Reading roundup: Iorich and Lies of Locke Lamora
1. Steven Brust, Iorich -- so, finally, after two books and *checks tags* about seven years, I finally get some Morrolan. All three scenes of him. But damn if I didn't enjoy the hell out of those three scenes, and reread each one of them at least once. The relationship between Vlad and Morrolan is my favorite thing about these books, or just about. I'm partial to slashing them, but the canonical relationship does it for me just fine. Although I do feel compelled to point out that we learn, in this book, that Vlad can recognize both Morrolan's footfalls and his clapping. Anyway, it was great to see them together again, however briefly, to see Vlad finally feeling he was home when he teleported to Castle Black, the wonderful scene where they're sharing some Eastern-style sausages and passing a jug of wine back and forth.
But, OK, things other that Morrolan, which, after all, took up most of the book. I found Aliera's (pseudo)drunk interrogation hilarious. The though of Sethra being sloshed was quite amusing, too. Speaking of unexpectedly drunk people, the conversation between Vlad and Zerika at the end was also most interesting. Vlad pulling a Kragar on Kragar (and gloating about it) was priceless; and then Kragar getting him back was awesome, too. I found the various Iorichs and their legal talk amusing. And was glad to see some interaction between Vlad and his son, finally, though I don't really have a fix on Vlad Norathar yet. And Vlad's interaction with Cawti continues to be interesting and painful and not something you see in a fantasy novel. And, OK, it had some interesting things to say about justice and law. And the logic is impressively circuitous, which is always nice (and made my head hurt). But mostly I read these books for the fun, not for the super-convoluted plots, impressive as they may be. But mainly: three scenes with Morrolan! And Vlad hopefully-maybe actually staying around this time, despite Zerika's "hint"?
Random stuff: Delwick (Iorich Imperial Rep) knows about Castle Black but gets Morrolan's name wrong. I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean? I'm also amused that while the Warlord is Aliera and then Norathar, the Lady of the Chains is Lord Avissa. Also, Vlad had a Draegaran lover after Cawti. The Issola he thinks about before turning his mind back to business? ("Those thoughts [of Lady Teldra] led me to another Issola I knew, but I pushed those away: I needed to concentrate on business."Quotes:
"But we are assassins: when we make mistakes, people live."
"Do you like the wine?" [Cawti asked]
"You know I do."
"Just trying to make conversation."
"And avoid talking."
"Yes," she said. "That too."
I am also halfway through rereading Taltos, because I was in a mood for more Vlad and especially more Morrolan (I think I could just read Taltos-Yendi-Jhereg in a closed circuit and be happy like that...), and also my hold on The Phoenix Guards has come in, so I'll probably go do that next, maybe alternating the two. But, because I was in the mood for reading about the criminal element some more, what I actually read after Iorich was:
2. Scott Lynch, The Lies of Locke Lamora -- So, I enjoyed the hell out of reading this book. Fastest 720 pages I can recall since A Storm of Swords, and maybe even faster than that. But I feel like I liked the book less than I enjoyed it, if that makes any sense. And I think the root of the problem is, I'm largely indifferent to Locke. MAJOR SPOILERS from here on
I like the archetype Locke fits into a whole lot; tricksters and conmen are one of my bulletproof favorites (see, for example, Moist von Lipwig). I like a lot of the things we see from Locke -- the banter with Jean and the other Bastards, his devotion to his friends, his willingness to be reckless with himself (I totally snickered at "Nice bird, asshole.") but put up with just about anything to preserve the people he cares about. But it doesn't add up to anything particularly compelling for me, almost like there's a hollow core to Locke, or my reading of him. It may be an artefact of the way he spends so much of the book being someone else, putting on a variety of roles. It may well even be intentional and making some point -- I had no trouble liking most of the other characters in this, even quite minor ones. But even so, the fact remains -- I enjoyed reading about Locke's exploits, will happily read about more of them, but I don't actually care about Locke.
