Eden (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
wilderthan) wrote2007-12-07 11:23 pm
wilderthan) wrote2007-12-07 11:23 pm
Entry tags:
Review - The Liveship Traders Trilogy
I just finished rereading the Liveships trilogy, by Robin Hobb. There are some beautiful ideas in there -- about dragons, and the life cycle of a dragon -- and there are references to the Farseers trilogy that complete that story, that explain things. Yet it's also, for quite a few people I've spoken to, quite tedious to read. This time as I was going through, I tried to put into words why it's broken for me. Comparisons to the Farseers trilogy abound, as well as spoilers for both trilogies and probably for the Tawny Man trilogy as well. Some of this, I've already written elsewhere.
Essentially, I have three main issues I'd point to -- all somewhat interwoven.
Narrative
I think it suffers from being in third person rather than first. All the sense of someone setting down memoirs with all the relevant details put in the right places is lost, and it's less easy for Hobb to fit in the back story she needs to make the "front" story work. For example, Paragon's story -- it could come out through dialogue and interaction, for example, between Mingsley and a client, or Amber and a Trader, or Amber and Paragon himself... instead it comes out while Althea is sat down thinking about Vivacia. That might work, if it was written from Althea's point of view, but as it is you rather forget that you're even with her while you go on a five page foray into the woes of the Ludlucks.
Mind you, I can see why it would be impossible to write this story from first person and still have it be a "member of the cast", so to speak, doing it. In Farseers, sometimes Fitz's ignorance of other events helped the story, and sometimes the fact that Fitz could Skill out to Molly, Burrich and Nettle and see them prevented it from hindering the story. But in Liveships there's no one central character: in the first book alone there's Althea, Brashen, Ronica, Keffria, Malta, Vivacia, Wintrow, Kennit, Kyle, Paragon, Amber, Maulkin, Shreever... and a range of locations from all corners of their world. There's no way any one of them could know the whole story -- indeed, so much of the story, especially the romantic conflicts, is based on that fact.
Still, I think Hobb's writing shines best in first person. I also noticed that when I read the Tawny Man trilogy, I enjoyed that much more than Liveships. I'm not sure whether that was just the return to the familiar characters, or whether it was in a large part due to the return to a single point of view.
Characters
There are so many characters this trilogy follows. I couldn't even begin to list the main ones. They come in groups, in a way -- Bingtown Traders, Rain Wild Traders, pirates, serpents, Jamaillians -- yet those groups splinter and reform over and over again throughout the books. It isn't hard to follow exactly, but I do wonder if Hobb could have made readers care more about the characters had there been fewer, and had she kept the changes in viewpoint down. For example, you see from inside Malta in one section, and you see Malta from Ronica's eyes in the next -- it's jarring, to see so many sides to one character: not just implied, but "said" by the characters through third person (not actually very) limited.
One of the common mistakes in writers, one of my books says, is to make characters too passive. They aren't interesting to read about. And there are far too many passive characters in Liveships, people who can't or won't take control of their own lives. For example, Wintrow -- in the end, he realises it, but for most of the books he refuses to accept and grow with his experiences, but only look backwards. Keffria is shown as spiritless, completely taken in by her husband, believing he's good and right when he's actually quite cruel. She only wants things to go back to where they were, she wants Kyle to take over things and leave her untouched by cares. It's hard to care about characters who are so passive, who do nothing to better their circumstances. They bring their misfortunes on themselves.
On the other hand, there are the "strong" characters. They try to take their lives into their own hands, but without regard for others. Althea leaves her family when they need her, dividing it when they need to be strong, just to get what she wants. Malta doesn't care about the shame she might cause her family, or the hurt she might cause the men she flirts with and ensnares. She just wants to look beautiful and be adored. Tintaglia the dragon doesn't care about humans, even when they help her, but only about the fate of her own race.
It's true that there are a few intriguing characters: Ronica, in particular, strikes me as a strong female character who wants the best for her family, for her home. She, most of all, considers everyone in Bingtown and pushes for everyone to unite. There are other intriguing characters, too: Amber, and Jek, and Shreever, but... they're often more minor characters, or in Amber's case, have to be slightly separate from the plot so it isn't too obvious who they really are.
