(no subject)

[skygiants]

When I started reading the Seven Kingdoms Trilogy with Graceling, I was pretty much expecting that Bitterblue was going to be my favorite.

Now I've read Fire and Bitterblue, and my preferences did not totally shake out as I expected. I liked both of them! But I think if I had to pick one of the books in a cage match, it would be Fire.

Fire is about a woman named Fire who is a monster, which means she has the magic powers of being almost irresistible and a certain level of mind control over others. This is deconstructed as much as it ought to be. The plot isn't really a plot, per se, in that dramatic things happen; there's a war inching closer in the background, but most of the book is about Fire balancing her abilities with her responsibilities as a moral and ethical person, which she is. It's the quietness of Fire I like, as much as anything. I like seeing the dynamics shake out between the characters, who feel like real people with real concerns. I like seeing Fire figure out a place for herself on her own terms. It all feels very solid to me.

Bitterblue, meanwhile, is about learning how to rule and recovering from trauma -- on a personal and a nation-wide scale -- and both of these are things I really like, so theoretically it should be the book I like the most. And I do definitely admire a lot of what it's doing, but somehow the internal logic of it never felt one hundred percent solid to me. There's something almost dreamlike about the experience of reading it -- I mean, part of this is because everyone is super traumatized and so they keep spitting out trauma-related non sequiturs, and partly this is because all the architecture in the book was designed by a psychopath, including lots of weird sculptures and secret passageways, and partly this is because the government policies are designed by a lot of traumatized people and explicitly make no sense. But it means you get a lot of conversations like this:

BITTERBLUE: I would like to discuss our problematic governing policies with you.
ADVISOR: Just please don't bring up bones in the course of this conversation.
BITTERBLUE: What?
ADVISOR: Also, I don't know what you're talking about, Your Majesty, everything in the city is perfectly fine.
BITTERBLUE: What?
ADVISOR: Have you ever wondered what would happen if you jumped out a window? I wonder that. ALL THE TIME.
BITTERBLUE: What?
ADVISOR: May I be excused?

And then Bitterblue will wander off down a secret passageway and stare at some surrealistic architecture and think about how none of her advisors make any sense, which they don't. So, I mean, I liked it, and I'm very glad she wrote it, but I had a little bit of a harder time investing in it . . .

(Also, and unrelatedly, I was incredibly bored and annoyed by the love interest, although I liked the way it was evently resolved.)

(Also also, even more unrelatedly, but can we have a moratorium on characters-named-Death-pronounced-differently? I actually liked this particular character, but I kept getting distracted!)

This is just me, though! I know a bunch of people who say Bitterblue is their favorite of the trilogy, and there are definitely good reasons for that. So because I'm curious, a poll:

Poll #13297

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 20

View Respondents

My favorite book in the Seven Kingdoms Trilogy is . . .

View Answers

Graceling!
6 (30.0%)

Fire!
8 (40.0%)

Bitterblue!
3 (15.0%)

I can't pick, I loved all of them!
3 (15.0%)

I can't pick, I hated all of them!
0 (0.0%)

Comments

[likeadeuce]

I really liked Fire a lot too. I liked the idea of Bitterblue but -- well, all the stuff you said. And while I liked the general idea of Bitterblue going undercover out into the city, and monarch-in-disguise as a romance motif, I agree with you that the specific love interest was obnoxious.

[skygiants]

It's extra frustrating because there were a bunch of actually likeable dudes lurking around -- Teddy! Teddy was great! -- and instead we got the BLANDEST AND MOST ANNOYING ONE OF ALL.

[minkhollow]

I can't pick, I've only read Graceling! (The sentence fragments. For no apparent reason. Drove me a little batty. That and I wasn't quite pulled in by the world, so I haven't felt the need to seek out the other two.)

[skygiants]

Hee, I've seen other people complain about the prose. It doesn't bother me! But I can't read Tamora Pierce's prose anymore, so everybody is different . . .

[oyceter]

I hated the love interest for Bitterblue!

Also, I felt it was very dreamlike in that the same things kept happening over and over. I think Bitterblue went through the following conversation about fifteen times.

ADVISER: Everything is great!
BITTERBLUE: Uh.... I do not trust you.
ADVISER: Here is a hint about stuff that is not great!
BITTERBLUE: Maybe I can trust you.
ADVISER: More secrets!
BITTERBLUE: No more trust!

I like Fire and Graceling pretty equally; Graceling won for me in the poll mostly due to how refreshing the "I don't want kids and don't want marriage" was.

[rachelmanija]

Not to mention that two of her advisors take the exact same very dramatic action in quick succession. I got to the second one and thought, "Didn't I just read that?"

