#i love dwarves but i'm a magic nerd so it's not the same

[fortcliffe]

there’s the da character creation and there’s me, a clown.

[elenajohansenreads]

Books I Read in 2021

#83 - Shadowmarch, by Tad Williams

Mount TBR: 69/100

Beat the Backlist Bingo: Cover features your favorite color prominently

Rating: 1/5 stars

Well, that was a slog.

So I have a history with this piece of intellectual property. I was introduced to Williams as an author in college (1998) because several of the friends I made my first year were big fantasy nerds--no surprise there--and I was perfectly ready to move on from my high-school-era love of less sophisticated fantasy authors. I borrowed The Dragonbone Chair from one of those friends and off I went.

So in 2001 when news about Williams writing an online serial went around, and I saw the $15 price tag...well, I was a perpetually almost-broke college student still, and sure I spent money on books, but that was a high gateway, because a) I didn't own my own computer yet, I was borrowing friends' or using the computer lab to write papers and such; and b) sure, a chunky fantasy novel might be $7 or $8 in paperback, but it was portable, easy to reread whenever, and nobody had tablets or smartphones or e-readers yet, so an online serial publication was definitely not portable. Even fifteen dollars seemed like too much for the inconvenience of a book I could only read sitting at a computer, and couldn't read all of at once.

I was genuinely angry about this shift away from the paradigm, and much like Williams vowing this serial was online only and would never be published traditionally (which I distinctly remember but don't actually have a source for) I too vowed that I would never read it.

I held out much longer than he did, if my memory of that claim is even true. But I'm wishing now that I hadn't bothered.

This is bad. Not even close to the level of quality I expect from Williams, based on the earlier Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn series, as well as War of the Flowers--which was weird but I enjoyed it--and the Otherland series, which was even weirder and not always good, but yeah, I still enjoyed that too, for the most part.

Who am I supposed to care about in this book? I'm no stranger to multiple protagonists, but there are simply too many here, meaning none of them get the development time they would need to be interesting. I'm trying to wean myself from the complaint that protagonists need to be "likable," because a character can be a jerk and still be interesting, but few of these protagonists are particularly likable either!

1. Barrick is a whiny jerk who folds under pressure and abdicates responsibility to his sister, and then makes a spectacularly bad decision for no reason other than to set up some tension at the end, and his future arc. If it's because he's "mad," bad plot reason, and if it's because he's affected by the more general shadow-madness, well, I guess he could be vulnerable to it like anyone else, but that's pretty flimsy too. 2. Briony is a fairly standard "if only I weren't a woman, people would take me seriously" princess who doesn't fold as much under pressure but is dealt a really raw deal. I'll give her credit, she does legitimately try her best to rule her lands, but she's also kind of a whiny jerk like her brother, too. 3. Quinnitan is...pointless. Sure, I see how the end of her arc in this book echoes those of the Eddon twins, but there is no direct connection between her plot and anyone else's. And I mean that literally, if there's anything that ties her story to any other single part of the book, I simply do not see it, it's buried in lore or foreshadowing that was lost on me amid the sheer weight of nearly 800 pages of plodding narrative. I read all of her scenes constantly wondering why I should care, and the fact that her arc is a very basic harem plot, "I don't want to be a token wife but really what choice do I have?" sort of thing, doesn't help, because on its own it's incredibly unoriginal. 4. Chert is marginally likable, because he's arguably got the most defined personality and most personal growth in the book, as a person of a "little" race who is distinctly not human--I get a mix of gnome and dwarf, with a faint whiff of Podling from The Dark Crystal--and who deals with an unexpected foundling by taking him into his family and trying to make it work, even when that foundling is really a big blank space in the story who still manages to get into trouble. 5. Captain Vansen gets points from me for being the guardsman deep in unrequited love, which is a trope I would absolutely eat up with a spoon. The problem is, the object of that love is a protagonist I don't care for (Briony,) leading me to question what the eff he's thinking that he can even admire her from a distance, let alone be in infatuation/love. And his plot arc is mostly "something goes wrong that's not really has fault but everyone blames him anyway." Which got dull.

Chert and Vansen are most of the reason this book gets a second star*, honestly. Chert's scenes with the Rooftoppers are generally pretty excellent, even if they're mostly tied to a plot arc that I don't care for.

The other thing that's getting me about this is that it feels like a deliberately grim-dark retread of Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn. You've got a castle that's the seat of current government but used to belong to the enemy--the enemy that no one is sure even exists anymore, that lives in a land far enough away to feel distant but also somehow close enough to be threatening, once people believe in them again. That castle is perched upon magically important ruins/caverns, and that enemy has forms of magic/communication that affect humans and can cause or appear symptomatic of madness. There's a race of small likable people who aren't quite dwarves or any other "standard" fantasy race, but are still somehow cute/appealing. There's a crippled prince who's not really well-liked. One of the primary female protagonists is a young woman who laments the limitations of her womanhood under the patriarchal feudal system of the world.

