mjj (flemmings) wrote,

The mid-Atlantic view from here

I'm a little... bemused, I suppose, reading American writers' comments on Rivers of London. LMB was apprehensive that Aaronovitch would kill off Nightingale-- because so many fantasy writers kill off the mentor-- and pleased that he didn't. Kate Elliott was delighted that Peter actually has to work to master Newtonian magic, instead of being a spesshul chosen one who can yanno *just do it* because he's spesshul chosen, or fae, or whatever.

Maybe I don't read enough fantasy. But seriously, it never occurred to me that Aaronovitch would do either because, well, it's just not that kind of world. Maybe it's the fact that it's Newtonian magic which predominates: suggests order, logic, and reason in the human world. (Genii locorum are another matter, of course.) Peter's not special. He's a rookie cop who nearly became a paper-pusher until it turned out he was qualified to become an apprentice mage. Become. So of course he has to learn, and of course he needs someone to teach him, someone who won't be killed in the first book because then where'd Peter be? British ensemble cast, is what this feels like. Much more so than, say, Kate Griffin; and you don't relentlessly prune your cast every season (or book) to leave the shining hero still shining (as Griffin does, grump.)
Tags: lj, reading, rivers
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded