2012 Reading: Red Country by Joe Abercrombie

Standard

 

Shy South and her cowardly stepfather Lamb return home to find their farm burned and Shy’s younger brother and sister kidnapped and set out in pursuit, as you do.  Meanwhile, Temple, a lawyer in the service of infamous soldier of fortune Nicomo Cosca, begins having conscience issues as Cosca’s mercenaries, the Company of the Gracious Hand, are hired by the territory-hungry Union to terrorize the Far Country, so as to make the Union’s forces look like saviours when they arrive.  Both are heading west, into recently settled, hard-scrabble frontier country filled with desperate miners and desperate businessmen and all the desperate people who lived there before, now struggling with the arrival of “civilization”.

 

Red Country is Abercrombie’s sixth novel, and takes place in the same fantasy setting as all his others.  His first three books, The First Law Trilogy, are a take on epic fantasy that utilizes many of the genre’s tropes — political strife, invading armies (of dark-skinned people, for bonus stereotype points), a quest for a magical object that will lay the righteous smackdown on the evildoers –, but emphasizes cynicism and the complete moral equivalency of the forces initially set up as “good” and “evil”, and subverts the idea that characters’ arcs will see them grow and improve throughout the course of such a story.  This, now, is the third of three semi-standalone novels that take place in the years following the trilogy, telling individual stories that explore different parts of the setting, bring Abercrombie’s brand of cynical, low-magic fantasy into contact with other genres, such as the war story and the revenge thriller, and, fairly clearly, lay groundwork for future conflicts in this setting.  Red Country is Abercrombie’s western, and it contains all the grim, chiselled jaws and badassery that could be wished for in its few, frenetic, filthy action sequences, as well as all the discomforting of the myth and romance of the frontier, of the notion of progress, of the noble and rugged explorer, that might be expected from Abercrombie.  His vision of a frontier town, a western staple transported onto the edges of fantasy territory where Abercrombie’s novels live, is, for instance, almost hellish: a crumbling, decrepit, grime-covered press of people grasping desperately at the needs and wants they’ve convinced themselves they’ll be able to satisfy in the west.

 

A lot of the specific characters we focus on evince a similar, largely futile desperation.  Shy goes west to find her kin.  Temple hopes to evade his past crimes-by-proxy and become a better person in a vague sort of way simply by running from his former life.  Some of the older characters, a couple of them returning from Abercrombie’s previous novels, are going west to recover something of their former selves.  Temple’s mercenary boss Cosca’s portrayal in particular has a frantic air about it, and I think this is very deliberate, rather than a sign the author’s running out of steam: He cracks old jokes — Abercrombie’s longtime readers know they’re old, because Cosca’s cracked them in previous novels –, lies about his exploits to such a chronic degree that it’s unclear whether or not he half believes himself, cannot mount or dismount a horse without help, gesticulates uselessly where once his drinky, fetid, grungy facade concealed a genuinely keen mind.  What happens to the incorrigible rogue, the book asks, when his graceful surface deteriorates, and all that remains is the undisguised slimeball, with no wits to mask the slime?

 

Everybody’s staking something of themselves on the west, ignoring the desires of those who live there already and just want things to go back to exactly how they were (a goal that, in a move you may or may not find offensive depending on how colonial the whole thing rings to you, is in and of itself problematized).  And, in its resolution of these searches for fulfillment in the west, I’d argue that this is simultaneously Abercrombie’s most and least cynical novel yet.  On the one hand, in a move to acknowledge that the world entire is not absolutely always and inevitably a complete bowl of shit for everyone everywhere for ever and ever, a couple individual people’s lives actually improve over the course of Red Country, which is kind of new for Abercrombie.  I’m so proud, Joe.  So proud! On the other hand, don’t worry; he’s not losing his touch.  Most people still get screwed, and the book casts a very jaundiced eye over pretty much any and all large-scale ambition or hope for the futures of groups, rather than individuals.  Red Country’s full of the trademark Abercrombite insistence on people’s tendency to do the wrong or easy thing, gleefully dirty and unglamorous settings and characters, depictions of the indigenous inhabitants of the Far Country as rag-clad scroungers on their last legs that almost get by because the whole damn cast is portrayed precisely this same way but still feel rather dirty, and hints that a bare few might yet get a chance at lives.  It’s ostentatiously hard-nosed and nihilistic fantasy fiction punctuated by dark humour, and there’s a reason Abercrombie is the internet-crowned king of this niche: there really is a lot to be gotten out of this if it’s your thing.  I read it in the right mood and enjoyed it thoroughly, even though I find I’m in the right frame of mind for Abercrombie less and less often and have increasing reservations about his fiction.  It is strong medicine, though.  I usually feel kind of tired after finishing an Abercrombie book, like I won’t need another for a little while, and Red Country’s no exception in that regard.  Not
my very favourite book by Abercrombie — the bar is high, despite the problems — but an often excellent novel that plays to the author’s strengths, focuses them into a lean, narratively economical package, and begins to show hints of his power to subvert not just fantasy mainstays, which he lampoons wonderfully (and perhaps occasionally overzealously), but also his own insistent grimness.  Start here, as it’s standalone.  Or, if you want to follow the series in chronological order and thus get the full impact of the character arcs that culminate in Red Country, start with The Blade Itself, the first book of The First Law.

