N.K. Jemisin, The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms

[The Evil Hat]

That quote's...wow. I mean, I'm still generally interested, but that's hardly encouraging.

I've got an interview with N.K. Jemisin HERE. Lots of talk about gender and race in genre, her books, videogames and a whole lot more.

It's generally a good interview, but there was one thing that really bugged me. In the question on best of lists/gender, she seems to say something along the lines of: I used to limit my reading by only reading male authors, which's bad because you shouldn't chose books based on something that arbitrary. Okay, I'm on board so far. And then she says that, because she's realized this, she (almost) only reads female authors. What?

[aidan]

That quote's...wow. I mean, I'm still generally interested, but that's hardly encouraging.

It's generally a good interview, but there was one thing that really bugged me. In the question on best of lists/gender, she seems to say something along the lines of: I used to limit my reading by only reading male authors, which's bad because you shouldn't chose books based on something that arbitrary. Okay, I'm on board so far. And then she says that, because she's realized this, she (almost) only reads female authors. What?

Yeah, that was an avenue I would have liked to pursue, but didn't want the interview to devolve into an endless discussion of gender issues. As I said in my interview, I have rather opposite views on consciously guiding your reading habits one way or the other, rather than just naturally picking up books that interest you.

[The Evil Hat]

I agree with not choosing books based on some scale of worth higher than your own interests (such as what someone else said), but it still pays to be aware of whatever pointless limitations you have on yourself that you don't even realize, such as the gender thing could (potentially) be. Not that you have to go out and buy fifty books of the opposite gender to compensate, but you should be aware of it. After all, if there's no good reason (and there likely isn't) you've just found a ton of new books to explore. And...that's the end of my tangent.

[aidan]

Agreed.

[Renasko]

And then she says that, because she's realized this, she (almost) only reads female authors. What?

Not surprised. Her editor apparently 'gushed' when she first read the book. It's definitely orientated towards female SFF fans, I feel. She sees herself as the main character, which makes you ponder some things that you'd rather not.

[Bastard of Godsgrace]

Not surprised. Her editor apparently 'gushed' when she first read the book. It's definitely orientated towards female SFF fans, I feel. She sees herself as the main character, which makes you ponder some things that you'd rather not.

Yes, definitely. I wanted to like it, and I admit it starts promisingly, but the heroine is very obviously authorial self-insert, and the whole thing reads as a wish-fulfillment story, pure and simple.

[Renasko]

The funny thing is, if you want to look at the main character, you could challenge whether she's a good example of feminism in fantasy or not. I'd say she's not. She's in an influential role, on the same standing as males, and indeed in her former land she was the leader, while the males were oppressed and pushed into menial roles. Though there are a couple of incidents that soured this, though I can't quite make my mind up about this one:

When she's finishing her last 'passage' into adult society in her culture, she's faced off with the strongest male warrior, who she then allows to have her way with her. In Goodkind-esque style, she 'puts of a good show', that reminds me of Kahlan Amnell. She reels the male in through sex, and stabs him in the head with a concealed shard of stone.

There are more moments where she is found weak, than a strong independent woman. I'd put that down as a half and half. What truly clinched it, though, was the soppy mess she became with Nahadoth, her Sky-God Lover, as this book rightly should have been named, and can barely keep herself off him.

He lifted his eyes, and suddenly I knew he was remembering the time I had stabbed him. I have waited so long for you, he had said then. This time, instead of kissing me, he reached out and touched my lips with his fingers. I felt warm, wetness and reflexively licked, tasting cool skin and the metallic salt of his blood.

He smiled, his expression almost fond. "Do you like the taste?"

***

Not of your blood, no.

But your finger was another matter.

Gag now. I'm sure there's a bit that he almost bites her on the neck, as well. *eye roll*

And the sex scenes that follow accordingly are just awful. Predictable tosh through-out.

I did like Sieh, though, the child God.

[Bellis]

OK, I devoured it last night, while waiting for NBC to show the top group of ice dancers.

Devoured is an odd word choice. I didn't think it was quite as bad as Ser Renasko, but I was quite disturbed by the sex scenes. But I wasn't sure whether her absolute weakness around the god-figure was meant to be disturbing in the context of the story. In any case, there was a supernatural explanation. In fact, while the book was distressing to read, in the end, it all sort of made sense. The goddess is both a destroyer and creator after all.

I don't know whether I'd rush out and buy the next couple. She has an interesting world, but I'm not as enamored of her storytelling style, and there's something not quite coherent about her characters.

[The Evil Hat]

Ser Renasko, could you use spoiler tags, please? I haven't read it, and I don't think a few other people here have either.

[Larry.]

