Miévillians discussion
This topic is about
Deathless
Catherynne M. Valente
>
Deathless spoiler thread 2: Chapters 6 to end of 9
date
newest »
newest »
I'm not far enough yet to comment (my reading has suffered much in the last fortnight), but I'll push through tomorrow, because I really like this part so far!
You know, we could always do it chapter by chapter as we go along, in the respective threads. I purposely only posted about the first chapter, because I was thinking to try out the way we discussed a book in an informal discussion thread elsewhere on GR, where we sort of did it chapter by chapter in the same thread.
I read Chapter 6 a couple of weeks ago, and I liked it. I liked the intimacy of their journey, the surreality of the things Marya was seeing and experiencing, and the notion that it could all very well be delirium brought on by her sickness.There was, of course, also a thread of unease for me. This was obviosuly an unhealthy relationship, one Marya believe she could control despite her being ill, in a strage land, and with no one to support her. I felt great concern for her during that time.
The next chapter, however, changed things for me considerably. We see Marya after she has been living in Koschei's realm for some time. She hunts animals for sport, she wears jewels on her fingers and in her hair and practically everywhere else on her body, she orders others around like a queen, and she doles out cruelty to those who should be her friends without a second thought, justifying it as something they enjoy. Marya is a changed person, and not one I particularly like.
Indeed, this change has made it a little difficult for me to read on. How can I enjoy a book if I despise all the major characters? I continue in the hope that Marya will redeem herself.
I'm continually amused by how communism bleeds into the fairy-tale world (Property is theft!) and also by how it parallels the real-world lies of it all: it's not Comrade Yaga; it's Chairman Yaga, and don't you forget it!
Finally, I was intrigued by the descriptions of Buyan. You get a general impression of pastoralprettiness, but this is juxtaposed with grotesqueries like fountains gushing blood and dermal walls getting goosebumps in a chill wind---because all of it is life, after all.
This (not to mention Koschei's behaviour) highlights that, despite what some of us may like to tell ourselves, life is no more inheerently good than death is bad. I think I'd hate living in Buyan: constant war, deep-seated inequality, and a stagnant culture? No thanks.
Thanks for that nice long post, J.J. wrote: "This was obviosuly an unhealthy relationship,"
Hmm, would you care to elaborate on that? I'm interested to know how you view their relationship and why you say this is obvious? I suspect different people might have different ideas over that, but I'd be interested in your own view of why you said that?
I'm not saying that I necessarily disagree, but I found their relationship rather complex and not easy to define and something that wasn't easy to put a stereotype tag on to.
J. wrote: "Indeed, this change has made it a little difficult for me to read on. How can I enjoy a book if I despise all the major characters? I continue in the hope that Marya will redeem herself.."
Marya's apparent dominance did seem rather jarring to me at first, but I'd like to know, when you get a bit further on, if you still dislike Marya. I saw it as part of her strength, her fighting spirit, and part of why Koshcei had chosen her in the first place.
I'm not sure what Marya has done to make you despise her? And who are the other characters that you despise?
J. wrote: "This (not to mention Koschei's behaviour) highlights that, despite what some of us may like to tell ourselves, life is no more inheerently good than death is bad. "
Do you honestly feel this way? You feel that oblivion would be worse than being aware, even when one's being alive comes with hardship? I'm not sure that I personally agree with that, though there have been times in my life when i would have preferred oblivion, and there might come such a time again. All in all, I'd fight for my life as things stand now, I'd say.
J. wrote: " I think I'd hate living in Buyan: constant war, deep-seated inequality, and a stagnant culture? "
Have you come to the bit where you find out who the war is against, though?
I'm not too sure what you mean by deep-seated inequality and stagnant culture, though? I must have missed that, because Buyan seemed to me to be supposed to represent a kind of Utopia, ha ha. (For Marya at least.) She gets to live like an aristocrat, being free to hunt and hang out with her friends all day, couched in the most exquisite luxury, amongst people that she loves. (And she gets lots of yummy things to eat, which is a biggie, since hunger seems to have been one of the biggest hardships in Russia around that time.)
It is true that she and Koschei are pretty rough with one another, but I took this as part of the theme that Koschei represents "life", and the fact that life is indeed filled with hardship as well as pleasure.
This is why I wasn't sure if Buyan might have been wishful thinking on Marya's part? An imaginary world that she could escape to? But then, who would wish Baba Yaga on yourself, ha ha ha.
