Thoughts on the thinking chud's fantasy series? First Law seemed to understand it was going to be just another generic Tolkien rip-off unless it learned hard into cynicism and actively rejected Tolkien. Unlike GoT which did the same thing though, it didn't feel like directionless bitching and subversion for the sake of subversion. It's full of neat historical allegory and has a primal "might makes right and fuck you if you ever believed otherwise" theme running through it. Remaining alive and killing those who want you dead is pretty much the only moral truth at the bottom of this well. The centuries-long Nietzschean wizard battles happening far above the petty concerns of normal people is pretty interesting as well. I think Abercrombie develops the idea way better in the second trilogy though. The follow-up series Age of Madness is way more interesting because it asks what happens in a world where the best killers/survivors successfully reproduce. Orso's arc from decadent spoiled rich kid to heroic king who leads a final, gloriously doomed cavalry charge and then gets captured and executed was pure kino. Abercrombie's addiction to historical allegory was on full display as he borrows all the most interesting elements of the English civil war + French/Russian revolutions. It was written in a historical moment (late 2010s/early 2020s) which seemed revolutionary to many and took the wind out of reader's sails by basically saying "all revolutionaries, even the successful ones, are still pawns"I still think about it a lot even years after reading it.
>>25548432I read it and thought it was just okay, I wish I had more to say but it just didn't leave that much of an impression on me. I remember thinking "god damn I'm sick of the description of this blokes teeth clicking together" and "that wizard dude is definitely going to betray everybody". I felt the same way reading the black company book but I didn't bother finishing that. Sorry to be negative but it was honestly a 6/10 for me.
>>25548432>Thoughts on the thinking chud's fantasy series?Do you unironicly think that The First Law series is written for thinking men?
>thinking>fantasyStay in your containment thread manchild
>>25548432>I still think about it a lot even years after reading it.Have you read them at 12 years old and now years later you are 14?
>>25548432Never read it but my impression is that it's slop
>>25548432I disliked it. The series is so cynical that it actually becomes tedious. It's misery porn built for people who worship suffering. I honestly had to stop after book 2, did not finish.Scavenger Trilogy is similarly grim but it's way better.
Even asoiaf has moments of levity, this one is just a miserable slog all the way through. No, Glotka's reddit character doesn't count.
>>25548432Truthnvke
>>25549292>It's misery porn built for people who worship suffering.Ok gonna check it out
>>25548432The First Law sets up a grand narrative that nothing happens to. Age of Madness does the french revolution and industrial revolutions in a fantasy setting. The grand narrative of the First Law goes nowhere. The Age of Madness trilogy itself ultimately spins its wheels given how it ends. Then the author gets very bored with it all and writes a new trilogy about vampires werewolves and fairies in alt history. Why do people give these cunts the benefit of the doubt. The only author to have had a grand narrative set up and paid off was Tolkien and even then he had to put half the shit in appendices.Imagine a murder mystery series of 9 books that just punts on telling you who the murderer was or what all the linked clues were about but it’s okay say the readers because we made friends along the way and didn’t that first murder get sort of explained?Even other genreslop wouldn’t accept the eternal cucking of the fantasynigger.
>>25548432I liked it
>>25549292What? This is Disney tier compared to actual doomer literature...>>25549904>Then the author gets very bored with it all and writes a new trilogy about vampires werewolves and fairies in alt history.One of the top five worst books I've ever read.
I don't remember very much about these other than my enthusiasm tended to trail off with each new book. Agreed with sentiment that they are fine, worth reading if you like this genre. That's all.
>>25549292Now this is some good advertising
Was Bremer Dan Gorst "our guy"?
>>25549973>One of the top five worst books I've ever read.It's trashy and he also reuses basically the same party formula from The First Law to boot. With special editions being a flourishing area in publishing they're even hawking "limited editions" of that piece of trash FIRST BOOK IN A SERIES. https://fablelistikeditions.com/collections/the-devilsFor the low price of a thousand dollars you too can own the unrealized promise of this series not being trash.
