Hi Tori! I was curious on how you would feel about this book. But indeed, this book feels like one big long kick to the nuts. But I think it was a really gutsy way to end the series. No one gets their happy ending, and things just keep going on like they always had. That's what I find the point of the series is: it's about people who want to change after a lifetime of bad choices and mistakes, but they are left unable to, rather it be because of circumstances or their own flaws. What makes all three of the main characters similar is that they're all trapped, Logen in a cycle of bloodshed and violence, Glokta in a job he hates and which grates on his soul and conscience (or whatever sliver of one that he has), and Jezal in a system that initially benefitted him, only for him to realize too late that he is trapped. It's a downer ending for sure. I enjoyed this! Great video Tori!
Yep, I definitely see what Abercrombie was doing with the tropes and the themes of the trilogy, and I actually really love the idea of that. I think my struggle was more with the execution than the themes themselves. Thank you so much for watching!
I've been waiting for this vlog for a while, since we started this Trilogy about the same time and I've been following your progress on it. It was hard to watch you struggle through it and I'm sorry it didn't land for you entirely. When Tal died remember thinking, "Yikes, Tori is going to be pissed" and you were. I had a different experience but think a lot of what you said was totally valid. I have a different take on Logen and "The Bloody Nine" that I'll state here with the understanding that I totally get where you're coming from with it and I'm not saying your wrong...just wanting to offer a different thought on it. I kind of appreciated the "Bloody Nine" part actually. In the first book when it was introduced, I just went along with it (as I tend to do). I didn't hate it so when he popped up again and again, it didn't bother me so much. What I appreciated about the character was that I almost think he did The Hulk but correctly. The Hulk was always my favorite character in the Marvel line up. I used to watch him back, way back, when it was a tv show. He always had the potential to get mad and hurt allies, but because the story wasn't grimdark, and the MU's version of Hulk is far less tragic and far more comedic than before, you never really saw the major impact The Hulk could have on his friends as well as his foes. I'm sure it happened here and there, but never in the grimdark way. The Hulk is a great character because he has very little control over his powers and his personality when he changes and then he has to deal with all the ramifications of his actions as Bruce and that's so hard and tragic. To me, The Bloody Nine was the Hulk done right. Because a person who loses all sense of themselves and all control of themselves wouldn't necessarily be able to see friend from foe. That person is operating on a pure ID POV at that point and I actually liked that his friends were just as susceptible as his enemies to the consequences. Logen is a very capable and great fighter to have on your side but there's a cost and sometimes the cost is paid by the foes and sometimes by the allies. It makes him a little too OP if there are no consequences to his side for getting all the benefits of having him on the team when he's Logen. Anyway, that's just my opinion. I'm super glad you finished it and I can't wait for your thoughts on Best Served Cold!
I totally see the Hulk comparison and agree that it is a cool element to bring in to a character like Logen. I think for me the "Hulk"-esque part of the character was really underdeveloped, so it ended up feeling like it had just been thrown in for no reason. I think having Logen make mistakes and be a danger to friend and foe alike is a GREAT character structure. I just would've liked to have seen it done a bit better. Personally! I'm so glad you had such a great time with the series!
@@ToriTalks2 Can't argue with the logic. I'd have liked to see more development on the bloody nine as well. Though, anytime he appeared he just seemed to mess things up for poor Logen!
I agree with this. Also, I think the Bloody Nine killing Thunderhead was more about the reader seeing Logen for how much of a danger he is to everyone around him than to evoke emotions, because of Thunderhead's death. Maybe that's something I appreciated more on a reread, because it is actually build up by how people talk about Logen and how he sees himself. He always tries to make good choices but his choices always lead to suffering.
I loved it. Still not sure how I feel about the end end of the book, but overall, I loved the series. I think in terms of Jezal and the characters, it is true to human nature to show that when we are not with the people who maybe "inspire" us, that we often revert back to their original tendencies and selves. I still really enjoyed Jezal and liked him through the end, but, I think it is because I accept that he is a super flawed character, as they all are.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think it was more the execution of HOW the ending came about that bothered me more than the reverting back. And the fact that it was all the characters (who didn't die) all at the same time. I agree that human nature struggles to act outside of base instincts, and that the "heroes" we read about are not pillars of morality the way many people make them out to be. I really loved Jezal's character arc overall, but the ending I struggled with because it felt like everything in the story was sort of for nothing.
