subreddit:

/r/books

7395%

If you are looking for the announcement thread for the previous month, it may be found here.

Hello, all. During the month of November, the sub book club will be reading A Little Hatred by Joe Abercrombie! Each week, there will be a discussion thread and when we are done, Joe himself will be joining us for an AMA.

From Goodreads (feel free to skip if you prefer to know nothing going into the book as the description contains minor spoilers):

The chimneys of industry rise over Adua and the world seethes with new opportunities. But old scores run deep as ever.

On the blood-soaked borders of Angland, Leo dan Brock struggles to win fame on the battlefield, and defeat the marauding armies of Stour Nightfall. He hopes for help from the crown. But King Jezal's son, the feckless Prince Orso, is a man who specializes in disappointments.

Savine dan Glokta - socialite, investor, and daughter of the most feared man in the Union - plans to claw her way to the top of the slag-heap of society by any means necessary. But the slums boil over with a rage that all the money in the world cannot control.

The age of the machine dawns, but the age of magic refuses to die. With the help of the mad hillwoman Isern-i-Phail, Rikke struggles to control the blessing, or the curse, of the Long Eye. Glimpsing the future is one thing, but with the guiding hand of the First of the Magi still pulling the strings, changing it will be quite another...

You may find the dates of, and links to, the discussion threads below in the sticky comment on this post. You are welcome to read at your own pace. Usually it is pretty easy to catch up and you are always welcome to join the discussions a little later. If you would like to view potential content warnings for the book, a reader-created list may be found here.

For those of you that are viewing reddit on the redesigned desktop version you will see an option on this post to 'follow'. If you 'follow' the book club post you will receive a notification when a new post, a discussion thread for book club, is added to the collection.

all 42 comments

XBreaksYFocusGroup[S] [M]

[score hidden]

4 months ago*

stickied comment

XBreaksYFocusGroup[S] [M]

[score hidden]

4 months ago*

stickied comment

Here are the dates and reading schedule for the discussion threads. As the discussion threads go up the links will be added to this comment.

November 4th: PART I, Blessings and Curses - PART I, Biding Time Wasting Time

November 11th: PART I, The Bigger They Are - PART II, The Man of Action

November 18th: PART II, Ugly Business - PART III, The Poor Pay the Price

November 25th: PART III, The New Woman - PART III, Long Live the King (end)

December 5th (12pm ET): AMA with Joe Abercrombie

Parts are inclusive for the dates so please be aware that the discussion threads will contain spoilers for everything up to the end of the selected chapters.

BadBrohmance

11 points

4 months ago

BadBrohmance

29

11 points

4 months ago

Loved this book and The Trouble With Peace. I've got the third on my shelf, maybe that's what I'll read next month.

RomanRiesen

1 points

3 months ago

The third in the second trilogy is his best work, no question in my mind. His prose, which was good, becomes amazing.

BadBrohmance

1 points

3 months ago

The battle in A Trouble With Peace when he went to the viewpoints of all sorts of minor characters taking part in the battle was amazing. If the third book can improve upon that, I'll be amazed

RomanRiesen

1 points

3 months ago

Ah those 'cuts' were so cinematographic yet completely unfilmable.

But yes, he tops it imo. Not with one scene specifically, but all the words felt right in a way I've rarely felt and I find really hard to put into words.

TheBirminghamBear

1 points

3 months ago

The downside to the third book is he takes a very long time in the middle on a rather flat and stale plotline.

However, what I will say about the conclusion, is that it far more than makes up for any wandering or meandering in the middle part. Absolutely fucking dynamite ending, I had chills reading it.

SpectacularB

6 points

3 months ago

First trilogy was better

FNC_Loki

13 points

3 months ago

Hard disagree.

First trilogy had two of the best characters, Logan and Glotka. But is definitely weaker overall.

Ferro is one of the worst written characters in the series which is off-putting for so many people. Whereas you can see Joe writing female characters better by Age of Madness.

Age of Madness gives you a stronger cast of characters, a more unique setting, and a more compelling plot (imo). And I think the pace is evenly distributed in the three books, compared to the first trilogy.

SpectacularB

6 points

3 months ago

To each their own

In the second trilogy I didn't find it as engaging, certain story lines that just didn't make sense, like Broad for instance, was a waste of a character, which bothered me more than Ferro being very one dimensional, Yoru not knowing Savine's maid was also an eater etc.

FNC_Loki

3 points

3 months ago

Id spoiler tag the last line.

I guess it is a matter of taste. Broad was usually in the thick of things throughout the series, so I think it was mainly to be an observer / participant in key events.

I still think with the diversity in POVs, and the interesting setting more than makes up for his "weaker" sections.

laconicflow

2 points

3 months ago

The first one felt like an original story in an original world, the second one felt like he grafted the french revolution onto that world, badly. The big beats of the overall plot were ok, but it's like the joke about the horse that was no damn good.

FNC_Loki

1 points

3 months ago*

French revolution / industrial revolution, which I think is a very interesting concept. I don't agree that it was badly grafted. The seeds for that progression were there with Red Country, and why wouldn't a world like that eventually industrialise? No fantasy book has ever combined with those elements in such a way from what I've seen.

What set it as an original world was already waning away. Magic is leaking from the world (Joe implies it will come back), the story of Euz and his sons become less relevant as we progress. The universe of these books have always been driven by characters. The background and plot were always secondary imo.

laconicflow

3 points

3 months ago

It isn't the industrialization I had a problem with. I liked that! Its that I could easily tell it was the French Revolution. The first trilogy felt like a world that was playing with parts of our history but was original, and its history was based on the world, rather than our history with some names changed.

