Treason Keep by Jennifer Fallon

I've been pretty harsh to Medalon in the past. Mostly due to the handling of the incest plotline (I don't care if you're not genetically related, if you're raised together you're still siblings and it's still weird).

However, I have misjudged other authors on one bad book, so this year I decided to give Fallon a second chance and picked up the sequel Treason Keep at Bookfest. 

And I'm glad I did. While Treason Keep won't ever be in my top-ten list, I was absolutely smitten with one new character.

Princess Arina.

She's royalty from an oceanic culture reluctantly married off to a foreign zealot prince. Finding herself trapped in a very delicate political position, she must fight to maintain her autonomy during a time of war and murderous politics. Unfortunately there's no shortage of interested parties who wish to exploit her. 

What I like about Arina is that she's filled with contradictions: she's a spoilt brat, but sharply intelligent. She's sheltered, but politically astute. Manipulative, but emotionally vulnerable. All of these things describe her, yet none of them encompasses her fully. She's that rare gem; a well rounded character. If you ever read Liveship Traders and was even passingly fond of Malta, you will love Arina.

The other characters and storylines, I could take or leave. I'm not even remotely invested in R'shiel, and I keep mixing up Tarja and Brak. Every time they're onscreen (onpage?) I found myself desperately bored until Arina came back.

While I still can't recommend Meladon on its own merits, I will recommend it as backstory to Treason Keep which I do recommend wholeheartedly. If I don't see more of Arina in the next book, I will be severely disappointed.

Final Verdict: Good. Has a way to go before I'd call it awesome, but Arina represents a big step in the right direction.

"I know the gods exist, whether I believe them 
worth worshiping is an entirely different matter."

Nevernight by Jay Kristoff

If you like amoral assassins, boarding schools from hell and more snark than you can poke a stick at, oh boy do I have the book for you.

Nevernight by Jay Kristoff is that rare, perfect blend of genres. It's as if someone lifted the School for Assassins out of Discworld, added a generous scoop of Locke Lamora, and just a sprinkling of David Eddings. (Look, there's a reason I don't write recipe books.)

The main protagonist is new initiate Mia Corvere at an infamous school for assassins. Not only are the lessons actively trying to kill her, but there's a limited number of graduate positions, meaning competition between students is insanely (read: fatally) high. On the plus side, if she survives, she's got steady career prospects in a high growth industry.

With Pratchett-style footnotes and snide undercuts of dramatic moments, Nightshade is a thoroughly entertaining read. However - and all credit to Jay Kristoff here - he never crosses the line into parody. The stakes remain high and the threats remain real. Rather than downplaying the danger, the humour serves to humanise the characters and stave off darkness-induced-apathy.

In fact, it's the characters who can't laugh at themselves who are the least sympathetic. Mia might be a budding killer with demonic powers and an ax to grind, but her bodycount is a drop in the ocean compared to the respectable citizens who run her world. They consider themselves perfectly righteous and will defend their dignity to the death, which makes them more dangerous than any number of poisons, blades or magic spells.

It's hard work making a murder-school look morally superior, but Kristoff pulls it off. He balances the pathos and laughs beautifully, and Mia comes off as fairly sympathetic despite her proclivity for stabbing people. If you're missing Arya Stark something chronic, Mia will fill the void nicely until the next episode of Game of Thrones.

Final Verdict: Awesome. Can't wait for the sequel.

"Whether any of this is true, of course, remains a matter of drunken speculation on the decks of various pork ships. What is true, is that after learning from Mercutio what exactly went on at the Porkery at age thirteen, a young Mia Corvere swore off eating ham for the rest of her life." 

Who's Afraid by Maria Lewis

Maria Lewis has a new book out, which makes it a good time to go back to her first urban fantasy novel Who's Afraid.

The protagonist Tommi is a young woman seeking out her birth family in New Zealand, only to stumble across a world-shattering secret. (Spoiler alert: she's a werewolf). Said family reunion does not go well and now she must fight to defend herself and her loved ones.

There's a lot that's good about this book. Its premise is similar to Kelly Armstrong's Otherworld series - young woman undergoes traumatic initiation to the supernatural community - but it approaches the subject matter in its own unique way. Sometimes I'd argue a better way. For example, when your family knocks you out and locks you in a cage, it's not for your own good. They're just assholes.

However the book is undermined by its jarring tones. Tommi's light breezy narrative clashes with the trauma she undergoes, and not in a 'bad things happen to good people' kind of way. More as if it can't decide what kind of story it wants to tell. Halfway through a riveting tale of abduction and escape, the book takes a sharp  turn into paranormal romance.

To be clear, there's nothing wrong with paranormal romance. Nor is there anything wrong with dark and deconstructive. In this instance, the combination just doesn't work well together.

