Everywhere kings and thieves...
Finally read the latest Megan Whalen Turner instalment, A Conspiracy of Kings. I don't know if it's because there's a little more distance between this book and the others for me, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I expected. Some of the niggling issues I have with the politics of the series were more present here, I think? Such as the whole moral about how Of Course Kings Are More Awesome Than Everyone, Just Because. I guess it always helps that in fantasy you can have your kings verifiably god-ordained... And then there was the whole thing about how bloodless negotiations are for the weak and if you really want to rule properly you'll murder in cold blood without trial or warning, and be willing to let someone fester in a cramped, freezing cell indefinitely because they lied to you in service to the person you already knew they were loyal to. And these are the good guys.
I'm not sure if this is overthinking the text or expecting too much of a series aimed at a young adult audience. I overlooked it previously, because it's plainly not the point, but this time... eh. I guess I'm used to a more balanced take on the demands of kingship and monarchy on a person, and vice versa. To the notion that summary executions are bad, and not implicitly approved by the narrative? I suspect Pratchett and Vimes have ruined me forever to rose-tinted perspectives on the inviolable glory of royalty.
All that said, it was nice to see more of Sophos. Everyone's incessant focus on Gen was getting on my nerves a little. I never quite liked him as much as I was supposed to, I think. And no Costis? Not even a passing mention? Hardly any Attolia?
Maybe I'll try it again when I'm more in the mood.
Also saw Robin Hood. Was more or less the fluff it promised to be, but did impress in a few points, such as showing Richard with metaphorical dirt intact (hello, slaughter at Acre!) and casting a Marion who had the gravitas to go toe-to-toe with Robin. Does every Hollywood historical epic have to include a staggeringly ahistoric speech about Liberty And Freedom For All, though?
I would have liked to have seen Robin really stick to his early-ballad roots and be a roving bandit thief who kept all his spoils. There's an interesting origin story for you...
I'm not sure if this is overthinking the text or expecting too much of a series aimed at a young adult audience. I overlooked it previously, because it's plainly not the point, but this time... eh. I guess I'm used to a more balanced take on the demands of kingship and monarchy on a person, and vice versa. To the notion that summary executions are bad, and not implicitly approved by the narrative? I suspect Pratchett and Vimes have ruined me forever to rose-tinted perspectives on the inviolable glory of royalty.
All that said, it was nice to see more of Sophos. Everyone's incessant focus on Gen was getting on my nerves a little. I never quite liked him as much as I was supposed to, I think. And no Costis? Not even a passing mention? Hardly any Attolia?
Maybe I'll try it again when I'm more in the mood.
Also saw Robin Hood. Was more or less the fluff it promised to be, but did impress in a few points, such as showing Richard with metaphorical dirt intact (hello, slaughter at Acre!) and casting a Marion who had the gravitas to go toe-to-toe with Robin. Does every Hollywood historical epic have to include a staggeringly ahistoric speech about Liberty And Freedom For All, though?
I would have liked to have seen Robin really stick to his early-ballad roots and be a roving bandit thief who kept all his spoils. There's an interesting origin story for you...