The Sword and Laser discussion
This topic is about
A Darker Shade of Magic
2016 Reads
>
ADSOM: April 2016 Main Pick: A Darker Shade of Magic by V.E. Schwab
Before YA was a classification, by local library back in the late 90s, classified what could be considered YA as High School fiction.
Mod
Creepy London would be less creepy if it was just our London with evil leaders. The whole world feels dark (Except for it's name) and a place you wouldn't want to visit and Kell London feels magical with it's castle built over the red river .
I am glad she made them so different. I want to see more of Dead London before it was closed off.
message 105:
by
Tassie Dave, S&L Historian
(last edited Mar 31, 2016 10:48PM)
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
I'm a bit torn-- on the one hand, tiny differences that turn out to be major among seemingly similar cities is part f the fun of the multiverse story-- I would like to see EVIL WESTMINSTER ABBEY and MAGICAL WESTMINSTER ABBEY etc etc-- but on the rhet hand making them all so different *does* make sense, and it heightens the weirdness of them all being named London.
E.J. Xavier wrote: "The natives of Grey London also didn't strike me as particularly English, but Lila in particular read more like a contemporary American girl to me. I didn't buy her as an English girl from the early 1800s. Even within her established character of being a rebellious tough-cookie tomboy, her speech and mannerisms were very contemporary and not remotely English. "I completely agree, I think that is partly due to an America author though. Certain passages just pulled me out of then book when I realised it was using American English rather than English as I'd not been doing the translation in my head. One example I found yesterday was about Lila brushing something off her "pants" when I was expecting "trousers".
Minor quibbles really but when I'm not set up to do translation in my head I just completely forget and end up trying to figure out why she wasn't wearing trousers trousers.
Would have been better if it was set in Detroit.
Mod
If that's a serious question, why?
If that's not a serious question, why? ;-)
Not being a dick, but the only thing I know about Detroit is it's part in the music industry (huge) and they apparently made cars there.
A Darker Shade of Magic 2: Kell vs Robocop?
E.J. Xavier wrote: "The natives of Grey London also didn't strike me as particularly English, but Lila in particular read more like a contemporary American girl to me."I haven't gotten that feeling, but I'm listening to the audiobook, and the reader is a Brit, so that might be why.
Tassie Dave wrote: "E.J. Xavier wrote: "Would have been better if it was set in Detroit."If that's a serious question, why?
If that's not a serious question, why? ;-)
Not being a dick, but the only thing I know ab..."
It was a joke. Dark humor, but humor nonetheless.
Detroit is a poster child for the rust belt, urban decay, racial tensions, vast income inequality... the list goes on. The city declared bankruptcy a few years ago. Flint Michigan with its infamous lead poisoned water is nearby.
Basically the opposite of whimsy in every way.
It popped into my head because Lila's bravado, barely hidden emotional wounds and her escapist pirate dreams would make more sense to me if she was a child of modern Detroit, and not Ouldie Timey London.
A very different book though.
Brendan wrote: "A Darker Shade of Magic 2: Kell vs Robocop?"They could get Zack Snyder to direct the movie adaptation. It's right up his alley.
Kel would have a Coat of Many Greys.
3/4 of the way through and I'm really liking it, except for the part where someone in what I gather was late 18th century London had a shotgun.
About a fifth of the way in. Reading hard copy which means I also have a book on kindle for insomniac reading. I find my mind wandering to the other book regularly.It isn't a bad book, but ADSOM seems like it's stunting with the characters. Also, blood and death everywhere. I kinda miss main characters actually being good.
Mod
It's 1819. Shotguns were around then. Mainly for shooting birds. It probably wouldn't have been called a shotgun in London but using a name we all understand saves the author explaining it.
Tassie Dave wrote: "It's 1819. Shotguns were around then. Mainly for shooting birds. It probably wouldn't have been called a shotgun in London but using a name we all understand saves the author explaining it. ..."OK, that does make me feel a lot better about it.
Huge missed opportunity to not use the word "blunderbuss" when it would have been perfect there.
Also, pedantic quibble, it's 19th century.
Rob Secundus wrote: "Also, pedantic quibble, it's 19th century."Yeah, I recognized George III but missed the exact year. Early 19th, not late 18th.
All of which is not to say I'm not really, really enjoying the book and won't be jumping immediately into the sequel.
Brendan wrote: "Huge missed opportunity to not use the word "blunderbuss" when it would have been perfect there."YESSSS
Now a third of the way in, and..yeah. There's no plot. Just a lot of deliberately stark characters marching around London. I guess I was hoping for something more along the lines of Worlds of the Imperium or even something freaky like Wizard of the Pigeons.