It's hard to care about Tommi's forbidden relationship with the mysterious Lorcan when the first half of the book worked so hard to set up her conflict with her family. Lorcan works perfectly well as a mentor figure and exposition-giver. But as a love interest, he offers nothing I haven't see a hundred times already and - if I'm being completely honest - comes off as kind of skeevy, given what Tommi just went through.

Finally, I found the presentation of Maori culture problematic, similar to Stephanie Meyer's appropriation of Quileute beliefs. For a more indepth outline, see this article which articulates it far better than I ever could.

There's a good story in Who's Afraid, about a vicious fight for survival and families of choice versus blood. Unfortunately it focuses on the least interesting aspect, making it a rather frustrating read. I may get round to the sequel eventually, but I'm not exactly panting for it.

Final Verdict: Okay. Has good stuff, but I'd like it better if it could follow through on the grittiness of its premise.

"I screamed, and not with fear this time, with pure exhileration. It took me a second to realise I wasn't screaming at all. Following me down into the unknown was a piercing howl."

The Changeling Detective by Phillip Berrie

If you're looking for something short and sweet in urban fantasy, The Changeling Detective by Phillip Berrie might be just up your alley.

It starts off seemingly grounded in science fiction, with a private detective John who is a shapeshifter and - as far as he knows - the only one of his kind. When a seemingly harmless job takes a murderous turn, he must use all his abilities to survive.

This novella bolts out of the gate and never slows down. Whether it's an overzealous bodyguard or corrupt cops, there always seems to be someone in John's face. It reminded me of Harry Dresden how the character keeps ricocheting from disaster to disaster, accumulating a truly astounding number of damage points. This kept the pages turning even when the characters weren't particularly deep or complex.

Which, unfortunately, leads into the story's biggest weakness for me. Despite being an interesting premise, John is a rather blandly heroic character, never giving the reader any real sense of what he wants beyond the short-term. Events happen, he responds, and by the end of the book he hasn't grown or changed in any significant way. Even his female love interest/sidekick Ruth is more developed because she at least has a goal she works toward.

It's a shame, because there's several interesting directions he could have gone. Had his amoral traits been more emphasized and his goal been to return to his life as he likes it (drinking, spying on people, sleeping with hot bartenders...) that would have given him a place to grow from. In fact, the horror of his potential future could have been a real wake-up call as he was confronted what he could become.

Or if the entire point is that his moral code is not changed by his origins, Berrie could have pushed the tragedy and isolation of John's life a lot more. The material is there already. There's no one John can be truly honest with and his identification with X-Men comics suggests that he too feels like an outcast. And that in turn would have given more weight to his attachment to Ruth.

On a more positive note, the villain was excellent. Newman is a disturbingly unpredictable antagonist. Swinging between wanton cruelty and cold practicality, his goals remain opaquely inhuman for most of the book. I was utterly invested in the characters' efforts to escape him, as I'd be running like hell if he were after me too.

There wasn't much in the way of world-building, but that worked in this instance as half the tension comes from not understanding is going on. The book ends on a cautiously optimistic note, leaving just enough threads dangling for a sequel.

Final Score: Good. I'd have liked it to be longer, but as a tasty introduction to a series it does exactly what it's supposed to. You can also check out the author's website here for free samples of his other work.

"I felt like an actor who'd missed an important rehearsal; 

someone had definitely changed the script on me."

The Broken Well Trilogy by Sam Bowring

What's there to say about Sam Bowring's Broken Well trilogy?

'Go and read it!' is a start. However, since that would make a pretty short review, I'll try and go into more detail.

Think of the Broken Well like "reverse Star Wars".

At first glance, these two works appear to follow the same rules - and not just because Star Wars is high fantasy set in space. Both have a literal black-and-white religion where you're either following the pretty gods of light (the 'light' side) and are good, or you're following the dark creepy gods (ie, the dark side) and are unrepentantly evil. No backsies, no do-overs, do not pass go or collect $200.

If you didn't know this was high

fantasy, clearly you need to go 
back and watch again.

They also revolve around a prophesied Chosen One that will decide the battle between light and dark... blah blah savior... blah blah destiny. You know the drill. Literally fifty percent of fantasy has this premise.

The Anakin Skywalker stand-in of Bowring's universe is a blue-haired infant born on neutral ground. Upon discovering this, the light side does the obvious ethical thing and sends agents to protect the family from the machinations of the-

- Holy crap, did they just steal a baby?! 

Yep, they totally just stole a baby. While fighting darksiders with the same idea. And just to rub in that light emphatically does NOT equal good, they also had a magical tug of war. Using the baby.

Fortunately, this being a magical tug of war, instead of a splatter of gooey insides we get two whole infants, each with a separate aspect of the original kid's personality. Losara is stolen by the "bad guys" while Bel is stolen by the "good guys". So within the first chapter, we have a protagonist literally torn between light and dark.

And more importantly, we learn that everything I just told you is a lie. Nothing in this world is as
simple as it looks. Dark and light have nothing to do with morality, faith is a poor replacement for strategy, and no one's hands are clean in war.