I have no recollection of the love interest in Bitterblue. I guess I didn't even find him memorable enough to hate.

[skygiants]

It also weirded me out a little that almost everyone in the palace had basically the same reaction to the trauma -- enough to agree on a very specific and conspiratorial course of action -- and everyone in the city had a different reaction. Like, I appreciate that they're all treated with compassion, but surely at least some of the people in the palace would have a different response . . .?

[jinian]

(I just want you to know that I successfully identified Hawkeye from that image.)

[skygiants]

(TEN POINTS TO GRYFFINDOR. :D)

[rachelmanija]

Yeah, it's a little strange. I felt like the book was very convincing in terms of "what would it be like if the entire country was traumatized?" but less good at differentiating how different individuals reacted to trauma.

On the other hand, I'm not sure it was meant to be "realistic" in the same way as the other two novels. I thought of it as allegorical, but dreamlike also fits.

[skygiants]

Yeah, I think that's part of what jarred me -- I went in expecting a commensurate level of realism, and I got something that wasn't trying for that, and found it disorienting. Which is not really the book's fault! I think the surrealism works in a way for what she's trying to do, as you say, which is more on the scale of overarching effects than individuals.

[skygiants]

Not just a jerk, but a boring jerk! Two unforgivable sins.

Also, hah, yes, this is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT ACCURATE. And I kept wondering why she only ever interacted with the same six people in her palace in order to have the same frustrating conversations -- like, I get that was part of the plot and the conspiracy, but still! (And then the same six people in the city, when she went into the city.)

I like both of them a lot; Fire feels like a more mature book to me, so it wins out by a margin, but Graceling was just deeply enjoyable. And refreshing, as you say!

[hebethen]

I kind of conceptualized him as an anti-LI, aha. It's definitely a big change from the previous two books with their straight-up romances!

Who's the other death (psych!!!), the guy from Feet of Clay? I agree it's a bit distracting; comic fiction gets a pass, but Bitterblue is... not comic fiction :P It is my favorite of the three -- though it must be admitted that I have always liked dreamy, vaguely weird stories, so you are probably onto something there.

[skygiants]

Ha, it's true! I did really like that it basically turned out to be ust a fling, but I would have appreciated it more if I could muster up any reason why Bitterblue would be interested in him in the first place . . .

There's the Discworld character, there's Lord Peter Wimsey's alter ego Death Bredon, there's Deth the harper from The Riddlemaster of Hed (though I guess that's the reverse -- spelled differently, pronounced the same) . . . I'm sure there are others that I'm forgetting, too!

[dimestore_romeo]

I think I read Graceling first, then Fire, then Bitterblue. I definitely preferred Fire out of the three, because I thought that in comparison to Graceling it was very tightly focused on the theme of human nature and relationships, whereas with Graceling I felt that physical endurance came out more strongly? You're right when you say Fire is a quiet book, and I enjoyed the way that the past was so slowly revealed and how much Fire herself struggled with her own nature.

In both books I LOVED the feminist themes, and the very alternative (for fantasy) approach to fertility and children - Katsa DOES NOT want children, she is absolutely sure, and the man she loves says "fine, we can grow the birth control plants in our garden!" That has never happened in another book I have read. And Fire, although she wants children, refuses to do it, makes sure she never can, and embraces her found family! The most memorable parts for me, definitely.

[skygiants]

That's the order I read it in too! And yeah -- I mean, I really like Graceling as well, and it makes perfect sense that it is the way it is, because that's what Katsa is focused on; they're both books that are very shaped by their protagonists. But Fire's story was just so interesting! (Also, it had a bigger cast, and I love ensemble pieces.)

But yeah, I appreciate the feminist messages of both books as well. And, again, the way they were handled very differently, because the protagonists were such different people.

[nextian]

Yeah, agreed! I liked what she was trying to do in Bitterblue best, but Fire was so much better constructed that I'd rather spend time in it by a large margin. Fire was also by far (and for very good reasons) the most adult protagonist in the most adult world of the three books. Neither Katsa nor Bitterblue felt their age to me, Bitterblue especially; Bitterblue obviously had reasons for this, but it still was more fun for me to read someone who, while sometimes immature and still definitely acting in a YA context, was capable of thinking through political situations in a more careful and reasonable way, since all three characters insisted on doing it. *g*

[skygiants]

Yeah, this, one hundred percent. I mean, both Katsa and Fire have done significant things before their books begin -- which is something I like of both of them -- but Fire especially starts out with a much more careful conception of herself and the ripples that her actions may have in the world. Whereas Bitterblue spent a lot of time flailing around trying to be active and having her actions sort of rebound back at her because of things she hadn't thought fully through, and couldn't fully control.

