Hello and welcome to another episode of Is This Just Fantasy the podcast where every
other week two nerds get together to rate, read and review a fantasy novel.
I'm your host, Geordie Bailey.
And I'm his ex-Soldier turned mob-boss friend, Duncan Nicholl.
Duncan, it's good to be back in the world of just sort of grungy urban fantasy.
It is very nice, particularly for me.
This is a slice of the fantasy pie that I have a certain extra liking to.
I think, I don't know what it is, something about it means that maybe something that would
normally go down as like a five.
If it's in this sort of ballpark, it's kicked up to a seven for me.
Right, because this week we're doing The Straight Razor Cure by Daniel Polanski, also called
Lowtown, the first book in the Lowtown trilogy.
That's right.
And just a little bit of background, I have previously read the entire trilogy.
I am a veteran of this.
I really like Daniel Polanski as an author.
He has a geology, a similar kind of grungy dark fantasy geology out.
He's also written a couple of apparently very interesting short stories.
He's even written the only other short story or section of a story written in the second
person that I think is halfway sort of decent.
The first one obviously being of the fifth season, which is the best used to be I've
ever had.
Yes, that's definitely the when I turn to a book and I look to the second person, that's
the one I look to.
The only other example of a really successful second person narrative is a story about you,
which is just a given episode of Welcome to Night Vale that I just think is really good.
Jordy, before we dive into The Straight Razor Cure, have you read anything else in the intervening
time?
I've been very busy still.
I was so busy and so tired that I actually uploaded our episode of Witcher with five
minutes of dead air at the start.
So I am barely keeping it together.
Don't worry mate, it happens to the very best of us.
I hope that correction is down and please everyone, thank you for joining us at the
start of 2025.
Oh, here in the ground running.
No, I've also been very busy as well.
I have only read Straight Razor Cure and to be pretty honest, it was a read that I started
off with, I'll just flick through the top of it and then I suddenly realised, oh no,
wait, no, no, no, I need to stop and reread in detail.
Right, because it is a mystery novel, the detail matters.
It does.
So let's kind of get the vague premise out.
The Straight Razor Cure is a murder mystery.
I would almost say it has elements of noir kicking about, not that I truly know what
that term means.
Absolutely, it's very much a noir and it's more so just a noir as opposed to it being
a murder mystery because you have noir stories like say Double Indemnity which are definitively
noir but not about a murder mystery like the main character is the one who does the murder.
So, and the reason I make the distinction is that this isn't like a Poirot story,
you know, it's not solely about, oh, something has happened and the detective needs to figure
out what that is.
No, I think a very even amount of time is spent in this novel with our main character
Warden who fulfils the role of the detective but he spends just as much time I feel like
negotiating sort of the underworld and political mechanisms and a lot of time is just kind
of given over to sort of the flashing out of the world that Warden inhabits.
Yes, I agree.
That's definitely the case and I think it is something that does work about the story.
I do have a real sense of Lowtown as a living breathing space.
I have a good sense of the different issues that people have, you know, I get a sense
of where the different sources of friction within the narrative, like it's very explicit
in a way that like there's a lot of racial division in the city that comes down and you
have like, you know, the city's divided up into like various ghettos.
And it kind of lends into my original point of having to like, oh no, I need to sit down
and revisit in detail because although I could basically recount to you the core sort of
murder mystery, you know, I know, yeah, that person gets killed there and that's how he
finds that out and then, you know, I remember who done it.
There are so many, I don't want to say vignettes, like they're sort of pointless, but they are
this sort of these little world building episodes that are really enjoyable and when you first
read it through and you're like, oh, how do these fit in?
I think maybe you have a bit more of that, but maybe they don't necessarily go anywhere.
There's quite a lot of carrots in this book that I feel kind of come and go as Warden
sort of interacts with them just to sort of expand that bit of Lowtown's world.
Yeah, I definitely agree with you there.
It's something that like it could be a serious detriment to the book.
Like if I was in a very negative frame of mind, I could say a lot of the story is spent
wasted on stuff that isn't about the main mystery.
But the fact of the matter is that for the most part of that slight, you know, looking
to the side, that sort of thing, it tends to work out more or less.
Does it slow the story down?
Yes, absolutely.
It does.
I'd say it has a knock on effect that does diminish the quality of the book, but the
stuff there, you know, it is of a certain quality that I can't dismiss it.
It does get into like, you can tell that Daniel Polanski is trying with every bone in his
body not to be racist about Chinese people, but he flirts with it in a way that like,
I just don't think he was really capable of writing, you know?
Yes, I do know.
I think this comes down to an author who I'm inclined to say has no real ill intent, but
wants to write a world that is racist and has racist characters.
And it definitely gets muddied at times where what is Warden's perspective and what is the
author laying out?
Exactly.
And like I said, I think it does speak more to maybe just a slight lack of finesse rather
than an intent.