And to someone who's never read either of these series, that list of similarities could mostly read like fairly common fantasy tropes, and I forgive anyone who reads this review and thinks that. But I've read MSaT probably ten times all the way through in the twenty-plus years since I was introduced to it, and I feel like I've just been handed the same story again, with a thick coat of gray paint slathered on it and a few details changed--and those changes are basically always for the worse. No one in this story can be said to be a direct equivalent to Simon, who gets a very clear hero's journey, but if I'm supposed to slot Barrick in as a Simon/Josua mashup (that crippled prince problem) then it takes the entire book to get Barrick out of his comfort zone and on his journey, where Simon got booted from the castle at the end of the first act of the first book.

And that gets at the underlying problem that is at least partially fueling all other problems--this book is clearly just the first act of the larger story, and yes i know! that is what first books do! but this also doesn't have a lot of forward motion on its own, and it doesn't resolve anything aside from the mystery of a single murder at that happens near the beginning. Seriously, all other plot threads get kicked down the road with the "and now they're exiles" theme that the ending has assigned to most of the protagonists. Chert doesn't suffer that fate, but the ending of his story line--also the end of the book itself--is the foundling reasserting that he doesn't know who he is, which is not new information. We've literally not known who he is the whole time, except that we do find out who his mother is, but don't find out how he was taken or why he apparently hasn't aged as much as he should have or what the Qar intended by sending him back "home." The identity of his mother is basically the least important question surrounding him.

I truly feel like I just read a 750-page prologue, and that is not a good feeling.

*Yeah, I told myself this was a two-star book, but by the time I wrote the whole review, it's not and I can't pretend I still believe that. This is a one-star book. This is so bad I don't want to go on with the series, even though it almost has to get better, now that most of our protagonists are out on their journeys. And because it could hardly get worse, right? But this already took up so much of my time (I had to take a week-long break in the middle to binge some romances, as a relief from all this grimdark toil) and even though I've managed to collect secondhand copies of the rest of the series, and they've been sitting on my shelves for a few years waiting for me to invest my energy into them...I'm giving up. Not worth it.

[rosiewitchescottage]

I'll agree with you here.

These 'reimaginings' are getting mind numbingly boring. Because at heart they are all the same.

You can predict far too easily what characters are going to do. And sometimes we want to be surprised!

Now, my hubby is an old fashioned, 'our if the 60s' Tolkein Nerd'. There are few questions I've asked about this world that he's been unable to answer.

From what he tells me. Galadriel, in battle with those of her own kind, would likely have had to fight with weapons, because being of equal power, they'd be firing magic at each other with no effect.

So, OK. I see where that's coming from. But I want to know that I'm still getting Tolkein's Galadriel.

No one needs to try to make her 'strong' and powerful. She already is.

Then they put Hobbits in. Well, firstly they wouldn't have been around at this time.

And secondly. The only way we can learn more about Hobbits is by what went on after the events of LotR.

But we've already heard plenty about them, and dwarves too. 6 movies worth. Enough, already!

Elves, fair enough. We've only tickled the surface with them. But what the heck have they done with Elrond? 😲

And as for Sauron. He makes me think of Uriah Heap, who admittedly is a nasty bit of work. But a master of evil and servant of Melkor? I don't think so.

What I'd love to see. And if we do, then that'll be great. Is where Sauron lies to and manipulates the Easterlings and Southrons, turning them against Gondor and Rohan.

Of course he wouldn't want all the races of men to be supportive of one another. And together be supportive of other peoples.

What a story that could be. Apparently info is thin on the ground. But I'm sure a Tolkein scholar worth the name could piece a narrative together.

Casually following Amazon’s Rings of Power debacle as it unfolds like a train wreck in slow motion.

This morning I came across a video of Galadriel in full armor charging into battle and was reminded yet again of every other Hollywood attempt to infuse 98% of modern media with The Message.

The buzzwords are all present in the features and marketing material; “reimagining”, “for a new generation”, etc. As if “reimagining” is an imperative of some kind or what the legion of Tolkien fans of any generation have been clamoring for.

The hubris required to do what they’re trying to do to Tolkien is on a level of its own. I’ve never seen a corporate machine attack such a beloved work of fiction so openly with such ignorance of it and disdain for it.

The whole mess reveals how creatively bankrupt and narrow-minded the talent placed in control of corporate mass-entertainment really is.

Tolkien’s women could be heroic, majestic and feminine. When you see the mistake repeated over and over again with poorly written heroines in modern films it becomes evident that femininity is the “problem” the apparatchik anti-creatives have.

Intersectional dogma conflates femininity with weakness.

A female hero has to ape a male in all respects or it’s not good enough despite achieving the same ends using the same legitimate virtues.

When show runners and writers attempt to mash women into a male archetype the character almost always ends up being a boorish and off-putting caricature of an insecure man.

Ideological rails prevent the anti-creative from understanding why their “strong female” characters do not resonate with audiences.

