Reply With QuoteEnjoyed it too but I didn't really consider it depressing outside of Bayaz not being dead. I think Ferro will take care of that later, she just has some higher priorities at the moment.
Glokta was definitely the high point of the books.
Since the other First Law/Joe Abercrombie thread is only partially marked as spoilers, I thought we should have a dedicated spoiler thread for the 3rd book: Last Argument of Kings.
SPOILERS!!!!! ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK !!!!!
I just finished Last Argument of Kings and I thought it was extremely good, although damn depressing. Often fantasy literature tries to feed the reader a light uplifting experience or at least the vicarious sense of heroism and good deeds being rewarded. The First Law series pissed all over that convention, but told a pretty damn interesting story in the process.
The book contained a lot more eventful substance than I expected. The subject matter I was expecting (Jezal as King, Logren victorious in the North) happened in the first half of the book and then the book had a lengthy second act I wasn't expecting. The Glotka plotline was IMO the best of the series. The Logren stuff would have seemed like a retcon except I realize now that the first book's portrayal of Logren was deceptive. Self-deceptive to be accurate. We started the first book with Logren in media res as he tried to be a better man and it wasn't clear to the reader how much better he needed to be. The third book made that clear. The Bayaz stuff was truly great. The gradual reveal of his true thoughts on humanity ("cattle") and his involvement in all the various nastiness was well done, if expected.
I do have some nits to pick. The world building was interesting in places but thin in others, and some points of view were given short shrift (West, near the end, and Ferro). Also, some of the pacing was very jumpy, and the big confrontation between Bayaz and Mamun's group could have used a bit more buildup. Also, there was some left field stuff (Tolomei) but clearly Abercrombie has left himself room for additional books in that world.
Overall, a strong, refreshing, bitter, depressing and yet satisfying conclusion to the trilogy. Not perfect, but better than most recent fantasy by a mile IMO.
I'm curious where Abercrombie goes next. I hope he doesn't do anything too tightly connected to the narrative in this series but instead branches out somewhat.
Enjoyed it too but I didn't really consider it depressing outside of Bayaz not being dead. I think Ferro will take care of that later, she just has some higher priorities at the moment.
Glokta was definitely the high point of the books.
Yeah, I was particularly disappointed by how West was given short shrift at the book's end, considering how important a role he played. He was arguably the only really "good" character in the book, despite his murder of the Prince. That said, I don't remember if he was actually dead at the end. People spoke of him as being on death's door, which makes me think he may reappear in future books.Originally Posted by Sharpe
Last edited by Ergo; 09-10-2008 at 05:02 PM.
Either way, I thought West's ending was completely unwarranted. It was the biggest point against the book's favour. The other stuff I sort of understand, and even like Logen's character reveal and ending.
But the West arc felt a little too much like Abercrombie writing dark for dark's sake. Taking West character into a territory so far gone for no other reason that to create some sort of parallel to Glokta. I would have no issue with the rest of the book being depressing if he offered that one spark of hope with West. At the very least, Jezal's relationship with the princess seems like it would be on an upswing.
Apologies if this pointed out in another thread - It would appear that the author is a massive game head to boot, and has written some very readable game reviews on his blog. www.joeabercrombie.com
Seems to enjoy PS3 titles mostly.
He likes MGS4. I really thought the man had better taste. :)
I really loved this series. The idea of a non-altruistic Gandalf was very appealing to me. I don't think I've read anything like that before.
One of the more interesting things is the way that each of the manipulative Magi used people. Bayaz used money, greed and power and Kalkhul (forgot the spelling) used religion. Each was able to manipulate whole countries with their choice.
Funk.
What I'm wondering is what Bayaz got out of it all. Building up an entire civilisation in order to do....what?
Play civilization, dur.
I kinda thought since Euz and Juvens built civilizations, Bayaz wanted to equal or surpass them in every way, and so he had to do the same.
Funk.
