Rate what you Read, or the fight against Necromancy

[Roomsky]

Interesting, seems the only one I may be interested in that is divisive is Curze.

 

I'll probably stick with the ones I expect greatness out of first, and see if Curze can pull me in later (or depending on availability at the shop, whatever is there! lol)

 

What's the negatives to Curze, just gross out gore stuff or poorly written? 

 

Nah, you'd have to go pretty far to put me off with gore. It follows Haley's usual habit (generally averted in Perturabo and Corax) of reducing primarchs to obvious caricatures of themselves who exclaim how they're feeling at every opportunity. There's no subtlety and the "you made me evil" line still makes me cringe. Also the "plot" is more interested in connecting all of the other stories involving Curze rather than telling its own.

 

Just read Prince of Crows again.

[Lord_Caerolion]

I mean, he's not trying to be subtle, this is literally his final statement to the Emperor before his death. He's laying out the truth behind his actions, and is doing so while also being completely and utterly insane. He's simultaneously pleading for mercy and denouncing any blame on his part, placing it all upon the Emperor. When you're trying to convict someone of murder, you don't only subtly hint at points during your prosecution, you lay the facts on the table. That's what this book is, the final plea of Curze to his father about the life he's lived. They may as well have called this The Trial of Konrad Curze, with Konrad Curze playing both prosecutor and defendant.

 

I'm not sure how you can say it's only interested in tying every other story of Curze together when the only events written about before are

the destruction of Nostramo, and the arrival of the assassin, and very briefly his confrontation with Dorn.

Events on the ship? New. Scenes of his early life? New. Confrontation with the Raven Guard? New. Insight into the corruption of the Legion with tainted recruits? New. There's nothing on Thramas, there's nothing on the arrival of the Emperor, there's nothing on his time in captivity. It covers (briefly) the confrontation with Dorn because it deals with his foreseeing of the Heresy, and details one of the final times in his life, if not the final time, when he actively tried to change fate. He saw a horrible future, tried to warn others, and was attacked because of it. It covers the destruction of Nostramo because it's one of the most defining points in his life.

[SkimaskMohawk]

The only objective negative imo is some of the needless macabre stuff curze gets into. It establishes very fast that he does some gruesome stuff, and some later scenes aren't very necessary.

 

The rest is rather subjective; the non-linear structure and the inherent hypocrisy of curze. These are fair, but also...kind of the point. There's a reason why curze goes on non-tangential, obsessive monologues and why he seemingly has moments of clarity but then keeps on thinking in blindly self-destructive mind patterns. He's depressed and subconsciously taking actions that justify his horrible opinion of himself. Some pretty classic psychology, something I mention every time the books brought up.

 

Roomsky basically has those subjective complaints and also kind of shows how he kind of missed the thrust of the writing.

Edited September 10, 2020 by SkimaskMohawk

[Roomsky]

I mean, he's not trying to be subtle, this is literally his final statement to the Emperor before his death. He's laying out the truth behind his actions, and is doing so while also being completely and utterly insane. He's simultaneously pleading for mercy and denouncing any blame on his part, placing it all upon the Emperor. When you're trying to convict someone of murder, you don't only subtly hint at points during your prosecution, you lay the facts on the table. That's what this book is, the final plea of Curze to his father about the life he's lived. They may as well have called this The Trial of Konrad Curze, with Konrad Curze playing both prosecutor and defendant.

 

I'm not sure how you can say it's only interested in tying every other story of Curze together when the only events written about before are

the destruction of Nostramo, and the arrival of the assassin, and very briefly his confrontation with Dorn.

Events on the ship? New. Scenes of his early life? New. Confrontation with the Raven Guard? New. Insight into the corruption of the Legion with tainted recruits? New. There's nothing on Thramas, there's nothing on the arrival of the Emperor, there's nothing on his time in captivity. It covers (briefly) the confrontation with Dorn because it deals with his foreseeing of the Heresy, and details one of the final times in his life, if not the final time, when he actively tried to change fate. He saw a horrible future, tried to warn others, and was attacked because of it. It covers the destruction of Nostramo because it's one of the most defining points in his life.

 

And he delivers his final defense like a dysthymic adolescent. I'm not asking for the highest of subtle mystery with all primarch appearances, I'm asking them to speak like actual human beings or at least adults. It is not a high standard, if Kyme can do it so can Haley.

 

I don't find insanity or desperation anything close to justifying it, either. He's just not the same character. Curze HAD a character when the series began, and the Horus Heresy at large has done its merry best to reduce him to a blubbering child. What you dislike about the series' treatment of Ferrus, Lord_Caerolion, I see in Curze's treatment.

