Julio’s review of The Lies of Locke Lamora (Gentleman Bastard, #1) > Likes and Comments

113 likes · 
Comments Showing 1-23 of 23 (23 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Lori (new)

Lori Love your review... cannot disagree with a word of it, even though it's my all time favourite book.
(view spoiler)


✘✘ Sarah ✘✘ (former Nefarious Breeder of Murderous Crustaceans) I think I'm going to love the way women are depicted in this book. And, no queeeeeeeeeeers? Now now, Julio, don't be ridiculous. What would be the fun in having queeeeeeeeeeeers in a book?

I'm starting this on on Monday, so I better go and practice saying grrbhlstnwyrsheddin out loud.


message 3: by Cari (new)

Cari Z. I DNFed this one. The writing was so good but the story was so...yeah, choppy is the word.


message 4: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao Lori wrote: "Also. This is the book that lead me to gay fiction because I don't believe Locke & Jean aren't i..."

i'm sayin' tho. their meet-cute with chains had me like... awwww, bless


message 5: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao ✘✘ Sarah ✘✘ (former Nefarious Breeder of Murderous Crustaceans) wrote: "I'm starting this on on Monday, so I better go and practice saying grrbhlstnwyrsheddin out loud. "

heh. you might enjoy it a lot more than i did. i was definitely being unfair about the women, as they, uh, exist.

i just wish the ladies had more to do than menace men with teeth around their cocks


message 6: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao Cari wrote: "I DNFed this one. The writing was so good but the story was so...yeah, choppy is the word."

dat structure tho

i don't understand how nobody told him it was sapping his narrative of energy and momentum

just tell the fuckin story, stop with the eighty squintillion interludes


message 7: by carol. (new)

carol. haha--too funny "the man's got chops."
Isn't being all post-modern and hip with one's writing mean narrative jumping?


message 8: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao oh, god, carol. I know I'm a fussy fucker but it was starting to get funny. I'd be all into it and then—whomp whomp. time for an object lesson in intrusive world-building that may or may not come in handy later! yaaaaaaaay!!!!


message 9: by carol. (new)

carol. oh, and brilliant btw to notice the most important female was the one missing.


message 10: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao what even was that? I presume she appears later, but I've never really seen that before: here's someone you need to know JUST NOT IN THIS BOOK IN YOUR HANDS RIGHT NOW


message 11: by Choko (new)

Choko Very nice review!!!


message 12: by carol. (new)

carol. was it Lynch Being Mysterious? Was he trying to be like Rothfuss and Leave The Reader With Questions?

Personally, I found it annoying.

But now I'm leaning toward your thought that she is a stand-in so we don't misconstrue the intimate relationship between Jean and Locke.


message 13: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao it did seem curious. and we all know how fragile sff dudebros can be.


message 14: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao Choko wrote: "Very nice review!!!"

thank you, choko!


message 15: by Elizabeth (new)

Elizabeth Bernstein THANK YOU for noticing the lack of women. I'm 100 pages in and of the two women that have been mentioned, one was described as a bimbo and the other was eaten by a shark.


message 16: by Julio (last edited Apr 07, 2016 07:24AM) (new)

Julio Genao I hate that.

I never used to notice it—but now? it's like noticing there are no brown people on a tv show.

once you realize it, you can't un-realize it.


message 17: by Dafydd (new)

Dafydd I love your review! It totally moved me in the direction of "pass on this one because I've encountered enough stories where women are whores / killed / nonexistent." But your review was entertaining independent of its effect on my decision on whether to read the book.


message 18: by Tiyana (new)

Tiyana White time for another fucking interlude about the ceremonial vestments of the priesthood of chekthelionassus and why they only wear breechclouts on the third day of grrbhlstnwyrsheddin.

no, it's fine—go ahead. i'll wait."


Unfortunately, this was evident in the very first sentence--and several more times after within the first chapter sample I read. That immediately worried me, so if this really is a pattern throughout...then it's probably best I do myself a favor and not continue with this one. (I'm having a similar problem with Name of the Wind, which I stopped reading after so many chapters...)

Anyway, thanks for the heads up!


message 19: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao Tiyana wrote: "Unfortunately, this was evident in the very first sentence--and several more times after within the first chapter sample I read. That immediately worried me, so if this really is a pattern throughout..."

ugh. it drove me nuts.

name of the wind is fly, tho. that one i'd recommend sticking with, because the random stuff you don't get right away gets callbacks later in satisfying ways.

unlike in this one. :-/


message 20: by Julio (new)

Julio Genao David wrote: "I love your review! It totally moved me in the direction of "pass on this one because I've encountered enough stories where women are whores / killed / nonexistent." But your review was entertainin..."

fffffffenks!


message 21: by Lisa (new)

Lisa I disagree with you on the portrayal of women in the book. I originally thought the exact same thing - "this is a very male-dominated plot, all the women are either insignificant background characters or cannon fodder" - but then you hit the three-quarter-mark and it turns out that it's the women who pull all the strings to pretty much the entire plot, and that without them nothing would happen and/or everyone would be screwed - and I think that was the point of the backstory interlude about the whores of Camorr who formed the first guild.

I mean,
***spoiler alert for everything that follows***


You have, like you said, the Spider, a very clever woman who pulls the strings of the entire city and all its criminal and military contingents, and is only able to do so because people assume she could only ever be a man.

You have Dona Sofia, who single-handedly takes the plot forward for the entire second half of the book, defeats the thorn of Camorr through her "women's network" when her husband would happily have gone on being swindled for another five books, and literally saves the day by disarming several chemical weapons that would have destroyed the whole city.

You have the twin sisters, pretty much the true villains of the story, the brawn as well as the brains of the entire grey king's operation - they infiltrate the home of their enemy, work undercover for decades, and do all the work while the grey King runs around playing ghostly mascot. Oh, and they find the time to become executioners and lethal shark killers for sport.

And then you have Aza Guilla, the goddess of death, arguably the main character of the story, also represented as female.

So, yeah, when you stop and think about it, all the men in the story run around being flamboyant idiots while the women play all the key roles and pull all the strings behind the scenes. And I think that was very much intentional.


message 22: by Kelley (new)

Kelley Ceccato But are there any significant women in this story who are NOT villains, and NOT stuffed into the fridge with nary a tear shed on their behalf?


message 23: by Gitta (new)

Gitta I honestly wish I had seen this comment instead of all the 5 star ones before I added this book to my wishlist. Because same. Just... same.


back to top