Characters in this book I care about a lot more than I care about Locke Lamora: numerous. I adored Jean and Bug; Bug may have been my favorite character until his untimely demise (*sniff*, although I do think his death speech was a bit overdone), and Jean is definitely my favorite character left standing. I love the way Jean is soft-spoken and occasionally downright motherly and the only rational man in the bunch and at the same time a total BAMF. I would normally love his relationship with Locke... but there is not enough to Locke for that to really resonate, sigh. Oh, and Chains! I loved Father Chains, and the way he chooses to deal with Lock and the other boys. I'm a sucker for mentors in general, and he's one of the most unusual and amusing examples I've seen. The Sanzas amused me to no end, too, and I was very saddened by their deaths as well. So, basically, 100% of the Bastards. (I do need to add that I absolutely loved the interaction between all the Bastards as a group, their little rituals and history and bantering and camaraderie -- and while I adore Jean, I'm very sad that that whole dynamic is broken for good by the Sanzas' and Bug's death :(
Continuing on to other characters I liked more than I liked Locke: I was completely disproportionately fond of the Salvaras, especially Lorenzo's worshipful attitude towards the brandy and Sofia's no-nonsense attitude towards things (I love that it's she and not Lorenzo who threatens Locke at the end), and the way Conte is part of their little family -- they are highly adorable. I was totally rooting for the Salvaras in the con game, which made for a more interesting book. And I like the fact that the conversation between Conte and Locke presents both sides of the conflict, and without too much moralizing on either side: "'Now Lorenzo,' said Conte with undisguised pride, 'he's more a man of business than his father was. But he's made of the same stuff; he went into that alley with a blade in his hand when he didn't know you, when he thought you were being attacked for real, by real fucking bandits that meant you harm. Are you proud, you fucking pissant? Are you proud of what you've done to that man, who tried to save your fucking life?' || 'I do wht I do, Conte,' said Locke with a bitterness that surprised him. 'I do what I do. Is Lorenzo a saint of Perelandro? He's a peer of Camorr; he profits from the Secret Peace. His great-great-grandfather probably slit someone's throat to claim a peerage; Lorenzo benefits from that every day. People make tea from ashes and piss in the Cauldron while Lorenzo and Sofia have you to peel their grapes and wipe their chins for them. Don't talk to me about what I've done.'"
I find it not particularly believable but still cute that Dona Vorchenza has decided to make them her heirs. (Also, I'm guessing Lorenzo Salvara is the boy who gets stabbed when he's distracted by Jean's entrance in the flashback interludes? Although I don't know if the timing works out, or even would be internally consistent, since at one point the book says it's been nearly 20 years since Locke and Jean had been with the Thiefmaker, but I'm not really sure how to read that given that they seem to have joined Chains several years apart.)
So, yes, I found the Salvaras adorable -- almost as adorable as Stephen Reynart, who clearly loves his adopted mommy (the way he punched Locke for hitting her and handed his sword over to Locke so that he could stab the Grey King -- clearly for daring to mess with Mommy's mind). I don't quite know why, but Stephen reminded me of Carrot a bit; such an upright young man. And of course Dona V as the Spider was right up my alley; I thought back to the westerostamping application where I said I'd like to have Olenna Tyrell as my Master of Whisperers and there you go; although Dona V seems a lot sweeter and less thorny than the QoT.
I even liked Capa Barsavi in flashback, back before he lost his mind -- especially the detail that he'd been a teacher of rhetoric. (And I kind of wonder if the whole thing with the favorite carpet he was ostensibly reluctant to get blood on was a little bit of homage to Zelazny and Amber. I don't see either on scott_lynch's interests list, so maybe not...) And while I wasn't particularly enamored of Nazca or her brothers, I did find it a nice touch that all three of them have to wear glasses, which doesn't prevent them (of Jean, for that matter) from being formidable. Oh, and I liked Meraggio, who seemed to know all of his people by sight and be a fairly decent and interesting guy.
So, clearly, Lynch can write characters I care about... Locke just isn't among them. And if he had been, I probably wouldn't have a problem with this next bit, which is that I feel like the narrative cheats in his favor. I don't like when that happens... except when the character(s) who are so favored are characters I want to win and be OK at any cost, and that wasn't the case here. And, OK, if any narrative would have justified reason to cheat in the protagonist's favor, this would probably be it, since Locke is a priest of the Crooked Warden and all that. But still, meh.