Traveller wrote: "I must admit that I already started feeling a bit confused here. The previous husbands covered the Tsarists, the Whites, the Reds, and finally the Bolsheviks or Soviets. Who is Koschei supposed to represent? This is where the story starts to resemble the folktales more closely, what with them going to Koschei's own country, Buyan. "Trav, confused is my normal reaction to Valente's works until I get closer to the end. The thing is - she never sticks just with one nice parallel to the world, she usually is all over the place, covering quite a bit of ground, and eventually it all comes together in a beautiful tapestry. This is becoming so much more prominent to me since it's my second read of 'Deathless'.
To me, it's not as much about the magical world paralleling the real world; it's about traces of one invading the others and not even the world of fairytales being safe from the rest of the world, from darkness and cruelty and thirst for power and blood. Marya's former life and her new life are more similar, more entwined than the girl who lost her red Pioneer scarf could have dared to imagine. You can't escape reality even if you dash head first into the world of magic because they are one and the same, really.
J. wrote: "I'm continually amused by how communism bleeds into the fairy-tale world (Property is theft!) and also by how it parallels the real-world lies of it all: it's not Comrade Yaga; it's Chairman Yaga, and don't you forget it!
Finally, I was intrigued by the descriptions of Buyan. You get a general impression of pastoralprettiness, but this is juxtaposed with grotesqueries like fountains gushing blood and dermal walls getting goosebumps in a chill wind---because all of it is life, after all."
I really like your observation here. Life encompasses all, even if it's not warm and fuzzy, even if it's disturbing and troubling. Especially given who Koschei is (view spoiler), it's very fitting.
J. wrote: "The next chapter, however, changed things for me considerably. We see Marya after she has been living in Koschei's realm for some time. She hunts animals for sport, she wears jewels on her fingers and in her hair and practically everywhere else on her body, she orders others around like a queen, and she doles out cruelty to those who should be her friends without a second thought, justifying it as something they enjoy. Marya is a changed person, and not one I particularly like.Indeed, this change has made it a little difficult for me to read on. How can I enjoy a book if I despise all the major characters? I continue in the hope that Marya will redeem herself."
I agree with you - the characters in this book are incredibly flawed; they have amazing qualities (like Marya - she is full of strength and vitality, but with it comes recklessness and impulsiveness, poor judgment and even casual careless cruelty) but in the end they are not exempt from all the fallacies that make humans... well... human. Marya goes on to do so many reckless and stupid things - but she has an amazing heart and so much passion that to me it justifies it all.
I will spoiler-tag a beautiful quote from Koschei that comes from Chapter 13:
(view spoiler)
Traveller wrote: "J. wrote: "This was obviosuly an unhealthy relationship,"
Hmm, would you care to elaborate on that? I'm interested to know how you view their relationship and why you say this is obvious? I suspect different people might have different ideas over that, but I'd be interested in your own view of why you said that?
I'm not saying that I necessarily disagree, but I found their relationship rather complex and not easy to define and something that wasn't easy to put a stereotype tag on to."
I found the power play in their relationship pretty staggering, actually. It's like a miniature war, a push-and-shove relationship that is always on the verge of tipping the precarious balance and descending into a real battle. Marya made a conscious choice when she was just a little girl to have power that stemmed from knowing where her sisters' husbands came from; she cannot stand to be left out of the loop - and many of her actions are propelled by her need to know, to be reckoned with. Koschei is an ancient domineering power that has met his match - and he will put up his own battle. It is not quite healthy, but it works for those two, feeds the primal forces inside them.
I'm loving this discussion. Nataliya, I think your reply to J. makes me realize where he might be coming from.J., I suspect you're wanting your protagonist, and especially since she is female, to be 'good' in the traditional role that is designated for 'good' females. Valente is having none of that, she subverts traditional female virtue and gives us a character who is, like Nataliya mentions, human, alive, and full of vitality. Full of 'human' qualities even though they are not traditionally feminine.
I've been suddenly reminded of Scarlett O'Hara in Gone with the Wind. Scarlett is actually a very unlikable protagonist- one actually feels a lot more drawn to her quiet, more traditionally feminine cousin Melanie, but boy, has Scarlett got spunk and can she get things done! Despite disliking Scarlett at the start of the novel, one has to grudgingly admire her toward the end of the novel.
