View original postI liked Locke meeting Vorchenza and punching her in the nose to get his antidote and then climbing out the window to escape. It felt properly dramatic and seat-of-his-pants-ish. The Falconer does indeed show off his Evil Overlord credentials a bit too much, though in his defense he's used to not having to worry about anyone ever hurting him, both because of his powers and because of the threat of bondsmagi retribution. I liked that Locke's first name is fake too, and I got some vicarious joy out of seeing the Falconer given a taste of his own medicine. I disliked him enough that what they did felt satisfying, even knowing that it's going to come back to haunt them. I hope Locke and Jean get to take down Karthain at some point.
I sure hope it comes back to haunt them (for the sake of the story, that is
). Having magic be so exclusive and scarce is a smart decision, though one does suspect that sooner or later we'll get to a point where that ceases to be the case.
Yeah, the punch moment wasn't bad, but again, Vorchenza's utter lack of established credentials weakened it. It's one thing to pull something like that on for instance Lady Olenna Tyrell, and quite another to do it on an old lady who has demonstrated very little skill or awesomeness other than happening to have a very capable intelligence service working for her. The elevator jump read like classic James Bond - one of the too rare moments in the closing chapters that did.
View original postHowever, rushed endings seem to be a problem that Lynch suffers from — it's an issue in Red Seas as well. I would have much preferred if Locke and Jean had defeated the Falconer and the Grey King using their smarts and some clever plan, rather than getting ridiculously lucky with the one and duking it out with the other.
Yeah, facing them both separately gives you twice as many showdown scenes to play with, I guess, but also rather reduces the challenge - without his sisters or his Falconer, the Grey King is nothing but a not particularly talented pirate, and not even that good with his blades if Locke's performance is anything to go by.
View original postLocke tricking Vorchenza into sinking the plague ship with all his gold aboard it, both to foil the Grey King and as a death offering for the dead members of his crew, was good, I thought, but you're right that everything surrounding it is less than stellar. He just escaped from the tower, so having him rush back to save the nobility felt off. I don't mean that Locke wouldn't do that, just that it feels off in terms of pacing and plot structure, a too-quick return to place that was already dealth with. And then Locke defeating the Grey King because of his previously established trick with Jean. I was entertained by all of this the first time around, but this time it didn't work as well and I wanted, like you said, more of the audacious scheming by characters who are cleverer than anyone else.
Yeah, agreed, the sinking of the gold ship was one of the stronger elements.
View original postHere's a question. Does anyone think that Locke's parentage might be important at some point? He's hidden his true name from everyone but Jean. Is it just because it's a dumb name, or is it something that people would recognize? He told Chains that he was named Locke after his father, which might be a clue if his father's name has something to do with Locke or locks or similar. But I don't remember if we were told any names in the story that we might be able to connect with this.
I would say no, not so much for plot reasons as for thematic reasons. In thematic terms, pretty much the whole point of the book is that the "family" you create for yourself with your close friends can be as strong and more so than actual blood ties, with the Gentleman Bastards considering themselves a family. It would be pretty lame if Lynch then suddenly decided to make Locke's father someone important, and make a big deal out of blood ties after all. Though I could see a "Pirates of the Caribbean"-style father-son reunion, or something like that - Chekhov's gun does tell us that there's a very high probability of Locke's father surfacing one way or another. But, as you say, he could intentionally subvert that cliché.
As for his true name, I got the impression it wasn't a big deal, just something extremely flowery. Although I suppose it could still be revealed at some point, like Inspector Morse's (I'm certainly putting comparisons to a very combination of narratives in this post...).
View original postOverall I would say that it's an emotionally satisfying book, especially on a first read, but on a re-read it reveals itself to be mentally unsatisfying once it loses its unexpectedness. But I still love Locke and Jean as characters, and can't wait to see what they get up to next.
I didn't consciously recall much of the plot when rereading, honestly. Subconsciously, maybe, but I'm more inclined to think that I've just grown a bit more critical as a reader since the last time I read this (which I'd guess was about five years ago).