 

Recommended: If you like very grounded, irreverent, nihilistic fiction, and like or think you would like this method of storytelling applied to fantasy, Abercrombie pretty much rules the roost. Think of it like George R. R. Martin’s A Game of Thrones, but with more irreverence and less of the underlying sense of majesty and tragedy that always runs under the grim surface of Martin’s fiction.

 

Avoid: Abercrombie’s novels, with exceptions, are about how life is a festering cesspit and people do not and cannot change.  Yes, in my opinion some of the notes on which this novel leaves its characters make it the author’s most hopeful and sympathetic work to date, but this is still Abercrombie.  He’s always being cynical to a purpose, mercilessly puncturing and problematizing romanticized cliches, but the technique as deployed here is persistent to the point of overwhelming, so if a heaping helping of cynicism isn’t your bag a pass might be most judicious.  In particular, the first part of the novel’s climax involves an extended series of scenes covering the comprehensive massacre of an entire group of indigenous western people and the looting of their homes by greed-crazed invaders which puts the lie to the narratives of noble exploration that so often crop up in both fantasy and frontier fiction very thoroughly but in terms of being grueling to read is pretty much the worst, and which some people may just not be interested in reading whether they think the book’s well-written or not.

 

If World War Z is the Best we Can do as a Culture I am Very, Very Frightened

Standard

 

            World War Z is the kind of movie that makes me feel like a resource-sucking waste of space for sitting in air-conditioned theatres watching movies instead of doing something with my life.  Not because it’s bad — though in a sense it is, intensely.  Or rather, not because it is bad in the way most of us usually index badness.

 

            This movie isn’t bad, doesn’t lance the blister of soul-draining meaninglessness that lurks beneath my relationship with pop-culture, because it is poorly-made.  No, this movie is bad because of its systematic, clockwork adequacy.  I have encountered very few things in the course of my life that are this suffocatingly okay.

 

            There is running and shooting and the making of serious faces, because people find all those things absorbing.  There is some creeping around dark corridors while zombies jump out and go “iiririllrllrrrerrg!”, because people like that too, just not too much or too intense with the “iiririllrllrrrerrg!”, because we need to keep this PG-13.  There are actors.  They say things.  They shoot guns.  Zombies are sweeping over the globe infecting everyone everywhere, and the actors who are in the movie and say the things and shoot the guns make concerned faces about this — you see how all the things that are in the movie are, like, tying together? One of them is Brad Pitt, and he protects his nice American family womenfolk.  Some of the other people fail, at various points throughout the film, to accept Brad Pitt’s recommendations as to best practices in zombie outbreak survival and management, and they die horribly, with the wrote degree of sadness or manful tooth-grinding attached depending on whether they were in the armed forces or not.  Some of them are people who live in places Brad Pitt travels on his quest to find a way to stop the zombie outbreak, and those people are proper fucked, because the plot follows Brad Pitt like an ill-favoured zombie-fuelled wind of destruction, so as to create action scenes for Brad Pitt to square jaw his way out of.

 

            But, despite all the things that happen in this bulletpoint apocalypse populated by the actors who say the things and shoot the guns, this isn’t really a story.  This is a movie executive’s well-oiled minimum input satisfaction machine: Everything in this movie is just precisely good enough, good enough to keep us sitting, to prompt us to tell our friends “yeah it was a fun way to pass the time at the movies I guess”, to stimulate us like the dormant zombies Brad Pitt encounters when we get to the creepy-infested-government-facility entry on the film’s checklist, waiting open-mouthed and drooling for something to happen.  (To give them credit I understand the infested government facility thing was a late addition at considerable extra expense and I thought it was one of the film’s best bits.  An inventive change from the usual big action scene finale.  Nothing is ever all bad, I guess, or even all meh.) It’s just so good enough, so cut and dried, oddly safe for a film about shrieking biting menaces who are coming to turn all of us into more like them.

