banjax451's review against another edition
3.0
Meh. About all I can say about this. Not sure if I'll read the other books in Parker's first trilogy or just move on to later works. I can see her talent, but I just didn't care about any of the characters in this novel.
shadowcas's review against another edition
4.0
I first read Colours in the Steel by K. J. Parker when I was about 17 years old. I loved it. If you asked me what my favorite book was, I would almost always answer with this. Recently I was asked what my favorite book was and while I replied with Colours in the Steel, I realized it had been so long since I had read it that I could only vaguely remember the premise. I decided to grab it up and read it as a group reading challenge for the month of August.
I must say that time does blur the details. I remembered a fast-paced novel with epic characters and magic and swordplay. What I just read was vastly different. The novel is not fast-paced. There were more lulls in the storyline than there were sword fights despite the promises of the back cover. Bardas Loredan was not an epic hero. Even he would argue with the description of a hero at all. He was cowardly, and argumentative, and dour, and a drunk. I fell in love all over again, which also makes me ask the question on my own tastes.
The magic was mostly just science or philosophy that the layman couldn’t understand. There were times of premonitions that weren’t really explained or dwelled upon. But for the most part, it was a magic-less fantasy novel.
I’m giving it 4 stars because, despite the fact that the middle sagged in pace and content, the story still remains in my top novels. The characters are perfectly crafted with believable flaws and redeemable bravery. You can’t help but root for the underdog while still hoping that everything will turn out okay for everyone. Is it a perfect novel? No. But I do find it is still well worth the read even a decade later.
I must say that time does blur the details. I remembered a fast-paced novel with epic characters and magic and swordplay. What I just read was vastly different. The novel is not fast-paced. There were more lulls in the storyline than there were sword fights despite the promises of the back cover. Bardas Loredan was not an epic hero. Even he would argue with the description of a hero at all. He was cowardly, and argumentative, and dour, and a drunk. I fell in love all over again, which also makes me ask the question on my own tastes.
The magic was mostly just science or philosophy that the layman couldn’t understand. There were times of premonitions that weren’t really explained or dwelled upon. But for the most part, it was a magic-less fantasy novel.
I’m giving it 4 stars because, despite the fact that the middle sagged in pace and content, the story still remains in my top novels. The characters are perfectly crafted with believable flaws and redeemable bravery. You can’t help but root for the underdog while still hoping that everything will turn out okay for everyone. Is it a perfect novel? No. But I do find it is still well worth the read even a decade later.
mpetruce's review against another edition
3.0
Boy, this book took me forever to read, although it is not necessarily the fault of the book. Just had other things to do.
Interesting fantasy world K.J. Parker has set up here. An apparently impregnable, prosperous city, center of the empire. Matters of law are settled by fencers, who are lawyers, but they don't fence with words, they literally fence, with the case decided by which lawyer (fencer) lives and which one dies. Magic in this world, like so many other things, are a bit of a fraud, although that it exists is understood fully by the ones thought to practice it.
Anyway, the characters here are interesting takes on the grizzled old soldier, the young assistant, the vengeful young warrior, etc.
Some of the "magical" coincidences seemed a little to coincidental for my taste, but they still make sense in the logic the story presents. A rich fantasy world well-written, if a bit slow at times.
One big misstep though was there was no map. A fantasy book should always, always, always have a map, although there is very little traveling in this book. Perhaps subsequent books in the trilogy have it.
Interesting fantasy world K.J. Parker has set up here. An apparently impregnable, prosperous city, center of the empire. Matters of law are settled by fencers, who are lawyers, but they don't fence with words, they literally fence, with the case decided by which lawyer (fencer) lives and which one dies. Magic in this world, like so many other things, are a bit of a fraud, although that it exists is understood fully by the ones thought to practice it.
Anyway, the characters here are interesting takes on the grizzled old soldier, the young assistant, the vengeful young warrior, etc.
Some of the "magical" coincidences seemed a little to coincidental for my taste, but they still make sense in the logic the story presents. A rich fantasy world well-written, if a bit slow at times.
One big misstep though was there was no map. A fantasy book should always, always, always have a map, although there is very little traveling in this book. Perhaps subsequent books in the trilogy have it.
seabright22's review against another edition
5.0
Really liked the descriptive side of what we don't normally see in these fantasy books, and the magic system being more abstract them some I've read recently is great. The honest description of fencing, duelling and war in general is super refreshing.
hazelsf's review
5.0
After reading The Engineering Trilogy I had a feeling I'd enjoy this, and I wasn't disappointed!
Filled with interesting characters, Bardas, Alexius and Temrai, the kind of humour that I enjoy, plenty of 'how to make this', fencing battles, and the uncomfortable feeling that there IS magic underlying events...not that anyone understands how it works! Not even the Patriarch.