 

The whole novel reads like a big book of every small gap in the Konrad Curze experience was put in front of Haley and he was told to make something cohesive out of it. The flesh sculpture of the Emperor is an excellent metaphor for the book itself. What's more it has the gall to supersede the many other tales of Curze's last hours with something far less well written. No somber goodbye of a tortured demigod to his sons, have this frothing bag of oversimplified self-pity instead.

 

And yes, clearly this is all a matter of my taste as I can see most Fraters here really enjoyed it. But I mean that's how we rate everything on here isn't it?

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

I mean, he's not trying to be subtle, this is literally his final statement to the Emperor before his death. He's laying out the truth behind his actions, and is doing so while also being completely and utterly insane. He's simultaneously pleading for mercy and denouncing any blame on his part, placing it all upon the Emperor. When you're trying to convict someone of murder, you don't only subtly hint at points during your prosecution, you lay the facts on the table. That's what this book is, the final plea of Curze to his father about the life he's lived. They may as well have called this The Trial of Konrad Curze, with Konrad Curze playing both prosecutor and defendant.

 

I'm not sure how you can say it's only interested in tying every other story of Curze together when the only events written about before are

the destruction of Nostramo, and the arrival of the assassin, and very briefly his confrontation with Dorn.

Events on the ship? New. Scenes of his early life? New. Confrontation with the Raven Guard? New. Insight into the corruption of the Legion with tainted recruits? New. There's nothing on Thramas, there's nothing on the arrival of the Emperor, there's nothing on his time in captivity. It covers (briefly) the confrontation with Dorn because it deals with his foreseeing of the Heresy, and details one of the final times in his life, if not the final time, when he actively tried to change fate. He saw a horrible future, tried to warn others, and was attacked because of it. It covers the destruction of Nostramo because it's one of the most defining points in his life.

 

And he delivers his final defense like a dysthymic adolescent. I'm not asking for the highest of subtle mystery with all primarch appearances, I'm asking them to speak like actual human beings or at least adults. It is not a high standard, if Kyme can do it so can Haley.

 

I don't find insanity or desperation anything close to justifying it, either. He's just not the same character. Curze HAD a character when the series began, and the Horus Heresy at large has done its merry best to reduce him to a blubbering child. What you dislike about the series' treatment of Ferrus, Lord_Caerolion, I see in Curze's treatment.

 

The whole novel reads like a big book of every small gap in the Konrad Curze experience was put in front of Haley and he was told to make something cohesive out of it. The flesh sculpture of the Emperor is an excellent metaphor for the book itself. What's more it has the gall to supersede the many other tales of Curze's last hours with something far less well written. No somber goodbye of a tortured demigod to his sons, have this frothing bag of oversimplified self-pity instead.

 

And yes, clearly this is all a matter of my taste as I can see most Fraters here really enjoyed it. But I mean that's how we rate everything on here isn't it?

 

 

Because this is the very end of his descent into madness. We've not seen him this crazy before because he's not been this crazy before. His degradation as the series progresses is entirely the point of the character. If there is one Primarch that is objectively not the same psychologically at the end of the Heresy than he was at the start of the Crusade, it's Curze. The Crusade and Heresy broke him entirely, that's the entire point. What this is is him rationalizing that breaking, as to whether it was meant to happen all along, or if it were his choice.

 

He's always been dissociated, look at his portrayals in AD-B's works, where he can't remember where he is half the time, forgets what happened to Sevatar, and addresses people as if they're Sevatar.

 

There's no somber goodbye because, as this expands upon from the Night Lords trilogy, Curze absolutely hated his Legion. He didn't care about saying goodbye to them, because they were worthless in his eyes.

 

You'll also notice that

the book is clear to state that he becomes more regal as he goes to his final moments.

[Roomsky]

Look guys I'm not saying those themes don't exist. I'm saying I think they're handled incompetently. I'm glad it works for all of you, I just don't believe it.

 

Though I must thank you all for giving me a new sympathy for my friends, for all the times they looked at me bewildered while I tried to explain why they just don't get Batman v Superman.

[Scribe]

Well all the shop had was the ones I was going to avoid no matter the cost, so...no new book today. :D

[Lord_Caerolion]

All good, Roomsky. I do agree that his portrayal in this is pretty jarring compared to others.

 

Also, on a brief skim, it turns out that I have not actually read Leman Russ. I think I got it confused with the Russ parts of Wolfspear. I've still got to read Magnus/Guilliman/Vulkan/Lion, but I think I'll skip the middle two.

[Roomsky]

All good, Roomsky. I do agree that his portrayal in this is pretty jarring compared to others.

