Scan barcode
A review by vickycbooks
The Goblin Emperor by Katherine Addison
Interestingly mixed feelings about this one. I actually read this because I read part of a Tumblr post ( https://aethersea.tumblr.com/post/746505725777510400) that talked about it in such a way (mostly on the appeal of the revolutionary ideal of trust) that I felt compelled to actually borrow it from my library, even though it's one of those books that I'd usually put on my TBR and then never read.
I read this in less than three days, which is the fastest I've read any SFF book in the past like...five years (especially now that I work full time). And I agree with Tumblr user aethersea that Addison's portrayal of trust was a really bright moment in this book. The way she structures the story about the importance of trust, and moreover rewards doing so in the story, make it very compelling in almost a cozy way (in the sense that good things do happen to people who deserve it). aethersea says this much better than I can.
I liked Maia's story independently -- I have a soft spot for underdog stories (like I loved SHE WHO BECAME THE SUN) and I guiltily love that almost Cinderella-esque rise to royalty. Even though Maia is honestly just some guy who's barely getting by with the weight of the empire on his shoulders, he's a compelling hero and you want him to succeed. I would argue that as a reader, you don't even want Maia to succeed based on his own personality, but you want him to succeed just by virtue of his journey and where it has taken him as a person.
I also enjoyed the very court-politic focused nature of the story. There was very little action, very much politics. The fact that the politics are from a perspective of Maia who's distinctly uncomfortable by politics & is generally just being honest about how they try to rule things makes it a lot more approachable for readers. It made it comforting that you were following along with Maia, who is honestly just trying to do his best instead of trying to outwit and outmaneuver other people.
But I also cannot reconcile my like of these elements with how much I detested the worldbuilding.
I don't know who out there was like "wow the linguistic worldbuilding was so great" because....babe...what linguistic worldbuilding? A handful of prefixes and suffixes and some made up words make not a sophisticated linguistic worldbuild. Honestly, the language worldbuilding largely contributed to (1) an atmosphere of political intrigue and formality in titles and appropriate forms of address and (2) reader confusion about who's who. I don't think Addison did anything exceptional with the linguistics -- sure, it was complicated, but it wasn't like. very important to the story or very clever or meaningful or anything really. I would argue that the biggest role of the language that Addison creates is to create rules and regulations within the story for address, and also help provide tension and conflict between in-group (the court) and out-group (Maia, who only has some education in the topic). Which is fine, and a valid purpose for introducing this language. But I wouldn't really call the linguistics anything special.
I also found the rest of the worldbuilding, outside of politics, severely underwhelming. Elves are snowy white, in skin and hair. Goblins are black-skinned (and to be clear: the color black, not Black) with dark hair and red/orange/etc. eyes. In form, goblins are generally stockier, but also taller and sometimes fat, but still human-shaped (so not little goblins). Mixed-race people have grey skin tones and inherit some mix of features, of which Maia is. Noblewomen are expected to become wives, and there are fairly strict gender roles both in the story and in the made-up linguistics.
I tell you all this not to be particularly because you care, but to highlight how lazy this is for worldbuilding. And like. I'll admit, I didn't really expect much from a 2014 fantasy novel. But how uncaring must you be to simply concede to already established fantasy tropes and just. Keep going along with it. Elves are white! Goblins are black (but not really Black, because we obviously can't write about Black people in fantasy)! Women are oppressed!
Addison attempts to involve some element of racism against the goblins, but also doesn't really engage with it critically...ever. It is simply something that is used to discredit Maia by his enemies, that's brought up every once and a while and is used to highlight who are the xenophobic "bad guys" and who are the "good guys" (who do spit out the occasional microaggression, but contritely learn from their mistakes). I very much felt like the racism in the story was very much a tool Addison was able to use to emphasize this underdog story that she was trying to tell, but it is never examined critically or ever engaged with in a way that made sense in the context of the worldbuilding.
I would argue that the main reason the racism isn't fleshed out enough is because Addison refuses to use it as an actual motivator. All of the motivations in the story are largely political, and that the racism is more of a moralistic signaling, and is executed with no real significance to the story. The extent of its effect was that it made Maia more of an underdog and it helped heighten political tensions. It felt like Addison was scared to develop her fantasy racism in any meaningful capacity, and that she refused to make any characters predominantly engage with racism as the influence on their politics.
In a similar capacity, the sexism (and classism) were used to demonstrate Maia's goodness. Oh, he's kind to his servants. He tries to learn their names. He encourages women to pursue their passions (except for his wife, that is). This is just a dressed up version of THE SELECTION where America Singer is not-like-other-girls (she's better!) because she's down to earth.
I'll concede that the classism is an important part to the politics. But the story never really engages with the sexism and racism built into the world other than as seasoning for highlighting political tensions.
I realize I am being critical, and that maybe I just shouldn't expect so much, especially from a book from this era. But again, I'll say that I did like a fair amount of THE GOBLIN EMPEROR. I liked its heart. I just wish that more thought went into the worldbuilding. I genuinely feel that the same story could have been told without relying on these fantasy tropes in such blatantly uncritical ways.
Yes, Addison needs some sort of power structure, some boundaries and rules to be able to structure a rags-to-riches story. (Of course, what we really want to see is down with the empire! Burn it all down!) But I also think that she didn't have to lean so hard into so many old fantasy tropes with, what I see as, no real reason other than lazy writing. To me, it felt like these tropes were kept so Addison didn't have to worldbuild as much, and could instead rely on the readers' preconceived notions of how these systems work to be able to signal and guide readers' understanding of the politics.