For the Tul Duru/Bloody Nine bit that upset you, I had a different take that made it make more sense. The Bloody Nine doesn't come out when he's in a battle rage. It comes out when he's cornered and about to die. After being chased by the Practicals and exhausted, when the Shanka are blocking his only way out of the tunnel, etc. It came out on the Seventh Day because he was knocked onto the ground and getting trampled, it came through when he was knocked unconscious. And Tul Duru was helping him up when he regained consciousness as the Bloody Nine, who is there as a defense mechanism. Also I haven't seen this talked about, but I'm pretty sure that it's implied that Logen has devil blood. It's never outright said, but Bayaz's story about Ferro's lineage mentioned that one of Euz's sons was granted the gift of speaking to spirits. So that power comes from devil blood. Which would explain the superhuman abilities and ruthlessness of The Bloody Nine. Also, I think that's how Logen/Bloody Nine ALWAYS was. We only got to see the brief glimpse of his life where he got away from it all and tried to be a better man for like a year in the first two books. He went back and the trail of bloodshed and reputation in the North caught up to him and it was so bad he couldn't escape it. Black Dow didn't attack him because he had a personal score to settle. He attacked him because Logen was responsible for nearly everything bad the North has been through over the last several decades. Countless dead, Bethod's rise to power, hundreds more dead from bringing everyone to Adua. He wanted peace for his people and knew that couldn't happen with Logen in charge. And Logen didn't come back to challenge him, Logen still thought he was king and just returning home. He left Black Dow to hunt down Bethod's sons. I hope I don't come off as an angry defender of the series or saying your frustrations aren't valid, just trying to offer a different perspective! I know some people unironically love Logen, but I like him because he's an interesting character study on a tragic man. I nearly teared up when he asked Jezal if he's evil and Jezal tells him he's the best man he knows.
Haven't read your comment the whole way through, I'll finish it but first I wanted to say two quick things. The first is a clarification and the second is a question/inconcistency between how the bloody nine is presented in the first book and the rest of the trilogy. For the clarification, no, Logen doesn't have demonic blood, you could interpret it as such but it wouldn't make sense, because if he did bayaz wouldn't need Ferro. Ferro is precisely needed because she has demonic blood, which makes her inmune to the seed, it doesn't require to be much demonic blood, even if it's a tiny bit anyone who has it would be inmune. Why would bayaz need Ferro then? She is a pain to him and his plans, Logen would be the better option if he had demon blood. The question/inconcistency. I remember pretty clearly how the first time the bloody nine came out in the blade itself he was about to kill Ferro, but a voice inside him told him not to (logen as it is implied) and the bloody nine obliged. But then in the following books it seems like once he comes out the bloody nine is unstoppable and he will kill with zero regards to anyone, and Logen can't stop it once it starts. Am I crazy? I went back to read that scene and it's there, maybe you could give a different interpretation, but for the way it is written, it's pretty similar to how people with dissociative personality disorder describe how their alters interact with them when one is in control, so I can only take it as a demonstration that Logen could talk to his violent alter when he is in control and actually tell him who not to kill. But hen it is forgotten in the following books.
Sorry for the late reply! I agree that devil blood would've made the Bloody Nine make a lot more sense. But if that was the case, I wish Abercrombie would've utilized that a bit more intentionally, because there's no confirmation anywhere in the story that Logen does have it. I think that Logen is more interesting without The Bloody Nine. I honestly think if he was overcome by bloodlust or battle rage it would've had the same effect. I find that too many readers point to it as an obvious "multiple personalities" example.
As someone formally diagnosed with DID, I can say with certainty that The Bloody Nine is NOT an example of the disorder. One of the main issues I had with the portrayal is that a lot of people point to The Bloody Nine and Logen as an example of multiple personality (DID), and sensationalizing hyper-violent "alters" is a disservice to people who genuinely have the disorder, because it's simply not realistic.
Reading what you wrote to me last week but then seeing you so deflated in this video is kinda heartbreaking. Your criticisms are very fair. I can’t wait for you to get to Heroes because i think you’ll love that one.
Hey Zara! I appreciate your willingness to be a sounding board while I was reading through this one. I have very high hopes for the standalones, especially Heroes! I definitely plan on reading more of Abercrombie, because I think his writing is really incredible.
Oof, you can just feel the disappointment radiating through the screen hahahah. Sorry to hear that this wasn't what you were hoping for, Tori! I actually had a very similar experience on my first read, but then I recently reread it and continued on with the standalones, which has been a blast! 🤣 Totally agree that Bayaz is just an unpredictable loose cannon, and not in a good way. I did personally really like Jezal's storyline though, but mostly on reread after I'd watched some reviews with Abercrombie. Sounds like he was trying to make the point that we all go back to our base insticts in the end, so everything comes full circle and characters basically end up back where they started (which is indeed not the most satisfying thing ever, lol). I think it's a good call to leave the First Law world for a bit, though I hope you enjoy the rest of your journey whenever you get back to the series! Thanks for sharing your honest thoughts Tori, I loved this vlog!! 🤩
Hey Esmay! Definitely ready for a break, but not permanently. I will definitely return to the First Law universe to see what the rest of the series looks like! Abercrombie interviews are a blast to watch. I definitely get the base instincts, but I also think that to have every single character revert to that for the most part at the same time (or die) is a tough sell. Thank you so much for watching all the vlogs and supporting the channel, as always!
I share a lot of your sentiments, Tori. I think that Abercrombie is an excellent writer (as you mentioned: his characters, dialogues and combats are awesome), but I'm not fond of the choices he makes about the story, plot development and the characters trajectories. The last third of the book, I felt like he was throwing anything anywhere, it was a mess, while I had lost much of the interest already because everything goes Bayaz's way anyhow. Nonetheless, I'm tempted to read the next books, because I'd love to reunite with some of the characters, not certainly for how Abercrombie delivers a story.
I really enjoyed the sequel trilogy Age of Madness. I feel like it makes The First Law Complete. As for the Bloody Nine I always felt it was a very true representation of the Complete shutdown of humanity that happens in battle. That's why veterans, like myself, have such severe PTSD. It's like a demon is truly there but locked behind a door.