They don’t know how to write strong female leads and have absolutely no desire to learn or understand the composition of one.

We then end up with the tantrums in the press lashing out at the prefab enemies already prepared for rhetorical denunciation within their dogma on the failure of their project; patriarchy, toxic males, white males, sexism, racism, etc.

[rainydawgradioblog]

Covers vs Originals Vol #1

Ah covers, from the greats like "The Man who Sold the World", to the hellscape of Kidz Bop, or even whatever Weezer's Teal Album was going for, covers are part of the cultural canon. Today, I'm going to stack up some of my favorite covers with their original counterparts, and have them wrestle it out.

1. "All Along the Watchtower" by Bob Dylan and Jimi Hendrix

Surprising almost no one, Hendrix always takes the cake. While Dylan's iconic nasally vocals and harmonica are amazing on their own, they crumble when stacked against the soaring guitars of Hendrix. Ask any Seattlelite, and you'll get the same answer 9 times out of 10.

2. "Tainted Love" by Gloria Jones and Soft Cell

Okay, I know, controversial opinion. I seethe at the idea that almost everyone knows the cover and not the original, even if the cover is a certified banger. Gloria Jones' 1965 song went mostly unknown, as a B-side to the single "My Bad Boy’s Comin' Home", a massive commercial flop. But even when covered by two British synth pop nerds, her magnum opus still hasn't been given the respect it deserves. Take this as a wake up call, go listen to the original and form your own opinion.

3. "Borderline" by Madonna and The Flaming Lips ft. Stardeath and White Dwarves

If not for my Astronomy 101 course, I wouldn't have found out about this cover (shoutout Dr. O!). I watch the video religiously, the two bands have a sublime jam session in an abandoned warehouse as frontman Wayne Coyne runs around like a madman, banging a gong and getting lost in the piece of art the collective of musicians created. Pure magic.

4. "Fly Me to the Moon" by Frank Sinatra and Yoko Takahashi

Evangelion fans rejoice! This cover made for the anime, even to a non-fan like myself, is absolutely wonderful, and shows the culturally transcendent nature in music. I can't help but smile when Takahashi says "fry" instead of fly in the first line of the song, and then speaks perfect English for the rest of the recording. It's a fun quirk that can't even bother me, since the cover is THAT good.

5. "True Love Will Find You in the End" by Daniel Johnston and Wilco

Wilco my beloved, you just can't outdo the perfection of the original Johnston version. Johnston's raspy, unsure vocals and strings meshes perfectly with a polished studio recording. This hybrid of outsider and indie create a haunting masterpiece, with nothing else quite like it, both tooth-achingly-sweet and heart-wrenching.

That's all for now folks! Hopefully I can make another edition of this, but if I don't, here's a playlist of my favorite covers and their originals, so you can form your own hot takes at home!

-Sommer Holloway (she/her)

[helloturtlebutter]

You bring up some good points!

And I agree that being an extremist isn't necessarily a bad thing especially when it comes to equal rights (to mages and elves in this case). But I believe Solas was kind of stupid the way he handled it.

Leliana, for instances, share much of the same views, if not even *more* extreme views as she also wants mages, elves, dwarves (and I believe qunari?) to be allowed in chantry ranks in they want to be. She wants mages to be free and she wants better lives for elves, more rights.

But Leliana doesn't have a complex, she doesn't act like she knows better than everyone and she treats all classes and races with respect unless the individuals are assholes.

Solas is still trapped in his time, he looks down at everyone as if they were peons.

And I totally understand wanting to "undo their deaths" especially if its by time magic and you're not actively causing the deaths of millions, I get that and in some ways I would support that.

But he doesn't treat people in the now with the respect they deserve. It was a poor choice of words on my part to say he doesn't care, it's very clear he cares about the dalish and alienage elves, so much so it makes him angry.

Here he is with a world of knowledge to give these elves and they sometimes hate him for it. I'm sure he feels like the proverbial man "leading a horse to water but can't make it drink" and that makes him bitter. And you can really see this when he's with Sera, trying to coax out her "true elf" or whatever.

But people, like Sera, don't want or need it. He makes me think of a parent trying to force his kids into being something they're not. "That's not my dream, dad, thats *you're* dream!"

At some point he needs to realize, as powerful as he is, he can't and shouldn't force the world to go in the direction he wants. When your kids grow up you need to let them go.

Personally, I think if (aside from wanting to bring back all who died unjustly, that's super understandable and I don't blame him for that) he wants people, elves, to know the truth he could have used the Inquisition's resources!

Yeah the dalish probably didn't believe him when he was just some wandering hobo but with the Inquisition on his side he could have gotten the truth out there, I'm just saying there's a lot of other ways he could have handled some of his issues.

And I also want to thank you for the polite discussion! I usually hate having debates since they get so heated but I love talking about nerd stuff.

Autistic Cole for the win!!!! (I also headcanon Sera as autistic, she's just so much like my sister it's uncanny)

My friend just began playing Dragon Age and is romancing Solas 🙃