I definitely am on the same page as you Duncan, because a lot of the stuff you're seeing is
just like, yeah, this is Warden, and I can tell from his perspective that like, we're
not supposed to agree with this.
We can see this is coming from a place of ignorance, but you know, in the character
of I think it's he's called Li Shan, you know, in him, we see this caricature, a so explicitly
old fashioned racist caricature of a Chinese person, even down to having like a Fu Manchu
that it's just it really defies belief that you're seeing it on the page.
Like why?
Like genuinely why?
You know, we're 20 years separated from Deadwood, which was a series that where every single
character was racist towards Chinese people.
But the story itself really isn't that racist towards them.
I'm not really sure what was to add on to this point is sort of saying I do think it's
a point that I think Dan Palance does improve in subsequent stories, although I'm not going
to there's a bit in the third one where I'm just gonna put that out.
We get sort of this redneck hillbilly archetype.
And it gave me a very similar reaction.
I went, oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, where are we going?
Yeah, that is a slightly less important thing.
I just I'm surprised I even brought it up this early in the episode, because really
what we should be doing is we should be giving an initial reaction to how did we find the
novel?
Yes, absolutely.
That is not far more important, but how we should show this our way.
So Jordi, I brought this novel to you because I would stand by and say I like this book.
Sure.
I enjoyed it.
I enjoyed the whole trilogy.
I will not stand here and say it is one of the absolute greatest.
This is not Kings of the Wild, but it gave me enough of a like a unique flavor that it's
really stuck with me.
And I enjoy it for that.
And you were nervous about bringing it to the table, as you said in our previous episode,
because I had such a negative reaction to the gutters prayer.
Why is that?
Why are those stories being mentioned in the same breath?
So I think if you try to describe them in terms of genre, there's a lot of crossover.
They are both urban fantasies, dealing with sort of criminal underworlds and moving mechanisms
of the characters with a degree of underlying mystery.
Unlike the gutters prayer, which I'm just going to say not as well written.
Sorry, actually, like the gutters prayer, which I was going to say not as well written,
it does put a lot of time and energy into the world building.
What I think the straight ways of Cure does really well, or a lot better than the gutters
prayer, is straight ways of Cure has a much more focused narrative.
And I think its core cast of characters are just a hell of a lot more deep and interesting.
That's my take.
Jordy, do you do you agree with my assessment?
I definitely agree that this book is better than the gutters prayer.
Nice.
I don't think it's a good book.
Oh, I call it a five out of 10.
I'm not going to say it's a bad book, but it's not good.
I refer back to my opening comments on it's just that flavor that takes a five out of
10 up to a seven out of 10.
Yeah, I was thinking when you said that, I'd be like, oh, well, watch out for that, pal.
Yeah, you know, like the balance between world building and the actual mystery does take
it up from a three and a half to a five.
Duncan, this book's fucking cringe.
Oh my God.
I don't think I've ever used that word in the entirety of the podcast, but it's really
it's just true.
I just don't like the writing style at all.
I just really can't stand it.
I certainly think there's a bit of this book where I wonder, is the author doing like,
because when you talk about earlier, I use the word Noah, and I'm not going to say I
have great experience in that genre.
But the bits in this book, I'm like, are you paying homage to something?
Are you attempting to really strongly walk like the beaten archetype, which I can definitely
see that angle.
And also this book, obviously, is focusing with elements of sort of the grim dark.
And now I definitely think there are moments which it kind of tries to be edgy in a way
that makes it does look slightly how to say this, 14 year old boy trying to be edgy.
Yes, yes, absolutely.
How old was he when you wrote this book?
That is not a question I can answer right now.
One second.
So Daniel Polanski would have been so he's 41 now.
This book was released in 2011.
So 14 years ago.
So that would have made him in his late 20s.
I guess that checks out.
I think if you're of a certain disposition, maybe this could seem really cool.
The fact that it's written by a man in his 20s instead of his 30s, I think does sort
of check out.
Okay, Jordy.
So you're calling it cringe.
Can you and do you give the points that I would identify why someone would think of
it cringe?
That's very much where you're coming from.
Yeah, it's all about the fact that it is trying to be dark and brooding and edgy.
And it's trying to do the noir thing.
And when I say the noir thing, what I really mean it's it's trying to be Raymond Chandler.
Duncan, you probably know who Raymond Chandler is.
Have you ever read his stuff?
I actually haven't.
And I do really think I should because I feel like I would like it.
You definitely would.
You definitely would, Duncan, because you know, you're someone who enjoys pulpy fiction.
And Raymond Chandler is a guy who, you know, he was writing novels like he wasn't, you
know, just writing.
Actually, you know, I tell a lie.
I don't know whether he was writing like for magazines and stuff as well, given the era
he was writing.
He probably was.
But he's best known for novels like The Big Sleep.