Bayaz' longterm goals may get more explanation in future books, but I do think his actions in this trilogy were explained reasonably. He had two major goals: amass the power to counter and defeat Khalul's agent Mamun, and the 100 words, which ended up requiring a combo of the Seed plus the Union military (if only to set the stage). And second: I think it was made clear that he enjoys power for power's sake. The use of the Seed, the combination of 3 disciplines into a new Art, the manipulation of politics, all seemed to get Bayaz off. Plus on top of all that, the use of the Seed and his new Art seemed to reinvigorate Bayaz (at the end his grey hair was being replaced by young dark hair). The overall theme here is that Bayaz, as a semi-immortal doesn't give much weight to the lives of ordinary humans, and that he enjoys the creation and use of power. On his scale, the concerns of ordinary people dont matter much at all.
In the short term, his manipulating makes perfect sense. A nation happens to be a weapon he needs to fight Khalil on even terms and he'll use whatever means he needs to get what he wants.
I'm wondering about the long term though. Dragging barbarian tribes out of the stone age and creating a kingdom from scratch sounds like a lot of work for a man who doesn't seem to care one bit about humanity.
Recall that the Maker set up his workshop in Adua. Glustrod had a city as well, supposedly more advanced than all. There were civilizations growing up around the three brothers already. Once they were all dead, all Bayaz did was use the pieces that were left for his own ends.
Funk.
Seconded. I loved how the series took a fairly typical epic fantasy premise, changed a few of the underlying assumptions (my favourite was also Bayaz - what Gandalf would have been had he been corrupted by the Ring, although Bayaz was rotten long before he picked up the Seed), and let things unfurl from there.
Glokta was also great. I spent the third book alternately thinking he was the coolest thing since sliced bread, and being utterly horrified.
This was a great series. I'm curious to see more of Khalul, given that it turns out he was right. The Hundred Words know that they're doing evil in order to achieve "good" (revenge for the murders). It's hardly novel, but it's an interesting take.
A buddy of mine and I used to argue about something very similar. He claimed that Gandalf was the most evil person in LoTR because he manipulated everyone into doing his work for him. I didn't agree.
However, someone like Bayaz is more like what he was talking about. A ruthless jerk who was using an entire kingdom for his own ends.
I find it curious. Did Khalul start the Gorkish kingdom so that he could use them to get vengance? Did this then force Bayaz to start the union to protect himself from Khalul? I would like more.
Funk.
First, it's LOGEN not Logren.
Second, I can't imagine how anybody could characterize West's murder of the prince as "evil." The man had it coming. West was just finally standing to the defense of the helpless like he felt he should have years ago on behalf of his sister to their father.
I really didn't care for the deus-ex crippling (possible killing?) of West at the end, but that's probably because the whole symptoms-of-nuclear-fallout just seemed a bit too Terry Brooks for my taste in an otherwise well crafted fantasy story.
It's not a trilogy I would recommend to the typical fantasy reader for all of the same reasons that I appreciated Abercrombie's work with them. I'm glad I picked them up based on recommendations around here: this is certainly fantasy work with the most "heft" that I've read in a long time.
West's death (and I'm positive it was a death, though I don't have the book in front of me) bugged me, but that was Abercrombie's intent- the one guy who more or less overcomes his inner asshole to Do Good dies pointlessly for no good reason.
It was also a great illustration of how much of a bastard Bayaz is. He may or may not have been able to slow/stop/deflect the disease, but he just didn't care enough about the deaths to try. The man just didn't give a shit.
It's a story that's really grown on me since the first book.
Here's the part where West collapses:
And that's the last we hear of West in the book. Remember that when Lord Marshall Burr first collapsed, the language used made it appear he was dead when he was, in fact, not (yet).West nodded, slowly. "Here's to the lucky few, then..." His eyes rolled back, he swayed, then slumped sideways. Jalenhorm was the first forward, catching him before he hit the ground. He flopped in the big man's arms, a long string of thin vomit splattering against the floor.
"Back to the palace!" snapped Kroy. "At once!"
Brint hurried to swing the doors open while Jalenhorm and Kroy steered West out of the room, draped between them with his arms over their shoulders. His limp shoes scraped against the floor, his piebald head lolling. Glokta watched them go, standing helpless, his toothless mouth half open, as if to speak. As if to wish his friend good luck, or good health, or a merry afternoon. None of them seem quite to fit the circumstance, however.
The doors clattered shut and Glokta was left staring at them. His eyelid flickered, he felt wet on his cheek.
So I wouldn't be too surprised to see West alive but forever crippled/weakened in a future title but I also wouldn't be too surprised to see him dead and gone either.
Posting Permissions