Like, I found it very hard to believe that the Bondsmage would randomly choose to switch to a subject over whom he had less control just to torture him a bit more before killing both. The Falconer certainly seemed annoyed by Locke, but he seemed like a man of business first and foremost, and not someone who would sacrifice an advantage just for a bit of sadistic jollies. I could certainly see him as arrogant enough to think he could control Locke with just a first name, and I'm OK with accepting a sadistic streak, but I just don't see how he could have decided there was any sufficient payoff to the switch -- so it felt like a cheat. (And maybe part of it was that I'd been spoiled for the fact that Locke wasn't his real name and so was looking to see how that was going to become relevant rather than angsting for Locke.)
Also, I had a very hard time believing that the Spider would not have some backup on hand when talking to the very slippery individual. It seemed particularly weird not to have Stephen accompany Sofia and "Lukas" to see Dona V, when he had already explained his relationship with her and would've had every pretext in the world to come along. And Dona V had to get Sofia out of there because she was still maintaining that she was not the Spider, but Stephen could certainly have stayed. And it's not like they needed Locke's confession -- if he spooked, Stephen could just grab him. So, the only reason for Dona V to be left alone with Locke was so he could make his daring escape off Raven's Reach (and have some very interesting exchanges with her, to be sure; I love the fact that he apologizes for hitting her and expresses his respect/admiration as he is tying her up -- and I especially liked it that she pointed out he'd been duped by his own expectations, just as he does to his marks: "I have always found the presumptions of others to be the best possible disguise -- haven't you?"). So, OK, it worked out very well, plot-wise, but it still felt like a cheat.
The thing with the Bondsmage. I hope Locke's in a world of trouble with the Bondsmages (which at least appears to be the case, so, yay) because I simply cannot accept that an organization that would level an entire city and shatter a kingdom would care about the distinction about killing one of their members and merely crippling him horrifically. Or, if they would see it as a difference, then that Locke would be the first person to hit on that loophole. Although I suppose I cold grudgingly accept that he might be the only person crazy enough to try to exercize it. (And also, that given the fantastic cost, encounters with Bondsmages are probably not that frequent.)
And then the fight with the Grey King. I really enjoyed the way it was set up, with Locke first echoing the interlude with 'I don't have to beat you, I just have to keep you here until Jean shows up' -- which I'd seen coming -- and then subverts it while still using it to distract the Grey King and kill him before Jean even enters the picture. So, cute foreshadowing, really nice twist... but I still had a hard time believing that a man as skilled and deadly with a blade as Capa Raza and who has very little left to lose would not succeed in killing Locke before he could put his little strategem into practice, especially considering Locke is not exactly in peak fighting condition.
So, basically, the entire climax, right. :P
On a different but still cheating note, I also felt like all the references to Sabetha were a tease, especially with the way the interludes abruptly switch from Locke's past to general history right around the time she would've presumably made an appearance in his past. The thing is, the whole to-do about Sabetha, the sparse but glowing mentions of her by the Bastards, Locke's hissy fit, and the fact that everybody in Camorr seems to know he's got it bad for her still added up to neither intriguing nor amusing to me, but merely annoying. I hope it will be less so when we actually meet her.
My Locke-centric problems aside, I did enjoy the book a ton, as mentioned. I love caper plots, and the interlacing caper plots here were pretty great. The posing as Midnighters subplot was pretty genius, and I did also like the fact that this hubris-like addition was the downfall of Locke's scheme (or would've been if there had been no other complications). I loved the way the Wraithstone peril had been set up -- best approximation of/twist on a bomb scare in fantasy that I've read, I think. And I loved the whole "boy who cried wolf" aspect of Locke trying to warn people about it when he came back to Raven's Reach, only to have everyone wanting to gag him to prevent any more of his tricks. (That, and the moment when the Bondsmage threatens the Bastards for the first time were the only two when I found Locke genuinely sympathetic.) And turning the Satisfaction into a death offering was pretty brilliant, though I did figure out that was why he was doing it before Dona V realized what had happened. (...It just occurred to me that the name of the ship is significant as a sort of synonym for "revenge"...) And of course having the "cops" digging through shit for gold that wasn't there was a very nice touch.
The revenge plot was quite interesting, too, and makes the Count of Monte Cristo's approach seem half-hearted. I'm glad it wasn't the focus of the book, because revenge plots as focus are apparently boring (or at least I thought so reading Best Served Cold). What I did like was the way the cycle of revenge was shown to be self-perpetuating. Raza et al are after revenge because their family was murdered over business between Capa Barsavi and the Spider; in pursuing his revenge, he murder's Locke's family for essentially business reasons -- he needs their gold -- and then Locke vows revenge and it goes from there. I liked the symmetry of it. (And I thought Locke's speech vowing revenge was quite powerful.)