 

Also, on a brief skim, it turns out that I have not actually read Leman Russ. I think I got it confused with the Russ parts of Wolfspear. I've still got to read Magnus/Guilliman/Vulkan/Lion, but I think I'll skip the middle two.

 

I'm curious to hear your opinions on Lord of the First. I'm a Guymer fan but I found it dull as dishwater, lacking the conflict and interesting supporting cast that I loved in Gorgon of Medusa, BUT I've seen a lot of positive buzz surrounding it (even on /tg/) because it portrays The Lion and his legion as quite competent and effective (not implying your opinions of books are that shallow, but like I said, maybe that will tip the balance.)

 

Russ is honestly worth it just for the Dark Angels. Also makes an awesome companion piece to ADB's Ragnar Blackmane.

Edited September 10, 2020 by Roomsky

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

All good, Roomsky. I do agree that his portrayal in this is pretty jarring compared to others.

 

Also, on a brief skim, it turns out that I have not actually read Leman Russ. I think I got it confused with the Russ parts of Wolfspear. I've still got to read Magnus/Guilliman/Vulkan/Lion, but I think I'll skip the middle two.

 

I'm curious to hear your opinions on Lord of the First. I'm a Guymer fan but I found it dull as dishwater, lacking the conflict and interesting supporting cast that I loved in Gorgon of Medusa, BUT I've seen a lot of positive buzz surrounding it (even on /tg/) because it portrays The Lion and his legion as quite competent and effective (not implying your opinions of books are that shallow, but like I said, maybe that will tip the balance.)

 

Russ is honestly worth it just for the Dark Angels. Also makes an awesome companion piece to ADB's Ragnar Blackmane.

 

 

Oh, don't get me wrong, I think the conflict in Gorgon was done well, the Terran members were awesome, and there were definitely interesting scenes. The scene of Ferrus overcoming the psychic assault is cool, it's just hindered by the fact that he absolutely should have known it would happen given it's exactly what happened to the Thousand Sons, and his flip-flopping in that scene between "nobody gets me" and "everyone knows exactly what I am". My criticisms of the book are just the portrayal of Ferrus himself, and the role of Arkaduana/Emperors Children within the story. Tone down the "and then the EC saved the blundering IH yet again", make Ferrus have actual strategic ability, and it'd be amazing.

That's what kinda upsets me the most about it, I can recognize that it could have been an absolutely amazing book. Conflict and supporting cast he nailed, he just utterly flubbed the main characters.

[mc warhammer]

i think, if any of the primarchs can get away with sounding like an adolescent...it's curze

 

i also don't have much trouble with 40k/30k dialogue. to my ear, almost all of it is OTT or on the nose no matter the author, but i figure that's just the setting.

 

 

the only time it got too much for me was when i tried to read "the masters, bidding" by farrer. though i think that's what he was aiming for with all the bragging, i just couldn't cope.

Edited September 10, 2020 by mc warhammer

[Roomsky]

Saturnine - Dan Abnett

 

Well, the actual thread got nuked, so here we are. A quick note about how I rate things (also known as, why I’m giving this a 10), I don’t use 10 as “flawless” or “perfect.” No work of fiction is perfect, and having a number on your scale you can’t use would be a bit daft. “Flawless,” too, isn’t an especially good metric; to those who have played Portal and its sequel, I would say Portal is a flawless game, and while Portal 2 is not I would rate it higher for its ambition, greater length, etc.

 

But I mean numerical ratings are arbitrary anyways so wgaf.

 

So, Saturnine. It’s great, for reasons I’m sure many of you know already. It’s a book packed with action, but it never gets stale. It’s full to the brim with characters, but they all feel well realized. It’s a work that feels integral to the Siege itself, and it’s not even adapting much from the original descriptions of events.

 

This book shouldn’t work, but it does and it excels. It exceeds. It goes EVEN FURTHER BEYOND.

 

Abnett is a master of writing the common soldier (to a layperson such as myself, at least.) Kordy and Monday would have been annoying distractions under a lesser pen, but here they work as a great pov for unfolding events who are almost completely divorced from the “big players.”  Hari and Piers immediately have a believable friendship formed by facing atrocity together, and their story is one of the book’s best, cementing the thematic glue that The Solar War lacked (more on that later).

 

The marines and commanders fare no worse. Radoron continues The Lost and the Damned’s efforts (to make him an actual character) brilliantly. Perturabo and Abaddon both come across with the dignity and intelligence they deserve. Dorn balances the brutality of French’s writings and the idealism of Abnett’s, and I even bought his explanation for the Vulkan reveal back in LatD. Loken’s journey is a fantastic extension of everything leading up til now, and all the astartes even talk like comrades again a la the early series. Yeah yeah, joke about how often they say , at least we’re back to 30k lax astartes rather than 40k astartes lazily shoved in due to a lack of creativity.

