skygiants | (no subject)

Crossposts: http://bookelfe.livejournal.com/308811.html

Entry tags:

(no subject)

So three years after everybody else in the world read Graceling, I too have at last read Graceling!

I think part of the reason I put it off for so long is because I remember it being HUGE at about the same time that The Hunger Games was huge. Also, they both have stoic lady protagonists with names beginning with Kat, which meant I could not tell them apart. So I read The Hunger Games after months and months of hype, and was entertained enough but somewhat underwhelmed after months and months of hype, and sort of went "well, that's my stoic-lady-protagonist-called-Kat taken care of!" and forgot about both of them for a while.

It turns out I probably should have done it the other way around, because I actually liked Graceling way better than The Hunger Games!*

Part of this is that Katsa has SO MUCH agency. For those of you who have not actually read Graceling: Katsa is a magically skilled killer who reluctantly intimidates and murders people for her uncle, a semi-evil king. I knew this going in.

I did not expect the book to open with Katsa going, "By the way, I was so bothered by all this intimidation and murdering that I decided to found a thriving secret organization to FIGHT CRIME AND ABUSES OF POWER all across the land! And it's going great, thanks for asking. Today I rescued someone's granddad, just because I don't want to live in a world where people's granddads get randomly kidnapped. AND IT WAS AWESOME."

Maybe it's because my expectations for Katsa's room to have agency were so low (probably due to The Hunger Games again -- sorry, Katniss!) but I was totally delighted by this and fell in love with Katsa from that moment on, big damn hero that she is. I spent the next four hundred pages watching Katsa do her badass thing and enjoyed it enormously.

My only real annoyance with the book was that the Big Bad was such an Inhuman Monster of Terribleness; there was room for a lot more subtle and interesting evil in there, given his particular superpowers, instead of "I am a sadist who murders cute fluffy animals and pursues whatever seems to be the most convoluted yet evil plan available at any given time."

I also can't decide how I feel about the final plot twist with Po. On the one hand, I'm kind of annoyed that it's yet another Blind But Not Really Because Superpowers. On the other hand, I guess I'm glad that the book did make it clear that being blind was still a problem and superpowers did not magically fix everything. But then on the third hand, despite all the effort that Cashore went to to establish this, I spent the entire last two chapters trying to repress a knee-jerk reaction of "Stop whining, Po, you can still BASICALLY see."

Anyway: I know at least a few of you posted about this book when it was still actually a trending topic! If you reviewed it I would love to get a link to your thoughts for my behind-the-times self. Or, you know, recap them here.

(Although, as a sidenote, The Hunger Games and I have now made our peace, due to a very pretty film soundtrack and some excellent costuming choices.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

There's more exploration of Po & more about [villain] in the later books though I'm not sure [villain] ever gets much motivation beyond 'horrible evil for everybody to respond to.'

What I particularly like about the third book (Bitterblue) is that we see Katsa and Po through an outside POV, and even though Bitterblue basically worships them, the story also makes it obvious that they are sometimes really infuriating people to be friends with.

Anyway yes, basically, excellent book. I particularly love the chapter that's just basically a series of completely contradictory internal monologues by Katsa about whether or not she likes Po. Like, "Feelings, what are these?" "I HATE FEELINGS." "But. . .maybe feelings have something to recommend them." "DOWN WITH FEELINGS!"

I actually finally got around to reading Graceling because I saw talk going around about Bitterblue, which seems like it deals with a lot of things I really like -- queenship! young rulers taking on their responsibilities! events from previous books in a series having consequences!

Hee! OH KATSA AND HER CONFLICTED FEELINGS ABOUT FEELINGS. She didn't ask for all these feels, man.

Yes, that's about right! Some people might tell you that you can skip right to BB from Graceling but I personally really enjoyed Fire (and it does have elements that show up again in BB, without spoiling)

I am a completionist reader at heart, so I probably would have plowed through all three regardless. Also, Fire sounds interesting for entirely different reasons! I am just extra looking forward to Bitterblue. :D

I've yet to read Graceling, it was on my list but not one I've read.

Also I've been thinking about you lately as I'm reading a non-fiction history book that I want to be so much better than it is. Its about anarchists and all that history in the 1800 and 1900s but the author doesn't know how to gossip. Instead its all then this happened and it makes me sad.

Oh no, that is a shame, because it sounds like a super fascinating topic! I firmly believe a solid component of gossipiness is important for any nonfiction history book.

It even has a fantastic title and cover; The World that Never Was, but its dull and the author clearly knows their stuff. The introduction was full of how hard it was to get information from archives, which made me think ooh, but then the book isn't as good.

I haven't completely stopped reading it but its one where I check how many pages are left in a chapter.

I own all of these books and I really like Graceling - but my favourite is absolutely Fire. Both protagonists are fabulous and very different, and very determined about their relationships and sexual agency, which I love. Still on the fence about Bitterblue. I need to reread it.

I have Fire out from the library now! I'm super looking forward to seeing how Cashore writes a very different protagonist.

It was big? Wow, I missed that whole fuss then. But it is a brulliant series, 100% correct, I can't wait for you to see Fire and Bitterblue because I think you will love them just as much.

Apparently there was fannish criticism of that whole Disability Superpower implication in Graceling, which Cashore like... acknowledged in Bitterblue??? Explicitly?????? Is this the real life

Maybe it just feels like it was big around my flist? I have memories of hearing about it a LOT, anyway. And I think it tends to come up a lot (often paired with The Hunger Games) in "Let's Talk About Strong YA Heroines" discussions, which, I mean, totally valid, Katsa is.

And YES GREAT. Ten points to Cashore for responding classily to criticism and acknowledging problematic stuff!

Yes, I came in to say that! She wrote like, "OOPS, okay, I did not realize that I took away all issues with Po's blindness so that he essentially was not blind, that was a problem! I tried to fix it! I'm sorry!" So Po's grace gets more complex in Bitterblue.

Interestingly, I didn't like Fire as much. It was good! I read it all! But I don't feel like I necessarily need to read it again the way I'd want to reread Graceling. Loved Bitterblue, though, which is a merge of the prior two--more from G, but a sprinkling of stuff from F, too.

I am curious to see which of the books I end up liking best! I suspect Bitterblue based on purely anecdotal evidence, but perhaps I will surprise myself. I may end up doing a poll once I've finished so everyone can come root for their favorite. :D

I have already told you my memory of my thoughts from two years ago, but I will recap here!

- loved Katsa forever
- dubious about the worldbuilding, but kind of figured going in that I probably would be, so I can mostly ignore that
- liked Po a lot too, especially the flipped gender dynamics inherent in Katsa/Po
- strongly disliked Bitterblue, not for herself but because she did not remotely read as a plausible child to me and so I got thrown out of the book nine times out of ten that she did anything.
- had similar thoughts about the villain, except that it didn't bother me so much because I sort of figure Evil Villain Who Is Evil Mwahahaha is a given when reading YA enough that I'm pleasantly surprised whenever it isn't the case.

My main complaint was Bitterblue, because that was the only thing that really threw me out of the story consistently. I haven't read Fire (yet) or Bitterblue (not sure if I will, though I'm intrigued by a couple of the things people have said in posts about it).

I did not think Bitterblue read as a plausible child either, but I was too busy being happy that Katsa was having real conversations with another woman to care all that much. (Not that I disliked Po! I thought they and their flipped gender dynamics were pretty adorable. But it made for a nice change.

Also, 'Bitterblue' is a REALLY WEIRD name for a kid, especially if you don't particularly want to signal to the whole world that you are planning to torture your daughter and make her perpetually sad when she grows up.)

I expect I will get around to Bitterblue with a reasonable turn of speed; if you want, I can let you know if I think you're likely to enjoy adult Bitterblue enough to overcome your initial dislike of her. :D

Edited 2012-10-18 03:07 (UTC)

I want, please! Everyone else seems to have unreservedly loved Bitterblue-the-character, or at least not found the problem worth commenting on in reviews if they did find it a problem. Which means that I can't tell from reviews of Bitterblue if I would find her far less annoying, or if it would be the same trouble except without Katsa's POV to keep me reading. I would be interested to hear your assessment!

But yeah, Bitterblue really is an odd name for a kid. Also, a bit of a tongue-twister. But oh well!

I will let you know, then! I am kind of expecting that adult Bitterblue-from-within is going to be a fairly different beast than baby Bitterblue-from-Katsa's-POV but I could be totally wrong on that.

I don't find it a tongue-twister particularly, and maybe a good name for, like, a river. In Hobbiton. ON THE BANKS OF THE BITTERBLUE etc. Just . . . not for a baby . . .

I think it's a Lienid thing? I mean, who names their baby Greening Grandemalion either? Admittedly, Greening Grandemalion is more on the lolarious side of baby names. Bitterblue.... not so much.

. . . this is a fair point. Maybe Bitterblue is the kind of thing depressed Lienids name their babies?

My kind of shallow review of Graceling and Fire, from a few years back. I think I'd have more nuanced thoughts on them if I bothered to reread. But I liked them, although I think Cashore tends towards ambitious ideas she maybe can't quite carry out.

I don't feel like particularly nuanced thoughts are necessary on Graceling, at least! I mean, I am happy to enjoy the book just on the level of "Katsa Beats Up Everything." :D

I am intrigued by these other comments, as I thought that Graceling was much better plotted than either Fire or Bitterblue--the latter two had lots of interesting ideas and I enjoyed reading them both, but the stories didn't feel complete in the way that Graceling did. (Maybe because Graceling was intended to be a one-shot and was then turned into a trilogy, like all successful YA novels?)

I have LOTS MORE THOUGHTS, but they will probably have to wait until the weekend. Curse you, progress reports!

I think you are the first person to pop up and say Graceling was the best! I will say I do not think Graceling is particularly well-plotted, though I don't think it's poorly plotted either. Its plot is basically a functional necessity in order to carry on the book's purpose of showing Katsa undergoing character growth and being awesome.

I look forward to your LOTS MORE THOUGHTS! :D

(Why am I still awake? I blame Yuletide.)

...so often when I say "I liked the plot" I mean "I liked the way the plot suited the characters." YES, I truly earned my undergrad degree. I liked the overall arc of KATSA'S INCREASING BADASSERY and the plot was made for that! The other two books are less about MAIN CHARACTER'S INCREASING BADASSERY and more along the lines of MAIN CHARACTER LEARNS TERRIBLE TRUTHS AND GROWS UP. Except Fire's terrible truth is deeply predictable and Bitterblue's terrible truth is really freakin' disturbing, like DEEPLY unsettling. The last book also ends on an ambiguous note, which generally I like, but I'm not sure if Cashore had the chops to accomplish what she wanted.

EVEN MORE WEIRDLY, I don't mind the narrative beatdown of the Hunger Games trilogy. The whole sacrificing children thing gave me certain expectations for how the overall narrative would go. Suzanne Collins also doesn't necessarily have the writing chops to fully express her vision, but WAR DESTROYS EVERYTHING IT TOUCHES INCLUDING THE SO-CALLED HEROES OF THE STORY was something I enjoyed seeing in a YA context!

NOW I AM REALLY GOING TO BED.

(I AM SO EXCITED for the day when I can finally sit down without distractions and plot out my Yuletide signups. Right now it is the greatest carrot for me to actually get through my days.)

Hee, yes, okay, fair and valid! In that case, I AGREE upon initial summation pending review of Fire and Bitterblue.

I did not mind the narrative beatdown, per se . . . (I also never really got to the narrative beatdown bits, I read the first book and then read enough spoilers that I never actually got around to the second and third.) But I did keep wanting more agency for Katniss, even if it was sucky agency -- like, my biggest problem with the first book is that Katniss never really had to make a choice about whether to kill somebody or not. And I wanted her to have to make that choice instead of the narrative making it for her! AGENCY.

PS I HOPE YOU GOT SOME SLEEP.

Wow I appear to have missed this in previous DW/LJ skimmings, but ahoy there! A book I have actually read! Though to be honest, while I generally enjoyed the story, Katsa just... hit all the wrong buttons for me? I still can't articulate why, but she is probably among my least favorite YA heroines, despite the fact she has so many aspects to her that I should like? I sometimes feel I ought to do a reread, just to try and be able to explain why she was such a turn off for me, especially since I read it when it when it first came out, so it's been a while.

That said, I still read the later books and: BITTERBLUUUUUUE *______*

Haha well, there is no such thing as 'should' in personal taste! You liked her or you didn't and that is your prerogative. :D I will continue to want to pat her head and give her encouraging talks about feelings, which is mine! I will be curious to hear if you put your finger on it during a reread, though.

I'm actually in the middle of Fire right now, also super enjoying it, also keep accidentally tripping and falling into it when I should be doing school reading!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only