There are a lot of great lines in this book, great descriptions of people, funny dialogue. There is a fair bit of lovely description, too, but to be honest I could've done with less of that. The descriptions of Elderglass this and that were impressive, but I'm still not really sure what they were for. And if they weren't for anything, then... I'm not sure there needed to be quite so many of them. I mean, they worked quite well as far as worldbuilding and scene-setting went... and then some, and I could've done without the then some part. Oh, but I loved the term "the Right People" and lots of the other worldbuilding details, like the masked anonymous magistrates of Camorr, and the Eight Beautiful Arts of Camorr (all having to do with cooking), and all of the various applications of alchemy, which seems rather scientific and even industrial.
Quotes:
"I don't need to be reminded that we're up to our heads in dark water. I just want you boys to remember that we're the gods-damned sharks."
"Those prancing little pants-wetters come here to learn the colorful and gentlemanly art of fencing, with its many sporting limitations and its proscriptions against dishonorable engagements. || You, on the other hand, [...] you are going to learn how to kill men with a sword."
"For the love of the gods, madam," snapped Locke, "Can you please pick one man in your bedroom to cheer for and stick with him?"
"The years play a sort of alchemical trick, transmuting one's mutterings to a state of respectability. Give advice at forty and you're a nag. Give it at seventy and you're a sage."
"It was a simple question, and I won't repeat it again: Do you want to live?"
"I... yes," the man said softly.
"Then it pleases me to deny you your preference."
"If these things are alchemical," said Sofia, "I'd better be the one to have a look at them."
"And me," said Conte.
"Great! We can all go! It'll be fun!" Locke waved his tied hands at the door. "But hurry it up, for fuck's sake."
"It must be nice to be righteous; from where I'm standing it looks like fucking lunacy."
So: will definitely read the sequel, but I do hope I'll like/care about Locke more at the end of it.
Now, I normally wait to post until I've read 4-6 books at a minimum... but I'm crap at delaying instant gratification, and I know at least a couple of you (cancan_cadenza, firebluespinel, IIRC? I know I remember a discussion on its merits relative to something else -- Best Served Cold?) have read The Lies of Locke Lamora and have strong feelings about the book, so I couldn't bear to wait to talk about it :)
But, OK, things other that Morrolan, which, after all, took up most of the book. I found Aliera's (pseudo)drunk interrogation hilarious. The though of Sethra being sloshed was quite amusing, too. Speaking of unexpectedly drunk people, the conversation between Vlad and Zerika at the end was also most interesting. Vlad pulling a Kragar on Kragar (and gloating about it) was priceless; and then Kragar getting him back was awesome, too. I found the various Iorichs and their legal talk amusing. And was glad to see some interaction between Vlad and his son, finally, though I don't really have a fix on Vlad Norathar yet. And Vlad's interaction with Cawti continues to be interesting and painful and not something you see in a fantasy novel. And, OK, it had some interesting things to say about justice and law. And the logic is impressively circuitous, which is always nice (and made my head hurt). But mostly I read these books for the fun, not for the super-convoluted plots, impressive as they may be. But mainly: three scenes with Morrolan! And Vlad hopefully-maybe actually staying around this time, despite Zerika's "hint"?
Random stuff: Delwick (Iorich Imperial Rep) knows about Castle Black but gets Morrolan's name wrong. I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean? I'm also amused that while the Warlord is Aliera and then Norathar, the Lady of the Chains is Lord Avissa. Also, Vlad had a Draegaran lover after Cawti. The Issola he thinks about before turning his mind back to business? ("Those thoughts [of Lady Teldra] led me to another Issola I knew, but I pushed those away: I needed to concentrate on business."Quotes:
"But we are assassins: when we make mistakes, people live."
"Do you like the wine?" [Cawti asked]
"You know I do."
"Just trying to make conversation."
"And avoid talking."
"Yes," she said. "That too."