Thank you so much for sharing your experience with this. I can completely understand the connection with combat PTSD, that makes a ton of sense. I wish the fandom in general leaned more toward that than using it as an example of DID (multiple personality). I will probably continue with the series in the future, I do look forward to seeing how Abercrombie expands the world. Thanks for watching!
Totally understandable that this didn’t land for you, Tori! I think the grimdark (and comedic) nature of First Law has to do with characters lacking agency despite good intentions (I actually don’t consider Malazan grimdark for this reason, despite having much darker, more graphic content). It’s flipping fantasy idealism on its head in a dark, comedic, absurdist way. I stand by The Age of Madness showing Abercrombie’s writing at its best (reading the third book right now), but I’m hesitant to recommend reading on if you were not crazy about the grimdark nature of the world. In any case, you thoughtfully articulated your criticisms, and I thank you for sharing your experience! ❤
Hey Johanna, thanks for watching! I definitely plan to continue, I'm pretty optimistic that I will find something to love in the future First Law book reads. Grimdark is not the issue for me, because I don't think grimdark always equals nihilism, which I think is more what I struggled with in this book. I agree with you that Malazan as a whole isn't necessarily grimdark, but it definitely has a lot of grimdark content and elements. Lack of agency in characters can be super frustrating, but not necessarily unrealistic or something that ruins a read for me. But I think having most of the characters at the end fitting into that same lack of agency (unless they are dead) makes the events of the entire trilogy feel rather pointless, which is a tough sell. Not necessarily always unrealistic, again, but I found myself wondering why I didn't just read the last 20% of the last book if that's the point of the story.
I'm super glad you powered through the book and did the vlog. As much as I love First Law, you hit the nail on the head with my biggest problem, the "Bloody-Nine" device seemed super unnecessary as a unique persona. The only thing I could think of was maybe it was a poorly explained double personality that somehow ties with Logen's ability to talk to the fire spirits. Again, could've easily been explained, but wasn't. For me, the character agency, or lack of, was one of the more interesting components... so much of the world has been controlled by the puppetmaster. Even tho you didn't love it as much as me, I give this video 5 stars. Would Recommend :)
I'm really glad I did it too! I did have a great time vlogging this trilogy, and it reminded me how much I enjoy sharing my thoughts in this format. I'm so glad you enjoyed it! There were a lot of things that felt underdeveloped, especially with the magic system and Logen. Thank you so much for watching and loving the vlog!
All very valid criticisms. Thank you for being honest about your experience. Glad you are planning to continue. Not sure how you will feel about the individual stand alones but I think you will enjoy The Age of Madness. There is a more focused plot in the final trilogy and the character work remains excellent.
Thank you so much for watching! I try really hard to show honest experiences whenever I do the vlog, that's important. I definitely am curious to see what lies ahead in the First Law universe!
My experience was that I struggled throughout the trilogy and dnf'ed it 1-2 times. Then came the ending which I loved!! So I continued the series and basically loved every book since. Weird but true.
Oh wow, you caught the change in temperament of Quai. I did not catch it when I read it, maybe it was because I did audiobook format. Also, *riot status activated* 100%. Great vlog. Also, great instincts on Bayaz, I sort of thought something else might be going on there, but he was not quite the good guy he's stood up to be. Also, did it seem like the wasting disease was essentially radiation poisoning? I got the sense Abercrombie was going for something along the lines that the "other side" power was akin to radiation in our world. Maybe I'm wrong though. Lastly, I thought it would have been nice to get more of Yulway or Yulweigh, (spelling?), he seemed like a great character that just didn't get enough page time.
Yeah to me the temperament shift between book 1-2 for Quai was so weird! I think too with Bayaz it helped that I never liked his character so I was always waiting for him to be something different than what he seemed. I totally see the correlation with radiation poisoning! That makes a lot of sense. Yulwei was a great character, I agree that he needed more page time.
A lot of people say that the original trilogy is very nostalgic because of the great iconic characters like glokta and logan etc. but the newer books and especially the newer trilogy are probably better books overall because joe gets better as an author
Your criticisms are more than fair. I share many of them. For me, the great characters, dark humour, and immersive action outweigh the plot contrivances and unsatisfactory resolution.
I saw the Bloody Nine as something of a multiple personality disorder, and one that Logen had managed to suppress for a time before this story. Now it surfaces, and the results are a mixed bag. What bothered me about that character element were the apparent inconsistencies. Was the BN not involved in any of the historic circles against Grimm and the others? It’s likely he was, so how would any the beaten men have survived that encounter? And given Logen’s self-awareness of his own bloody history, how is he *that* clueless about his contributions to the embattled state of the North (per Bethod’s final revelations). I was still there for the ride - especially for the extreme anti-Gandalf that Bayaz turned out to be. But the character inconsistency above stuck in my side a bit.
I agree that the BN is an incredibly inconsistent character element. I actually had a big problem with the fact that he is considered a representation of "multiple personality disorder" or dissociative identity disorder. It's a disorder already highly stigmatized and often utilized in media for these sensationalized killer roles, and that always makes me angry, because it's not accurate to call what Logen and the BN are a dissociative identity situation. It would make more sense to me if Logen and the BN are just the same entity and it the name he's been given because of the battle rage he feels when fighting. That would make a lot more sense. I don't see any reason for them to be separated entities.
