to believe in them. They are far more developed than the Non-Men. As for not having magic to create their underground kingdoms, they didn't need it. Its this little thing called engineering, which they used to great effect.

What culture? They lived in holes, loved gold.

[kuenjato]

I love how off-topic this thread has veered, in part because I referenced one random aspect of Bakker's timeline which was then dismissed by someone who, by appearences, hadn't read any aspect of said timeline or perhaps the books themselves, given the general ambiguity of the arguments that followed (though the substance of said dismissal was well-stated, I must admit).

To attempt to get this thread (somewhat) on track:

I love world-building, the more thought-out the better. I haven't read First Law yet. Is the lack of a developed world a hinderance in reading First Law (do plot holes emerge or do the competing cultures feel like bland variations of Western Civ. POV), and/or do the other elements make up for it? I'm thinking about starting the trilogy this winter, though it's a toss up between it and J.V. Jones' series.

[Shryke]

The World-Building is fairly minimal. It's enough to get the point across, but it doesn't seem all that deep. But because of the way the books written, very focused on the characters, it doesn't really hinder the story at all.

[Max the Mostly Mediocre]

I'm thinking about starting the trilogy this winter, though it's a toss up between it and J.V. Jones' series.

First Law, definitely. It's not my favorite or anything, but it's substantially superior to Jones' stuff, which is average at best.

[Spring Bass]

I love world-building, the more thought-out the better. I haven't read First Law yet. Is the lack of a developed world a hinderance in reading First Law (do plot holes emerge or do the competing cultures feel like bland variations of Western Civ. POV), and/or do the other elements make up for it? I'm thinking about starting the trilogy this winter, though it's a toss up between it and J.V. Jones' series.

As Shryke mentioned, it's very focused on the characters, so you don't really notice the general shallowness of most of the world-building. None of the civilizations have any real Earth equivalents (although you get vibes of the Roman Empire in the shattered Empire in the story, and Adua strikes me as an equivalent to some type of late 16th century/early 17th century London sans guns (and with an Inquisition-equivalent, and little signs of a religion)), but they're generally consistent for a back-drop.

[Bastard of Godsgrace]

Tolkein's world has big hole in its mythology - how on middle earth did Eärendil slay Ancalagon the Black? Sure he had a magical flying ship, but unless he had cannons, there is no way he could have taken Ancalagon out.

I have always imagined Earendil attacked Ancalagon's wings (batlike, yes?), and when he made enough holes in them, the dragon just fell to the earth.

[WrathOfTinyKittens]

The depopulation point is a good one; I admit the No-Men history is less lame than I thought it was. It is still lame though. Not to get too technical but:

There is a reason, until recently, that people lived by their food sources, and/or near water. You can't transport food more than seven days journey by ox(bullocks). After that amount of time, the bullocks eat their maximum pulling weight in grain. Bullocks also can't transport all that much grain, so the No-Men would have a huge number of them pulling grain loads at the same time. Of course, any disease that affected cattle would have wiped out their ability to get food. It's actually a more complicated problem, since you could have the bullocks graze along the way, taking more time but using less food. This would probably be a worse solution, since whatever mountain pasture that existed near the road would get eaten in a hurry. In past history on Earth, people relied on water transportation to move food across long distances, not bullocks and carts. It is hard to get to a city underneath a mountain by boat. I can only assume the No-Men had magical transportation never mentioned.

Big hole in your argument here being that people actually did ship grain using wagons for distances greater than that. How on earth to get around this problem? Hmm. How about grass? You know, the plants that grow in abundance all over the world and provide natural and sufficient forage for oxen and cattle?

Granted, if you fed your bullocks on grain, they'd eat their pulling weight pretty quickly. But you can easily feed them entirely on grass and scrub, or half-and-half. Not only is that perfectly sensical and historically accurate, it's actually what is done today on ranches, at least where I'm from. It's only in feedyards that cattle are fed cake and grain exclusively, and the purpose there is to make them fat. Oxen and such bred to work wouldn't need that much grain, especially in the pre-modern era when animals tended to be smaller and more adapted to eating only forage anyway.