I am also halfway through rereading Taltos, because I was in a mood for more Vlad and especially more Morrolan (I think I could just read Taltos-Yendi-Jhereg in a closed circuit and be happy like that...), and also my hold on The Phoenix Guards has come in, so I'll probably go do that next, maybe alternating the two. But, because I was in the mood for reading about the criminal element some more, what I actually read after Iorich was:
2. Scott Lynch, The Lies of Locke Lamora -- So, I enjoyed the hell out of reading this book. Fastest 720 pages I can recall since A Storm of Swords, and maybe even faster than that. But I feel like I liked the book less than I enjoyed it, if that makes any sense. And I think the root of the problem is, I'm largely indifferent to Locke. MAJOR SPOILERS from here on
I like the archetype Locke fits into a whole lot; tricksters and conmen are one of my bulletproof favorites (see, for example, Moist von Lipwig). I like a lot of the things we see from Locke -- the banter with Jean and the other Bastards, his devotion to his friends, his willingness to be reckless with himself (I totally snickered at "Nice bird, asshole.") but put up with just about anything to preserve the people he cares about. But it doesn't add up to anything particularly compelling for me, almost like there's a hollow core to Locke, or my reading of him. It may be an artefact of the way he spends so much of the book being someone else, putting on a variety of roles. It may well even be intentional and making some point -- I had no trouble liking most of the other characters in this, even quite minor ones. But even so, the fact remains -- I enjoyed reading about Locke's exploits, will happily read about more of them, but I don't actually care about Locke.
Characters in this book I care about a lot more than I care about Locke Lamora: numerous. I adored Jean and Bug; Bug may have been my favorite character until his untimely demise (*sniff*, although I do think his death speech was a bit overdone), and Jean is definitely my favorite character left standing. I love the way Jean is soft-spoken and occasionally downright motherly and the only rational man in the bunch and at the same time a total BAMF. I would normally love his relationship with Locke... but there is not enough to Locke for that to really resonate, sigh. Oh, and Chains! I loved Father Chains, and the way he chooses to deal with Lock and the other boys. I'm a sucker for mentors in general, and he's one of the most unusual and amusing examples I've seen. The Sanzas amused me to no end, too, and I was very saddened by their deaths as well. So, basically, 100% of the Bastards. (I do need to add that I absolutely loved the interaction between all the Bastards as a group, their little rituals and history and bantering and camaraderie -- and while I adore Jean, I'm very sad that that whole dynamic is broken for good by the Sanzas' and Bug's death :(
Continuing on to other characters I liked more than I liked Locke: I was completely disproportionately fond of the Salvaras, especially Lorenzo's worshipful attitude towards the brandy and Sofia's no-nonsense attitude towards things (I love that it's she and not Lorenzo who threatens Locke at the end), and the way Conte is part of their little family -- they are highly adorable. I was totally rooting for the Salvaras in the con game, which made for a more interesting book. And I like the fact that the conversation between Conte and Locke presents both sides of the conflict, and without too much moralizing on either side: "'Now Lorenzo,' said Conte with undisguised pride, 'he's more a man of business than his father was. But he's made of the same stuff; he went into that alley with a blade in his hand when he didn't know you, when he thought you were being attacked for real, by real fucking bandits that meant you harm. Are you proud, you fucking pissant? Are you proud of what you've done to that man, who tried to save your fucking life?' || 'I do wht I do, Conte,' said Locke with a bitterness that surprised him. 'I do what I do. Is Lorenzo a saint of Perelandro? He's a peer of Camorr; he profits from the Secret Peace. His great-great-grandfather probably slit someone's throat to claim a peerage; Lorenzo benefits from that every day. People make tea from ashes and piss in the Cauldron while Lorenzo and Sofia have you to peel their grapes and wipe their chins for them. Don't talk to me about what I've done.'"
I find it not particularly believable but still cute that Dona Vorchenza has decided to make them her heirs. (Also, I'm guessing Lorenzo Salvara is the boy who gets stabbed when he's distracted by Jean's entrance in the flashback interludes? Although I don't know if the timing works out, or even would be internally consistent, since at one point the book says it's been nearly 20 years since Locke and Jean had been with the Thiefmaker, but I'm not really sure how to read that given that they seem to have joined Chains several years apart.)