I do think you might enjoy the standalones more. The first trilogy was well... a mess that I liked. But the standalones are much better with a tighter story and you can really see joe improving as a writer.
Oh I'm so glad it wasn't just me. I had alot of the same issues you had with Last Argument of Kings. You actually put it into words better than I could when you talked about how once it revealed just how much Bayaz was behind everything it took away alot of the importance of decisions made by characters. I liked West's chapters more than you did, but other than that I think my feelings were very similar to yours. This was my least favourite book in the trilogy. I don't mind when books don't have "definitive" endings, but I really feel like Abercrombie decided to throw out any character growth for most of the characters and wanted absolute chaos instead. I agree that he does battle scenes and dialogue incredibly well and I loved the Northmen's chapters the most with Glokta's in a close second. But overall I was left feeling very underwhelmed at the end of this. I fully intend to pick up the sequels, but I'm going to take a break first to let my frustrations fade.
I think a break is a good way to approach this series when you struggled with LAoK. I think West had a really interesting character arc, he bothered me a lot more in book 1. And there was at least some reconciliation at the end of the trilogy. I totally agree with you in the sense that I don't necessarily mind nebulous endings to books. This one just felt rushed and all over the place. I hope you enjoy the sequels when you get to them!
*sigh* indeed 😂 I didn't hate this trilogy by any means, but I most certainly did not love it like the rest of the world. I have the next 3 standalones but I really don't know when, if ever, I'll get to them.
It's definitely a divisive ending from what I can tell. I loved Abercrombie's writing style, just not the execution. If you ever do pick up the rest of the series, I hope you enjoy it!
Although this was my favorite of the trilogy, I definitely think it has a lot of flaws. However many of the flaws I see in it are flaws that exist in the whole series, so by the third book I was more used to rolling with it.
You really should press on. I had kinda mixed felling about the first trilogy. More positive than you, but still. Later books solved a lot of my grips.
Yeah. This book fell quite flat for me. I think I liked this book up until the 3/4 mark and then I just kept getting annoyed at everything just going bad and things going back to square one. I actually didn't pick up any Abercrombie after this book for a year. Then I saw Bookborn and a few other people talking highly about the Age of Madness trilogy and decided to give him another try. And man I loved the first book in that. I'm not entirely sure if he had just improved as a writer or if I'm just more on board with the project of First Law.
I'm really looking forward to seeing the progression through Abercrombie's First Law universe. I have been hearing great things about the Age of Madness trilogy!
Just finished Last Argument. Really did NOT love it. Questjon: why do so many ma!e fantasy writers write fema!e characters so poorly and why do they really not seem to care about female story lines? The only fema!e character who didn't turn out be a victim of some sort is Ferro. Anxious to see more of her.
Because male writers are males, and they see how women actually behave and try to recreate it. Female writers write women how they WANT women to be, completely unrealistic and lame. In any kind of medieval-ish/fantasy society women will be victims and second class citizens simply because they are weaker physically and can be beaten into submission. Gotta be realistic about these things.
Had similar feelings when I finished Last Argument of Kings. Somewhat enjoyed it, but overall kind of disappointed. 5 years later I've been reading the standalones and I love them. I think taking a break is a good game plan.
@@ToriTalks2 all valid points. They just didn't bother me, granted the Northmen was consistently my least favourite plotline across the trilogy (it was still alot of fun tho).
@@thatsci-firogue Reading tastes are so drastically different across the board, it’s fascinating! The Northmen are easily my favorite, but that’s hardly surprising considering my affinity for motley crews, I think.
@@ToriTalks2 They can't all be winners that's for sure. I didn't expect you to like A Shadow in Summer and I was happy to have been proven wrong. I definitely endorse taking an extended break after your reaction to this book. I loved it and I didn't touch the standalones for at least 4 months afterwards but in your case I'd wait much much longer. Fingers crossed you'll like the standalones better should you decide to continue. I think you'll appreciate The Heroes the most given what you've highlighted across your vlogs. You have more Abercrombie motley crew dynamics to look forward to :)
Very cool to see your experience and hear your thoughts. Bayaz was one of my favorites from the beginning, so my experience was very different haha
Ben enjoyed Bayaz a lot more than I did as well! I think it's so fascinating to see who jives with which characters in the story.
Hi Tori! I was curious on how you would feel about this book. But indeed, this book feels like one big long kick to the nuts. But I think it was a really gutsy way to end the series. No one gets their happy ending, and things just keep going on like they always had. That's what I find the point of the series is: it's about people who want to change after a lifetime of bad choices and mistakes, but they are left unable to, rather it be because of circumstances or their own flaws. What makes all three of the main characters similar is that they're all trapped, Logen in a cycle of bloodshed and violence, Glokta in a job he hates and which grates on his soul and conscience (or whatever sliver of one that he has), and Jezal in a system that initially benefitted him, only for him to realize too late that he is trapped. It's a downer ending for sure.
I enjoyed this! Great video Tori!
Yep, I definitely see what Abercrombie was doing with the tropes and the themes of the trilogy, and I actually really love the idea of that. I think my struggle was more with the execution than the themes themselves.
