On Swordspoint and its "sequel", The Privilege of the Sword, and its ""sequel"", Fall of the Kings.
So I have (long since) finished _Swordspoint_. And its "sequel" (in quotations for a few reasons), _The Privilege of the Sword_. I have read the additional three short stories in the back of Swordspoint (and if I have ever done anything save eating hungrily, it was reading those stories). All that's left of canon is _Fall of the Kings_, which is a ""sequel"".
I am sad.
Okay, so PotS was good, but not Swordspoint-good. The political machinations were less interesting, having more to do with money than the fact that everyone in the city is a fuhreaking lunatic. I was thrilled, though, that _____ _____ed _____, and the way it was carried out was nothing short of shocking - in a giggle-inducing way. (No, the second blank is not what you probably think it is.) Katherine was kind of neat - not the Mary-Sue I was afraid of. The first third or so of the book, she's whiny and distraught ("I thought I was going to go to the city to become a woman, and wear pretty dresses, and look elegant on staircases, and meet cute boys, and I have to dress in boy clothes?"), and it's kind of funny. Her romance is not nearly as contrived as it could have been - sort of jarring and groan-worthy in the beginning, but not bad after that. Also, apparently going into the city makes you bisexual. =D *cheeky grin*
So I put "sequel" in quotation marks because ... well, firstly, it wasn't really about the main characters of Swordspoint. Secondly, it was not at all the same writing style. Neil Gaiman, paraphrased: "It reads like a YA novel for really smart YAs, only with lashings of hot sex.". Thirdly, it was a feminist novel. Kind of Tamora Pierce-esque, actually. It had four plots that were noticeable to the unshrewd eye: Katherine's training to be a swordsman; Artemisia's, um, *spoilers*; Teresa Grey's difficulty divorcing her husband; and Richard and Alec, which was more of a subplot, really. I mean, feminist novels are fine, really. But Swordspoint was not one of them. Swordspoint managed to not even be gay lit. It didn't stand for anything, and it couldn't have, and that's the way it should be.
On Richard and Alec: MORE. MOREMOREMOREMOREMORE. Ellen Kushner needs to understand that I want her to record every minute of Richard and Alec's lives, from when each are born, to the day they met, to the day they each die. I want tiny little things, like those scattered throughout Swordspoint - things like Alec using Richard's left-handed dagger to slice bread, much to the swordsman's chagrin; things like how Richard hates fish and Alec is for some reason obsessed with the idea of keeping bees; small images like Alec spreading his elbows out over the pillows so that Richard can't sleep and will have to tell him how his last fight went. I mean, big angsty things like those in PotS are fine, but they come secondary to how freaking domestic these two relative psychopaths are. How very much meant for each other they are.
And what do I get for this devotion? Two scenes. TWO SCENES. The first one is ... okay, it's from Katherine's POV, and it uses that awful device of "Oh, I dreamed that I heard these voices talking." when no one believes for a second that it's a dream. Anyway, so the first scene is mostly dialogue, and it's slightly over-the-top, angst-wise. I mean, really. However, Alec gets some very poetic lines in there, and that's nice. If not entirely IC. The second one is much more Swordspoint, but is way too short. Still...TWO SCENES.
*frustrated*
Anyway, _Fall of the Kings_ gets two sets of quotation marks because it has none of the same characters as Swordspoint, and is not about them. It is, however, set in the same universe. So technically, it counts. I read the prologue, and it was ... bizarre. Really, really bizarre. So I'm going to read it. And I'm going to like it. And I'm going to miss Richard and Alec.
I am sad.
Okay, so PotS was good, but not Swordspoint-good. The political machinations were less interesting, having more to do with money than the fact that everyone in the city is a fuhreaking lunatic. I was thrilled, though, that _____ _____ed _____, and the way it was carried out was nothing short of shocking - in a giggle-inducing way. (No, the second blank is not what you probably think it is.) Katherine was kind of neat - not the Mary-Sue I was afraid of. The first third or so of the book, she's whiny and distraught ("I thought I was going to go to the city to become a woman, and wear pretty dresses, and look elegant on staircases, and meet cute boys, and I have to dress in boy clothes?"), and it's kind of funny. Her romance is not nearly as contrived as it could have been - sort of jarring and groan-worthy in the beginning, but not bad after that. Also, apparently going into the city makes you bisexual. =D *cheeky grin*
So I put "sequel" in quotation marks because ... well, firstly, it wasn't really about the main characters of Swordspoint. Secondly, it was not at all the same writing style. Neil Gaiman, paraphrased: "It reads like a YA novel for really smart YAs, only with lashings of hot sex.". Thirdly, it was a feminist novel. Kind of Tamora Pierce-esque, actually. It had four plots that were noticeable to the unshrewd eye: Katherine's training to be a swordsman; Artemisia's, um, *spoilers*; Teresa Grey's difficulty divorcing her husband; and Richard and Alec, which was more of a subplot, really. I mean, feminist novels are fine, really. But Swordspoint was not one of them. Swordspoint managed to not even be gay lit. It didn't stand for anything, and it couldn't have, and that's the way it should be.
On Richard and Alec: MORE. MOREMOREMOREMOREMORE. Ellen Kushner needs to understand that I want her to record every minute of Richard and Alec's lives, from when each are born, to the day they met, to the day they each die. I want tiny little things, like those scattered throughout Swordspoint - things like Alec using Richard's left-handed dagger to slice bread, much to the swordsman's chagrin; things like how Richard hates fish and Alec is for some reason obsessed with the idea of keeping bees; small images like Alec spreading his elbows out over the pillows so that Richard can't sleep and will have to tell him how his last fight went. I mean, big angsty things like those in PotS are fine, but they come secondary to how freaking domestic these two relative psychopaths are. How very much meant for each other they are.
And what do I get for this devotion? Two scenes. TWO SCENES. The first one is ... okay, it's from Katherine's POV, and it uses that awful device of "Oh, I dreamed that I heard these voices talking." when no one believes for a second that it's a dream. Anyway, so the first scene is mostly dialogue, and it's slightly over-the-top, angst-wise. I mean, really. However, Alec gets some very poetic lines in there, and that's nice. If not entirely IC. The second one is much more Swordspoint, but is way too short. Still...TWO SCENES.
*frustrated*
Anyway, _Fall of the Kings_ gets two sets of quotation marks because it has none of the same characters as Swordspoint, and is not about them. It is, however, set in the same universe. So technically, it counts. I read the prologue, and it was ... bizarre. Really, really bizarre. So I'm going to read it. And I'm going to like it. And I'm going to miss Richard and Alec.