So, yes, I found the Salvaras adorable -- almost as adorable as Stephen Reynart, who clearly loves his adopted mommy (the way he punched Locke for hitting her and handed his sword over to Locke so that he could stab the Grey King -- clearly for daring to mess with Mommy's mind). I don't quite know why, but Stephen reminded me of Carrot a bit; such an upright young man. And of course Dona V as the Spider was right up my alley; I thought back to the westerostamping application where I said I'd like to have Olenna Tyrell as my Master of Whisperers and there you go; although Dona V seems a lot sweeter and less thorny than the QoT.
I even liked Capa Barsavi in flashback, back before he lost his mind -- especially the detail that he'd been a teacher of rhetoric. (And I kind of wonder if the whole thing with the favorite carpet he was ostensibly reluctant to get blood on was a little bit of homage to Zelazny and Amber. I don't see either on scott_lynch's interests list, so maybe not...) And while I wasn't particularly enamored of Nazca or her brothers, I did find it a nice touch that all three of them have to wear glasses, which doesn't prevent them (of Jean, for that matter) from being formidable. Oh, and I liked Meraggio, who seemed to know all of his people by sight and be a fairly decent and interesting guy.
So, clearly, Lynch can write characters I care about... Locke just isn't among them. And if he had been, I probably wouldn't have a problem with this next bit, which is that I feel like the narrative cheats in his favor. I don't like when that happens... except when the character(s) who are so favored are characters I want to win and be OK at any cost, and that wasn't the case here. And, OK, if any narrative would have justified reason to cheat in the protagonist's favor, this would probably be it, since Locke is a priest of the Crooked Warden and all that. But still, meh.
Like, I found it very hard to believe that the Bondsmage would randomly choose to switch to a subject over whom he had less control just to torture him a bit more before killing both. The Falconer certainly seemed annoyed by Locke, but he seemed like a man of business first and foremost, and not someone who would sacrifice an advantage just for a bit of sadistic jollies. I could certainly see him as arrogant enough to think he could control Locke with just a first name, and I'm OK with accepting a sadistic streak, but I just don't see how he could have decided there was any sufficient payoff to the switch -- so it felt like a cheat. (And maybe part of it was that I'd been spoiled for the fact that Locke wasn't his real name and so was looking to see how that was going to become relevant rather than angsting for Locke.)
Also, I had a very hard time believing that the Spider would not have some backup on hand when talking to the very slippery individual. It seemed particularly weird not to have Stephen accompany Sofia and "Lukas" to see Dona V, when he had already explained his relationship with her and would've had every pretext in the world to come along. And Dona V had to get Sofia out of there because she was still maintaining that she was not the Spider, but Stephen could certainly have stayed. And it's not like they needed Locke's confession -- if he spooked, Stephen could just grab him. So, the only reason for Dona V to be left alone with Locke was so he could make his daring escape off Raven's Reach (and have some very interesting exchanges with her, to be sure; I love the fact that he apologizes for hitting her and expresses his respect/admiration as he is tying her up -- and I especially liked it that she pointed out he'd been duped by his own expectations, just as he does to his marks: "I have always found the presumptions of others to be the best possible disguise -- haven't you?"). So, OK, it worked out very well, plot-wise, but it still felt like a cheat.
The thing with the Bondsmage. I hope Locke's in a world of trouble with the Bondsmages (which at least appears to be the case, so, yay) because I simply cannot accept that an organization that would level an entire city and shatter a kingdom would care about the distinction about killing one of their members and merely crippling him horrifically. Or, if they would see it as a difference, then that Locke would be the first person to hit on that loophole. Although I suppose I cold grudgingly accept that he might be the only person crazy enough to try to exercize it. (And also, that given the fantastic cost, encounters with Bondsmages are probably not that frequent.)
And then the fight with the Grey King. I really enjoyed the way it was set up, with Locke first echoing the interlude with 'I don't have to beat you, I just have to keep you here until Jean shows up' -- which I'd seen coming -- and then subverts it while still using it to distract the Grey King and kill him before Jean even enters the picture. So, cute foreshadowing, really nice twist... but I still had a hard time believing that a man as skilled and deadly with a blade as Capa Raza and who has very little left to lose would not succeed in killing Locke before he could put his little strategem into practice, especially considering Locke is not exactly in peak fighting condition.