Thank you so much for watching!
I've been waiting for this vlog for a while, since we started this Trilogy about the same time and I've been following your progress on it. It was hard to watch you struggle through it and I'm sorry it didn't land for you entirely. When Tal died remember thinking, "Yikes, Tori is going to be pissed" and you were. I had a different experience but think a lot of what you said was totally valid.
I have a different take on Logen and "The Bloody Nine" that I'll state here with the understanding that I totally get where you're coming from with it and I'm not saying your wrong...just wanting to offer a different thought on it. I kind of appreciated the "Bloody Nine" part actually. In the first book when it was introduced, I just went along with it (as I tend to do). I didn't hate it so when he popped up again and again, it didn't bother me so much. What I appreciated about the character was that I almost think he did The Hulk but correctly. The Hulk was always my favorite character in the Marvel line up. I used to watch him back, way back, when it was a tv show. He always had the potential to get mad and hurt allies, but because the story wasn't grimdark, and the MU's version of Hulk is far less tragic and far more comedic than before, you never really saw the major impact The Hulk could have on his friends as well as his foes. I'm sure it happened here and there, but never in the grimdark way. The Hulk is a great character because he has very little control over his powers and his personality when he changes and then he has to deal with all the ramifications of his actions as Bruce and that's so hard and tragic. To me, The Bloody Nine was the Hulk done right. Because a person who loses all sense of themselves and all control of themselves wouldn't necessarily be able to see friend from foe. That person is operating on a pure ID POV at that point and I actually liked that his friends were just as susceptible as his enemies to the consequences. Logen is a very capable and great fighter to have on your side but there's a cost and sometimes the cost is paid by the foes and sometimes by the allies. It makes him a little too OP if there are no consequences to his side for getting all the benefits of having him on the team when he's Logen.
Anyway, that's just my opinion. I'm super glad you finished it and I can't wait for your thoughts on Best Served Cold!
I totally see the Hulk comparison and agree that it is a cool element to bring in to a character like Logen. I think for me the "Hulk"-esque part of the character was really underdeveloped, so it ended up feeling like it had just been thrown in for no reason.
I think having Logen make mistakes and be a danger to friend and foe alike is a GREAT character structure. I just would've liked to have seen it done a bit better. Personally!
I'm so glad you had such a great time with the series!
@@ToriTalks2 Can't argue with the logic. I'd have liked to see more development on the bloody nine as well. Though, anytime he appeared he just seemed to mess things up for poor Logen!
I agree with this. Also, I think the Bloody Nine killing Thunderhead was more about the reader seeing Logen for how much of a danger he is to everyone around him than to evoke emotions, because of Thunderhead's death.
Maybe that's something I appreciated more on a reread, because it is actually build up by how people talk about Logen and how he sees himself. He always tries to make good choices but his choices always lead to suffering.
I loved it. Still not sure how I feel about the end end of the book, but overall, I loved the series. I think in terms of Jezal and the characters, it is true to human nature to show that when we are not with the people who maybe "inspire" us, that we often revert back to their original tendencies and selves. I still really enjoyed Jezal and liked him through the end, but, I think it is because I accept that he is a super flawed character, as they all are.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think it was more the execution of HOW the ending came about that bothered me more than the reverting back. And the fact that it was all the characters (who didn't die) all at the same time. I agree that human nature struggles to act outside of base instincts, and that the "heroes" we read about are not pillars of morality the way many people make them out to be.
I really loved Jezal's character arc overall, but the ending I struggled with because it felt like everything in the story was sort of for nothing.
Absolutely!! My feeling exactly - I was going to finish the entire trilogy if it killed me.
For the Tul Duru/Bloody Nine bit that upset you, I had a different take that made it make more sense. The Bloody Nine doesn't come out when he's in a battle rage. It comes out when he's cornered and about to die. After being chased by the Practicals and exhausted, when the Shanka are blocking his only way out of the tunnel, etc. It came out on the Seventh Day because he was knocked onto the ground and getting trampled, it came through when he was knocked unconscious. And Tul Duru was helping him up when he regained consciousness as the Bloody Nine, who is there as a defense mechanism.
Also I haven't seen this talked about, but I'm pretty sure that it's implied that Logen has devil blood. It's never outright said, but Bayaz's story about Ferro's lineage mentioned that one of Euz's sons was granted the gift of speaking to spirits. So that power comes from devil blood. Which would explain the superhuman abilities and ruthlessness of The Bloody Nine.
Also, I think that's how Logen/Bloody Nine ALWAYS was. We only got to see the brief glimpse of his life where he got away from it all and tried to be a better man for like a year in the first two books. He went back and the trail of bloodshed and reputation in the North caught up to him and it was so bad he couldn't escape it. Black Dow didn't attack him because he had a personal score to settle. He attacked him because Logen was responsible for nearly everything bad the North has been through over the last several decades. Countless dead, Bethod's rise to power, hundreds more dead from bringing everyone to Adua. He wanted peace for his people and knew that couldn't happen with Logen in charge. And Logen didn't come back to challenge him, Logen still thought he was king and just returning home. He left Black Dow to hunt down Bethod's sons.