But I'm going to read to you a quote from Farewell, My Lovely, another one of his famous
Philip Marlowe stories.
This is the iconic detective.
And let me see if you can sort of recognize the influence he's had on Daniel Polanski.
I needed a drink.
I needed a lot of life insurance.
I needed a vacation.
I needed a home in the country.
What I had was a coat, a hat and a gun.
I put them on and went out of room.
Alright, so you can hear it, right?
You can hear what he's going for.
Yes, definitely.
And from my perspective, I think it's delivered in a sufficiently enjoyable way.
So we're talking about Daniel Polanski, we're talking about...
Yeah, I figured we're talking about Daniel Polanski here.
So you know, the point I'm making is that he's going for that same dark, jaded detective,
you know.
This Philip Marlowe, sorry, this detective is also a down-on-his-luck guy living in a
fetid city.
You know, he has like problems with substances.
Philip Marlowe is an alcoholic, just like Raymond Chandler.
And you know, he has this sardonic, dark, moody perspective.
The difference is that it's like charm.
You got it or you don't.
And Warden is not as charming as Philip Marlowe.
He seems like a character who's completely assured of his own intelligence and it makes
him seem quite smarmy in every scene.
I would somewhat agree.
Warden definitely has a cockiness to him.
You know, he thinks because he, due to his sort of background in his training, he's one
step ahead of basically all the criminals that he interacts with.
Now you say kind of smarmy, I think he gives him a slightly cocky edge.
But also, I think, from a reading perspective, because you kind of see that, it sort of means
that when he does sort of blunder, you kind of chalk it down to that, it's like, oh, you've
been too cocky.
You know, you as a reader can look at him and be like, should have been better.
I mean, that's true.
I mean, it does work in that, you know, he is so assured of his intelligence.
I mean, for one thing, it's all from his perspective.
It's a first person, present tense story.
So you know, like you're always in his head, you're always seeing things the way he is.
But the fact of the matter is the fact that, you know, Polanski is trying to make him seem
cool and down to earth.
I don't really accept that it's just like all through his filter.
I think we are supposed to come away with a strongly positive impression of him.
And I can tell you some more reasons why this is the case.
Because just like someone like Philip Marlowe, this is someone who's down on his luck.
He used to be a real copper.
You know, he used to be a lawman and then he got kicked out of the force for nebulous
reasons that aren't explained in this book.
We understand that had something to do with a woman.
We understand that had something to do with drug use.
And now he's a man of the street.
He's a drug dealer.
You know, he's a violent thug in the language of the book.
But the difference there is that Polanski isn't actually interested in having an especially
morally complex protagonist because you never actually see him deal drugs to normal people.
You know, if you really wanted to make this dark and kind of shocking, you would have
him pushing drugs on vulnerable people, vulnerable poor people who live in his community.
The only people who see him sell drugs to are the extremely rich.
And more than that, they're like textually the bad guys in the story.
Yes, I would agree.
There's definitely an element and sorry, I'm doing that thing again.
I'm referencing Robert E Howard's going on where we get told that he does all these bad
things and they always happen off page.
And all the time it's that classic setup of, oh, he's got some rough edges, but you know,
deep down he's had a heart of gold and he's looking out for his community.
And that would work better if he actually had some more defined rough edges.
Like he barely starts, you know, he doesn't attack anyone that doesn't really attack him
first.
He doesn't do anything unless he thinks it's in the better interest of, you know, solving
the case, finding the murderer.
And you're right.
It's very clear that he's sending drugs to the pompous elites.
He's invited to their parties.
It's on their terms.
They're so high and mighty.
It's almost irrelevant what they're doing.
Yeah, like take characters like Tony Soprano and Walter White.
We actually see that like it's some of the most vulnerable people in society who are
caught up in the drug trade.
You know, we feel sympathy for the characters who this is inflicted upon.
We never go like, you know, like, oh, well, it doesn't matter if you're getting a bad,
you know, a bad batch.
It doesn't matter what's going to happen next because of yada, yada, yada.
And it's not even like, ah, forget it.
You know, I've said enough on this point.
Like because here's the real reason, right?
The real reason that you have him being a drug user and a drug pusher is that it's combining
characters like Walter White with Sherlock Holmes.
OK, I can see that.
So what's your, is there a critique in there?
Only in that Sherlock Holmes is a really great character and it just kind of irritated me
to see him compared to Warden.
I think where Warden though does work quite well is the fact that quite often, you know,
when bad things happen or, you know, at the end of this bad day, you see him either kind
of take his own supply.
There's moments where he kind of, he gets completely drunk.
He acts out to his like best friend, Adolphus.
And I think there's an element where you're meant to look at him and actually find him
quite pitiful.
Yeah, yeah, I agree.
I think that is somewhat something that works.
I remember once listening to a couple of people reviewing the first season of Jessica Jones.