Traveller wrote: "I've been suddenly reminded of Scarlett O'Hara in Gone with the Wind. Scarlett is actually a very unlikable protagonist- one actually feels a lot more drawn to her quiet, more traditionally feminine cousin Melanie, but boy, has Scarlett got spunk and can she get things done! Despite disliking Scarlett at the start of the novel, one has to grudgingly admire her toward the end of the novel."I dislike 'Gone With The Wind' with all the racism it does not even try to veil and instead just glorifies. But I have always loved Scarlett because of her vitality and, as Trav puts it, spunk. Scarlett May be the queen if stupid choices, but the fire in her is amazing.
Traveller, it's actually much more basic than that. It has nothing to do with what's typical or expected in a narrative nor is it related to Marya being a young woman. Quite simply, I think of myself as a generally good person, and I can't justify to myself rooting for a cruel, scheming person, especially one who has become so over the course of the narrative. That's just me, though.
J. wrote: "Traveller, it's actually much more basic than that. It has nothing to do with what's typical or expected in a narrative nor is it related to Marya being a young woman. Quite simply, I think of m..."
I perfectly understand where you are coming from. There were so many parts of the book where I wanted to reach into the story and shake some sense into Marya! And yet under all the frustration I still loved her spirit. Then Chapter 23 happened, and this book left such a scar on my heart that nothing could any longer push it off the pedestal I put it on, not even Marya's darkest traits. I had to let go of the desire to root for the characters (because it's difficult to do so in this book) and just let the narrative take me along on this uneasy ride. Valente does make it frequently impossible to root for her characters or identify with them, and it's quite gutsy of her.
J. wrote: "Traveller, it's actually much more basic than that. It has nothing to do with what's typical or expected in a narrative nor is it related to Marya being a young woman. Quite simply, I think of m..."
Eek, you people are making me feel like a very bad person indeed, because I could identify with Marya quite strongly... :S
I must admit that I can't really see where she does anything 'bad' or 'wrong'. After all, her scheming is for a good cause! (view spoiler)
J. wrote: "a cruel, scheming person.."Eh? scheming perhaps, though I'm nervous we might be a bit ahead of the reading schedule with that, but how is she cruel? You mean her and Koschei's interactions? You must remember that Koschei is not your regular human being. He is cruel as life is cruel, (remember who Koschei is) and she is basically just giving back what he gives her. I don't think he finds it unpleasant. Quite the opposite, in fact...
(view spoiler)
J., I'm really wondering what you mean bec I feel a need to jump to Marya's defense here...Do you possibly mean where she punishes her gun imp for being naughty? Well, I think we need to remember and explore the nature of 'fey folk' in general. It's only recently that fairies have gained a good rep.
Fey folk actually used to be a source of fear especially in medieval times. As it says in the Wikipedia article on fairies, Much of the folklore about fairies revolves around protection from their malice. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairy#Pr...
and
When considered as beings that a person might actually encounter, fairies were noted for their mischief and malice. Some pranks ascribed to them, such as tangling the hair of sleepers into "Elf-locks", stealing small items or leading a traveler astray, are generally harmless.
But far more dangerous behaviors were also attributed to fairies. Any form of sudden death might stem from a fairy kidnapping, with the apparent corpse being a wooden stand-in with the appearance of the kidnapped person. Consumption (tuberculosis) was sometimes blamed on the fairies forcing young men and women to dance at revels every night, causing them to waste away from lack of rest.
Fairies riding domestic animals, such as cows or pigs or ducks, could cause paralysis or mysterious illnesses.
As a consequence, practical considerations of fairies have normally been advice on averting them. In terms of protective charms, cold iron is the most familiar, but other things are regarded as detrimental to the fairies: wearing clothing inside out, running water, bells (especially church bells), St. John's wort, and four-leaf clovers, among others.
I know we're talking more Western folklore here, but fairies seem to be just as mischievous and malevolent in Western Europe as in Eastern Europe.
You might remember something of this kind of thing from the ballet Les Sylphides, and from the stories of how mermaids lure sailors onto the rocks with their songs. Originally sirens in Greek mythology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siren, they gained an equivalent in the German Lorelei, and the Russian rusalka, a variety of which which we had met as vodyanoi in the Bas-lag novels.
Statue of the Lolerei in the Rhine valley. She lures hapless sailors to their death with her siren song.
I'm not really far enough to know what J's getting at yet, but one has to remember that she is scheming—she determined long before meeting Koschei that she would take some power in any future relationship, and then Comrade Zvonok told her that marriage is all about "who is to rule." So, of course she schemes. I'll decide about cruelty later.