I hope I don't come off as an angry defender of the series or saying your frustrations aren't valid, just trying to offer a different perspective! I know some people unironically love Logen, but I like him because he's an interesting character study on a tragic man. I nearly teared up when he asked Jezal if he's evil and Jezal tells him he's the best man he knows.
Haven't read your comment the whole way through, I'll finish it but first I wanted to say two quick things. The first is a clarification and the second is a question/inconcistency between how the bloody nine is presented in the first book and the rest of the trilogy.
For the clarification, no, Logen doesn't have demonic blood, you could interpret it as such but it wouldn't make sense, because if he did bayaz wouldn't need Ferro. Ferro is precisely needed because she has demonic blood, which makes her inmune to the seed, it doesn't require to be much demonic blood, even if it's a tiny bit anyone who has it would be inmune. Why would bayaz need Ferro then? She is a pain to him and his plans, Logen would be the better option if he had demon blood.
The question/inconcistency. I remember pretty clearly how the first time the bloody nine came out in the blade itself he was about to kill Ferro, but a voice inside him told him not to (logen as it is implied) and the bloody nine obliged. But then in the following books it seems like once he comes out the bloody nine is unstoppable and he will kill with zero regards to anyone, and Logen can't stop it once it starts. Am I crazy? I went back to read that scene and it's there, maybe you could give a different interpretation, but for the way it is written, it's pretty similar to how people with dissociative personality disorder describe how their alters interact with them when one is in control, so I can only take it as a demonstration that Logen could talk to his violent alter when he is in control and actually tell him who not to kill. But hen it is forgotten in the following books.
Sorry for the late reply! I agree that devil blood would've made the Bloody Nine make a lot more sense. But if that was the case, I wish Abercrombie would've utilized that a bit more intentionally, because there's no confirmation anywhere in the story that Logen does have it.
I think that Logen is more interesting without The Bloody Nine. I honestly think if he was overcome by bloodlust or battle rage it would've had the same effect. I find that too many readers point to it as an obvious "multiple personalities" example.
As someone formally diagnosed with DID, I can say with certainty that The Bloody Nine is NOT an example of the disorder. One of the main issues I had with the portrayal is that a lot of people point to The Bloody Nine and Logen as an example of multiple personality (DID), and sensationalizing hyper-violent "alters" is a disservice to people who genuinely have the disorder, because it's simply not realistic.
Reading what you wrote to me last week but then seeing you so deflated in this video is kinda heartbreaking. Your criticisms are very fair. I can’t wait for you to get to Heroes because i think you’ll love that one.
Hey Zara! I appreciate your willingness to be a sounding board while I was reading through this one. I have very high hopes for the standalones, especially Heroes! I definitely plan on reading more of Abercrombie, because I think his writing is really incredible.
Oof, you can just feel the disappointment radiating through the screen hahahah. Sorry to hear that this wasn't what you were hoping for, Tori!
I actually had a very similar experience on my first read, but then I recently reread it and continued on with the standalones, which has been a blast! 🤣
Totally agree that Bayaz is just an unpredictable loose cannon, and not in a good way. I did personally really like Jezal's storyline though, but mostly on reread after I'd watched some reviews with Abercrombie. Sounds like he was trying to make the point that we all go back to our base insticts in the end, so everything comes full circle and characters basically end up back where they started (which is indeed not the most satisfying thing ever, lol).
I think it's a good call to leave the First Law world for a bit, though I hope you enjoy the rest of your journey whenever you get back to the series!
Thanks for sharing your honest thoughts Tori, I loved this vlog!! 🤩
Hey Esmay! Definitely ready for a break, but not permanently. I will definitely return to the First Law universe to see what the rest of the series looks like! Abercrombie interviews are a blast to watch. I definitely get the base instincts, but I also think that to have every single character revert to that for the most part at the same time (or die) is a tough sell.
Thank you so much for watching all the vlogs and supporting the channel, as always!
I share a lot of your sentiments, Tori. I think that Abercrombie is an excellent writer (as you mentioned: his characters, dialogues and combats are awesome), but I'm not fond of the choices he makes about the story, plot development and the characters trajectories. The last third of the book, I felt like he was throwing anything anywhere, it was a mess, while I had lost much of the interest already because everything goes Bayaz's way anyhow. Nonetheless, I'm tempted to read the next books, because I'd love to reunite with some of the characters, not certainly for how Abercrombie delivers a story.
Totally agree! The ending gave a sour taste to the trilogy for me.
I really enjoyed the sequel trilogy Age of Madness. I feel like it makes The First Law Complete.
As for the Bloody Nine I always felt it was a very true representation of the Complete shutdown of humanity that happens in battle. That's why veterans, like myself, have such severe PTSD. It's like a demon is truly there but locked behind a door.
Thank you so much for sharing your experience with this. I can completely understand the connection with combat PTSD, that makes a ton of sense. I wish the fandom in general leaned more toward that than using it as an example of DID (multiple personality).
I will probably continue with the series in the future, I do look forward to seeing how Abercrombie expands the world. Thanks for watching!