And I remember one of them saying that like, you know, in this character you have like
the classic alcoholic detective, you know, an absolute trope at this point.
And what they took umbrage with in it is that one of the people said, you know, my ex-partner
was an alcoholic.
And we need to understand about alcoholics is that they're the most toxic people on the
planet and just being in proximity to them is like being in a proximity to poison.
And so the way in which the character, they demonstrated a character like that without
actually like inspecting what it would mean to the characters around them who are in their
proximity and who care about them.
I'd say at least in this case, yes, Daniel Polanski is doing a better job of showing
that the destructive habits of Warden are having an impact on the people around him
in his personal life.
Adolphus, you know, at one point, like he just has to give Adolphus like really hard
truth and tell him like, you're not coming on this mission with me because you're too
fat and you're too old and you were never that good in the first place.
And it's a really brutal line.
And you're like, yeah, this is an effective scene.
I'm having to see the main character be an asshole to his best friend in order to keep
him safe.
That's an effective scene.
The fact that like, you know, he can't keep Ren out of danger and the fact that like his
method for trying to teach Ren and getting to grow up doesn't work and we see it not
work on the page.
That's effective stuff.
I agree.
Just to do a quick flyby.
So Adolphus is Warden's best friend, arguably only friend, the old ex-soldier buddies and
Adolphus when he came back from the war, opened up a tavern and it's from this tavern that
our character Warden basically operates out of.
Ren is a street urchin who picks up in the early parts of the story who kind of hangs
around and then Warden begrudgingly is like, well, I'm going to try and guide you in my
best broken way.
I really like, yeah, yeah.
And so adjusting to things I really like because, you know, you friend a lot.
Now let me, let me come back some things I really like because one of the things I said
that I really like obviously the world building here I think is a lot better than something
like the Ghost Prayer, but I actually really like a lot of these characters.
So we talked about Warden and you said, you know, you're meant to find something cool.
I debate that slightly.
I think you actually meant to make a little bit more pitiful and pick up on the sense
of his own inflated ego because I don't think there's that many moments where he actually
throws down the line and everyone's meant to applaud.
Like he actually gets roughed up.
Oh, disagree.
And I can prove it.
I think there's that many moments.
I didn't say any moment.
Go ahead but I'll come.
I'll come back.
I also like the other characters, the character of Adolphus.
I really like the fact that in there both of them throw down hard truths.
You know, you can tell that they have this deep friendship from what they've been through,
but they're not quite on the same page anymore, but because of their history that neither
of them is going to up and dump the other.
So I really thought that was a nice take.
I actually wish Adolphus maybe did go on a little bit more of the adventure with him.
I know the key point is that Warden tells him he can't, because I really like that interaction,
but I do like it how at the end of the day, every kind of day of investigation, Warden
comes back to the tavern and Adolphus is just like, what happened to you?
And this is when we get to the pitiful moments where Warden, you know, doesn't get to maybe
open up to his friend and have that sort of healthy communication like we'd ever expect
it.
He either gets completely drunk or goes and takes his own supply, or just lies down in
his bed.
So that was really nice.
I also liked it when they just- Yes, yes Duncan.
Yes, that's all true, but what you're missing there is the suffering in silence and going
about your business and not talking to your friend is part of the same power fantasy as
being a guy in a room who's smarter than everyone else.
I think, ah, now this is where, maybe, and this isn't 100th century because I did enjoy
this book more before I finished the whole trilogy.
Later on in the series, I think Daniel Polanski does deliver a very strong message about how
this is not the right way to go about things, but I was actually surprised reading this
first book.
It's not here.
I want to make that clear.
I don't, yeah, okay, that's fine, but we don't need there to be a, like, I wasn't
said, said they again, Sunset Boulevard, like, oh, one of the message kids, you know, telling
a story isn't enough, huh?
You know, I don't need the book to morally grandstand and tell me what's right and wrong.
All I tend to point out is that the book doesn't work for me because the whole book is smarmy.
The whole book is channeling behind the, you know, you're following the guy who thinks
he's smarter than everyone else and who you're supposed to think is cool.
And the reason I know people are supposed to think this is cool and people do think
this is cool because people like this book is because I read this book on Kindle.
I couldn't get an audiobook version this time, so I read it on Kindle.
And when you read something on Kindle, you can see the places that other people have
underlined the bits that people have highlighted.
So I'm going to read a section.
I hadn't tooled up before going to visit Mary.
Seemed like a bad way to make an impression, but I wouldn't need a weapon to get the jump
on this skinny little bastard.
The only thing better than ambushing a motherfucker is ambushing the motherfucker who thinks he's
ambushing you.
Okay, right.
There's a touch more of a cringe in that, I'll admit.
I think my counterpoint that I'm trying to say why this didn't come off as bad to me
is that because he goes out with this smiling attitude, but inevitably rocks off at the
end of the day a bit more broken, I think it strikes a balance.
