A couple weeks ago I finished up the Joe Abercrombie First Law trilogy by completing The Last Argument of Kings.
I had to ponder whether or not I really liked this one or not. I thought on it for a long time and in the end I think it's near brilliant. Just as in the first two books, the characterization was fantastic. The difference with the concluding novel was that all was revealed about the characters and it wasn't always pretty. In fact, it was most often not pretty.
The novel left a bitter taste in my mouth. There were characters that I loved that I ended up hating. Other characters I loved ended up dying. I didn't have a good feeling about the book when I finished. However, after reflecting on it and allowing it to sink in, I did realize that it was well crafted and made one very strong statement.
Sometimes evil needs to be done for the benefit of the greater good.
There aren't many that have the stomach to do it. This book is about those who have the stomach to do unpopular things for what they believe is right. However, what they believe is right is only right in their own frame of reference. How many innocents have to suffer for what one man believes is right?
With the paralysis of modern bureaucracies, I have often wondered if a benign dictator might actually be a better option. This book made me realize that there is no such thing as benign dictatorships, only dictatorships. Benign/good, malicious/evil - it's all dependent upon whether you're on the the oppressor or the oppressed.
Who will history cast as hero and who will it cast as villain in our own, non-fantasy world? I don't know, but I'm sure that neither heroes nor villains will fully deserve the mantle that will be cast upon them.
With that said - another book down on my quest for 10,000 pages. 1900 pages as of mid-February.
No comments:
Post a Comment