So, basically, the entire climax, right. :P
On a different but still cheating note, I also felt like all the references to Sabetha were a tease, especially with the way the interludes abruptly switch from Locke's past to general history right around the time she would've presumably made an appearance in his past. The thing is, the whole to-do about Sabetha, the sparse but glowing mentions of her by the Bastards, Locke's hissy fit, and the fact that everybody in Camorr seems to know he's got it bad for her still added up to neither intriguing nor amusing to me, but merely annoying. I hope it will be less so when we actually meet her.
My Locke-centric problems aside, I did enjoy the book a ton, as mentioned. I love caper plots, and the interlacing caper plots here were pretty great. The posing as Midnighters subplot was pretty genius, and I did also like the fact that this hubris-like addition was the downfall of Locke's scheme (or would've been if there had been no other complications). I loved the way the Wraithstone peril had been set up -- best approximation of/twist on a bomb scare in fantasy that I've read, I think. And I loved the whole "boy who cried wolf" aspect of Locke trying to warn people about it when he came back to Raven's Reach, only to have everyone wanting to gag him to prevent any more of his tricks. (That, and the moment when the Bondsmage threatens the Bastards for the first time were the only two when I found Locke genuinely sympathetic.) And turning the Satisfaction into a death offering was pretty brilliant, though I did figure out that was why he was doing it before Dona V realized what had happened. (...It just occurred to me that the name of the ship is significant as a sort of synonym for "revenge"...) And of course having the "cops" digging through shit for gold that wasn't there was a very nice touch.
The revenge plot was quite interesting, too, and makes the Count of Monte Cristo's approach seem half-hearted. I'm glad it wasn't the focus of the book, because revenge plots as focus are apparently boring (or at least I thought so reading Best Served Cold). What I did like was the way the cycle of revenge was shown to be self-perpetuating. Raza et al are after revenge because their family was murdered over business between Capa Barsavi and the Spider; in pursuing his revenge, he murder's Locke's family for essentially business reasons -- he needs their gold -- and then Locke vows revenge and it goes from there. I liked the symmetry of it. (And I thought Locke's speech vowing revenge was quite powerful.)
There are a lot of great lines in this book, great descriptions of people, funny dialogue. There is a fair bit of lovely description, too, but to be honest I could've done with less of that. The descriptions of Elderglass this and that were impressive, but I'm still not really sure what they were for. And if they weren't for anything, then... I'm not sure there needed to be quite so many of them. I mean, they worked quite well as far as worldbuilding and scene-setting went... and then some, and I could've done without the then some part. Oh, but I loved the term "the Right People" and lots of the other worldbuilding details, like the masked anonymous magistrates of Camorr, and the Eight Beautiful Arts of Camorr (all having to do with cooking), and all of the various applications of alchemy, which seems rather scientific and even industrial.
Quotes:
"I don't need to be reminded that we're up to our heads in dark water. I just want you boys to remember that we're the gods-damned sharks."
"Those prancing little pants-wetters come here to learn the colorful and gentlemanly art of fencing, with its many sporting limitations and its proscriptions against dishonorable engagements. || You, on the other hand, [...] you are going to learn how to kill men with a sword."
"For the love of the gods, madam," snapped Locke, "Can you please pick one man in your bedroom to cheer for and stick with him?"
"The years play a sort of alchemical trick, transmuting one's mutterings to a state of respectability. Give advice at forty and you're a nag. Give it at seventy and you're a sage."
"It was a simple question, and I won't repeat it again: Do you want to live?"
"I... yes," the man said softly.
"Then it pleases me to deny you your preference."
"If these things are alchemical," said Sofia, "I'd better be the one to have a look at them."
"And me," said Conte.
"Great! We can all go! It'll be fun!" Locke waved his tied hands at the door. "But hurry it up, for fuck's sake."
"It must be nice to be righteous; from where I'm standing it looks like fucking lunacy."
So: will definitely read the sequel, but I do hope I'll like/care about Locke more at the end of it.
Now, I normally wait to post until I've read 4-6 books at a minimum... but I'm crap at delaying instant gratification, and I know at least a couple of you (cancan_cadenza, firebluespinel, IIRC? I know I remember a discussion on its merits relative to something else -- Best Served Cold?) have read The Lies of Locke Lamora and have strong feelings about the book, so I couldn't bear to wait to talk about it :)