Whether or not the majority of people see it or not, that was my takeaway.
But it's not a question to me of like, he's giving me his comeuppance.
The point is that I have to spend all my time with this guy acting like he's so smart.
And what it comes down to as well is the actual way the book is written.
Now that doesn't come across in the passage I've just read because what we're looking
at there is straightforward, down to earth stuff.
But occasionally, and I don't even mean occasionally, on a very frequent basis, you really get the
sense that Daniel Polanski just loves big words and big words employed for no real effect.
I mean, there's a scene there.
You want to talk about one of those scenes where he's casually using drugs to get through
the day.
There's a bit he starts a chapter by saying, you know, this isn't an exact quote, but one
of these words is, I woke up feeling groggy from the pipe I had immolated.
What, you don't tell me how you don't get to work and say how you immolated your breakfast?
Not even that because what he's saying is he'd burnt like immolate means, you know,
obviously it means to burn something.
But you don't say, oh I immolated a pack of cigarettes.
That's insane.
No one would ever talk like that.
Like to me, immolate is like completely destroy down to the finest ash, you know?
Just say smoked.
Like it's not impressive to use big words like this.
I love this discussing your backup so much.
And here I stand, I'm like, I mean, I don't like ink horns at the best of times.
Okay.
You've got your points, your stance.
I will stand by that I somewhat disagree with your interpretation of, or at least I had
a different experience with the character of Warden, which probably might be you to
most people.
I will say if you are one of those people that would find the character who is very
cocky, cocksure, fun to read about, this book's got you mate.
Don't you worry.
15 year olds, it's here.
Let's then move on.
Can we actually talk a bit more about Wren?
Wren is a character.
What do you think about him?
Wren's fine.
There's not really a lot to him.
He's sort of a plucky art for dodger character.
I like his interactions and main character.
I like here, I like what seeing warden sort of mold him into a new version himself and
it not working.
Yeah, I like him.
Okay.
I get the impression from your question that Wren is very important to the sequels.
Well, the problem is what's actually I find the difficulty answer is that I basically
would say it.
Everything you've just said, I was going to call him plucky.
I've got to call him the art for dodger character.
I was going to tell you, I was really interested about how warden tries to mold him, except
I was just going to say it all with far more enthusiasm.
It's so funny to that we've read the same book and we've got almost the same points.
We just liked it differently.
This is very hard to come to the stress.
Yeah, I mean, that's the difference, right?
Is that you read this book and you said it's an eight out of 10 and I read this book and
I observed in the same way you did and I said it was a five out of 10.
Oh gosh.
It's like when the I think I think Miss Worn.
Is it Miss Worn?
I'm going to go.
Yeah, I think it's a Miss Worn where like the or just Brandon Sanderson in general,
his detractors and the many people have positives like they bring up the same points.
It's just some like them.
Some don't.
Yeah, exactly.
This is very direct with me.
I like that.
I do not.
There's not a lot you can kind of shake down the middle.
I like seeing this plucky character and I really do enjoy wardens attempts to, you know,
I like the fact that warden to send me a thinks he's doing the right thing.
He's like, I'm, you know, I'm getting this kid ready to face the harsh world.
And it kind of goes wrong in so many ways.
One it's sort of the are you kind of just doing a bit of self corruption and to your
effect that this kid isn't you.
He's not a younger you warden and he has his own feelings, vibes and wants.
What do you think it goes so wrong?
Actually from your perspective, Duncan, I before I answer that question, I was just
scrolling through my Kindle trying to find an example of overly flowery language.
That I was complaining about and I actually found a line which I underscored because I
felt it was deeply ironic where he comes back in and says, and Adolphus says, I'm sorry.
He said simply the fact that he honestly meant it worth more than any attempted eloquence
looking in mirror.
Plansky.
Come on.
I think that's fine.
If anything, because it's from wardens perspective, completely from my, that made this argument
because it's from warner's perspective, does that not just sort of hint at the fact that
warden has a deeper intellectual side that he doesn't let out in any of the way.
What are you talking about?
He warden doesn't let out his intellectual side.
He spins a whole thing waffling in high in high flowery language and like there's bits
in it that like they, he, okay, I'm getting a bit flustered and upset now, but there is
a bit which I find frustrating is that yes, you, Danny Polanski has him be this rough
man of the streets, you know, like a orphan of this disease that's swept through the city,
but he also has him be the protege of like the high wizard who looks after the city and
like has, has tutored him through his adolescence.
So on one hand he is both this rough guy of the streets, but he's also this very adroit
well-educated young man.
I don't have an issue of that per se, it's just that I feel like there's a strong friction
that exists here.
And frankly, it almost, it almost comes across as like a sort of classism because obviously
it's about a detective and detectives are supposed to be clever characters.
That's what's so enjoyable about seeing them put together clues.