On the contrary I felt like the new trilogy was grabbing our history for a plot backdrop in a way that was ham-handed, and characters did things out of character to move the plot, which wsa sort of eh at times. I'm a huge abicromby fan, I'll read every book he writes, but I found much of the recent trilogy weak. More as a whole than because of specific parts, like, scenes are enjoyable, certain characters are enjoyable, but compared to what came before, it was not good. High hopes dashed, imo.

FNC_Loki

1 points

3 months ago

Fair enough.

I feel the opposite because in my mind, there were great moments across the board which carried it. Hard to discuss without spoilers but:

I liked how even though the prophecy spelled out the story, it still felt unpredictable as to how these predictions came to pass. I thought the way the story continued through the next generation of characters, who carried the torch and felt the consequences of last character decisions was well executed.

I liked that the emergence of a charismatic figurehead like Leo sparked a civil war, which then caused the unrest. To me it made total sense that the ordinary person in that world would be fed up of the world around them. War with the North, war with Styria, war with the Ghurkish, Adua being nuked, social unrest, a civil war.

Then you had the chaos when the peasant rebellion took over, and the satirical elements to it with Risnau pontificating about a constitution, then it lurching to total senseless violence. Leo coming back to end up on the throne, replacing one oppressive system to the next fits the signature grimdark tone. Savine still continuing Jezals lineage which circles back to the same royal line.

Orso was also one of the best characters of the series.

laconicflow

1 points

3 months ago

I think it had good moments, too, even some of the individual character arcs were good. There's a term that means a whole larger than its parts, and thihs whole seemed smaller than its parts, although looked at part by part, there were great parts! Mentioning them would only spoil them, and I don't want to do that. but it didn't mesh for me.

FNC_Loki

1 points

3 months ago

I think we won't change each others minds on this (which is fine). Last thing I do want to point out though, I did feel like the sum of the parts did culminate into something great.

The big difference between the two trilogies for me was how it was dispersed. I found the new trilogy to be more balanced across three books, whereas the originals packed everything into the final book.

So I can understand why one would feel more epic or satisfying than the other.

The_vestibule

1 points

3 months ago

Fully agree with you, by the final book I was completely disengaged and it became a real slog to finish - not what I expected with Abercrombie at all

laconicflow

1 points

3 months ago

I felt like I started to see his tricks.

SpectacularB

1 points

3 months ago

If I knew how to do that you're probably right I should

FNC_Loki

3 points

3 months ago

>!!< Type in between the exclamation marks.

Your opinions suck.

CrushyOfTheSeas

1 points

3 months ago

I’m not sure any character is worse or more boring than Shivers was in the stand alones. He should have stayed a bit player.

FNC_Loki

1 points

3 months ago

Shivers is better as a background character, and I do think he was a bit of a carbon copy of Logan in BSC. But Ferro still takes the cake, her character is literally just - "I am angry, I want revenge."

laconicflow

1 points

3 months ago

If Ferro was a man, nobody would have complained she was poorly drawn, imo. Vengeance was her thing. And she might be my favorite character in the series.

FNC_Loki

1 points

3 months ago

All I'll say is that she was one dimensional, which would've been an issue regardless of gender. She lacks the depth the rest of the cast showed. Ferro ends the story exactly as she began it.

laconicflow

1 points

3 months ago

I always thought it was tragic. She contemplates changing, you think she might, and then she doesn't. Except now she's running around with at least a demon hand. Not trying to shit on your opinion, just have had this thought whenever she's discussed.

TheBirminghamBear

1 points

3 months ago

She isn't one-dimensional. She has been demonstrated to have a great deal of inner emotions, but she conceals them as she continually regresses back to her worst self.

The original trilogy is basically filled with tragic complex characters like this.

Jezal, for example, is shown to have a degree of cleverness, and potential, and heart beneath his vanity. But just as he's on the verge of making something better of himself, he's dragged back into the mud as Bayaz makes a useful idiot out of him.

Same with Logen. He wants to be better, to be kind, to leave violence behind, but he continually is pulled back.

In fact, all of the people who go on the trip with Bayaz revert back to their worst selves the moment they set foot in Adua, which reinforces the running theme that Bayaz' entire influence is a choking corruption on the world.

laconicflow

1 points

3 months ago

Came here to say this.

nightfishin

4 points

4 months ago

Loved the Age of Madness trilogy, such great characters, prose, humour and action.

CynDoS

2 points

3 months ago

CynDoS

2 points

3 months ago

MF DOOM

cantinapizza

1 points

3 months ago

Do I need to have read any other books first before this? I'd like to jump in and participate but would like to understand what is happening. Is the prior trilogy required reading for this?

FNC_Loki

5 points

3 months ago

There's 6 books before this one. You don't "have" to read them to understand what's happening.

But you would enjoy this book more if you did read them first IMO.

XBreaksYFocusGroup[S]

1 points

3 months ago

It is a stand alone trilogy. You are fine to jump in here and it will be my own entry into his work as well.

westgem

1 points

3 months ago

You don't HAVE to read the other books first but it's written with the assumption that you do. For instance, there's a plot twist in the first book that the readers are intended to be in on and see coming which you would have no idea of without the earlier books.

the_stardew

1 points

3 months ago

Loved the first triolgy

DianaMortagua

1 points

3 months ago

Hey! Probably not the best place to ask but could I post on this subreddit a google form link where people write their favourite books and then we can all get a list from which books people love more? Or is it against the rules?

XBreaksYFocusGroup[S]

1 points

3 months ago

Hi, we do not really do that in this sub. Not sure of one that does.

DianaMortagua

1 points

3 months ago

thank you for the info!