Hrmmm...these comments, good and bad alike, are going to be helpful, as I just got word I'll be interviewing Jemisin for the Nebula Awards blog. If any of you want to suggest questions, feel free, although much of the interview will deal with her short fiction, I suspect.

[Calibandar]

Wow, those sex quotes are awful. I read the first 3 chapters on the author's site and had no idea something like this was coming. I may have given the book a pass had I known this. I'm sure I'll be able to skip that sort of shit in favour of better sequences, provided there aren't that many of them. Still, I'm surprised so many of the bloggers/advance reviewers didn't even mention this. I understand this is part and parcel for much of the paranormal "Dark Fantasy" genre, but I would have expected someone to remark on this at least for this sort of book.

[aidan]

It really just wasn't a deal breaker, certainly not something that affected my opinion of the book enough to mention it in the review. It's just a short scene, and the lurid prose sort of makes sense in the context of the story. I read it, and moved on; I expect it was the same for other reviewers.

[beniowa]

Really, I'm surprised about the reaction to a sex scene taken out of context. Have we all forgotten about the fat, pink mast? The scene sounds bad, but I'm still going to read the book and judge for myself.

[Myrddin]

Ok, so is this like Elizabeth Haydon where Rhapsody got all kinds of praise and then people will turn around and slam her after books 2 and 3 come out?

I'm finally getting caught up on my reading list, so this will be one of the first "debuts" I'll have read about when the author debuts. Worth it?

[Renasko]

Give it a read, guys. Not like it takes long. I'm very interested in seeing what the reactions will be, though as ever I am a pessimist.

[Tom the Merciful]

Didn't like it much. It was fun and quick read, but in the end I found it lacking on many points.

Pathetic sexual fantasies didn't help.

I liked writing, especially in the first half and I must admit that the ending was not bad.

Not entirely bad, but nothing to recommend, IMHO.

[MattD]

Finished this last night. Decent but not great. Honestly some of the superlatives and descriptions being thrown around about it strike me as being as close to factually untrue as is possible for subjective judgments.

Almost finished with this one. I'm finding it an enjoyable enough read. Little baffled by the level of strong praise, though.

How does everyone feel this compares to other works currently out there? I can't help but make comparisons, like with Trudi Canavan's Age of the Five trilogy, which just doesn't cut it, as far as 'book of the year' goes. :/

This is an interesting way of discussing the book. I thought, for example, that in terms of the "woman trying to remember her own story" method of narrative, it was less accomplished than J.M. McDermott's debut Last Dragon from a few years ago; in terms of portraying a "barbarian"'s entry into an exotic culture, a seat of empire, it was less interesting in terms of description, character, and cultural anthropology than Martha Wells's Wheel of the Infinite; in terms of portraying a living god and romance between them and mortals, it wasn't noticeably superior to Judith Tarr's Avaryan books. (And all of the above also do interesting things with race, gender, and empire. Anecdotally, David Anthony Durham's Acacia and The Other Lands are next in my TBR pile.)

This isn't to say Jemisin's novel is an actively bad book, but it was to me essentially uninteresting: the characters didn't think interesting thoughts, make interesting choices, or voice any interesting insights, human or otherwise. The second volume seems like it will be even worse in this regard, so I will probably pass.

[Tom the Merciful]

Now that you mentioned it, it does remind me of Acacia, somehow. Not bad, but also not as good as some reviews point out.

Recent discussion in blogosphere comes to mind. After Speculative Scotsman's negative review of hyped Right Hand of God, it turned out that some of the bloggers (and authors) are not as independent as we would like them to be. But that's another discussion and Hundred Thousand Kingdom is far from being outright bad.

[Renasko]

Anecdotally, David Anthony Durham's Acacia and The Other Lands are next in my TBR pile.)

I'd be interested in hearing how you feel this compares to Acacia, as well. I wasn't totally impressed with Acacia, and found the praise aimed at hugely generous.

Recent discussion in blogosphere comes to mind. After Speculative Scotsman's negative review of hyped Right Hand of God, it turned out that some of the bloggers (and authors) are not as independent as we would like them to be.

Everyone has something to gain.

[kcf]

Recent discussion in blogosphere comes to mind. After Speculative Scotsman's negative review of hyped Right Hand of God, it turned out that some of the bloggers (and authors) are not as independent as we would like them to be.

Would you care to expand on this? I'm not sure I follow you - I've basically only seen negative reviews of The Right Hand of God - the hype seems to be coming from the publisher pushing it really hard to a general audience that isn't all that familiar with SFF (the whole thing smells to me like some editor/publicist who never reads SFF picked up and said 'hey this is awesome, everyone will love it' when in reality the book is highly derivative and not really a great example of SFF.