I find it frustrating the fact that he feels that he has to make him this adroit character
who's well read, who reads like at one point at later part of the book, a history book
before he goes to bed, you know, like he's Sherlock Holmes, he has a, you know, a bookcase
full of reference materials, but he doesn't want him to just speak in plain language or
just be a, you know, a guy who's from down the street, you know, just a clever working
man.
He has to be adroit and he has to be a scholar and raised by this wise wizard.
That's definitely a bit of a backstory that always kind of jarred with me because we basically
learned that Warden has been a street urchin, a wizard's apprentice, a war vet and almost
basically a war hero at one point.
Also, he was a lead detective in the secret police organization and you are just a bit
like, oh, don't forget Duncan when he was, when he was put into like the secret CIA as
well because he was like in port charge of special operations.
I've basically always thought when reading this book, so we learn a lot about, I believe
it's called Black House, which is the secret operations.
You know, these are the people putting the strings behind not only society, but basically
the government as well.
Yeah.
And I just don't buy it.
So you want to me we learn is in an incident, which is less ambiguous in this book is disgraced
and it's kicked out and there's just a bit of me was like, I get the vibe.
This is the organization that probably would have just killed him.
Yeah, absolutely.
We're not even talking about the CIA.
We're talking about like the SMBP.
This is a secret police.
You don't let that guy retire and then take up residence in like, and like take him take
a section of the criminal underworld.
I'm shaking my head.
It is just a bit silly.
Like, just don't have him be a secret agent.
Just stop one step before that, you know?
I think it would have worked very well if he was just a normal detective.
And then it could just play into like the realization of the corrupt society that he's
operating in.
That's a key point of the story is the fact that he is trying to represent the people
in Lowtown because, you know, the greater mechanisms aren't going to deal with these
murders.
So he's got to step in.
Yeah, absolutely.
Like, a big theme of the story is that, you know, this is a sort of vigilante detective
who has to step up because the police aren't going to do anything.
Do you know what?
I was about to segue into the murder itself, but almost now I'm like, oh, I could segue
into the the world road in the greater plot.
I think we're going to hit the murder itself.
Jordy, this is a murder mystery.
What did you think of it as a murder mystery?
Come on, put that one down.
Did you like the turns, the steps of the investigation and the ultimate reveal?
Like, because I personally thought that this murder mystery was very enjoyable because
although it wasn't something where I could necessarily piece it all together from I see
this, you know, these elements late, the breadcrumbs laid for me in the plot by Daniel Polanski.
And there was definitely an element of I'm going to make a guess based on the type of
story Daniel Polanski is very clearly telling.
I did enjoy going through the motions of this murder mystery.
I enjoyed seeing one body show up.
We meet some people.
We have a conversation which I generally enjoyed a lot of those sort of interview stage bits.
And then another body shows up and it evolves and it had intention builds and builds and
builds.
Um, I don't know.
I'm in two minds.
On one hand, I kind of like a bunch of the twists and turns.
The resolution wasn't what I expected.
I made a mental note that because I was reading again, I was reading on Kindle, I could see
my exact progress for the book.
So at 52%, I made a mental note of exactly what I thought the ending the book was going
to be.
And I got like one and a half things wrong and everything else right.
But unfortunately, those one and a half things were actually quite big.
So yeah, I'd say I definitively got it wrong.
So to lay it out quite plainly, the mystery is that as children are going missing, they
turn up murdered and then, uh, and it seems like at first it's a common, you know, child
molester who's doing this.
But ultimately the twist adds up.
One thing actually I'll say jumping right here, something I really like about this book
and I think it is really effectively is dropping in the different fantasy elements one by one.
When you first start this book, there's absolutely no indication that it's a fancy story at all.
And then like one little thing gets dropped in.
Oh, and then, and just one more thing, and then one more thing, and it drips you through
until like halfway through the book until you have the full, uh, the absolute full picture
of all the different magical stuff.
For example, when he catches the child molester and he's about to pin him down and beat him
up and take him in, a demon shows up and demons have never been mentioned in this book up
till now.
You know, we know there are wizards by this point, not demons.
So when it does show up, it is shocking and it like widens the scope and it does create
this really effective moment of, oh man, how deep does this go?
So kudos there.
That was a really good trick.
Oh, a positive note.
Excellent.
I've said lots of positive things about this book.
We just happened to have spoken about all the crap stuff for a while.
No, and I really like that because I also like the fact that the world building, it
doesn't feel like we're pausing to, it's not like we're taking long pauses.
Let me check, correct myself.
We do pause for world building, but not taking long pauses.
As the murder mystery evolves, we're slowly seeing more and more of this world.
And as Warden goes on his investigation to new places, we then learn more about those
areas, particularly all contained in this city, which by the way, I really enjoy the
fact that, no, so I'm going off, stay on the murder mystery Duncan.