To me, there's a lack of a certain type of character we saw a lot of in the Farseer books: the Sacrifice. My favourite character in those was Verity, followed by Kettricken and then Fitz himself. They were still humans, with flaws, but in the end they pushed that aside to do what they had to do -- particularly Verity and Kettricken. In Liveships there is no single character who is willing to simply give him or herself up -- not through despair, but to bring hope to others. Nor do the characters have the sheer tenacity that Verity has. If they had to carve a dragon, I don't think they would continue as he did. Granted, perhaps the situation doesn't offer a chance for such a sacrifice, but it does seem as if in places, someone could simply do something instead of waiting, or trying to turn circumstances toward their own gain.
The people in Liveships are like real people, (literally) warts and all. I wonder, though, if it isn't too realistic.
Portrayal of Women
To be a women in these books is to suffer. I don't think a single one of them escapes humiliation in some way. In contrast, the men escape lightly: in the course of the books, Serilla, for example, loses everything, but the Satrap gains more than he ever had (although admittedly suffering in the process); Althea loses so much, while Brashen only gains -- and Althea's gain of Brashen is portrayed as filling all the places in her life where she's lost, which troubles me. There's a general attitude in the men that women should be kept in the home, kept safe, and not let to do anything, because they can't. While the women in the books do manage things capably, it's always at a loss to themselves: Althea could marry Grag, but she would lose by doing so, so she doesn't, but she loses in not doing so, too. Malta takes control, but to do so she has to accept humiliation. Keffria learns to manage things, but knows that in doing so she loses her husband.
In the end, they are all shown as strong in their ways, even Keffria. But things are heaped against them as they aren't against the men: it could be said that the society Hobb structures around them is what brings that upon them, but it still felt like a barrier to my reading than a natural part of the world.
I've discussed a lot of ways the books could be more intriguing, with various people. More interesting characters, more of the interesting characters there already are -- starting in the Rain Wilds instead of taking so long to get there... I can see why it's written as it is, but with some tweaking to the plot to allow it to be written differently, I think these books could have been marvellous. I don't recommend reading them casually, but to fill out the details of the whole world in the Realm of the Elderlings cycle, I do recommend trying to push one's way through them. There are some lovely things in these books, but they're rather obscured, for me, by the things I've already mentioned.
Essentially, I have three main issues I'd point to -- all somewhat interwoven.
Narrative
I think it suffers from being in third person rather than first. All the sense of someone setting down memoirs with all the relevant details put in the right places is lost, and it's less easy for Hobb to fit in the back story she needs to make the "front" story work. For example, Paragon's story -- it could come out through dialogue and interaction, for example, between Mingsley and a client, or Amber and a Trader, or Amber and Paragon himself... instead it comes out while Althea is sat down thinking about Vivacia. That might work, if it was written from Althea's point of view, but as it is you rather forget that you're even with her while you go on a five page foray into the woes of the Ludlucks.
Mind you, I can see why it would be impossible to write this story from first person and still have it be a "member of the cast", so to speak, doing it. In Farseers, sometimes Fitz's ignorance of other events helped the story, and sometimes the fact that Fitz could Skill out to Molly, Burrich and Nettle and see them prevented it from hindering the story. But in Liveships there's no one central character: in the first book alone there's Althea, Brashen, Ronica, Keffria, Malta, Vivacia, Wintrow, Kennit, Kyle, Paragon, Amber, Maulkin, Shreever... and a range of locations from all corners of their world. There's no way any one of them could know the whole story -- indeed, so much of the story, especially the romantic conflicts, is based on that fact.
Still, I think Hobb's writing shines best in first person. I also noticed that when I read the Tawny Man trilogy, I enjoyed that much more than Liveships. I'm not sure whether that was just the return to the familiar characters, or whether it was in a large part due to the return to a single point of view.