 

            The plot is that there are zombies and OMG they are killing the shit out of us, and Brad Pitt has to travel the globe and find a way to make them stop — thus justifying the “World War” in the title, I suppose; where the novel World War Z by Max Brooks is a series of vignettes set all across the world and featuring different unconnected characters that together make up a journalistic history of the war against the undead, the movie strips this understandably tough-to-film premise out completely in favour of following Brad Pitt in his gallivanting to South Korea and Jerusalem and etc, as he demands answers in an earnest voice and merrily spreads destruction in his wake.  This is all held together by the movie’s precisely calculated sense of how often there needs to be a zombie outbreak in order to keep people from checking out.  Yes, this movie basically uses zombies like kitten yarn.  Apparently we can last about five minutes, maximum ten if there are people making intense faces and talking about military things in the interim.  So I guess we can be flattered and relieved that the people running World War Z’s stimulation engine have determined us to have attention spans roughly six times the length of those belonging to your average goldfish; I know I was.

 

            The characters are equally reducible, with no rough edges that might slice on the way down an audience’s delicate collective gullet.  Brad Pitt is a family man who is protecting his family because they’re the most important thing in the world, dammit.  Stoic soldier people are soldier people who are stoic.  Brad Pitt’s loving wife is a person who mostly says Brad Pitt’s name a lot, and the names of their beautiful beautiful American daughters who are young and helpless and don’t deserve to be killed by dirty foreign zombie viruses but don’t worry Brad Pitt will protect them; Brad Pitt has got that shit covered; do you see how we started this sentence talking about Brad Pitt’s wife and now we’re talking about Brad Pitt again? Do you see what the movie did there? It certainly hopes so.  The zombies growl and moan and sob out these long, haunting wails, but don’t worry they’re just walking virus vectors; we can totally shoot them.  Nothing is ambiguous.  Nothing makes demands on us.

 

            You know what? I enjoyed the time I spent watching World War Z.  Quite a lot.  I enjoyed and was grateful for the time with friends, and the film is, well, it’s a fun way to pass the time at the movies I guess.  Because it is very acceptably pulled together; that’s its power.  It’s just that as an exercise in the storytelling of sufficiency the movie scares me, and it scares me in a way that I cannot reconcile.  I cannot reconcile it because I love this big, flashy storytelling.  Examples of this kind of popular culture – not necessarily zombie narrative specifically, but big action-adventure science fiction — have substantially improved my life, provided me some of the geographies for the places my imagination roamed in middle school, when I had almost no one, and provided points of connection and reconnection for communicating with the friends I made and regained through high school and university, and you know what? A lot of it is just plain fun.  But I am also very conscious that many examples of such storytelling are animated by a ravening hunger, that underneath their pretty lights and iconic characters is an insatiable lust for gold, a howling skeletoal fiend with a hollow stomach dancing on a pile of coins with his mouth open to the sky, and that any instance of this entertainment will only be as complex and engaging as is deemed needful for the slaking of this endless want.  I love this stuff, and most of the time I think there can be good in it some places.  But I also hate its inherent calculating, exploitative cynicism profoundly, and find myself increasingly unsure of what it is worth.  And the two feelings are never far from one another these days.

 

            I look at Wikipedia and I see that this minimum input satisfaction machine cost a cool 190 million US dollars to produce, and I just don’t know what to do with that information.  I’m not sure I’m okay with it.  I’m not sure what not being okay with it would mean, and, conversely, what being okay with it would mean.  Am I a tool of the Man if I’m okay with it? Well, if you frame it that way …  kind of, yeah.  What do I do if I’m not okay with it? Stop going to movies with friends? What a phenomenally pointless, joy-killing gesture.

 

            I am naive as can be in the ways of economics, but I know that, for reasons probably not unlike those that prove trickledown economics to be bullshit perpetuated by the sickeningly rich, money spent in one sector in no way equates to money not spent in another, so I’ll spare us the over-simplistic “190 million dollars not spent on a big action movie could, like, feed a developing country for a decade” speel on the grounds that it insults everyone’s intelligence.  But, well, if nobody anywhere in the Global North could find any better use for 190 million bucks than the creation and distribution of World War Z, I think that would constitute a pretty definitive litmus test for the irrelevance of western civilization.