Yeah, we'll come back to that.
I mean, you like that element.
And I thought, I like the fact that because of, you know, a lot of these characters who
are getting murdered, they're not ones that we have a big emotional connection to.
That's you know, it's not something that we meet beforehand and we grow a relation with
and then they die.
But the fact that we're kind of generally, we're seeing the people who are being impacted
and we're getting a sense of this community as a whole.
I still felt incredibly driven to be like, okay, let's find out.
Let's stop this before someone we actually do care about gets hurt.
Yeah, because once you've introduced the fact that like he has a young protege, it's like
pretty obvious where that aspect of the story is going.
Not that that's necessarily a bad thing.
Sometimes seeing a twist coming way in the future is actually a good thing.
Sometimes that creates tension.
And I think that works effectively here with Ren.
You've got a character you kind of like, you see that he's the one who's going to be in
danger later on.
He is in danger.
That's good writing.
Good job.
I'd also say on that point, Jordi, tell me if you disagree, but due to the general tone
of this story, I genuinely wasn't confident if Daniel Polanski was going to kill off Ren
or let him be saved.
Like no, there's enough ambiguity I thought could go either way.
No, disagree.
The only difference is that I thought this is literally the only difference that I...
Okay, I'll lay it out now.
Spoilers ahead.
There are two things that got wrong about the climax.
I predicted most of it straight down the line and said, okay, yes.
The big thing I got wrong was that I thought that the person doing the murders, or at least
the first murder, was Blue Ren, was his mentor.
The reason I thought this is I thought the big twist was going to be that the wards that
had shown up in order to stop the plague in the first place had been accomplished through
the exact same means.
It was demon magic used by human sacrificing children.
And therefore, as the wards were failing now that he was dying, it had to be repeated again.
So the first child that goes is Blue Ren demonstrating how to do this to a cabal of wizards, which
could or might not include Celia.
And the reason why I felt there was a really strong indication this would be the case was
that there was a big note in the story that the children were abducted without force.
And what we learn is that Ren is really good with kids.
So it made sense to me that Blue Ren would be able to lure kids away by using his special
magic flute, which entertains children.
And it would be extra grim and dark if he, the guy who raised two children, turned out
to be a child murderer.
And the reason why he's so upset when he finds out that a second murder has happened is that
he's like, oh no, it's still happening.
It didn't work just once.
And now these wizards I've trained how to recreate the wards are still doing it.
I mean, that is actually a really good theory, Jordy.
And we'll definitely deliver a very different emotional sucker punch if that had turned
out.
Just a little backstory to people who maybe haven't read the book and what Jordy's just
described.
So pre the start of the story, when our main character Warden is a child, there is a plague
that ravages the city and everyone praises Blue Ren, also known as the Crane, who is
a great magician who basically-
Sorry, yeah, Blue Crane, not Ren.
That's my bad.
I'm sorry.
I was thinking like, was that mentioned?
I knew it was the Crane for how the wizard who put up the wards, the Crane, and he saved
the day and then he eventually adopts the orphans of the plague, one being our main
character Warden.
He, Juggie Ford, and Tyne.
Celia, a girl who Warden finds in the ruins of a city and takes to Crane to raise and
she becomes his apprentice.
Yes, it is worth noting that Warden doesn't really have any of that kind of background
magical training, whereas Celia does.
So Warden ultimately leads and pursues his own life of soldiering and CIA-ing and ultimately
a drug dealer mob bossering, as all young kids do.
So that's a good theory.
Ultimately what we get instead is that Celia is the one who's doing it.
This was not the method it was done before, but in sort of a panic that the wards are
failing she's attempting to do any level of magic, a sort of experimentation to find
a way to stop the plague returning.
Yeah, so the difference there is that- and this is the big twist which surprised me is
that Ren- no, Crane found an actual perfect means, but other people cannot replicate it.
And so, Omelas style, the plague can only be kept at bay now through continuous child
sacrifice which is very grim.
I felt like there was going to be a big twist at the end, be like, no, we only need one
more child if we just kill Ren.
Nope.
Yes, yes, Ren, not Crane this time.
I do mean Ren.
Then we'll be able to keep off the plague forever.
And the big challenge at the end would be Warden saying-
What, the last of us?
The last of us, yes.
Again.
Would be him saying, no, I'm not going to let you sacrifice this child because it's
wrong.
I mean, he'd take it back and then he'd be responsible for everything that comes after.
But actually, no, there's no indication that he'd ever stop killing children.
So there really isn't that much- I mean, I guess it's still a quandary, but it would
mean that everyone would just have to be really cool about child murder.
And I don't think there's any real scenario where you'll expect any protagonist to be
like, yep, let it slide.
Keep it going, Celia.
No, I think there's a low level more quandary in the sense that, you know, how many people
died to the plague.