Oh, yes, I agreed that she is scheming, you will see that even more soon, but you get a 'bad' kind of scheming which is selfish in the Machiavellian way, and you get a kind of scheming which, although it is aimed at gaining more power for yourself, (in a situation which may be ruled by a skewed dynamic to start with) it is more about survival and getting yourself out of predicaments and even about helping people, as I believe Marya does a bit later on in the novel...but then I have come to believe, sadly too late in my life, that it is not a bad thing to look out for yourself, to hold your own and to prevent yourself from becoming downtrodden. Indeed, if you're not looking out for number one, chances are extremely good that nobody is, and I personally don't see any heroism in senseless martyrdom which doesn't bring any good to anyone.
So I'm behind Marya in her ambitions.
One of the dominant themes in the novel is indeed power play and shifting dynamics of dominance. A biggie is the war between Life and Death.
Remember the story that Marya read in the black book that Likho gave her? A lot of the book's themes flow forth from it:
The Causations of the Great War were several. First, the avid student must be aware that when the world was young it knew only seven things: water, life and death, salt, night, birds, and the length of an hour. Each of these things had Tsars or Tsaritsas, and chief among these were the Tsar of Death and the Tsar of Life.
Marya Morevna looked up from the book.
“Comrade Likho, this is not the history of the Great War,” she said uncertainly. “This is not a book approved by my school.”
The widow chuckled, and the sound was a heavy stone falling into a shallow well.
“Read, child.”
Marya’s hands shook on the black book. She had never seen a book so beautiful, so heavy and rich, but it did not seem friendly, like the books in her mother’s room, or in Svetlana Tikhonovna’s or Yelena Grigorievna’s suitcases.
“The world is a slow learner,” Marya Morevna read.
And only after eons did it master the techniques of the sun, earth, sugar, the length of a year, and men. The Tsars or Tsaritsas retreated into mountains and snow. They stayed far from each other out of family respect, but had no interest in these new things, which were surely passing fashions.
But the Tsar of Death and the Tsar of Life greatly feared one another, for Death is surrounded by souls, and is never lonely, and the Tsar of Life had hidden his death away in a place deeper than secrets, and more secret than depth. The Tsaritsa of Salt could not reconcile them, though they were brothers, and the Tsaritsa of Water could not find an ocean wide enough to place between them.
After a space of time longer than it takes the stars to draw breath together, the Tsar of Death was so well loved by his court of souls that he became puffed up and proud.
He bedecked himself in onyx, agate, and hematite, and gave bayonets of ice, and cannons of bone, and horses of drifting ash with eyes and nostrils of red sparks to each of the souls that had perished in the long, tawdry history of the world. Together this great army, with shrouds flying like banners and trumpets of twelve swords lashed together marched out across the deep snow and into the lonely kingdom of the Tsar of Life.
Another thing is that it seems to be particularly difficult to achieve equality in the Russian setup. After all, as Valente highlights in an ironic way, the Soviet rulers didn't subscribe to equality either; the party bosses were more equal than the normal populace.Can one blame anybody for trying to hold their own, for clinging to life and clawing a path to survival in this law of the jungle landscape that Marya finds herself in?
Traveller wrote: "Can one blame anybody for trying to hold their own, for clinging to life and clawing a path to survival in this law of the jungle landscape that Marya finds herself in? "People will blame… but I agree. I long ago realized that you couldn't fault people for doing whatever it takes to protect themselves or their families, even if you would wish they could have done better.
"The rapt pupil will be forgiven for assuming the Tsar of death to be wicked and the Tsar of Life to be virtuous."So it's good to be recognized as a rapt student!
I have to take some issue with Baba Yaga's threat "Better married than rendered into girl-broth and maiden cutlets." Hard to find maiden cutlets after you've "let the groom have his way with your womb for a year..."
I recently read Tam Lin, and the editor of the Modern Classic Fairy Tales series had bemoaned the fact that modern fairy tales have been largely bowdlerized... then promptly presented the most innocuous retelling of Tam Lin imaginable. This OTOH is a Fairy Tale.
Ha! Yes the original Western fairytales can be quite frightful. I have a book of Irish fairytales (or I had one) and the stories tend to cruelty and some are quite macabre.
Traveller wrote: "Can one blame anybody for trying to hold their own, for clinging to life and clawing a path to survival in this law of the jungle landscape that Marya finds herself in?"I agree too. But I'm not sure if I saw her as much clinging to life as learning to taste it, drink it up, everything that Koschei taught her in the first chapter ... Her friends, while part of this fairytale, often mention that life is to be lived. Life's the hedonist. Almost like a pirate, and I know it's a little on the pop culture side but one of my favorite movie quotes is from a pirate: "Take what you want, give nothing back."
