![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Gentle, Mary. Ash: A Secret History. New York: Eos Books, 1999.
---------. Carthage Ascendant. New York: Eos Books, 2000.
I said a while ago that all my new reviews are impelled by people saying egregious shit on Twitter. That's not quite true, but this is definitely one of those reviews. This time people are saying that GRRM writing female characters in Game of Thrones was revolutionary…because there had never been female characters in epic fantasy before?
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME.
Ahem. I don't imagine that inarticulate with rage is really a good look on a book reviewer, but I offer the following as, I hope, a refutation of the idea that there were no female characters, much less female authors, in epic fantasy before George R. Rapefest Martin. (Actually, in what fairness to GRRM that he deserves, I remember GoT being less rape-tastic than, say, Terry Goodkind. But still.)
The Book of Ash, which was published in one volume in the UK and in four volumes in the US, follows female mercenary captain Ash in the wars of the late 15thC in Europe. Ash's company principally fights both for and then against the Duchy of Burgundy, of all principalities of Europe the richest and the most glorious, but also the heart of the continent, as becomes clear when the Carthaginians invade, intent on absolute conquest. Ash, who since a very young age has heard a voice, a military genius that advises her on tactics in battle, soon finds herself at the heart of the all-out conflict, and her company along with her.
I suspect that these books are comparable to Rosemary Kirstein's Steerswoman sequence (and I haven't read them yet, so don't spoil me) in that the books start out on the terra firma of one genre premise and then gradually shift very definitively into something else entirely. Suffice it to say, with minimal spoilers, that I was wondering by the end of the first book whether it was techno-Orientalist.
By the end of the second I definitely didn't quite get everything that was going on, but well before that, I was hooked. Ash's world is drawn as vividly as any I've read, and it's amazing to me that Gentle got her master's in war studies after writing this book rather than before it. Ash herself is believably complicated and, at times, frustrating, as well as believably vivid--the constant comparisons between her and her cowardly husband's attitudes towards war and combat are instructive. The series also is definitely thinking about gender, both in the person of Ash (who is not the only woman in the books, or on the battlefield) and of her company's doctor, and their thorny relationship. There are also just a lot of women wandering around in general, which is both historically accurate and depressingly remarkable for the genre.
Kate Elliott asked me on Twitter whether the books pass the Bechdel test; they do, but the women are mostly talking about war. Given that war is the subject and the setting, there is quite a lot of vividly described violence in these books, including some gender-based violence and at least one rape. I found these scenes much less exploitative than comparable scenes in books by male writers, on the whole, but YMMV.
The one false note in the whole, for me, is the frame tale concerning the academics and editors preparing to publish the Ash manuscripts at the turn of the third millennium. They're almost universally incredibly annoying, and ironically, given her consummate mastery of medieval society and warfare, Gentle utterly biffs how academic publishing works, probably for the sake of dramatics. First I started skipping the in-text footnotes and then I started skimming the appended emails, and that vastly improved my reading experience.
All in all, these books are a brilliant, discomforting alternate historical fantasy with more invention than many writers can muster for their entire careers. As
cofax7 remarked to me, Gentle swings for the fences; though I haven't yet read the other two books and can't say if this is a home run, it's well worth reading, and recommended.
---------. Carthage Ascendant. New York: Eos Books, 2000.
I said a while ago that all my new reviews are impelled by people saying egregious shit on Twitter. That's not quite true, but this is definitely one of those reviews. This time people are saying that GRRM writing female characters in Game of Thrones was revolutionary…because there had never been female characters in epic fantasy before?
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME.
Ahem. I don't imagine that inarticulate with rage is really a good look on a book reviewer, but I offer the following as, I hope, a refutation of the idea that there were no female characters, much less female authors, in epic fantasy before George R. Rapefest Martin. (Actually, in what fairness to GRRM that he deserves, I remember GoT being less rape-tastic than, say, Terry Goodkind. But still.)
The Book of Ash, which was published in one volume in the UK and in four volumes in the US, follows female mercenary captain Ash in the wars of the late 15thC in Europe. Ash's company principally fights both for and then against the Duchy of Burgundy, of all principalities of Europe the richest and the most glorious, but also the heart of the continent, as becomes clear when the Carthaginians invade, intent on absolute conquest. Ash, who since a very young age has heard a voice, a military genius that advises her on tactics in battle, soon finds herself at the heart of the all-out conflict, and her company along with her.
I suspect that these books are comparable to Rosemary Kirstein's Steerswoman sequence (and I haven't read them yet, so don't spoil me) in that the books start out on the terra firma of one genre premise and then gradually shift very definitively into something else entirely. Suffice it to say, with minimal spoilers, that I was wondering by the end of the first book whether it was techno-Orientalist.
By the end of the second I definitely didn't quite get everything that was going on, but well before that, I was hooked. Ash's world is drawn as vividly as any I've read, and it's amazing to me that Gentle got her master's in war studies after writing this book rather than before it. Ash herself is believably complicated and, at times, frustrating, as well as believably vivid--the constant comparisons between her and her cowardly husband's attitudes towards war and combat are instructive. The series also is definitely thinking about gender, both in the person of Ash (who is not the only woman in the books, or on the battlefield) and of her company's doctor, and their thorny relationship. There are also just a lot of women wandering around in general, which is both historically accurate and depressingly remarkable for the genre.