 

            I’m in dangerously prescriptive territory here, to my mind, in terms of the evaluation of what cultural objects, what pursuits, are and are not worthwhile.  I am young, privileged, and have never really suffered, I don’t think, but it is still my belief that fun, good, honest fun, is a priceless thing, a worthy thing, and that creative endeavour is too, in some nebulous indefinable way, even if only the most delusional English major believes it’s changing the world or whatever.  But what about when the fun is produced by formula, a formula that then gets plugged into the minimum input satisfaction machine in order to rev it up with just enough juice to keep us shuffling contentedly on? Is this question gonna keep me away from the movies? Of course not; what a ridiculous notion.  It’s just that I don’t know how I feel about that.  It’s just…  It’s just …

 

It’s just so much for so little. 190 million US dollars.  Ouch.

2012 Reading: Whispers Underground by Ben Aaronovitch

Standard

Well, huh, damn. Turns out coming up with things to blog about is somewhat more labour-intensive than I bargained for. First I tried to write about movies. I was gonna write something about Iron Man 3 and how I thought the movie in general and one of the major twists in particular are super-awesome but how the excellence of the whole package highlights what I feel is a retreat into the clunking tropes of the over-loud action scene at the films climax, or some pompous bullshit of that kind. Then I was gonna write something about Star Trek Into Darkness, and how I think some fun setpieces and absolutely great depictions of the Enterprise’s bridge crew are sunk by an ending that’s cowardly in a deep way, some quick hop-skip-and-jumping over thorny character issues that is similarly chickenshit, and a defiance of logic so agregious that even I noticed it while I was sitting in the theatre. Then I was gonna review a couple recent books I finished. But then, in each case, I thought … nah, meh, bah. Turns out writing in real depth about single texts is hard. And I’m lazy. Super lazy. And this is meant to be stress-free fun writing. But I wanted to do something…
So what I’ve settled on is an overall retrospective rambling survey of the novels I’ve read thus far published last year, alphabetized by author’s last name, because I promise you it won’t be organized in any more coherent way. Most of these books will be fantasy and science fiction, a preference for which I do not apologize, but I try to broaden my horizons here and there, so my reading of last year’s offerings has observed no strict guidelines. These aren’t reviews, just slapdash impressions based on what I think of these books right now as I scribble. Down at the bottom of my rant about each individual book I’ve put “Recommended” and “Avoid” sections, containing additional notes as to the types of readers I think the book might work especially well for, and conversely those types of readers who in my possibly worthless opinion should avoid it like the plague.
So then: how I spent a bunch of time when I could have been working or reading stuff for school in 2012 and earlier this year: Not asked for. Not necessary. But kinda fun to put together, and an excuse to say some disorganized things about some escapist reading I mostly enjoyed a lot. Because I apparently can’t shut up, these will come in individual posts, one book at a time; I dunno if I’ll make it through the whole thing. Lots of fantasy written by dude authors in the first batch; not that that’s not great, but breadth of coverage is nice, and things do broaden out at least a little later on.

Whispers Under Ground, by Ben Aaronovitch

This is the third book in Aaronovitch’s series focused on London metropolitan police constable and apprentice wizard Peter Grant and his colleagues in the Metropolitan’s magical division, which has a cool-sounding name I’m too lazy to look up right now and works out of a sweet 18th-century mansion called The Folly. This time, Peter and bosses and friends are investigating the murder of an American citizen on British soil and its connections to a trade in magical objects, though given that this plot is kicked off by a dude being beaten to death with a magic plate this summation makes the story sound a lot more like a standard thriller out of a can than it actually is. Their inquiries lead them to believe that the murderer may have some connection to the London underground, which means we can have trains, and also scenes set in sewers.

The Peter Grant novels are the first of a few series with representative installments that we’re going to encounter on this list that I have real issues being objective about; they’re like candy that comes in three-hundred page chunks and takes wonderful hours to eat. Whispers Under Ground is another great installment (after Rivers of London — or Midnight Riot in the US and Canada, where we hate good titles — and Moon Over Soho) that mostly does what its predecessors did: It tells a fun mystery story grounded in a detailed but accessible fictional evocation of London. Peter narrates in enthusiastic first-person frequently punctuated with humour and irreverent, evocative descriptions of London’s architectural and social history. For example, here he is on a suspect’s house: “For decades Notting Hill has been fighting a valiant rearguard action against the rising tide of money creeping in now that Mayfair has given over entirely to the oligarches. I could see that whoever had done the conversion on the mews adopted the spirit of the place, because nothing says I’m part of a vibrant local community quite like sticking a bloody great security gate at the entrance to your street” [32]. I’ve never been to these places – underneath some of them, maybe, on that one visit to London, but that doesn’t count even as visiting –, and Peter’s wry and loving commentary on London evokes them in a very accessible way.

Just as importantly, the fun mystery plots are staffed by a fairly small funny but also dramatically absorbing cast of diverse characters (London is not mysteriously all white in this book). Peter’s growing relationships with friend, crush, and fellow apprentice wizard Leslie May, and their master Thomas Nightingale mix humour with a warmth and complexity that feels very honest. The thoughts throughout Peter’s narration about growing up throughout London as a person of mixed race and the ways this effects his work, plus the addition of a larger role for “Muslim ninja” policewoman Sara Guleed, help to make the series feel more representative of lived reality of what I understand is one of the world’s most culturally diverse cities.

I’ll own my shallowness and admit that the magic here in and of itself doesn’t grab me in the same flashy “pow!” “kaboom!” “zonk!” way that the action-friendly takes on the paranormal in, say, Butcher’s Dresden Files do. Here it’s Peter’s approach to this magic, the mixture of gleeful wonder and unsentimental experimentation and insistence that magic liven its ideas up and submit to being researched scientific method-style, that appeals, and gives Aaronovitch’s low-key take on the supernatural its own unique texture. (The location spirits are also great, particularly the rivers of London, and especially Peter’s sometime nemesis the casually malevolent Lady Tyburn.) In fact, now that I think about it, Jim Butcher’s Dresden novels and Aaronovitch’s books feel almost like two opposite ends of a spectrum encompassing mystery-based urban fantasy, though this could have something to do with me not being that familiar with the subgenre: Harry Dresden battles world-annihilating necromantic threats, vampire courts, and vicious faerie queens in Butcher’s increasingly epic, plot-heavy novels; Peter Grant and colleagues pursue suspects in magical murders by tracking shipments of vegetables up Tottenham Court Road and clambering around London’s sewers, and occasionally take time out to put in a bit of work on their manhunt for one single, shadowy, recurring villain. There are always stakes in the Peter Grant novels, and a larger plot is very slowly emerging, but the focus is very firmly grounded in the everyday rather than the epic, in the police procedure and the escapade of the moment. I kind of wish this overarching plot, which Aaronovitch keeps very much in the background in favour of standalone cases resolved within each episode, would get on a little faster, but we do get a bit of it in this one, and the development in the characters’ relationships serves as enough of a throughline between the books to make up for the snail’s pace at which the long game’s mysteries are unfurling.

In the same respect, while Whispers Under Ground’s climax takes low-key to an initially disorienting and deflating extreme — it involves pigshit, and completely subverts the expectation that a fantasy thriller of this kind will end with a violent showdown with evil –, upon reflection, in a genre crowded with action sequences, it’s really refreshing to find a series that often resists ostentatiously thunderous conflict, and — goose-stepping around spoilers here — privileges connection and cooperation over socking it to the forces of evil. Plus the books are gloriously nerdy. There are so many references. I’m sure I didn’t catch them all. We seem to have reached a point in the conversation about pop culture at which “beach read” or “airplane read” is as much an insult as it is a recommendation, implying that, while the book is very readable and passes time ably, it’s not very well done and falls apart when thought about. As you can tell by how often I’ve slipped away from talking about Whispers Under Ground specifically in favour of the series as a whole the Peter Grant novels do certainly have their greatest effect on me viewed as an overall series rather than as individual works of fiction, and they do absolutely fall into the category of fun, light reading, but they’re the stylistically distinctive, well-done kind of light reading that knows precisely the type of animal it is trying to be, is okay with this, and will never make your brain feel like it’s gone on a cotton candy bender when you finish it. Escapist in the best way. Start with Rivers of London (Midnight Riot in the US and Canada) for the full chronological effect, but really they stand alone well, and the narration explains the backstory enough that I can’t see jumping in with Whispers Under Ground being a problem. The series continues in Broken Homes, out this month in the UK and, due to a change in publishers, in February in North America.

Recommended: If you like supernatural mystery novels but don’t wanna get caught up in some huge long multibook plot. If you like things that can be earnest and funny at the same time with a strong first-person narrative voice. If you love very very British things.

Avoid: If you don’t like fun and hate England. So basically avoid these if you’re a monster. Oh, and I suppose if you like your supernatural elements less understated and prefer an overarching series plot that represents a little more these might legitimately not be for you.