Sadly, the old 'beard or no-beard' test has proved unreliable.

Remember this because it's the overarching theme of the trilogy.

That's great, you may be thinking, but what does that have to do with Star Wars? This isn't the first fantasy novel to challenge black-and-white coded morality (Sara Douglass and Ann Bishop are two of a few million examples). So lets look at the protagonists.

Our light-sided warrior Bel has a lot in common with Anakin Skywalker. He's a magnificent fighter, ruled by his passions, and romantically devoted to a woman he has nothing in common with. And just as Anakin has a bad habit of dismissing any opposition as "evil", Bel blindly assumes that everything dark is an abomination.

Yet this is just a symptom of a deeper problem. Bel, by his own admission, possesses no higher convictions or ideals. He couldn't tell you specifically why the light is better, because deep down, he doesn't care what side he fights on. The only reason he fights for the light is sheer chance. Had he been stolen by the dark, he'd have fought just as passionately for them.

The one on the left has blue hair.

That's how you tell them apart.

Anakin also had a dim understanding of what he was fighting for (recall his arguments for dictatorship during that schmaltzy romance scene in the meadow) and was only committed to the Jedi insofar as they didn't stand in the way of getting what he wanted. He had zero problems lying to them or violating their rules, and the moment they became an obstacle, he turned on them.

So what does this mean? Aside from Bel's idiocies being a bit more justified than Anakin's?

Well... maybe it's a pointed commentary on what happens when you demonise your enemies.

See, both Anakin and Bel were born balanced between light and dark. Bel was initially unified with Losara. Anakin was told his purpose was not to fight for either side, but to keep both sides in check (see the brilliant Mortis arc of The Clone Wars cartoon series). However, they were both recognised as Chosen Ones and taken to be raised by the light, which is where things go wrong.

Both children were taught a very simple life philosophy: light is good, dark is bad. Losara was a "dark worm" that Bel is better off without, and Anakin's ordinary human emotions (fear, anger, love) must be purged. Understandable when you're raising the Chosen One, and you don't want him having doubts at a critical juncture. Yet utterly inadequate when dealing with real-world situations.

And predictably enough, when dealing with the complexities of adulthood, these simple codes completely fail them. Neither youth has any idea how to deal with a situation that's not black and white. Bel throws a tantrum when his girlfriend and father are (justifiably) arrested for committing crimes, while Anakin falls to pieces when he believes his wife is going to die and the Jedi either can't or won't help. And before you say anything, Vader isn't any better. He's simply Anakin adjusting his moral code to suit himself; if the Sith can help him, then the Sith are good and the Jedi are bad. He just swings from one kind of extremism to another.

It's only in Losara that we see any kind of balance, and that's only because he has an advantage the others don't. Unclouded, unbiased logic.

The dark sorcerer who performs human sacrifice and
political assassination...and is the only guy 
who seems to know what he's doing. 

See, because Bel got all the passion, Losara is physically incapable of reacting with strong emotion. This lack means he immediately sees the contradiction between what he's told and what he's observed. He can't hate or fear, so he alone can see both sides for what they truly are. And while that doesn't stop him from doing what he must (seriously he does some scary shit), he's also the only person who makes any effort to avoid the war.

Perhaps the scene that best encapsulates Losara is his meeting with the dark gods. They demand that he serves them first, over and above even his people. He considers this - bearing in mind he is physically in front of the gods at this time - and replies "I'll serve you as well". Not an outright rejection, but an offer of compromise. Later he even suggests to Bel that they withdraw to their respective lands and ignore the prophecy.

That's Losara in a nutshell. Balance. Compromise. Coexistence.

Of course he'll murder your allies in an unholy ceremony and unleash an unkillable monster on your army if you insist on war. But the point is, he gave you an out. It's not his fault you didn't take it.

On the one hand this could imply the Jedi were right - lack of emotion is the way to go - but actually shows how wrong they were. Rejecting and demonising an entire aspect of one's self, religion, or country leads to ruin. The Jedi and Sith have been fighting the same war for millennia, in the same vicious cycle of retribution and counter-retribution. Bel and Losara's gods didn't do themselves any favours when they parted ways; they just made it possible to destroy each other.

Losara and Bel eventually both acknowledge this, that neither of them are whole and that a great wrong was done to them. Whatever you think of the ending (which I won't go into detail on) it's at least suggested that the cycle of violence has been broken. Whereas Luke Skywalker, who won by utterly rejecting the dark side, saw the same cycle start up again a few years down the road in Force Awakens.... Man, this article gone in a depressing direction.

Anyway, this leaves just one last question.

Is there a second version of Anakin Skywalker running around the Star Wars universe, maybe trying to fix everything his double broke?

Someone who encapsulates everything Anakin is not. Someone utterly brilliant, devious and genre savvy. Someone immune to manipulation and strategically unparalleled -

Holy crap. It's Admiral Thrawn.

Admit it. It's all starting to make sense now.