Sounds to me like you're the one who doesn't know a lot about agriculture.

Living underground is lame. Natural caves are usually very small (in diameter), and have air quality issues. There are significant engineering issues with making huge, artificial caves that don't cave in, with a lot of people constantly breathing air. The caves would have to have some sort of illumination as well. Now magic might solve some of these issues. However, I would like to point out that we on earth have the ability to construct caves that we can live in, and transport food to those caves, and yet everyone seems to not want to do that.

Nonmen are not human.

Nonmen have incredible magical abilities and endless slave labor with which to construct their subterranean keeps, and at least in Cil-Aujis, there is a giant screw that allows air in and out.

See a main feature of No-Men civilization is that they live underground, and away from food. Why do they do that? If Bakker ever explains how they were able to live that way and why, then the No-Men will be cool. If not they will stay lame.

Why do you assume they live far from food? We know nothing about Ishterebinth, Cil-Aujas is located in a forest, which could easily have been cultivated while the Mansion was inhabited, and people still live near the Shimeh Mansion, where there is an ocean, a river, and fertile flatland.

-----

As to the comparison, I find PoN much more enjoyable than FL. I enjoyed them both, don't get me wrong, but FL's world just felt shallow and unworkable. Especially when considering distances and travel times. People seem to just appear in one place from another with very little time elapsed, and communications are incredibly fast, considering technology. In fact, they're unbelievably fast. There's no explanation given for this, and though Abercrombie tries, it just jarred me.

[Shryke]

I don't remember communications in FL being all that fast. They just seem that way because generally the narrative doesn't dwell on the time in between important moments. Sometimes months can go by between 2 POVs.

[Arthmail]

What culture? They lived in holes, loved gold.

Riiight.

[Red Wedding Participant]

Bingo. You're talking about my idea of dark and gritty ("Imagine! We had to sleep at a 3 star hotel!") with a war victim's idea of dark and gritty (see: Darfur, etc).

Not comparable.

I mean, one author just says "fuck" a lot; while the other starts off the first chapter with a description of homosexual rape of a minor, IIRC. And then goes into aliens possessing bodies who go around raping people.

If I may ask, which one is which (the Internet has been less than helpful in figuring this out)? Thanks a lot.

Also sorry for ressurecting this thing.

[Sci-2]

First Law: Lots of "Fuck"

Prince of Nothing: Rape depictions from the get go.

[sologdin]

PoN - lotsa black seminal fluid.

tFL - first chapter features a literal cliffhanger

[Francis Buck]

I still haven't read the First Law, but this thread made me really want to get it. But in regards to the Prince of Nothing...

*SPOILERS*

I'm honestly just kind of neutral towards it. It's certainly not horrible, but there are a lot of very noticeable flaws that make it more difficult to enjoy than a book should be (especially a fantasy). For one, I agree that very few of the characters are truly likable. Now, this doesn't mean they aren't interesting. But it does mean that I really couldn't care less what happens to them. The only time I was actually pissed that characters died was Cnaiur and Conphas, and even then it was only because, aside from Kellhus, I never found the other characters particularly interesting. Achamain, for me, is mostly a chore to read. He's constantly moping, constantly going over the same angsty shit in his head. And then we have passages of two to three pages where nothing really happens except for him...thinking. Sure, he's philosophizing. But it's not particularly interesting when it happens all the time. Dialogue is almost always more interesting than internal thought in my opinion, and so it's annoying when virtually every other chapter will often go at least a page or two without any speaking. The pacing in general is just kinda shitty more often than not (though I admit that Bakker is getting much better with it as time goes on). Not to mention the really poorly-handled "exposition dumps" where he basically straight-up force feeds the audience information about the Holy War and whatever else, which to me simply screams clunky, dull writing.

The world-building, while good, to me feels a little "hollow". Certain aspects I honestly think are kinda brilliant: the Inchoroi, the Dunyain, the magic system, the whole idea of Heaven and Hell being real, the role of Kellhus in all of it...to me these things are what make the series worth reading in the first place. But at the same time, the details of the world itself seem arbitrary and surface-level. It doesn't feel like a world that was "lived in", so to speak.

