[Eventine]

I suppose that any book that offers "alternative" viewpoints on issues such as sexuality, religion or politics are always going to attract a certain level of attention from conservatives. They're probably the same people who wanted Harry Potter banned from schools.

[Caligula]

Wow! Really enjoyed reading everybody's thoughts on this one, even though I'm very late to the party. :)

I thought this was really cool. It was the perfect warm fire and red wine book. I liked how it owed as much to a novel of manners as it did to traditional high fantasy. It reads like an Austenian version of the swashbuckling adventures of Dumas, Orczy, and Sabatini. I felt the writing could be a little self-conscious and conceited, but at times (most memorably the opening) it was beautiful. I liked the wit and humour, which helped balance the melodrama.

I really loved the nameless old city. The urban setting and the elaborate, highly stratified and hierarchical social structure was a nice break from more typical rural fantasy settings. I loved the idea of the aristocrats living in mansions on the Hill overlooking the thieves' warren of Riverside. Also, there were enough details hinted at about the walls beyond the city walls to bring the whole world to life.

Richard and Alec were wonderfully rich and dark characters; Richard sociopathic, violent, arrogant, but skilful, honourable and loving; Alec neurotic, melancholy, spoilt, but intelligent, wry and loyal. Sexual mores have varied throughout societies and history, and I wish more fantasy novels would reflect this. I also really liked Michael Godwin.

I agree that it could have been longer (More! More!). I think the Michael Godwin plot line was left unresolved.

Also have to say the Tom Canty cover is beautiful.

I'll certainly pick up the sequel and give it read sometime.

[Yobmod]

I agree with Michael's story getting a bit ignored. If the sequels had followed him, then it would be much higher up on my to read list.

Unfortunately I'm a bit discouraged by the blurb and the mixed reviews that The Fall of the Kings got. Although i loved really liked the characters in Swordspoint, the sequel sounds like a bit of a rehash :o

I'd definately recommend her WFA winner Thomas the Rhymer tho.

[FicusFan]

I thought I would update the thread. I just came across a listing for the 3rd book in the Swordspoint series by Ellen Kushner: The Privilege of the Sword, which is scheduled to be printed July '06 in tradepaper (in the US).

I think the new book is supposed to fall between the 2 out now, and continue the story of the characters in the first book.

[Nic_C]

Just finished reading Swordspoint last night, and thoroughly enjoyed it. A fascinating, vivid world, great dialogue, some very memorable characters - and even more memorable relationships.

I loved the complexity of Richard and Alec's relationship - the fierce mutual dependence, the deep tenderness, the way they encourage each others' worst traits while curbing them at the same time. There's something quite disturbing about the way Alec thrills to Richard murdering everyone who looks sideways at him - the way Alec deliberately provokes people into such situations, the way Richard feels like he's doing his protective duty to Alec. I loved every scene they shared, but could never decide whether they were good, or terribly bad, for each other. Both, I suppose, like most relationships!

All this, together with the not-quite-horrified references to Richard's murder of Jessamyn, went a good way towards establishing the quite alien sensibilities of Kushner's fantastical-Regency society: the casual approach to mortality, so necessary in a society where honour is built around contract killings, and tavern disputes are settled with first-body-on-the-floor, no questions asked. In short, I think Kushner manages historicism better than most historical novelists... :)

Still, I did feel that Kushner was struggling to make it hold together as a novel. The short story origins were quite plain in certain places. The pacing was a touch choppy, with characters and storylines frequently disappearing for long periods (e.g. Michael, as several here have mentioned). The structure also faltered, especially towards the overly-talky, too-many-revelations climax (Ferris and the Duchess were both under-explored prior to their pivotal moments, and the former's personality and history in particular seemed to be partially created just for the end).

The latter point, while a criticism, I also recognise very much as a function of the novel's narrative focus: Richard and Alec are largely uncaring of what goes on outside their own little world, believing (wrongly) they can remain aloof and unaffected, despite one being the nobility's assassin of choice, and the other being the scion of its most influential family. So the fact that the reader remains in the dark is perfectly understandable; neither look, since neither want to know. Yet still, we do get PoV characters from the Hill; I would've liked a little more, earlier, on the broader significance of the politicking, rather than a great big splodge of exposition at the end.

On the whole, a very richly textured world (though, again, wish we'd got a bit more on the University) - loved the fireworks, the unseasonable outdoor parties, the dicing, the torch-hiring, etc. Loved, also, the completely unsensational way Kushner dealt with the range of sexualities. We need more fantasy novels like this! Incidentally, I imagine that it's a function of the clear social and political dominance of men in Kushner's world that is behind the prevalence of m/m relationships, and the apparent dearth of f/f. Men are shown at every turn to have much more freedom of movement and association.

The short stories were largely forgettable, although Alec's death (and, more, the fact that Richard had already died) made me sad. :(