That's why Koschei made her taste the caviar first, starving or not.
And it's why I like that you wrote: "One of the dominant themes in the novel is indeed power play and shifting dynamics of dominance. A biggie is the war between Life and Death."
While confused early, she's finding what she seeks - she does not want to play a part in the realities that her sisters so willingly (and without thought?) embraced. She always wants to see the hidden, as the novel and so many others here have pointed, and not just to see but to be able to see. She wants that power of life, so it isn't surprise to me either that she schemes.
My question is why Koschei showed her the way? Why bring her into the fold when she is not named like the others and will never fully "be" like him, like the "demons." I figure I'm in for some surprises I suppose.
J. wrote: "This (not to mention Koschei's behaviour) highlights that, despite what some of us may like to tell ourselves, life is no more inheerently good than death is bad. ..."I took that from the creatures in Buyan, too, and I think it's almost directly mentioned somewhere in the novel. I mean, a cross-pollinated imp and rifle? A sentient pile of rocks (my favorite)? We're almost being primed for a yin and yang discussion or parallel later on ...
One thing that's only been referenced, but I wanted to discuss further ... Did Chapter 6 on Marya's journey seem a bit like the Marquis de Sade to anyone?Dominance, submission, discipline - these are all themes here that are similar to that period of literature. And it's not just that Koschei wanted to take her to bed. While we know they do from the "groom have his way with your womb" comment, and a scene later on that I'm not sure is in this thread, this first chapter goes beyond the mere physical.
As it is in de Sade, both dominance and submission is a state of mind, and one that's not easy to achieve. That's why I found the discussion of the will and who is to rule so fascinating. It's not limited to the physical. His pleasure is not that he forcibly bends tells others what to do or whips someone or bribes them with sumptious meals to get what he wants ... Life seeks a deep trust that's given by others, the willing submission of others, just as the others like to let go and be guided - as Marya admits is pleasing. This control over others, even your own death, seems to be a parallel here.
And I imagine the real question, as in de Sade, is whether the formula is sustainable over the length of time that is reality.
Allen wrote: "I agree too. But I'm not sure if I saw her as much clinging to life as learning to taste it, drink it up, everything that Koschei taught her in the first chapter ... Her friends, while part of this fairytale, often mention that life is to be lived. Life's the hedonist. Almost like a pirate, and I know it's a little on the pop culture side but one of my favorite movie quotes is from a pirate: "Take what you want, give nothing back."That's why Koschei made her taste the caviar first, starving or not..."
Sure, but also, when every day runs the risk of being your last, I think that life becomes more intense as well, and you have to love it, to cling to it, even if it tortures you, even if it brings suffering with it; and in this sense, I think Valente very cleverly personifies life in the guise of Koscehi. As life beats her down and digs into her flesh and makes her suffer, she just loves it more and wants more of it, she grabs life fully, and I loved how Valente portrayed that.
No need for boring history, but one has to remember that even without haughty Tsars and repressive Soviets, the Russias were a hard country to stay alive in what with the cold and also with the hunger not only because of natural famines, but also the state-caused ones. Add to that the ravages of the two world wars and the shenanigans of the Bolsheviks and the Soviets with their reigns of terror, then you realize that life was something rather hard to cling to for ordinary Russians.
To get an idea of the privations that some Russians had to suffer and endure through, have a look at The 900 Days: The Siege of Leningrad
Allen wrote: "One thing that's only been referenced, but I wanted to discuss further ... Did Chapter 6 on Marya's journey seem a bit like the Marquis de Sade to anyone?
Dominance, submission, discipline - these..."
Yeah, I felt very uncomfortable at first when the sadomasochistic bits started, but then I started seeing it in the sense of that Koshei represents Life, and Life is rather like that, isn't it? It tortures us and enforces obedience. ..and I think to an extent Valente also introduces the primalness of life (and perhaps Russian life at the time) to us.
Traveller wrote: "To get an idea of the privations that some Russians had to suffer and endure through, have a look at The 900 Days The Siege of Leningrad"As Valente did: she references it in her afterword.
