Review by scaryradish - Sha Po Lang [杀破狼]

scaryradish 's review for:

Sha Po Lang [杀破狼] by priest

1.5

adventurous emotional slow-paced

Plot or Character Driven: A mix

Strong character development: Complicated

Loveable characters: Yes

Diverse cast of characters: No

Flaws of characters a main focus: Complicated

The book is suitable for those who enjoy reading about (fictional) battlefields, imperial court politics, fights against and for imperialism, steam punk, and scifi with a little bit of romance sprinkled in between. Unfortunately, the majority of these themes I find uninteresting especially when mixed with the slow pace of the novel. However, my low rating is not so much based on personal literary preferences as much as it is based on a few important issues I had with the novel.

Number 1. Racism

The enemies of the Great Liang are "Northern Barbarians". While I understand these enemies are made to be fictional, I couldn't help but find the discriptions slightly too similar to general attitudes towards non-Han (foreign) ethnicities. I would also like to support my argument by adding that the other enemies in the novel were very much references to real enemies in Chinese history ("The Westerners" (European imperial powers & the USA) & "The Dongying" / "wokou" pirates (Japan)). Therefore, it wouldn't surprise me if these "Northern Barbarians" is actually just a way to label either Xiongnu, Mongols, Turks, or Jurchen who could be considered enemies of certain Chinese dynasties. Additionally, while these "Northern Barbarian" enemies are a generalised enemy made up of (likely nomadic based on the descriptions throughout the novel) 16 tribes, the language used towards them without any (implicit) criticism from the author (f.e., irony) is very much real. It made the reading unenjoyamble and uncomfortable. The following descriptions of the "Barbarians" I have written down while reading the novel: "smelly", "hairy", "uncivilized", "animals", "wild dogs," and "rats". There may be more as I only started writing those down near the end of the novel. In general, there is a vibe in the book about how these "Barbarians" are not to be trusted and should be, for a lack of a better word, exterminated. It is unfortunately too often that in real life nomadic tribes get labelled as uncivilized, and I'm afraid this novel is just a continuation of such attitudes. To me, the description of "Northern Barbarians" sounded like previously used (often made up) description of and later turned into explanations for conquering "uncivilized" populations by the Western powers: voodoo, black magic, child sacrifice, "unconventional" medicine, poverty, famine, nomadic lifestyle. What a perfectly unsalvagable enemy to conquer! (Sarcasm)

Number 2. The book's solution to imperialism... is more imperialism (and perhaps even colonialism)

Imperialism and colonialism thrive on justifications of "saving a population," "liberation," and "civilising the uncivilized." The same goes for the Great Liang's attitudes towards the "uncivilised Northern Barbarians" who keep attacking at the Northern border. After the "Northern Barbarians" are defeated, the lands are simply incorporated into the "civilised and prosperous" Great Liang to govern over the territories and tribes and everybody is happy (or at least relatively content not to start another rebellion). Ironically, the Westerners who have come to conquer and profit off of the Great Liang are not used as an ironic counterexample to Great Liang's attitudes towards the "Northern Barbarians". Instead, they are just another one of Great Liang's immoral enemies to be defeated with whom cooperation is not an option. This is not an argument for support of imperialism on the part of the novel's Westerners as some wicked form of punishment. However, I found it interesting that the Great Liang is only portrayed as the victim, and never the oppressor. In general, the book has a strong stance against peace agreements / peace talks, every conflict is to be solved through force and unquestionable victory: The "Northern Barbarians" were defeated and then their territories were taken into the Great Liang. When the Great Liang is fighting against the Westerners, the peace envoys from the Great Liang are described as "traitors of the nation" that are selling the empire out. Both enemies are painted as untrustworthy and unable to hold an agreement. I am not surprised, considering Chinese history (more on this in my point four) but such a reoccurring, unbroken, negative, perspective on peace agreements, also felt a bit imperialistic —> Conquering and military superiority is the only way forward. In some ways, it is correct in practice in the history of political science (and the political theory of realism). However, such attitude failed to address the mutual companionship and diplomacy that would have been required for the relationship between The Great Liang and the "Barbarians" to thrive and the latter to not revolt.

Number 3. The Great Liang's enemies felt like one-dimensional, over-simplified caricatures made solely to show off Gu Yun's and Chang Geng's respective skills.