After devouring The Fifth Season, I read the Kindle sample chapter of ADSoM, and did not care for it. Simplistic style and no strong sense of either place, tone or character.I'll give this one a pass. Fortunately it's only the first among two equal picks, so I can still do my duty to the book club ;)
John (Taloni) wrote: "I kinda miss main characters actually being good."The push for everything to be dark and gritty has become very annoying.
The only link I found to London, apart from the name and the river Thames, was Lila used the work 'nicked' a couple of times. A lot of the blurb seems misleading and just a marketing ploy.
This was my first go at reading the book of the month at S&L. I hope this isn't an intimation of what I can expect going forward. Will read the alternate pick in the next few days now that the library has released the ebook to me.Interesting story but definitely needing development and conflict beyond something what you would find in YA. Everything ends up too wrapped up to actually matter any.
Finally, halfway through the book, a hint of plot!I'll finish this, but am grateful that it is not a cliffhanger. I don't know if I can grit my teeth and do a trilogy like I did for the Annihilation series.
I finished it today. Luckily it was a quick read so I can start on House of Suns for one of my other groups.I ended up give it three stars overall. I liked the story but unfortunately I have to agree with quite a bit of what Kevin said.
Now that I'm a bit further into it, I understand the YA comments. I still think they're wrong though. Yeah, the characters are not that complicated, and yes conversations and situations are unrealistically set up just for exposition (like "HEY BROTHER IVE APPARENTLY BEVER ASKED YOU WHAT OTHER LONDONS ARE LIKE JN THE PAST TWENTY FIVE YEARS"). But that's not YA. YA is all about character. The hunger games are all about Katniss' brain, how she as a character reacts and grows and falls apart in response to things. This is not that. If anything, it's closer to children's literature. It's closer to Harry Potter, or even more to Lewis or Dianne Wynne Jones.
But you know what? Narnia is great. DWJ is effing fantastic.
There was a lot of discussion during shnannara of liking/reading junk lit. The same stuff applies here. This novel isn't going to enter the canon. But it's a load of great fun.
Fredrik wrote: "Hmm.. now, what would be fun to read is a novel based on Fallen London, or Sunless Sea..."Loved Sunless Sea. Lost many hours to that game.
^As I mentioned briefly above, I really did love Worlds of the Imperium as a young'un. Alternate Britain and crosstime freakery. Might have to dig out my copy after this.
It popped into my head because Lila's bravado, barely hidden emotional wounds and her escapist pirate dreams would make more sense to me if she was a child of modern Detroit, and not Ouldie Timey London.19th Century London was a hell hole for the poor that probably makes modern Detroit look like a paradise. Life was nasty brutish and short. Rampant prostitution, execution for stealing bread. Mud, shit, no clean water and back breaking labour was the rule.
This was the inspiration for Dickens and his characters. Grey London seems entirely appropriate.
For another younger readers book that deals with this is Dodger by Pratchett.
Iain wrote: "19th Century London was a hell hole for the poor that probably makes modern Detroit look like a paradise. Life was nasty brutish and short. Rampant prostitution, execution for stealing bread. Mud, shit, no clean water and back breaking labour was the rule."I was surprised by how little of this came across in the book. Lila should have really seen some shit if she had survived to get to 19, but there's little hints of that other than she learned violence somewhere.
Red London on the other hand was some kind of Renaissance Faire view of history that was also totally bizarre.
Iain wrote: "19th Century London was a hell hole for the poor that probably makes modern Detroit .."Grey London felt rather vague and not at all historically researched to me. But the comment was about how Lila didn't act like a person from that period or place, and had the mannerism and ethos of a modern American girl.
I feel safe in stating that she would be even more out of place in a Dickens novel.
Yeah, women didn't discover agency until the 1960s /sEDIT: That opening line reads a lot more dickish than I wanted.
In all seriousness, 1. the "girl dresses up like a dude to get to go on dude adventures" trope at least goes back as far as Spencer. Britomart is a thing in the 1590s. 2. "19th century girl dresses up as a man to con people" is, I'm pretty sure, a common trope. I mean, girl dresses up as dude to con people is in shakespeare, but I'm pretty sure it's a common trope in fiction set in this time. Off the top of my head, Tim Powers pulls it out in the Anubis Gates. 3. Lady Pirates were indeed a thing for several centuries, they just weren't as big a deal as dude Pirates. 4. Dickens is not exactly known for his realistic characters.
But anyway. Even disregarding all of the above, I think complaining about historical accuracy in something like this is like complaining about scientific accuracy in Star Wars. This isn't, in the end, Tim Powers.