 

And while I could go on, it’s on the heels of discussing the characters that I want to address the criticisms of Abnett’s writing. Gonna give a warning here that I’m going to get a tad mean.

 

Let’s look at Euphrati Keeler, a character who in this book seems to have reverted to her characterization in Horus Rising and False Gods. No longer is she the cryptic, intensely spiritual waif she’s been since then. Thing is, Horus Rising is why I like Keeler. I wanted to see more of her because of the character Abnett built. Come Galaxy in Flames, this Keeler I enjoy has been replaced with a Keeler in name only. A Keeler who is the most basic, uninspired version of an “enlightened” person you can find. And that has persisted for over 50 books until this point. I don’t give two :cusss about post False Gods Keeler, because it’s not the same character.

 

So here’s the thing, Fraters. If a book is bad, I’m not sure why it’s the responsibility of a good author to accommodate that. Why is it Abnett’s responsibility to write a character worse because of a bad writer, but the bad writer just gets a pass as “this is what the character is now” when they give us their hackneyed follow-up? I’m sure any Star Wars EU fan here isn’t going to blame Zahn because he handwaved or ignored the authors who pooped all over his creations.

 

And you may say it’s his responsibility because the Heresy is still pretending to be a series. And to that I say: all I care about is a good story. If Abnett writes a book that has loose continuity but is better because of it, give me that book (and he did). If Abnett wrote a worse story because he was too concerned with accommodating every portrayal of Abaddon, Keeler, Dorn, etc, I think that would be a shame.

 

This isn’t to say holding the opposite opinion is invalid. You do you. But art review is subjective, and I’m sure as hell going to die on this hill. The Night Haunter for example is a marvel of continuity, but FAILS COMPLETELY IN TERMS OF CHARAC

 

Stay on target, Roomsky.

 

Anyway, similar point for the Perpetuals. Ignoring the fact that we don’t even know if Erda is telling the truth,  Abnett doesn’t just get to drop his   on the meeting table and strong-arm all his ideas into the series, trajectory be damned. They’re just another layer that other authors have chosen not to focus on, and regarding my points above I’m probably in favour of that (I’m still salty about Kyme Grammaticus). In the grand scheme, they’re just one more moving part to this ludicrously convoluted, galaxy-spanning series of events, and they bring an ambiguity I really enjoy. Having a secret cabal (lol) doesn’t mean you were actually behind everything. Read The Witcher for a great example of shadowy councils that fail to accomplish anything of substance. Like, even if Erda isn’t lying, was it really her? Did Chaos manipulate her? Did she do something actually inconsequential and Chaos just framed her for it? There’s enough ambiguity right now that most people can probably fit it in line with their previous beliefs about the event.

 

The complaints about all of Abnett’s ”twists” come across a bit flaccid to me as well. The guardsman legend was always a legend, it’s wholly fair to make it come from a couple of places to cover all the bases. What the Siege series is doing is certainly better than any BS about a Custodian. The Emperor’s birth name probably isn’t Neoth and if Leetu is II legion it only helps reinforce the scale the Imperium operates on. Corswain and a few fleet dregs aren’t going to salve The Lion’s and the bulk of his Legion’s infinite guilt over not making it on time. And again, this is all they hashed out in meetings; no IP author sneaks that kind of thing past the editors.

 

But back to the good, because there’s SO DAMN MUCH.

 

Every plot is interwoven and paced fantastically. This is the big moment for so many characters, new and old. Camba Diaz’s last stand is an amazing passage and is only one of many kickass set pieces. Sanguinius solos a titan as only he can, Sigismund takes a few pieces out of Fulgrim, Dorn again proves he’s the hero Gotham Deserves, and Loken (OH LAWD LOKEN) gets the catharsis we’ve been waiting for since the series began he came back to life. Criticize Abnett’s use of continuity all you like, if you’ve read all things Loken up until this point the payoff is so bloody satisfying. I’d argue this book actually makes Vengeful Spirit retroactively better for how well it follows up on that book’s legwork.

 

I think it speaks to Abnett’s skill as an author that scenes and characters so similar to some of the additions in the previous Siege books never feel like a distraction. Look, I don’t hate Katsuhiro and I liked Zenobi, but both were very guilty of interrupting more interesting material. That doesn’t happen here, Abnett makes every level of the war, every conflict big and small, compelling and nail-biting.