Kate Elliott asked me on Twitter whether the books pass the Bechdel test; they do, but the women are mostly talking about war. Given that war is the subject and the setting, there is quite a lot of vividly described violence in these books, including some gender-based violence and at least one rape. I found these scenes much less exploitative than comparable scenes in books by male writers, on the whole, but YMMV.
The one false note in the whole, for me, is the frame tale concerning the academics and editors preparing to publish the Ash manuscripts at the turn of the third millennium. They're almost universally incredibly annoying, and ironically, given her consummate mastery of medieval society and warfare, Gentle utterly biffs how academic publishing works, probably for the sake of dramatics. First I started skipping the in-text footnotes and then I started skimming the appended emails, and that vastly improved my reading experience.
All in all, these books are a brilliant, discomforting alternate historical fantasy with more invention than many writers can muster for their entire careers. As
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 19:47 (UTC)I think I liked more than loved the ending, and didn't completely understand how it happened, but I did feel satisfied. IIRC, the academics have more to do with the overall plot than is immediately apparent.
When I graduate and have more time, I will re-read these. I have been wanting to do so for ages, but want to have time to sink into them.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 20:58 (UTC)eh he he it actually makes me feel better to know I'm not the only one. (I've never met anyone who actually finished Ash, which reinforces your point re. deplorably obscurity. [...or my failure at socializing with SFF folk, more like])
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 21:05 (UTC)But I agree with Rachel: even the second time, I didn't quite get the ending. But I don't mind much, because the rest of it is so brilliant.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 22:03 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-16 03:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-16 03:27 (UTC)YES.
Though I actually think the Urth of the New Sun sequence is something not a lot of people have actually read, which imo is a real shame because it's so awesome and brain-breaking. IDK what people who haven't read it have read of Gene Wolfe--maybe his horribly sexist short stories/other books?
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 20:53 (UTC)Gentle is always so interesting. I would class her with Miéville in the respect that she's an often uncomfortable and disorienting read (chapters on chapters of "but where are they going with this??", heh), but ultimately incredibly memorable. She has this stone-cold audacity to write grand concepts (is this what "swinging for the fences" means??) without regressing to the bombastic. (I'm still impressed by "Golden Witchbreed", sth like 15yrs later.)
(because I'm feeling silly: "Golden Witchbreed" is something like "Left Hand of Darkness" meets "Embassytown". I'm not sure I *liked* it all that much, but it's still...pretty awesome? /fuzzy memory)
I don't know that I wasn't too young to appreciate the specific resolution/trajectory of "Ash", and even though I have no real urge to re-read, now you made me want to revisit the ending specifically. Hmm. (Having lent it for years and years [it became an injoke] to a friend, who ultimately resolved not to finish it, it is at least again in my possession...well, my parents' house, damn.)
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 21:15 (UTC)I love Golden Witchbreed. But not Ancient Light. For the obvious reason, though I also found the rest of the book less than compelling..
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 21:35 (UTC)Oddly enough, I don't really remember why I was so upset by it, just that I was.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 21:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 21:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 21:47 (UTC)V sbetrg gur rknpg qrgnvyf, ohg gur Jvgpuoerrq ner erny naq fbzr napvrag raretvrf ner tbvat gb or hayrnfurq juvpu jvyy qrfgebl Begur naq xvyy rirelbar ba vg. Ylaa naq Ehevp senagvpnyyl gel gb nireg gur pngnfgebcur, ohg - ntnva, V sbetrg jul - snvy. Ehevp qvrf n fnq, cnvashy qrngu. V guvax Ylaa vf fbzrubj cnegvnyyl be nppvqragnyyl erfcbafvoyr sbe gung. Ylaa jngpurf va ubeebe nf gur raretl vf hayrnfurq, gb qrfgebl gur ragver jbeyq naq xvyy rirelbar jr zrg va obbx bar.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 22:06 (UTC)Thank you for summarizing this for me!
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-16 03:22 (UTC)Yup!
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 21:05 (UTC)This time people are saying that GRRM writing female characters in Game of Thrones was revolutionary…because there had never been female characters in epic fantasy before?
Also, the FUCK? What fresh hell is this? What do you call Darkover or Pern or Jennifer Roberson's Swords novels? Or the work of Joyce Ballou Gregorian, or Pamela Dean? I believe Melanie Rawn and P.C. Hodgell wrote women characters into epic fantasy. It's all bullshit.
We apparently HAVE lived and died in vain!
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-14 22:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-16 03:23 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-15 00:40 (UTC)GRRM himself rather predates Game of Thrones and his earlier work isn't all like that, but even so, *spits*
I hadn't heard of Joyce Ballou Gregorian, so thanks for that in particular. (Hodgell yes. Rawn is a more waffly nomination, IMO, given the implication of a focus upon female characters and/or strong female characters.)
(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-15 00:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-16 03:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-06-19 02:23 (UTC)Although you kind of lost me to incoherent flailing when I saw that you talked to Kate Elliot on twitter. Just in time for me to mark on my calendar the date for Cold Steel.
Thanks again for your book posts.