It's not the dressing like a dude or the wanting to go on adventures that's the problem, though as you correctly pointed out its been done quite to death, or even any of her actions. It's that her dialogue gives her no sense of place in the world, and certainly doesn't give her a feel of an early 19th century London street urchin.
Ok, I can see that. The only particularly individual voice in the novel, imo, really is the narrator's.
Rob Secundus wrote: "Yeah, women didn't discover agency until the 1960s /sEDIT: That opening line reads a lot more dickish
..."
With all respect, I feel like you're ignoring the argument actually made and substituting a different one that I don't disagree with you about. At no point did I say any of her cross dressing actions were an issue. I also don't think it needs to be perfectly accurate historically.
My argument (like Brendan's above) is that as a character Lila didn't fit the setting. As I said in earlier comments, her dialogue and attitude strikes me as too contemporary American, and frankly sometimes too painfully naive for the circumstances and place she supposedly grew up in.
The historical reality of 19th C London wasn't something I brought up. I didn't find the book to be at all focused on historical accuracy so the reality of 19th c London is beside the point in my mind. It doesn't matter if London of the era was worse than modern Detroit. If the author doesn't paint that picture in the book for the reader, than the London of the book is all we have to go by. (Though it does beg the question : "Why set this in19C London, unless you're going to make use of something specific to that time and place?")
However I DID make the negative criticism that grey London feels vague, and I stand by that. That's why I called it Ouldey Timey London. Aside from the brief glimpse of King George it feels more like a general impression of "London in the past". Historical accuracy would have been an easy way to fix that, but certainly not the only solution. How ever I do think it's an issue, and I do feel like both Grey and Red London are not clearly drawn.
And here we have the reason why I shouldn't start a response, and then spend forty minutes doing something else before I finish it and hit "post". You wind up responding to things that have already been addressed while you were cleaning the kitchen and feeding the cat.
I guess I was trying to figure out what you meant more specifically and filled in the details badly. I don't see how or where the setting and Lila's character don't line up for you (especially since you found the setting vague-- the more specific the environment, the more specific the character types it should produce).
Can you find an example of something specifically that she says or does that is contemporary American? So it's not the crossdressing, pirate desires, etc, then what? Glee as she burns down the homes of would-be rapists? Thrill at being a notorious outlaw?
As mentioned above by Elliott, it's kind of weird that she talks about her underwear when she means her trousers!
Rob Secundus wrote: " the more specific the environment, the more specific the character types it should produce"I don't agree. Vague "London in the past" is still London and still the past. I think it's reasonable to want the characters to be vaguely more London-y and Past-like than vaguely like "America today".
"Can you find an example of something specifically that she says or does that is contemporary American?"
Well her language is almost completely without 19c english idiom, syntax and vocabulary.
She actually responds to a question with "Yeah" at one point.
Or how about:
"This isn't a life!" she'd shouted..."This isn't anything. It's not enough. It's not f**cking enough."
That's pure unadulterated american teenager yelling at a parent. The F-word was not a commonly used slang term and rarely in any sense other than sexual. And even this kind of thing I could forgive if there had been more British slang included (Bollocks, Bastard, Bloody,a Brit could provide us with a better list I'm sure, of more than just swears). This isn't about nitpicking anachronisms. It's one thing to have a few slip ups that don't quite fit, but when you don't have enough language that feels correct to time in place to balance it then the contemporary stuff overwhelms. The vast majority of what she says is either out of place, or completely neutral. The cumulative effect is that she just sounds like a contemporary american teenager.
Ok, if, like Brendan's, your complaint is primarily about dialect/dialogue and voice I'm with you. It doesn't bother me personally, but I see why it's bothersome.
With all the faults being pointed out about Lila's language I'm thinking of knocking another star off my review :)
Mod
Kell: "What?"
I'm at 60% through the book and I want Kell to dump Lila.I don't like her, and it isn't that I don't like her in this book, I wouldn't like her in any book. She seems like a borderline sociopath.
The Sword and Laser
Books mentioned in this topic
Nice Dragons Finish Last (other topics)Vicious (other topics)
Worlds of the Imperium (other topics)
House of Suns (other topics)
Worlds of the Imperium (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
V.E. Schwab (other topics)N.K. Jemisin (other topics)
The natives of Grey London also didn't strike me as particularly English, but Lila in particular read more like a contemporary American girl to me. I didn't buy her as an English girl from the early 1800s. Even within her established character of being a rebellious tough-cookie tomboy, her speech and mannerisms were very contemporary and not remotely English.