Characters
There are so many characters this trilogy follows. I couldn't even begin to list the main ones. They come in groups, in a way -- Bingtown Traders, Rain Wild Traders, pirates, serpents, Jamaillians -- yet those groups splinter and reform over and over again throughout the books. It isn't hard to follow exactly, but I do wonder if Hobb could have made readers care more about the characters had there been fewer, and had she kept the changes in viewpoint down. For example, you see from inside Malta in one section, and you see Malta from Ronica's eyes in the next -- it's jarring, to see so many sides to one character: not just implied, but "said" by the characters through third person (not actually very) limited.
One of the common mistakes in writers, one of my books says, is to make characters too passive. They aren't interesting to read about. And there are far too many passive characters in Liveships, people who can't or won't take control of their own lives. For example, Wintrow -- in the end, he realises it, but for most of the books he refuses to accept and grow with his experiences, but only look backwards. Keffria is shown as spiritless, completely taken in by her husband, believing he's good and right when he's actually quite cruel. She only wants things to go back to where they were, she wants Kyle to take over things and leave her untouched by cares. It's hard to care about characters who are so passive, who do nothing to better their circumstances. They bring their misfortunes on themselves.
On the other hand, there are the "strong" characters. They try to take their lives into their own hands, but without regard for others. Althea leaves her family when they need her, dividing it when they need to be strong, just to get what she wants. Malta doesn't care about the shame she might cause her family, or the hurt she might cause the men she flirts with and ensnares. She just wants to look beautiful and be adored. Tintaglia the dragon doesn't care about humans, even when they help her, but only about the fate of her own race.
It's true that there are a few intriguing characters: Ronica, in particular, strikes me as a strong female character who wants the best for her family, for her home. She, most of all, considers everyone in Bingtown and pushes for everyone to unite. There are other intriguing characters, too: Amber, and Jek, and Shreever, but... they're often more minor characters, or in Amber's case, have to be slightly separate from the plot so it isn't too obvious who they really are.
To me, there's a lack of a certain type of character we saw a lot of in the Farseer books: the Sacrifice. My favourite character in those was Verity, followed by Kettricken and then Fitz himself. They were still humans, with flaws, but in the end they pushed that aside to do what they had to do -- particularly Verity and Kettricken. In Liveships there is no single character who is willing to simply give him or herself up -- not through despair, but to bring hope to others. Nor do the characters have the sheer tenacity that Verity has. If they had to carve a dragon, I don't think they would continue as he did. Granted, perhaps the situation doesn't offer a chance for such a sacrifice, but it does seem as if in places, someone could simply do something instead of waiting, or trying to turn circumstances toward their own gain.
The people in Liveships are like real people, (literally) warts and all. I wonder, though, if it isn't too realistic.
Portrayal of Women
To be a women in these books is to suffer. I don't think a single one of them escapes humiliation in some way. In contrast, the men escape lightly: in the course of the books, Serilla, for example, loses everything, but the Satrap gains more than he ever had (although admittedly suffering in the process); Althea loses so much, while Brashen only gains -- and Althea's gain of Brashen is portrayed as filling all the places in her life where she's lost, which troubles me. There's a general attitude in the men that women should be kept in the home, kept safe, and not let to do anything, because they can't. While the women in the books do manage things capably, it's always at a loss to themselves: Althea could marry Grag, but she would lose by doing so, so she doesn't, but she loses in not doing so, too. Malta takes control, but to do so she has to accept humiliation. Keffria learns to manage things, but knows that in doing so she loses her husband.
In the end, they are all shown as strong in their ways, even Keffria. But things are heaped against them as they aren't against the men: it could be said that the society Hobb structures around them is what brings that upon them, but it still felt like a barrier to my reading than a natural part of the world.
I've discussed a lot of ways the books could be more intriguing, with various people. More interesting characters, more of the interesting characters there already are -- starting in the Rain Wilds instead of taking so long to get there... I can see why it's written as it is, but with some tweaking to the plot to allow it to be written differently, I think these books could have been marvellous. I don't recommend reading them casually, but to fill out the details of the whole world in the Realm of the Elderlings cycle, I do recommend trying to push one's way through them. There are some lovely things in these books, but they're rather obscured, for me, by the things I've already mentioned.