 

And, as mentioned earlier, while the book has as many disparate moving parts as Solar War, it succeeds in providing a unifying theme across every plotline. I’ve seen a few compelling suggestions in the Saturnine thread (check out Indefragable’s especially) as to the book’s theme, but to me it’s all about the significance of the little man in 40k, how history has a way of burying the grandiose, and how this is the last gasp of the Imperium’s idealism. Come 40k, no one remembers Sanguinius soloing titans, or Camba Diaz’s last stand, or Loken killing two of the Mournival, Dorn’s ambush, Zephon’s sacrifice, Land’s liquid sealant that killed so much of the enemy, Kendel’s massive body count, or any of the other grand spectacles that happen in this book. Come 40k, all they remember about the events of Saturnine is that a lone Guardsman stood in the face of certain death for the Emperor. Olly Piers, some smelly guy who accomplished nothing important in the grand scheme of things, is remembered. If that isn’t a boot up the ass to an astartes-centric view of the setting, I don’t know what is.

 

And it’s remembered  because there were people (again, not astartes) to tell it, it’s why Sindermann and Keeler do what they do, and it’s the last example of the freedom that kind of story can have, because soon the Imperium will never let such a tale spread so easily again.

 

Olly Piers isn’t the end of the dream, but he will be the last part of it anyone can remember.

 

I mean, Sanguinius straight up tells people in-story that no one’s going to remember all these grand achievements, not when the scale of Terra is so apocalyptic. The subtext is text.

 

 

Anyway, this book SLAPS and you should go BUY it and READ it because Abnett’s writing makes my  ROCK HA

 

Must Read

10/10

Edited September 10, 2020 by Brother Lunkhead
metaphors too vivid for B&C unfortunately

[mc warhammer]

thank you roomsky, for expressing my feeings about that book, more eloquently than i probably could.

i never write full reviews here, so forgive me for piggy backing on some points raised. this isn't my favourite abnett book, but it also didn't dissappoint much:

 

* zephon's sacrifice. abnett has a way of writing small moments that have an emotional punch. here he uses a technique common with japanese film directors where they deny the audience intimacy with the subject they're supposed to sympathise with. in hollywood, it's all close ups and teary eyes and music. that works too. but sometimes, keeping the camera a long distance away from a dying character , peeking in through a window or letting things happen off screen but showing the consequences creates a distance and yearning from the audience that can amplify the emotional impact if done right. and for me, realising after the fact that zephon died silently and bravely, the quiet and dignified conversation the interrogator had in 'darkness' with the kind voice of zephon's father...it just struck me as so. sad. i felt that more than a dozen other heroic showdowns i've read in the series. it was quiet, it was subtle, it was moving.

 

it was a picture of grieving.

 

even though we got diaz's last stand, it was the reactions and feelings of the other character's to his death...witnessing from a distance and its impact on them that then had an impact on me.

 

abnett has a lot of these small moments. even things like olly mistaking krole for his saviour as he helped hoist the standard; it was a bittersweet moment of the almost heroic ignorance of normal people out of their depth in a war of transhumans and deamons.

maybe it's that human element roomsky talks about here that makes all these moments special.

 

* erda. i like that the emperor has contemporaries and that erda is as close to another human god as could exist outside of Him. john can barely look at her, in a similar way that most can't bear the emperor's presence. that He's still homelander to her queen maeve (the boys reference, natch) works well for me. if we can have a malcador, why can't we also have an erda? that abnett threw in the japanese art of kintsugi in that scene was just icing on the thematic cake to her discussion with john. if i had to pick at anything, it'd be that i don't think john's argument was all that convincing...but eh... i can overlook that.

 

* some of the writing is just damn funny. aximand being haunted by claustrophobic breathing hallucinations only to run into the most literally claustrophobic prison imaginable and freak out "dude. no. this is my actual nightmare" made me laugh out loud. i needed that.

 

i can agree that i was hoping for more in his scene with loken, but garviel much like dorn, isn't here for discussion. they don't need closure in the way we do. they've gotten there. loken wrestled with that in "vengeful spirit" already. they've judged the situation and the guilty...now all that's left is to execute them.

 

in that way, i can accept that scene.

 

* the large cast.  i often get confused with characters in much smaller roll calls than in this book. that can only be down to writer's skill or characters that don't leave a lasting impression (or maybe my habit of skipping chunks when the writing doesn't grab me). the fact that i never had to check the personae or a wiki during "saturnine" tells me that something was done right in this regard for this book.