Totally understandable that this didn’t land for you, Tori! I think the grimdark (and comedic) nature of First Law has to do with characters lacking agency despite good intentions (I actually don’t consider Malazan grimdark for this reason, despite having much darker, more graphic content). It’s flipping fantasy idealism on its head in a dark, comedic, absurdist way. I stand by The Age of Madness showing Abercrombie’s writing at its best (reading the third book right now), but I’m hesitant to recommend reading on if you were not crazy about the grimdark nature of the world. In any case, you thoughtfully articulated your criticisms, and I thank you for sharing your experience! ❤
Hey Johanna, thanks for watching! I definitely plan to continue, I'm pretty optimistic that I will find something to love in the future First Law book reads. Grimdark is not the issue for me, because I don't think grimdark always equals nihilism, which I think is more what I struggled with in this book. I agree with you that Malazan as a whole isn't necessarily grimdark, but it definitely has a lot of grimdark content and elements.
Lack of agency in characters can be super frustrating, but not necessarily unrealistic or something that ruins a read for me. But I think having most of the characters at the end fitting into that same lack of agency (unless they are dead) makes the events of the entire trilogy feel rather pointless, which is a tough sell. Not necessarily always unrealistic, again, but I found myself wondering why I didn't just read the last 20% of the last book if that's the point of the story.
I'm super glad you powered through the book and did the vlog. As much as I love First Law, you hit the nail on the head with my biggest problem, the "Bloody-Nine" device seemed super unnecessary as a unique persona. The only thing I could think of was maybe it was a poorly explained double personality that somehow ties with Logen's ability to talk to the fire spirits. Again, could've easily been explained, but wasn't. For me, the character agency, or lack of, was one of the more interesting components... so much of the world has been controlled by the puppetmaster. Even tho you didn't love it as much as me, I give this video 5 stars. Would Recommend :)
I'm really glad I did it too! I did have a great time vlogging this trilogy, and it reminded me how much I enjoy sharing my thoughts in this format. I'm so glad you enjoyed it!
There were a lot of things that felt underdeveloped, especially with the magic system and Logen. Thank you so much for watching and loving the vlog!
@@ToriTalks2 absolutely! As the series progresses, I think you'll find the agency parts get resolved quite a bit.
@@BrianBell7 love to hear it!!!
All very valid criticisms. Thank you for being honest about your experience. Glad you are planning to continue. Not sure how you will feel about the individual stand alones but I think you will enjoy The Age of Madness. There is a more focused plot in the final trilogy and the character work remains excellent.
Thank you so much for watching! I try really hard to show honest experiences whenever I do the vlog, that's important. I definitely am curious to see what lies ahead in the First Law universe!
My experience was that I struggled throughout the trilogy and dnf'ed it 1-2 times. Then came the ending which I loved!! So I continued the series and basically loved every book since. Weird but true.
I’m glad you ended on a high note with it!
@@ToriTalks2 I hope you enjoy the sequels after your break. Based on what you liked and didn't like I think you probably will
@@marcweber8509 I’m very optimistic!
Oh wow, you caught the change in temperament of Quai. I did not catch it when I read it, maybe it was because I did audiobook format. Also, *riot status activated* 100%. Great vlog. Also, great instincts on Bayaz, I sort of thought something else might be going on there, but he was not quite the good guy he's stood up to be. Also, did it seem like the wasting disease was essentially radiation poisoning? I got the sense Abercrombie was going for something along the lines that the "other side" power was akin to radiation in our world. Maybe I'm wrong though. Lastly, I thought it would have been nice to get more of Yulway or Yulweigh, (spelling?), he seemed like a great character that just didn't get enough page time.
Yeah to me the temperament shift between book 1-2 for Quai was so weird! I think too with Bayaz it helped that I never liked his character so I was always waiting for him to be something different than what he seemed.
I totally see the correlation with radiation poisoning! That makes a lot of sense. Yulwei was a great character, I agree that he needed more page time.
A lot of people say that the original trilogy is very nostalgic because of the great iconic characters like glokta and logan etc. but the newer books and especially the newer trilogy are probably better books overall because joe gets better as an author
I didn't love this trilogy, but I just finished A Little Hatred recently and I loved it. Hoping the rest of the Age of Madness works well for me.
I’m definitely planning to continue because I think Joe is an incredible writer. I’m looking forward to seeing the progression over his canon of work!
Your criticisms are more than fair. I share many of them. For me, the great characters, dark humour, and immersive action outweigh the plot contrivances and unsatisfactory resolution.
I can totally respect that. Abercrombie's characterization and dialogue is really awesome.
I saw the Bloody Nine as something of a multiple personality disorder, and one that Logen had managed to suppress for a time before this story. Now it surfaces, and the results are a mixed bag.
What bothered me about that character element were the apparent inconsistencies. Was the BN not involved in any of the historic circles against Grimm and the others? It’s likely he was, so how would any the beaten men have survived that encounter? And given Logen’s self-awareness of his own bloody history, how is he *that* clueless about his contributions to the embattled state of the North (per Bethod’s final revelations).
I was still there for the ride - especially for the extreme anti-Gandalf that Bayaz turned out to be. But the character inconsistency above stuck in my side a bit.
I agree that the BN is an incredibly inconsistent character element. I actually had a big problem with the fact that he is considered a representation of "multiple personality disorder" or dissociative identity disorder. It's a disorder already highly stigmatized and often utilized in media for these sensationalized killer roles, and that always makes me angry, because it's not accurate to call what Logen and the BN are a dissociative identity situation.