The reason the "Northern Barbarians" are conquering? Poverty, famine, lack of fertile land, and the bloodthirst "uncivilized" character of the "Barbarians". The Westerners were simply there to force the opening of treaty ports, exploitation, and conquering (reflection on the 19th and early 20th century Chinese history). But it just kind of morphs the West into one united enemy: influences of French or Belgian (Master Ja being named Jacques), British / Dutch (strong naval fleet + mention of exploited colonies), and the Vatican (pope, the Holy See, Holy Land) but no explanation for this arrangement (who gets what if they are separate or why they are multicultural if they are one) beyond "conquering" the Great Liang despite the constant discussion and some level of disagreement between the characters. What was peculiar, however, was that the Westerners were led by the "Pope" from the Holy See / Holy Land. Considering the invasion is lead by the Pope, the novel weirdly lacks any Christian theological debate on war. Assuming the author didn't want to do such in depth research, it still doesn't explain why the novel lacks religion-based reason for conquering or religion-based language from the Pope (there is some mention of God, but it is largely meaningless in terms of cause). Essentially, both the "Northern Barbarians" and the Westerners end up one-dimensional. They are there to 1. attack 2. be defeated by the Great Liang and show off Gu Yun's and Chang Geng's strengths —> Both conflicts are naturally resolved with Gu Yun's military expertise and Chang Geng's shenanigans in the imperial court.

Number 4. The novel comes off as a Chinese nationalistic wet dream.

To me the novel read like a steam-punk science fiction alternative universe of Chinese history where the "century of humiliation" is avoided through modernisation. However, due to the racism, imperialism, one-dimensional enemies, and the victories being used to reflect fictional character's strengths... it fell flat and didn't feel like it came from a "good place" if I can call it that. Additionally, it felt like the novel was making the Great Liang deal with all at once: The Northern Barbarians, the Westerners, and the Dongying (Japan) working together simultaneously sometimes and not in waves triggered by specific (for each enemy) events and reasons. The success of it therefore, for me, seemed a bit unrealistic even for a fictional steam-punk novel. Perhaps because the Great Liang did not have bear the unequal treaties as it was only at the fighting stage with the Westerners (which is when the sense of inferiority and doom set in) that it was "possible"? Maybe it is more enjoyable for the (ethnically Han) Chinese readers for a sense of nationalism. But I think it could have delved deeper into the reasons in the past for refusing to / being reluctant to modernise socially (funnily enough women's suffrage not mentioned in the novel) / technologically. The crown prince does end up travelling to the Western countries to learn, once the Great Liang is having peaceful times, I think in one of the extras but it is not part of the main story. I guess what bothered me the most was that Chang Geng was made into this revolutionary reformer who stood alone. However, the novel failed to incorporate the class of intellectuals who would have had likely similar ideas in their writings that Chang Geng could have drawn inspiration from, asked for advice, or discussed / debated with (by f.e., inviting to court). Instead, it was only portrayed from the inner court perspective where Chang Geng and his loyalists were the sole force.

Moving onto small complaints:

Number 5. Inner conflict resolution for the main character's love interest... is quick.

This is frankly the least of my concerns with the novel. Firstly, while the ship dynamic of a godfather and godson with a big age gap is not my favourite thing in the world, what bothered me was how quickly Gu Yun got over being Cheng Geng's godfather. Essentially, at first he was bothered by Cheng Geng calling him "yifu" (father) but then somewhere amid all the battles he just gets over it. ...He literally watched him grow up and he is fine with that in bed?

Number 6. Maybe I missed it (had to take a year off to finish the book as well) but I didn't quite understand how the Black Armor mechanism worked with the purple gold. I know it was burned, but where in the armor? How did it work? It didn't overheat? It didn't blow up when pierced?

One positive mention:
1. Depiction of disability. also spoiler warning for the novel "Disabled Tyrant's beloved Pet Fish"

I enjoyed that while Gu Yun's deafness and blindness was partially managed during and in the end relieved by a lot, it was not fully cured. Too often disability in novels is just used for the plot and a temporary inconvenience for the characters, only to be magically cured near the end. That is one issue, I had with the novel "Dysabled Tyrant's Beloved Pet Fish" despite how cute and loveable I found the novel in general. They cured the "Tyrant's" blindess... I was so upset. Disabled people deserve to be treated as people with serious conditions, who don't need their disability to disappear in order to be loved or respected.

Without these, I would give these book a 2.5/5 which in my books is "okay but I wouldn't enthusiastically recommend it to anyone else." However, due to the above mentioned issues, I cannot possibly give "Okay" to such a book. Therefore, my rating is simply "not good" for this book despite it having some lovely characters and cute scenes between the couple.

Content Warnings