 

* dorn was the dorn of PoD here. he isn't listening to alpharius and he is not listening to fulgrim. fulgrim's attempts to goad him and hit an emotional trigger rightly fell short. also, fulgrim and the EC landing on the wall was chilling.

 

* best perturbao and abbadon of the heresy proper so far as roomsy says. i can believe that they deserve their reputations.

 

* the battle scenes and the kill zones are the first time in the siege series that i felt i was actually immersed in war.

 

* as much as abnett gets flak for ignoring other bits of lore, there are so many moments here where he purposefully harkens back to other novels and moments. i think they work for the most part.

 

i still haven't finished it, but wanted to get those thoughts down before i forgot them.

Edited September 10, 2020 by mc warhammer

[Fire Golem]

 

All good, Roomsky. I do agree that his portrayal in this is pretty jarring compared to others.

 

Also, on a brief skim, it turns out that I have not actually read Leman Russ. I think I got it confused with the Russ parts of Wolfspear. I've still got to read Magnus/Guilliman/Vulkan/Lion, but I think I'll skip the middle two.

 

I'm curious to hear your opinions on Lord of the First. I'm a Guymer fan but I found it dull as dishwater, lacking the conflict and interesting supporting cast that I loved in Gorgon of Medusa, BUT I've seen a lot of positive buzz surrounding it (even on /tg/) because it portrays The Lion and his legion as quite competent and effective (not implying your opinions of books are that shallow, but like I said, maybe that will tip the balance.)

 

Russ is honestly worth it just for the Dark Angels. Also makes an awesome companion piece to ADB's Ragnar Blackmane.

 

Funnily enough, I bought those two together ages ago. Never got round to Russ though, think I’ll read that next. 

[Kelborn]

Don't know if it's still needed but the Primarch series is an up and down just like every other BL series.

 

Haven't read/ listened to: Vulkan and Ferrus

 

How I would rank them:

 

Tier 1 (pageturners, added great views and stuff and had a good story):

 

The Khan: What did you expect? Wraight made me a White Scars fanboy. The BA bits wwre great and overall, it fits perfectly into his previous work. A perfect example of what we could have if authors are solely responsible for something.

 

Russ: Nah, c'mon. Wraight. ;) Loved the Vlka even before the Scars. Again, it fits very well with previous work and the DA parts were the best I've read in a while. #thatsmylion

 

Curze: Though it contradicts with previous stuff, I still love that rollercoaster of madness

 

Angron: overall a good one but the War Hounds parts were so good that I'm placing it right here

 

Tier 2:

 

Lorgar: ever wanted to see world building? Go read that book. I despise Lorgar but Gav did a good job here.

 

Fulgrim: same with Lorgar. I still dislike Fulgrim and the ECs but it has some good philosophical ideas about purpose and desire. But it's a solid story after all.

 

Perturabo: good one with a better ending of Hayleys contributions

 

Corax: the interactions between Terran and Delivarence RG and the NL were a nice hoping. Solid but weaker than Perturabo, imho.

 

Magnus: I like Mcneils Perturabo. Fight me. TS are my fav traitor legions along with NL and IW. Story was ok but I love the interactions between the Legions and their Primarchs.

 

Tier 3:

 

Guiliman: some better bits, but mostly bolterporn :/

[DarkChaplain]

Strangely, I was most disappointed with Wraight's contributions to the Primarchs series. I didn't get much out of the Khan or Russ.

 

For the Khan, it is simply a prequel to his Scars duology-and-a-half, more setup and posthumous justification for certain things than a great narrative in its own right. It does examine Jaghatai, of course, but so did the novels. As a result, it felt like more of the same, something that ideally should've been published and read before Scar (or even Brotherhood of the Storm), while as a standalone novel, it felt lacking.

 

Regarding Russ, it felt more like a Dark Angels / Lion novel than one about Russ. I have a hard time even remembering which characters were in it, and a lot of the book is spent showcasing that Russ and the Wolves were... basically wrong and stupid, and the Lion justified in being upset. Instead of a misunderstanding and clashing ideals leading to the brawl, one side clearly screwed up. Sure, the approaches still differed between the Legions, but the Lion acted more efficiently in a plethora of ways.

The best part of the book was frankly the end / flash forward to post-Siege Russ and El'Jonson. The core plot, though, seemed pretty run of the mill to me.

[Sandlemad]

Sticking to authors you know you like isn't a bad idea but I'd second Wraights Khan book being something like DVD extras for his other White Scars books. It's not bad, it's just wholly unnecessary and doesn't do anything you haven't seen before if you've read BotS, Scars and Path of Heaven.