I think I'd be willing to read more from Addison, but I would want to see a more novel idea and more novel world from them. THE GOBLIN EMPEROR feels very...classic-rooted, is the nice way to say it I guess, and I would be interesting to see how they write more original worlds.
I read this in less than three days, which is the fastest I've read any SFF book in the past like...five years (especially now that I work full time). And I agree with Tumblr user aethersea that Addison's portrayal of trust was a really bright moment in this book. The way she structures the story about the importance of trust, and moreover rewards doing so in the story, make it very compelling in almost a cozy way (in the sense that good things do happen to people who deserve it). aethersea says this much better than I can.
I liked Maia's story independently -- I have a soft spot for underdog stories (like I loved SHE WHO BECAME THE SUN) and I guiltily love that almost Cinderella-esque rise to royalty. Even though Maia is honestly just some guy who's barely getting by with the weight of the empire on his shoulders, he's a compelling hero and you want him to succeed. I would argue that as a reader, you don't even want Maia to succeed based on his own personality, but you want him to succeed just by virtue of his journey and where it has taken him as a person.
I also enjoyed the very court-politic focused nature of the story. There was very little action, very much politics. The fact that the politics are from a perspective of Maia who's distinctly uncomfortable by politics & is generally just being honest about how they try to rule things makes it a lot more approachable for readers. It made it comforting that you were following along with Maia, who is honestly just trying to do his best instead of trying to outwit and outmaneuver other people.
But I also cannot reconcile my like of these elements with how much I detested the worldbuilding.
I don't know who out there was like "wow the linguistic worldbuilding was so great" because....babe...what linguistic worldbuilding? A handful of prefixes and suffixes and some made up words make not a sophisticated linguistic worldbuild. Honestly, the language worldbuilding largely contributed to (1) an atmosphere of political intrigue and formality in titles and appropriate forms of address and (2) reader confusion about who's who. I don't think Addison did anything exceptional with the linguistics -- sure, it was complicated, but it wasn't like. very important to the story or very clever or meaningful or anything really. I would argue that the biggest role of the language that Addison creates is to create rules and regulations within the story for address, and also help provide tension and conflict between in-group (the court) and out-group (Maia, who only has some education in the topic). Which is fine, and a valid purpose for introducing this language. But I wouldn't really call the linguistics anything special.
I also found the rest of the worldbuilding, outside of politics, severely underwhelming. Elves are snowy white, in skin and hair. Goblins are black-skinned (and to be clear: the color black, not Black) with dark hair and red/orange/etc. eyes. In form, goblins are generally stockier, but also taller and sometimes fat, but still human-shaped (so not little goblins). Mixed-race people have grey skin tones and inherit some mix of features, of which Maia is. Noblewomen are expected to become wives, and there are fairly strict gender roles both in the story and in the made-up linguistics.
I tell you all this not to be particularly because you care, but to highlight how lazy this is for worldbuilding. And like. I'll admit, I didn't really expect much from a 2014 fantasy novel. But how uncaring must you be to simply concede to already established fantasy tropes and just. Keep going along with it. Elves are white! Goblins are black (but not really Black, because we obviously can't write about Black people in fantasy)! Women are oppressed!
Addison attempts to involve some element of racism against the goblins, but also doesn't really engage with it critically...ever. It is simply something that is used to discredit Maia by his enemies, that's brought up every once and a while and is used to highlight who are the xenophobic "bad guys" and who are the "good guys" (who do spit out the occasional microaggression, but contritely learn from their mistakes). I very much felt like the racism in the story was very much a tool Addison was able to use to emphasize this underdog story that she was trying to tell, but it is never examined critically or ever engaged with in a way that made sense in the context of the worldbuilding.
I would argue that the main reason the racism isn't fleshed out enough is because Addison refuses to use it as an actual motivator. All of the motivations in the story are largely political, and that the racism is more of a moralistic signaling, and is executed with no real significance to the story. The extent of its effect was that it made Maia more of an underdog and it helped heighten political tensions. It felt like Addison was scared to develop her fantasy racism in any meaningful capacity, and that she refused to make any characters predominantly engage with racism as the influence on their politics.
In a similar capacity, the sexism (and classism) were used to demonstrate Maia's goodness. Oh, he's kind to his servants. He tries to learn their names. He encourages women to pursue their passions (except for his wife, that is). This is just a dressed up version of THE SELECTION where America Singer is not-like-other-girls (she's better!) because she's down to earth.
I'll concede that the classism is an important part to the politics. But the story never really engages with the sexism and racism built into the world other than as seasoning for highlighting political tensions.
I realize I am being critical, and that maybe I just shouldn't expect so much, especially from a book from this era. But again, I'll say that I did like a fair amount of THE GOBLIN EMPEROR. I liked its heart. I just wish that more thought went into the worldbuilding. I genuinely feel that the same story could have been told without relying on these fantasy tropes in such blatantly uncritical ways.
Yes, Addison needs some sort of power structure, some boundaries and rules to be able to structure a rags-to-riches story. (Of course, what we really want to see is down with the empire! Burn it all down!) But I also think that she didn't have to lean so hard into so many old fantasy tropes with, what I see as, no real reason other than lazy writing. To me, it felt like these tropes were kept so Addison didn't have to worldbuild as much, and could instead rely on the readers' preconceived notions of how these systems work to be able to signal and guide readers' understanding of the politics.
I think I'd be willing to read more from Addison, but I would want to see a more novel idea and more novel world from them. THE GOBLIN EMPEROR feels very...classic-rooted, is the nice way to say it I guess, and I would be interesting to see how they write more original worlds.