[Book Reviews] [Sociology] Ignorance of background stories, China, Japan, and fiction
Hello, Internet! After tithenai's glowing review some months back, I put Ken Liu's "The Grace of Kings" on my to-read list. I recently finished, and said on Goodreads:
This was a good book that came so close to being a great book. Truly excellent world-building, well realized characters who develop and change, compelling moral dilemmas with clear paths only sometimes available. I loved the first 40% of the book unconditionally, and there was still much to love in the following 60% -- thoughtful, robust female characters, political machinations, two supporting characters who almost separately Rosencrantz and Guildenstern the entire thing. Since this is the first installation of a series, I'm still holding out some hope for a more satisfying arc further down the line.
The thing I didn't like: there's a turn in the development arc of one character where they take a path that I think they're smarter than. It's a big, epic, tragic-heroic flaw, but the character's development up until that point seemed to indicate more insight and maturity than that, so it was a disappointing "and now doom happens, for a preventable and foolish reason" development. History's full of that, sure, but it didn't seem consistent with my read of that character.
Four stars, and hope for the future. I'll try the author's Hugo-winning translation next!
Welp... it turns out that apparently it's based on history and that guy really did do that thing. Hahaha, whoops.
"In The Grace of Kings, Ken Liu’s telling a version of the fall of the Qin dynasty, and the Chu-Han contention, in an alt-Hawaii-ish setting with gods and zeppelins and it’s totally great. But more to the point (for this essay, anyway), he’s using storytelling tricks which remind me a great deal of Ming Dynasty classics like Romance of the Three Kingdoms, and it’s these techniques as much as (or even more than!) the setting that make the book feel so fun and deep at once."
But not being already familiar with the Chu-Han contention, I thought it a disappointing gap in characterization only so dispiriting because the rest of the book is so great. Ahahahafacepalmhideunderthetable. Stranger than fiction. But one of the reasons I liked "The Grace of Kings" so much was that it spoke to a narrative I didn't already know and hadn't seen already done to death. Hooray, larger world. (I would love to see what those of you who know more about Chinese history and classical literature than I do think of it.) The author also has a collection of book-relevant links on his blog, including another perspective on foundational stories. Worth checking out!
In the course of finding out the above, and discussing it with ilcylic, I said:
Raven: Oh man. He has a free short story up and it's brutal. Unit 731.
ilcylic: Whee.
Raven: Yeah. It's brilliant, though, even if its conceit is very unlikely. Fantastic depth of characterization and multiple perspectives. In case you feel like reading really thoughtful sci-fi about war crimes and justice, heh. (And what is history, and who controls it.)
ilcylic: Well, the opening is interesting.
Raven: It's worth it all the way through, but man. Oof.
ilcylic: Indeed. I can't imagine sight-seeing such a thing. Even for historical purposes.
Raven: Yeah. I think they'd need, like, shock historians.
So I kinda want to go read the relevant source material for "The Grace of Kings" and then go back and see how that changes my perspective on the work. I might have to amend my review appropriately, though I think there's value in the reactions of both the unfamiliar and the educated reader, so I'll probably leave the original text and then just add to it. Besides, by the time I get around to that, the second book might be out, heh. In the meantime, on to "Three Body Problem"!
This entry was originally posted at http://ivy.dreamwidth.org/492014.html and has
comments there. Please feel free to comment on either site; comments rock.
This was a good book that came so close to being a great book. Truly excellent world-building, well realized characters who develop and change, compelling moral dilemmas with clear paths only sometimes available. I loved the first 40% of the book unconditionally, and there was still much to love in the following 60% -- thoughtful, robust female characters, political machinations, two supporting characters who almost separately Rosencrantz and Guildenstern the entire thing. Since this is the first installation of a series, I'm still holding out some hope for a more satisfying arc further down the line.
The thing I didn't like: there's a turn in the development arc of one character where they take a path that I think they're smarter than. It's a big, epic, tragic-heroic flaw, but the character's development up until that point seemed to indicate more insight and maturity than that, so it was a disappointing "and now doom happens, for a preventable and foolish reason" development. History's full of that, sure, but it didn't seem consistent with my read of that character.
Four stars, and hope for the future. I'll try the author's Hugo-winning translation next!
Welp... it turns out that apparently it's based on history and that guy really did do that thing. Hahaha, whoops.
"In The Grace of Kings, Ken Liu’s telling a version of the fall of the Qin dynasty, and the Chu-Han contention, in an alt-Hawaii-ish setting with gods and zeppelins and it’s totally great. But more to the point (for this essay, anyway), he’s using storytelling tricks which remind me a great deal of Ming Dynasty classics like Romance of the Three Kingdoms, and it’s these techniques as much as (or even more than!) the setting that make the book feel so fun and deep at once."
But not being already familiar with the Chu-Han contention, I thought it a disappointing gap in characterization only so dispiriting because the rest of the book is so great. Ahahahafacepalmhideunderthetable. Stranger than fiction. But one of the reasons I liked "The Grace of Kings" so much was that it spoke to a narrative I didn't already know and hadn't seen already done to death. Hooray, larger world. (I would love to see what those of you who know more about Chinese history and classical literature than I do think of it.) The author also has a collection of book-relevant links on his blog, including another perspective on foundational stories. Worth checking out!
In the course of finding out the above, and discussing it with ilcylic, I said:
Raven: Oh man. He has a free short story up and it's brutal. Unit 731.
ilcylic: Whee.
Raven: Yeah. It's brilliant, though, even if its conceit is very unlikely. Fantastic depth of characterization and multiple perspectives. In case you feel like reading really thoughtful sci-fi about war crimes and justice, heh. (And what is history, and who controls it.)
ilcylic: Well, the opening is interesting.
Raven: It's worth it all the way through, but man. Oof.
ilcylic: Indeed. I can't imagine sight-seeing such a thing. Even for historical purposes.
Raven: Yeah. I think they'd need, like, shock historians.
So I kinda want to go read the relevant source material for "The Grace of Kings" and then go back and see how that changes my perspective on the work. I might have to amend my review appropriately, though I think there's value in the reactions of both the unfamiliar and the educated reader, so I'll probably leave the original text and then just add to it. Besides, by the time I get around to that, the second book might be out, heh. In the meantime, on to "Three Body Problem"!
This entry was originally posted at http://ivy.dreamwidth.org/492014.html and has
comments there. Please feel free to comment on either site; comments rock.