 

Also check out Lorgar! I know feelings about Gav are mixed, and I'd often share a low opinion of most of his work, but this is the dark horse of the primarch series. The worldbuilding of Colchis is good, as has been pointed out, but it's also quietly radical in how it depicts the primarch. Doesn't get in his head, doesn't try to interrogate his motives other than through the increasingly worried eyes of those around him, the mortal POV characters. This keeps Lorgar as a strange unknowable demigod, avoids treading on the toes of ADB's portrayal, and dodges the need for Gav to do something he probably wouldn't be amazing at, i.e. depicting the interiority of an being like a primarch with sufficient gravitas and alienness. 

 

I've said it before but it's like a vision of a heresy series we could have had after Horus Rising, one where we didn't get too many unfortunately flat portrayals of the inner thoughts of primarchs, where they were kept at least a bit alien. That this is done in a primarch's own novel and one based around the most well-worn aspect of their background (the almost identikit "rise to prominence on a homeworld" narrative) makes Lorgar a rare beast.

[Cherubael]

Not sure if this is common knowledge or merely a coincidence.

 

Heart of Darkness is a novel by Joesph Conrad.

 

The novel inspired the Francis Ford Coppola film Apocalypse Now which starred Marlon Brando as a deranged soldier named Kurtz.

 

Heart of Darkness = Night Haunter, Night Lords

 

Conrad + Kurtz = Konrad Curze

 

The subject matter of Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now also fit the legion and primarch like a glove.

[byrd9999]

Not sure if this is common knowledge or merely a coincidence.

 

Heart of Darkness is a novel by Joesph Conrad.

 

The novel inspired the Francis Ford Coppola film Apocalypse Now which starred Marlon Brando as a deranged soldier named Kurtz.

 

Heart of Darkness = Night Haunter, Night Lords

 

Conrad + Kurtz = Konrad Curze

 

The subject matter of Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now also fit the legion and primarch like a glove.

 

Kurtz (the name and character) was originally in Heart of Darkness. Coppola rejigged the whole thing as Apocalypse Now with a modern 'Nam theme. Both are excellent.

 

And it's not a coincidence ;)

 

Nostramo is a tip o' the hat to Nostromo, another work by Joseph Conrad.

[Indefragable]

 

 

Not sure if this is common knowledge or merely a coincidence.

 

Heart of Darkness is a novel by Joesph Conrad.

 

The novel inspired the Francis Ford Coppola film Apocalypse Now which starred Marlon Brando as a deranged soldier named Kurtz.

 

Heart of Darkness = Night Haunter, Night Lords

 

Conrad + Kurtz = Konrad Curze

 

The subject matter of Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now also fit the legion and primarch like a glove.

Kurtz (the name and character) was originally in Heart of Darkness. Coppola rejigged the whole thing as Apocalypse Now with a modern 'Nam theme. Both are excellent.

 

And it's not a coincidence ;)

 

Nostramo is a tip o' the hat to Nostromo, another work by Joseph Conrad.

...and apparently the actual making of Apocalyose Now was it’s own form of Heart of Darkness in and of itself, with actors nearly dying (multiple times) and other surreal happenings.

 

**********

 

As for anti-Necromancy, I’m on book 8 of the Beast Arises series on Audible. You know, it’s not terrible so far. Will do a full series recap whenever I finish.

[Sothalor]

Having read some more of the Primarchs novel(las) now, I think I'm beginning to hone in on something that bugs me about Guy Haley's depictions of Primarchs, especially when they have dialogue.

 

There's something about the way they tend to speak in his works that they come across to me as... I'm not sure if melodramatic is the term I'm looking for, or a general in-authenticity. It's not so much the way they're depicted as a whole that bugs me - I think stuff like how he shows Corax's drive for vengeance overriding his strategic sense, or the way Guilliman is a somber, troubled man out of time in the Dark Imperium series is great, honestly. Those sections where Haley is writing from a narrative perspective, directly telling us something about a character? Great.

 

But there's something about their dialogue that reminds me of, well, something like watching a high school theater production where everybody on stage thinks every line must be delivered with maximum gravitas in the most overblown Shakespearean language possible. A lot of it just doesn't feel like real people talking. It's theatrical, but in a way that divorces me from the verisimilitude of what's occurring in the story.

 

 

That's why, while I appreciated what he was trying to do with the Curze novella, so much of it was dependent on ol' Konrad monologuing that it kinda fell flat for me.

[DarkChaplain]

One could argue that Primarchs aren't real people. Dawn of Fire in particular makes it pretty obvious that Guilliman, for example, is very deliberate with his words, often speaking for-effect, intentionally adding gravitas to his words, rather than having an organic chat even with his close sons. Roboute is even struggling to conform to "modern" language to begin with - because it is much blunter and degenerated in M41+ than it was in the Crusade era. In a sense, the Great Crusade was the time of Shakespearan language, whereas M41+ is basically set in the back alleys of New York, for all its eloquence.