[lacewood]

I think I enjoyed the cumulative effect of all 3 books and how they add up as a whole most of all. XD Because then it becomes the story of multiple girls learning to deal with their very different powers in vastly different ways, and that's always SUPER REFRESHING to see.

Bitterblue's scope seems so ambitious for a YA novel that I am willing to give Cashore points for even attempting it, even if she didn't entirely succeed in the execution. In comparison, Graceling/Fire were relatively smaller in scope, so it makes a lot of sense that they would be better executed, and I think Fire fares best there.

[skygiants]

Yes! I do really like how different they all are, and how much the books are shaped by those differences. Like, there's a reason all the books feel different, it's because they're about different people!

And for all my quibbles with Bitterblue, I definitely am super glad she wrote it. I feel like you so often get HEINOUSLY TERRIBLE VILLAINS in fantasy and then they're defeated and everything's fine -- it was a really nice change to actually see the long-term consequences of that explored. Like, this feels weird to say, but I think writing Bitterblue was the responsible thing to do, and I have a lot of respect for Cashore as a responsible writer.

[thistleingrey]

I thought Graceling was okay (disliked the worldbuilding) and bounced twice off the early pages of Fire. Bitterblue and I will have a go once the local library has circulating copies that aren't stuck in hold limbo; it's still going pretty good guns.

[skygiants]

The worldbuilding, especially in Graceling, is not really the strongest point of the series. (Well, mostly the naming conventions, which are kind of hilariously prosaic. ESTILL. MIDDLUNS.) I'll be curious to see how you and Bitterblue get on!

[aeslis]

I found Bitterblue absolutely fascinating, but the whole side-plot with the ciphers felt a little bit didactic to me, and THAT's what I found distracting. Then there was the disturbing content, which I wasn't exactly bothered by, but I don't feel like I can really recommend it to its intended YA audience. That's some disturbing shit up in there. Thankfully most of the disturbing shit wasn't ever actually 'on camera' as it were.

Fire was actually my least favorite, just because it felt like such a departure. As you pointed out, it wasn't so much plot-driven, which I found to be a weakness. Also I got very confused about how this kingdom is RIGHT THERE and yet you can only get to it by... falling through the mountains? So nobody knows about it?

On the other hand, I did like how balanced Fire herself was, and how she knew explicitly from the beginning that she never intended to have children. Yet she still found someone, and that person accepted her and didn't try to convince her or change her mind in another direction. Good message!

Graceling is still my favorite, though, because of how plot-driven it is while still character-focused, and it doesn't have nearly so many "Wait, what?" moments.

Meanwhile, I recommend you don't ever go read the commentary on GoodReads, because there are so many people who whine and carry on about how anti-feminist this series is. It flabbergasts me. Are they reading what I'm reading?! Or even, how it's such a loud attempt at feminism that it's pushing a feminist agenda while being full of things that make it BAD FEMINISM. I can't stand it. Augh.

[skygiants]

Hah, in general I liked the cipher stuff, but my biggest problem was that it went on and on about ONE kind of cipher which always turned out to be the key to everything. There are other kinds, I'm fairly sure . . .

Graceling I think definitely has the best balance of action and character! It's less ensemble-y, which is the other reason I like Fire more -- I like seeing sets of characters interact -- but it's definitely the clearest in terms of things ACTUALLY HAPPENING.

I keep hearing this about reviews on Goodreads and it BOGGLES me. I don't understand!

[littledust]

You know, I'm not minding so much that I am perpetually late on commenting on these posts, because then I can just steal everyone else's thoughts! *G* Graceling is my favorite (my whole household's favorite, actually) because of the balance between plot and character, as stated above. I was very fond of the ensemble in Fire, but a little meh on the plot.

Repetition! Repetition was one of my two issues with Bitterblue! The other issue was how nauseating I found the claustrophobic, fearful tone of the book--like, actually physically nauseating--which the book can't really help, since exploring trauma and recovery is the whole point of it! The repetitive bits only compounded the nausea, though, and I had had really high expectations thanks to the Internet. :( I liked many characters in the book very much (though you're right, BORING LOVE INTEREST), wasn't so fond of the plot.

[morbane]

Coming in EXTREMELY late to ask hopefully: is Winterkeep on your to-read list? Because I liked Bitterblue a lot (though, yes, not Saf) and liked Fire best... until Winterkeep came along, and now I cannot decide between Winterkeep and Fire.