Scan barcode
nostradamnus's review
challenging
dark
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
I'd recommend this if: you're into high-concept fantasy worlds that are significantly impacted by their religions; stories that are dark (and at times, a little gross) without being grimdark; well defined archetypal characters; and/or critiques of the links between masculinity and Westward expansion.
The first 90% of this book is a four-star read for me, and I will definitely be continuing the series. Jacobs did a great job turning this absolutely wild "Weird West meets the Roman Empire and also there are demons, dwarves, and elves" setting into a place that feels real. With that comes respect for how the cultures at play treated their marginalized populations. There is sexism and fantasy-racism (and no POC), which our narrator participates in to an extent. I think others' critiques of these elements are fair, but they didn't bother me, personally, as they felt more like the author actively pulling in historical perspectives than passively carrying on problematic tropes without consideration. I don't think he did so perfectly, but think he did a good job overall. It's like if Temeraire was inspired by Tombstone.
I don't want to go too deep into the setting (because it's definitely best experienced) but I do want to sing praises for the role of demons in this one. Rad af. Wholly original. I'd read a million books set in this universe through the ages.
But I think what really made this book work were the characters. Shoe, our narrator, is the first instance I've seen of an almost completely passive character being the perfect choice for POV. His silent observation for so much of the novel allows the reader to really get to know the rest of the cast, and he remains starkly individual despite his relative inaction. He's definitely not driving us anywhere, but he's a great guide. I particularly enjoyed his relationship with the world's primary god (warts and all). I could've done with his particular brand of objectifying women being pared down a bit, but again, it felt purposeful rather than simply carried forward. EDIT: Been struggling with articulating this critique for a while now, because the purpose of Shoe's sexism as a flaw was pretty obvious, but the area I think Jacobs faltered a bit in was in the paternalism he demonstrates toward his woman characters, which isn't as directly explored as more traditionally accepted means of objectification. That's what was missing, and it did make me uncomfy in a way the rest of his use of sexism did not.
There were really only a few lingering issues I had throughout, all of which I think I would have ultimately ignored if not for the last 10%. For me, the climax just ratched things much too quickly. We go from a very slow, interior creep of setting discovery and character work to a very pressing plot quite abruptly and the change in stakes being so dramatic, literally a matter of infernal war , felt unnecessary and unearned. An infodump about the true nature of reality/god, which is accepted without proof by our previously relentlessly devout narrator later, and Shoe's cohort is suddenly much more important than they ever needed to be, and his characterization suffers for it. I mean, like, imagine if Shoe had decided to take up Hellfire to save his friend despite believing it'd damn his mortal soul, instead of just accepting the word of a near stranger that his god was fake?
That One Thing About The Setting: The lack of POC really got to me at a certain point, especially because this is the Weird West. There are human civilizations that are defined as native to the frontier setting, but their relationship to modern cultures is unclear. They might be intended to be read as indigenous, but they could also be read as Northern European "pagans," a term used several times in the book. Also native to the frontier are elves and dwarves, the latter of which are really traditionally fantasy and the former of which are anything but. The elves are very much defined by their similarity to how white settlers would have viewed indigenous peoples (and are referred to as "indigenes"), a POV that's obviously less than generous to their morality/etc., but they also are literally monsters who are written as culturally similar to pre-colonial Americans. Jacobs uses their cruelty to better define that of his human characters and often, the humans are the characters I disliked more, but I think the lack of any native human populations to compare the elves to, in turn, made them feel shallow--particularly in death. Like, idk. I get that they're supposed to be ineffable to our characters, but couldn't they be made just a bit more effable to us?
That One Character: The impetus of the book's climax is the kidnapping of one of its female characters, Isabelle. I identified her as "quasi-marginalized" above because, while she's in a position of pretty significant power culturally, she's also a woman in a very sexist society and a political prisoner from an enemy kingdom that stands in for Southern Europe. (The existence of this kingdom as opposed to, like, an Aztec stand-in is a little weird for worldbuilding, since the Roman Empire definitely conquered the Mediterranean, but I digress.) It feels a little odd/mean to me that, of the several leading women of the novel who are rendered thoroughly and with empathy, and moreover, the sheer number of tertiary male characters that contain implied depth, she isn't given much more than a few passing descriptions of her as "dark," in that way old books used to describe folks with dark hair and eyes. Given, Shoe doesn't have many chances to interact with her, but I would've loved to see her take some kind of action, rather than having her choices implicitly ascribed to her love interest before she's killed and eaten off-page. (I promise it's not as bad as I'm making it sound--the book's just so well done otherwise that her treatment compared to someone like Carnelia, who holds less weight for the narrative but is given more interiority and is more "white", stands out like a sore thumb.)
The first 90% of this book is a four-star read for me, and I will definitely be continuing the series. Jacobs did a great job turning this absolutely wild "Weird West meets the Roman Empire and also there are demons, dwarves, and elves" setting into a place that feels real. With that comes respect for how the cultures at play treated their marginalized populations. There is sexism and fantasy-racism (and no POC), which our narrator participates in to an extent. I think others' critiques of these elements are fair, but they didn't bother me, personally, as they felt more like the author actively pulling in historical perspectives than passively carrying on problematic tropes without consideration. I don't think he did so perfectly, but think he did a good job overall. It's like if Temeraire was inspired by Tombstone.
I don't want to go too deep into the setting (because it's definitely best experienced) but I do want to sing praises for the role of demons in this one. Rad af. Wholly original. I'd read a million books set in this universe through the ages.
But I think what really made this book work were the characters. Shoe, our narrator, is the first instance I've seen of an almost completely passive character being the perfect choice for POV. His silent observation for so much of the novel allows the reader to really get to know the rest of the cast, and he remains starkly individual despite his relative inaction. He's definitely not driving us anywhere, but he's a great guide. I particularly enjoyed his relationship with the world's primary god (warts and all). I could've done with his particular brand of objectifying women being pared down a bit, but again, it felt purposeful rather than simply carried forward. EDIT: Been struggling with articulating this critique for a while now, because the purpose of Shoe's sexism as a flaw was pretty obvious, but the area I think Jacobs faltered a bit in was in the paternalism he demonstrates toward his woman characters, which isn't as directly explored as more traditionally accepted means of objectification. That's what was missing, and it did make me uncomfy in a way the rest of his use of sexism did not.
There were really only a few lingering issues I had throughout, all of which I think I would have ultimately ignored if not for the last 10%. For me, the climax just ratched things much too quickly. We go from a very slow, interior creep of setting discovery and character work to a very pressing plot quite abruptly and the change in stakes being so dramatic,
That One Thing About The Setting:
That One Character:
Content Warnings
Graphic: Body horror, Gore, Violence, Colonisation, and Death
Moderate: Misogyny, Sexism, Cannibalism, Classism, and Racism
Minor: Rape and Slavery
More...