So, I've finished the book, and I promised to revisit ‘cruelty’. There is a certain amount of, as Nataliya put it, "casual careless cruelty". Marya's punishment of Nadya seems of that sort, but it comes from Lebedeva's noting that Nadya had promised not to shoot anybody. I'm not really sure what sort of punishment is appropriate for someone who is casually careless about shooting people: I certainly don't think the punishment exceeded the crime.
Traveller has summed up Marya's relationship with Koschei well.
Any remaining cruelty on Marya's part seems mostly a result of exigency. She finds herself pushed into situations where she can't find a humane way out (except to give up her own life: which, as Traveller and I have both said in our own ways, should not be required of anybody).
Derek (Guilty of thoughtcrime) wrote: "So, I've finished the book, and I promised to revisit ‘cruelty’. There is a certain amount of, as Nataliya put it, "casual careless cruelty". Marya's punishment of Nadya seems of that sort, but it comes from Lebedeva's noting that Nadya had promised not to shoot anybody..."It's not Naganya (btw, it's so sad that only now I realized that her name comes from Nagant revolver, pronounced 'nagan') and not as much her dismissive treatment of Lebedeva (does Valente ever make it clear that Lebed means 'swan', in line withe the swan feathers she adorns herself with).
To me, it was more of her attitude towards both Ivan and Koschei that was screaming casual careless cruelty at times (and yes, I do realize the cruelty was reciprocal). It was her joining (view spoiler).
But now I also finished my reread, and I agree with you and Trav - it stems from her vitality, the greed for Life, and this time around it struck me much stronger.
I just picked up The 900 Days: The Siege of Leningrad. I have read many books about the blockade in the past, but not this one. If anything is a testament to people's desire to live and ability to survive,to fight Death, it would be the blockade.
----
As for the 'sadomasochistic parts' - the play of submission and dominance, the power play, the cruel passionate love - those are the themes I've seen in a few of Valente's works by now, and she writes very well about it. She makes them seem quite cathartic, doesn't she?
That spoiler hardly seems a spoiler, since that's where the book starts: but the whole point of that was that she doesn't shoot them, she lets them go.Yes, she's cruel to Ivan: that's what I meant by exigency. But I'll leave that discussion for when we meet Ivan!
As for the Nagant, better late than never :) Now we all know!
Derek (Guilty of thoughtcrime) wrote: "That spoiler hardly seems a spoiler, since that's where the book starts: but the whole point of that was that she doesn't shoot them, she lets them go."
Thanks Derek, I was just about to say that!
Okay, Ivanushka thread coming up, and I have quite a bit to say about that, though I might not right away due to Xmas activities having taken over around here by now... but I'll start the thread anyway.
Derek (Guilty of thoughtcrime) wrote: "That spoiler hardly seems a spoiler, since that's where the book starts: but the whole point of that was that she doesn't shoot them, she lets them go.Yes, she's cruel to Ivan: that's what I mean..."
Well, she lets that one preteen boy go, as far as we know. As for the others - she did not get promoted to her rank by showing mercy, I think. But that's probably a discussion for a later thread.
Ertugal wrote: "Wow!!!! what an experience! dr.marnish is a wonderful spell caster, he has made my life complete again by helping me cast a spell to return my girlfriend and also make her to be faithful to me again. I was skeptical at first, but what a believer I am now, his spell really worked! my lover is now faithful to me, if you are also seeking for help to get your lover back? call ..."Aww, tssk! tssk. ..and here I thought we had acquired a new member commenting on our Deathless thread, saying: Wow! What a wonderful discussion! :P
Needless to say, it has been flagged.
I'd like my lover back, too, but my wife would disapprove...
Funnily enough, we're discussing the hocus-pocus bits right now in the Foucault's Pendulum discussion. I wonder if Ertugal will pop in there as well...
Derek (Guilty of thoughtcrime) wrote: "I'd like my lover back, too, but my wife would disapprove..."Well, Marya Morevna did find a way around this tricky situation ;) maybe it was a relevant post after all...
Actually, it was surprisingly apt, if you think about it...
Miévillians
Books mentioned in this topic
The 900 Days: The Siege of Leningrad (other topics)The 900 Days: The Siege of Leningrad (other topics)
The 900 Days: The Siege of Leningrad (other topics)
Gone with the Wind (other topics)
I must admit that I already started feeling a bit confused here. The previous husbands covered the Tsarists, the Whites, the Reds, and finally the Bolsheviks or Soviets. Who is Koschei supposed to represent? This is where the story starts to resemble the folktales more closely, what with them going to Koschei's own country, Buyan.