I really loved how
Looking forward to starting the second book!
Filled with interesting characters, Bardas, Alexius and Temrai, the kind of humour that I enjoy, plenty of 'how to make this', fencing battles, and the uncomfortable feeling that there IS magic underlying events...not that anyone understands how it works! Not even the Patriarch.
I really loved how
Spoiler
Temrai was able to learn the secrets of engineering by just working in Perimidaiea and learning their skills, and how he and Bardas crossed paths several times, and ended up making him a sword.Looking forward to starting the second book!
joosty's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
informative
lighthearted
relaxing
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
verkisto's review
4.0
Random Thoughts:
1.
Why is Parker's fiction classified as fantasy? This is, at best, just Medieval fiction. As much as I love his stuff (and I do, don't get me wrong here; it's probably an unhealthy amount of affection I have for his fiction), I've wondered this. There are a few moments I can think of throughout his works where magic has played a role in the story, but it's usually so incidental (and so rare) that it's hard to think of his work as fantasy.
Whatever it is, though, I dig it.
2.
So much of the narrative involves describing weapons and how to use them. It doesn't sound like much, but Parker makes it all so compelling and interesting that it's hard to stop reading. Parker uses it as an allegory, especially here. He uses the structure of the bow to illustrate sources of power, and the titles of the books in the trilogy are names for significant parts of the weapons used in the battles, and Parker uses them to represent characters. It's fascinating stuff.
3.
Parker has a way of putting things that makes you pay attention. Allow me to draw your attention to:
Perfect and succinct. These kinds of lines are all over the place in his fiction.
4.
Parker disarms you with his style. It's easy to think his stories are larks, what with his wry wit, but rest assured, he's working toward yanking the cloth from the table and leaving the place settings intact. In my review of Prosper's Demon, I mentioned how his stories have a moment where you stop, hold your breath, and say, "Oh"; that's when you know you're reading a Parker book.
1.
Why is Parker's fiction classified as fantasy? This is, at best, just Medieval fiction. As much as I love his stuff (and I do, don't get me wrong here; it's probably an unhealthy amount of affection I have for his fiction), I've wondered this. There are a few moments I can think of throughout his works where magic has played a role in the story, but it's usually so incidental (and so rare) that it's hard to think of his work as fantasy.
Whatever it is, though, I dig it.
2.
So much of the narrative involves describing weapons and how to use them. It doesn't sound like much, but Parker makes it all so compelling and interesting that it's hard to stop reading. Parker uses it as an allegory, especially here. He uses the structure of the bow to illustrate sources of power, and the titles of the books in the trilogy are names for significant parts of the weapons used in the battles, and Parker uses them to represent characters. It's fascinating stuff.
3.
Parker has a way of putting things that makes you pay attention. Allow me to draw your attention to:
"... service is what makes you stand in the line [of battle] when nobody would try and stop you, if you ran away, and honour is what's left when every other conceivable reason for staying there has long since evaporated."
Perfect and succinct. These kinds of lines are all over the place in his fiction.
4.
Parker disarms you with his style. It's easy to think his stories are larks, what with his wry wit, but rest assured, he's working toward yanking the cloth from the table and leaving the place settings intact. In my review of Prosper's Demon, I mentioned how his stories have a moment where you stop, hold your breath, and say, "Oh"; that's when you know you're reading a Parker book.
nanas_books's review
informative
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
msjenne's review against another edition
4.0
Such a frustrating story, because you want both sides to win, and you know they can't. And yet so very enjoyable.
It's interesting, I've basically read Parker's 3 trilogies in reverse order of when they were published, and there are so many themes in this book that s/he apparently liked so much that she wanted to explore them at much greater length in the others. (the biggest one being, of course, the effects of more sophisticated technology on medieval-ish societies, but also: blacksmithing, swordfighting, military camaraderie, revenge, past misdeeds coming back to haunt you in ironic ways, bossy women, the invention of explosives, calmly competent engineers, mysterious not-really magic, etc.)
And bonus: this one actually passes the Bechdel Test!
It's interesting, I've basically read Parker's 3 trilogies in reverse order of when they were published, and there are so many themes in this book that s/he apparently liked so much that she wanted to explore them at much greater length in the others. (the biggest one being, of course, the effects of more sophisticated technology on medieval-ish societies, but also: blacksmithing, swordfighting, military camaraderie, revenge, past misdeeds coming back to haunt you in ironic ways, bossy women, the invention of explosives, calmly competent engineers, mysterious not-really magic, etc.)
And bonus: this one actually passes the Bechdel Test!