It would make more sense to me if Logen and the BN are just the same entity and it the name he's been given because of the battle rage he feels when fighting. That would make a lot more sense. I don't see any reason for them to be separated entities.
YES.
I do think you might enjoy the standalones more. The first trilogy was well... a mess that I liked. But the standalones are much better with a tighter story and you can really see joe improving as a writer.
I definitely intend to try the standalones someday!
Oh I'm so glad it wasn't just me. I had alot of the same issues you had with Last Argument of Kings. You actually put it into words better than I could when you talked about how once it revealed just how much Bayaz was behind everything it took away alot of the importance of decisions made by characters.
I liked West's chapters more than you did, but other than that I think my feelings were very similar to yours. This was my least favourite book in the trilogy.
I don't mind when books don't have "definitive" endings, but I really feel like Abercrombie decided to throw out any character growth for most of the characters and wanted absolute chaos instead.
I agree that he does battle scenes and dialogue incredibly well and I loved the Northmen's chapters the most with Glokta's in a close second.
But overall I was left feeling very underwhelmed at the end of this. I fully intend to pick up the sequels, but I'm going to take a break first to let my frustrations fade.
I think a break is a good way to approach this series when you struggled with LAoK. I think West had a really interesting character arc, he bothered me a lot more in book 1. And there was at least some reconciliation at the end of the trilogy. I totally agree with you in the sense that I don't necessarily mind nebulous endings to books. This one just felt rushed and all over the place.
I hope you enjoy the sequels when you get to them!
Thank you for the review. I still have to read it. It is on my shelf.
I hope you have a great time with it!
Commenting only for support. Will watch when I finish reading.
Is this spoiler free?
No it isn’t! I go through the book as I’m reading it and share my thoughts. Thanks for the support!
*sigh* indeed 😂 I didn't hate this trilogy by any means, but I most certainly did not love it like the rest of the world. I have the next 3 standalones but I really don't know when, if ever, I'll get to them.
It's definitely a divisive ending from what I can tell. I loved Abercrombie's writing style, just not the execution. If you ever do pick up the rest of the series, I hope you enjoy it!
This entry is my least liked trilogy endings ever…
Yup
I liked Bayaz from the beginning but the series was a miss for me. Book 2 was also top of the trilogy for me. Book 3 dragged.
Although this was my favorite of the trilogy, I definitely think it has a lot of flaws. However many of the flaws I see in it are flaws that exist in the whole series, so by the third book I was more used to rolling with it.
You really should press on.
I had kinda mixed felling about the first trilogy. More positive than you, but still.
Later books solved a lot of my grips.
Yeah. This book fell quite flat for me. I think I liked this book up until the 3/4 mark and then I just kept getting annoyed at everything just going bad and things going back to square one.
I actually didn't pick up any Abercrombie after this book for a year. Then I saw Bookborn and a few other people talking highly about the Age of Madness trilogy and decided to give him another try. And man I loved the first book in that. I'm not entirely sure if he had just improved as a writer or if I'm just more on board with the project of First Law.
I'm really looking forward to seeing the progression through Abercrombie's First Law universe. I have been hearing great things about the Age of Madness trilogy!
Just finished Last Argument. Really did NOT love it. Questjon: why do so many ma!e fantasy writers write fema!e characters so poorly and why do they really not seem to care about female story lines? The only fema!e character who didn't turn out be a victim of some sort is Ferro. Anxious to see more of her.
Because male writers are males, and they see how women actually behave and try to recreate it. Female writers write women how they WANT women to be, completely unrealistic and lame. In any kind of medieval-ish/fantasy society women will be victims and second class citizens simply because they are weaker physically and can be beaten into submission. Gotta be realistic about these things.
Had similar feelings when I finished Last Argument of Kings. Somewhat enjoyed it, but overall kind of disappointed. 5 years later I've been reading the standalones and I love them. I think taking a break is a good game plan.
Thank you so much for watching! And I'm glad to hear you're loving the standalones. I'm very optimistic. :D
I loved the trilogy as a whole, but the ending was a waste, so no I’m not mad at you Tori. Not on my top ten list of book series.
I havent watched yet but just based on the title how dare
We're not allowed to have opinions in this platform. It was a risky move. XD
Not gonna lie, I was not optimistic you would like this book...
I liked so many things about this trilogy, which was sad because there was a few things that really brought it down for me.
@@ToriTalks2 all valid points. They just didn't bother me, granted the Northmen was consistently my least favourite plotline across the trilogy (it was still alot of fun tho).
@@thatsci-firogue Reading tastes are so drastically different across the board, it’s fascinating! The Northmen are easily my favorite, but that’s hardly surprising considering my affinity for motley crews, I think.
@@ToriTalks2 They can't all be winners that's for sure. I didn't expect you to like A Shadow in Summer and I was happy to have been proven wrong.
I definitely endorse taking an extended break after your reaction to this book. I loved it and I didn't touch the standalones for at least 4 months afterwards but in your case I'd wait much much longer.
Fingers crossed you'll like the standalones better should you decide to continue. I think you'll appreciate The Heroes the most given what you've highlighted across your vlogs.
You have more Abercrombie motley crew dynamics to look forward to :)