Also - and I've said this before in previous threads - I don't think Bakker realizes what his strengths are. To me, the three most interesting characters in the series so far (Cnaiur, Conphas, and Kellhus) no longer have POVs, while Achamian and Esmenet (who are the least interesting characters for me) are still front and center. I'm sure plenty of people may disagree with me on this, but it's just how I feel.

To Bakker's credit, he is definitely getting better with each book (I still haven't read White-Luck Warrior). I imagine that the final trilogy, with all of his accumulated experience, could be great. But, for me, the first trilogy is pretty lacking in many ways.

[jurble]

Also - and I've said this before in previous threads - I don't think Bakker realizes what his strengths are. To me, the three most interesting characters in the series so far (Cnaiur, Conphas, and Kellhus) no longer have POVs, while Achamian and Esmenet (who are the least interesting characters for me) are still front and center. I'm sure plenty of people may disagree with me on this, but it's just how I feel.

Nah, I think many people agree. Esmenet and Akka are kinda boring, because in the context of the books...they're normal. Cnaiur, Conphas and Kellhus are so interesting because they're so out-of-the-norm - two are crazy (megalomania and psychotic), and one is a superhuman.

TJE and TWLW do have Kelmomas for our crazy, but he just isn't crazy enough.

[Sci-2]

Going to have to disagree, Esmi (until WLW) and Akka are among my favorites. Mimara too.

Pacing I didn't have a problem with, but sometimes I think Bakker overplays his hand in terms of what beliefs make us do or what power conviction gives us over physical realities.

I agree that there is a lot of infodumping, or at least for me the battles and marches were things I read to get through them without paying much attention to what was going on. Minor characters who died meant nothing to me.

I've always liked the world building Bakker does, admittedly it isn't as detailed as Martin but then few are. Bakker gives us enough, IMO, for the story to work.

[Happy Ent]

Esmi, Prosha, Acka, Sorweel, Mimara: I love them all.

The Conph, Kelly, Xerius, Nayu, Kelmo are damn entertaining, but very gimicky. They don’t really exist.

[sologdin]

admittedly it isn't as detailed as Martin

depends on what aspects of the setting are in focus. martin has religion, but no theology; supernaturalism with no explanation; intimations of long history preserved as vague myth rather than precise chronicle, and book-learned folks without specific presentation of the actual book-learning--all contrary to the much different presentation in RSB. on this scorecard, martin writes for literate persons who prefer to watch television, whereas RSB writes for literate persons who prefer to read non-fiction.

[Happy Ent]

I've always liked the world building Bakker does, admittedly it isn't as detailed as Martin but then few are.

That’s the insanest thing you’ve ever written, sciborg. We’re lauding Martin for world buildling now? When did that happen? All he has is heraldry and family trees.

[Sci-2]

Martin, to me, makes the world present in sometimes surprisingly little detail. References to history - immediate and ancient - from different POVs, better feel for the cultures involved though admittedly part of that seems reliant on stereotypes.

Bakker has given us more metaphysics, but the actual cultures feel less fleshed out. I have vague recollections of the Ainoi (sp?), Nansur and other cultures I can't spell, but it's hard for me to remember the exact details. Ainoi use face masks and speak sideways? Nansur are great deceivers? There's that barbarian culture that has lots of tough guys?

Martin's world feels more real, even the cultures just introduced in Dance.

=-=-=

ETA:

depends on what aspects of the setting are in focus. martin has religion, but no theology; supernaturalism with no explanation; intimations of long history preserved as vague myth rather than precise chronicle, and book-learned folks without specific presentation of the actual book-learning--all contrary to the much different presentation in RSB. on this scorecard, martin writes for literate persons who prefer to watch television, whereas RSB writes for literate persons who prefer to read non-fiction.

Not seeing the religion vs. theology bit Solo, not the television vs non-fiction bit.