It’s good that I did not expect Provenance, Ann Leckie’s most recent book, to be a repeat of the brilliance of her Ancillary Justice trilogy. It is not. It’s more of a mystery wrapped in politics. One professional review I read described it as a “cozy mystery.” It’s not cozy at all and that review is yet another example why I rarely use professional reviews as a guide to select my reading. Unfortunately, I found the book slow-moving with a rather boring, uninteresting main character and a disorganized plot involving alien politics that weren’t described clearly. I finished the book mostly out of respect for Ann Leckie’s earlier—and hopefully, future—brilliance.
Ingray Aughskold is one of two adopted children of Netano Aughskold, the matriarch of a powerful political family from Hwae. She has to compete with her brother, Danach, to win the approval of her mother and thus be named her heir. In order to do this, she has gambled on a scheme that, if it fails, will leave her penniless, scorned and without a future. However, if she succeeds, she will best her brother and possibly become the new leader of a powerful political family. Her scheme does go awry almost immediately and Ingray is pulled into a plot that involves powerful politicians on her home world and others, along with the alien species the Geck.
For me, this book starts out very slowly. Everything is told from Ingray’s perspective and Ingray is not a particularly vivid character. She’s the underdog, the inept, the less-favored of her mother’s children. She’s not so much unlikeable as boring as white bread. She cries a lot and doesn’t seem to have much of a sense of humor. She also kept losing her hairpins and I got very annoyed with how often her hairpins (missing or placed appropriately in her hair) were mentioned. I much preferred the mysterious and sometimes sarcastic Captain Uisine and the mysterious Pahlad Budrakim. None of the characters are as complex and well-written as in Leckie’s earlier books. None of them come across as particularly distinct.
The mystery/political intrigue did not draw me in at all. Aside from uninteresting characters, the plot isn’t clearly defined and I couldn’t quite get a grip on it. Is it a mystery? Is it a political drama? I fault Leckie for not describing the politics of the worlds clearly. Four different worlds are involved: Hwae, Tyr Siilas, Byeit and Omkem—and I’m actually not sure if Tyr Siilas is a separate world or a city on one of those worlds. The Geck, a non-human alien species, also makes an appearance. Leckie’s world building isn’t thorough enough for me to understand completely the differences between these people. This is a serious problem for me as the politics of these worlds are vitally important to the plot. Not much happens in the book; it’s pages of tedious dialogue strung together by a few bits of excitement. The last event of the book, which Ingray inserts herself into a heroically-I’m-rolling-my-eyes kind of way, results in an ending that is entirely predictable and not at all satisfactory. There’s also a kind of awkward romance that crops up between Ingray and another character who isn’t around enough for you to really care about—especially when Ingray herself is so annoying you can barely bring yourself to give a shit about her. The second awkward romance is between two other major characters and it’s just like…why? I mean, the book doesn’t spend enough time on them for me to really care/root for/be interested in their romantic attachments. Ann Leckie, please stop trying to force romances between your characters. The chemistry between Breq and Seivarden in The Ancillary Justice series was so good because it developed naturally. I didn’t have to read sentences like, “And suddenly it mattered very much to Ingray how Taucris would look at her, when she turned to face her again” (222).
A lot in the plot hinges on the idea of “vestiges,” historical artifacts very important to the Hwaeans. It seems these vestiges are what we would call souvenirs—postcards from a town you visited, an invitation from an important party—material objects you would keep for personal and historical reasons. A lot of what we keep in museums Hwaeans would consider vestiges—The Declaration of Independence, the Magna Carta, Great Britain’s Coronation Chair (actually kept in Westminster Abbey), a pen used to sign important documents, etc. These vestiges are very important to the Hwaeans and if you are politically powerful, you should have an impressive collection of them. The showdown at the end of the novel involves the most important Hwaean vestiges and a somewhat tiresome discussion of what’s more important: the objects themselves or what they symbolize. The discussion is tiresome only because of the characters involved and in the end, it’s a meaningless discussion because it doesn’t affect the actions of Ingray or other characters.
I also want to mention the third gender that Leckie introduces. It’s annoying as hell and distracting because Leckie so gracelessly shoves the reader’s face in it and yet never explains it—either directly through exposition or by a conversation between characters. These characters are humans and as humans, we (usually) only possess male or female parts. But in this novel, there are “nemans,” who are neither male or female (or both?) and “e” is used in place of “he/she” and “eir” and “em” used for possessive pronouns. I don’t know how “nemans” came to exist. One character is mentioned as having delayed choosing her name, thus her adulthood, for a long time because she was unsure and when her old name is mentioned, the non-specific “they” is used but after she has a new name, she’s a “she.” So…what the hell? There are a lot of “nemans” in the novel, and Ingray’s relative is one, her “nuncle.” “Nuncle” comes across as male to me, but apparently e’s not. E’s a neman. If Leckie intended to have a lot of nemans in her novel, she should have somehow figured out how to explain what they are—are they transgender? Are they deliberately not picking a gender? What’s going on? I have to say I spent a lot of time learning to read “e” and “eir” and “em” the way Leckie meant, and not as typos. She complicated the issue by insisting on using “eir” when a non-gender specific word (“the”) could have been used instead. I do wonder if the nemans are Leckie’s way of making a political point about transgender people because the nemans seem awfully overt to me (an artificial designation of a certain group of people) instead of occurring naturally. In her earlier trilogy of books, the Radch people/culture isn’t explained by long passages of exposition. While reading, you gradually learn about their religion, their customs, the fact that they do not consider gender to be important. It’s skillful writing. However, that level of skill and ingenuity is not present. I learned very little about these worlds and these people and none of them (aside from the Geck, because they are a holdover from the earlier books) makes much of an impression on me.
Because Leckie’s earlier novels are so incredibly good, it’s unrealistic to expect her to produce yet another amazing novel, or the first of another amazing trilogy. However, I would have rather learned more about the people and worlds she introduced in the earlier novels than these worlds and characters who aren’t a part of the Radch civilization (that is, the Radch never conquered them) and don’t expand the universe that she already created. Provenance is not terrible, but neither the plot nor the characters are all that fascinating and complex. My reaction to reading this book is the exact opposite of reading the books in the trilogy: with Provenance I would sigh with frustration to see how many pages I had left to wade through; with the earlier ones I was horrified at how quickly the pages dwindled. Provenance merely makes me want to pull Ancillary Justice down from my shelf and read it for the fourth time.