two books from two of my favorite authors: Catherynne Valente and China Mieville

[pyrofennec]

 Koschei the Deathless is to Russian folklore what devils or wicked witches are to European culture: a menacing, evil figure; the villain of countless stories which have been passed on through story and text for generations. But Koschei has never before been seen through the eyes of Catherynne Valente, whose modernized and transformed take on the legend brings the action to modern times, spanning many of the great developments of Russian history in the twentieth century.

Deathless, however, is no dry, historical tome: it lights up like fire as the young Marya Morevna transforms from a clever child of the revolution, to Koschei’s beautiful bride, to his eventual undoing. Along the way there are Stalinist house elves, magical quests, secrecy and bureaucracy, and games of lust and power. All told, Deathless is a collision of magical history and actual history, of revolution and mythology, of love and death, which will bring Russian myth back to life in a stunning new incarnation.

Sometimes I almost hate good books. First they make me so deliriously happy, and when they end it just breaks my heart. Fortunately I understand that this book isn’t a standalone (and wouldn’t make sense as one, anyway); unfortunately the sequel, if there will ever be any, isn’t yet available and I don’t think will be for quite a while.

(TW: relationship with fucked-up dynamics and power play.)

In the far future, humans have colonized a distant planet, home to the enigmatic Ariekei, sentient beings famed for a language unique in the universe, one that only a few altered human ambassadors can speak.

Avice Benner Cho, a human colonist, has returned to Embassytown after years of deep-space adventure. She cannot speak the Ariekei tongue, but she is an indelible part of it, having long ago been made a figure of speech, a living simile in their language.

When distant political machinations deliver a new ambassador to Arieka, the fragile equilibrium between humans and aliens is violently upset. Catastrophe looms, and Avice is torn between competing loyalties—to a husband she no longer loves, to a system she no longer trusts, and to her place in a language she cannot speak yet speaks through her.

This is a strange, unique book. It’s cerebral, undramatic, but at the same time it maintains a peculiar sense of suspense; it features a protagonist who is not particularly memorable, but who is nevertheless strikingly real. It’s political. It’s about language, about thought and how language shapes thought. It’s about colonization, and cultural integration.

It’s a book that necessitates the kind of review that will sound like pretentious twaddle, which may well be your first impression of what Embassytown is.

Comments

[dratinis]

Both of these books sound really interesting! Especially Embassytown, since it deals with language. I'll definitely be adding them to my list.

[feuervogel]

I bounced really hard off Palimpsest because of her prose style and pretty much hating every character in the book. Should I bother with Deathless?

[pyrofennec]

Eh, if you don't like her prose, you don't like her prose. Having said that I disliked Palimpsest because of the sexual dynamics and the characters being deathly boring. Deathless has a much stronger story and characterization.

[feuervogel]

I thought the sexual dynamics were interesting (well, inasmuch as they were very non-heteronormative), though the "casual sex to get back to Palimpsest" (which really sounded like a horrible place). I'm not generally a fan of what the critics these days are calling "lyrical prose."

It was annoying, because I wanted to like Palimpsest, because I thought her Big Idea piece sounded interesting. So I bought it and spent most of the time while reading it wanting to fling it across the room (and wishing I had a dictionary, because I didn't think various words could be used in that way).

I know a LOT of people who are fans of hers, but I didn't get it.

[pyrofennec]

I thought the sexual dynamics were interesting (well, inasmuch as they were very non-heteronormative), though the "casual sex to get back to Palimpsest" (which really sounded like a horrible place).

No, the thing is, a lot of them were having sex because they want to get to the city--not because they want to have sex. It's not the casual nature that bothers me, but that it's not really... sex positive. Sai for ex finds the sex tiring and borderline disgusting (having sex "with the speed of a new whore" I think is how she puts it). It's not "hey I like you, let's fuck" but "I'm desperate to feed my magic city addiction, please fuck."

I like language that's interesting, and language that's used well because the author knows what she's doing rather than burning through a thesaurus. I mean, if I wanted banal prose from authors who never challenge anyone I'd be reading shitty YA or something.

[feuervogel]

There should be a "not" after "though" in the original. On that aspect, I think we're in agreement.

I have to say, I remember multiple instances where it felt like Valente was just using a thesaurus, or choosing the right word's second cousin instead. I'd cite specific examples, but that would mean having to read it again. Considering the size of the stack of books I *want* to read, putting in something I found utterly boring isn't going to happen.

I prefer "banal prose" that's straightforward, not an eye-searing shade of purple. If that makes me an enjoyer of "shitty" fiction that isn't challenging, so be it.

[pyrofennec]

What, do you read a lot of YA or something?

It's funny how a lot of people yell "PURPLE PROSE!!!" at anything that's written with fractionally more complicated prose than, I don't know, Harry Potter. The term's become so diluted it has lost all meaning.

[feuervogel]

No, the genre's red-headed bastards, space opera and military SF. I can't begin to tell you how weary I am of my taste being belittled as inferior because the sentences don't contain phrasings like "Do you remember visiting your old Aunt that autumn when the trees shone so very yellow, and how she owned a striped and unsocial cat, quite old and fat and wounded about the ears and whiskers, with a crooked, broken tail?"

Repetition of "and" doesn't make the prose more "lyrical." Just more like a fairytale written for a child. And if that's the style one is choosing to emulate, then it was a success. But it doesn't make it inherently superior to "The woman, now, was local and more than local — she had backcountry written all over her. She was younger than her strained voice had at first suggested. Tall, fever-red from her weeping, with stringy blonde hair hanging down across a ferret-thin face and protuberant gray eyes."

[pyrofennec]

My word, do people like make fun of your reading tastes regularly or something?

Repetition of "and" doesn't make the prose more "lyrical." Just more like a fairytale written for a child. And if that's the style one is choosing to emulate, then it was a success.

uhhhh

you know this is the prequel to a work of Valente's that's pretty much children's fiction right

[feuervogel]

Quite frequently, yes. Often implicitly (through creating a dichotomy of "good" and "banal"). You've never heard space opera dismissed as banal, trite, shit, and other derogatory words? And military SF similarly?

Yeeeeeeesssssssss, which is why I said it was a successful emulation of that style. Also, it was available freely on the internet so I could copy and paste, rather than find my copy of Palimpsest and type out the text. None of the excerpts online are copyable.

[pyrofennec]

You do realize that I read genre fiction? I mean, both the books I reviewed here are that. It's not like I'm going to look down on whatever flavor of sci-fi it is that you read. FYI the "shitty YA" comparison was made because I read this dreck right after Deathless. So, yes, some writers are banal, which can either owe to using language badly or just writing down to the lowest common denominator.

Yeeeeeeesssssssss, which is why I said it was a successful emulation of that style.

Then... what's the problem? Picking something that's done the way it is because it's intended doesn't really seem to help your case, which seems to be "RARGH VALENTE'S PROSE IS SHIT AND BORING AND PURPLE."