[mc warhammer]

we have overly theatrical melodramatic primarch dialogue and we have sweary working class primarch dialogue. meanwhile, all i want is for a reveal that the II primarch had a squeaky voice- hence the purge.

[DarkChaplain]

...so what you're saying is that, actually, that squeaky-voice Navigator in Dawn of Fire was actually one of the Lost Primarchs? Jolly gee.

[Xisor]

One could argue that Primarchs aren't real people. Dawn of Fire in particular makes it pretty obvious that Guilliman, for example, is very deliberate with his words, often speaking for-effect, intentionally adding gravitas to his words, rather than having an organic chat even with his close sons. Roboute is even struggling to conform to "modern" language to begin with - because it is much blunter and degenerated in M41+ than it was in the Crusade era. In a sense, the Great Crusade was the time of Shakespearan language, whereas M41+ is basically set in the back alleys of New York, for all its eloquence.

There's something to this, but I don't think it works on a book by book basis, or perhaps a setting by setting basis.

 

It only works if you have someone popping out of 40k to speak to someone in 30k. Otherwise you're implying that within those settings, everyone's monolingual. (Or whatever the equivalent is for accents.)

 

In that respect, it's a grand failing of BL. (And of most SciFi I've read, to be fair. Very little of what I've actually read bothers to push any linguistic boundaries. Look at Arrival and compare that to Yesugei in A Thousand Sons. One's visionary and impressive. The other - up to that point in the series where everyone essentially spoke the same language without issue or comment - is a racist caricature of the howlingly offensive Ching Chong Chinaman variety.)

 

One example I always go to is Captain Corelli's Mandolin (great novel, by the way) - which is set on a WW2-era Greek Island (Cephalonia, if memory serves). The cast's big and varied, but one of the characters (isolated on a mountain, and speaking mainly with a young local shepherd) is a British paratrooper.

 

Being British of the old boys network, he was selected for this mission based on his expertise and familiarity with Greece & Greek via his education.

His education which was in Ancient Greek.

 

So to this perplexed shepherd, he's got some soldier with a radio halfway up a mountain yammering at him with "hark, forsooth wherefore art thy be" etc.

 

Absolutely wonderful stuff.

 

But BL don't touch it with a bargepole. It's just cod-Latin and maybe some startup-ified greek words. Or an outright fantasy language that is basically just English word-swapped. (Hell, even then there's few enough of those around.)

 

It's a perennial problem that I'm not sure I've seen tackled well.

 

Hell, even for Britain, only the 'guide to pronunciation' in White Dwarf several months back started to illustrate what they're missing. E.g., did you know the Nottingham (+Midlands) accents are fairly distinctive? That all the time they're Scots- or Brummie-ifying the scant phonetic pronunciations to make it sound more authentic, they could be doing any number of other tricks that are much more illustrative of stuff that even within the UK barely gets time of day?

 

Look at a film like This Is England (or Trainspotting) and think that it would be trivially easy to riff on some of the things like that. Not to make Orks more Corkney, but to actually explore and invoke and adapt real life stuff. The authors likely have reams and depths of it to engage with, but it's all filtered through to a fairly neutral output.

 

When was the last time a Space Marine was seen to be mithering?

 

'Cause they do it all the damn time.

 

---

 

Back on the Necromancy wagon, after a fashion:

 

Speaking of all of this, one of the few authors I recall who resolutely put some local flavour into their works was Bill King. Of the latest of his I read (the Macharius books, I really enjoyed them - decent 6+ or 7/10s for the first two, though I've still not read the last) there wasn't quite as much to go on (though the guardsman who was convinced he could be promoted to Space Marine was a gem of misunderstanding the likes of which we only recently started to see again in Chris Wraight's Terra books).

 

But from his old WHFB Gotrek & Felix? The character Malakai Makaisson? I always thought he was rendered as 'daft scottish', but when I re-read some of them recently, it's pretty un-daft - in fact it's pretty much close to the only bit of written Scots that BL's produced (to my knowledge).

 

And to think that for other aspects of the UK's languages and culture that are basically excised out - and for what? (Let alone persistent examples of other cultures feeding into the 41st Millennium and beyond!)

 

(This is not a 'make Britain great' angle, but a 'why be shy about getting into the rich, vibrant weeds of nearby culture when we'll more fervently [and badly] Aztec-ify lizards?)