I see this work in a very mathematical weighing up there, but there's no quandary for our
main character Warden, really.
He would have to abandon his whole campaign and just be like, yeah, sure thing.
Yep, I didn't see anything.
I'll just go back to whatever.
So, yeah, the murder mystery is okay.
I like it enough.
You can see where it's coming from a long way off, but again, I say that having got
some really important issues wrong, because the other thing which I got wrong was I thought
that I knew that the blade or beacon field, I knew that he was like not the main bad guy.
And that was something he needed to figure out.
But I was still trying to figure out, but how is he connected?
He must be connected somehow, but it's not obvious why.
And the big twist is he's not connected at all.
It's literally a red herring that he's been deliberately tricked into believing, which
is it is on one hand, it is a good twist because it tricked me.
I didn't see that coming.
On the other hand, it's like, oh, what I can't make it onto a bit of a waste of time, doesn't
it?
I was saying not just because I do enjoy the fact that firstly, he gives a sort of a physical
challenge to warden.
And the fact that he sort of going down this path, we do it is an excuse to explore many
other aspects of the world.
Yeah, but the those aspects of the world aren't important.
If that guy isn't in the story, you know, well, you know, the upper echelons and the
nobles, they aren't important to the story.
If that character isn't in it, it's not like if fair beacon wasn't in the story, and we
didn't have those scenes at his parties.
I'd be like, well, hang on, what are the nobles up to?
I wouldn't care.
And I want to say one more thing, which is that, you know, this is it's this book really
reeks of being written by an American when it's talking about the like the upper crust.
You know what I mean?
Oh, I do know what you mean.
No, I don't know what how do the Americans differ?
Well, it's just the way in which so like, there are I've seen hundreds of British writers
complain about the aristocracy in a way that is of a lived experience, because the main
difference is it's more than just, you know, okay, so, okay, so it's it's that's the that's
the fundamental thing when it comes down to if you're a British person, the main resentment
you'll have against the uppers classes is that they have a lot of money, which probably
shouldn't all belong to them.
Well, it also speaks.
It also speaks to the several other aspects as well, I would find, because often you get
the element of it's not just about wealth.
You can't just be rich enough and be the same as your traditional aristocracy.
There's like there's an other element.
And it's the other thing, which is that things like the sense of tradition and of innate
more importance of greater worthiness is is felt much more from a British perspective,
you know, these are people who genuinely somehow believe they're bulletproof.
You know, they believe there's something special about them that sets them apart from common
people.
But that's not the way Daniel Polanski writes about them.
The way Daniel Polanski writes about them is the way I hear aristocracy spoken about
by Americans all the time, which is that they just focus on the inbreeding, which is not
unique to them, which is not unique to them.
We're not defending inbreeding.
It's just that this is something which I hear Americans talk about all the time, especially
in the context of when they talk about, say, European history.
They really play up the idea of aristocrats or kings and queens marrying their cousins
and stuff, which is definitely true.
That did happen like a bunch.
But it's not the all encompassing thing you guys think it is, you know, it's it's part
of the the sort of the larger context of keeping like the wealth in the family and within certain
circles.
That was part of the hoarding the wealth element.
But I think the the key point I would say, if you're someone from across the pond listening
to this, I think some of the more key points is also is what Georgie said, that kind of
self-importance, because obviously, particularly in Britain, the royal family is closely related
to the church and actual divinity by our national rules.
And the little divine right of kings.
Yes, that took us down to the rest of the aristocracy.
And also, I find we talk about cumulative wealth.
Yes, it can seem unfair that some people come, you know, have a lot more to start with.
They have advantages.
That's how they climb to such heights.
But the thing with the aristocracy is that that I think I personally think is more of
an important factor is that a lot of that wealth was accumulated when literally the
rules were different.
It's like we took it back when we were allowed to just murder and take it.
And now all of a sudden, you can't do that.
That ain't the game anymore.
Exactly.
We won't give it back.
I feel like if Daniel Plancy wanted to give what felt like a more grounded in the world
criticism of grounded in the world criticism of an ability, it wouldn't be just by showing
them going to a bunch of parties and drinking a bunch and being degenerate.
If you really wanted to make fun of them, you would show them having silly traditions.
You would show them like going through this.
It comes close to at one point when they talk about like the boarding school, which domain
which domain villain went to like that.
That's close.
You're almost getting it there.
But if you just talked about them going off on silly hunts where they would dress up in
fancy clothes and doing that and like having big parties where they all just made kind
of fools of themselves, that would be a much more on the nose, close to the skin criticism
and mockery as opposed to just this like caricature that's drawn in this story, which just doesn't
feel like someone who has any actual knowledge or experience of living in a country with
an upper class.
You know, well, that's I've misspoken there because obviously America does have an upper
class.
That's a different thing.
But I would never say it is.
I hear your point.
I think there's been nuance that could have been added.
But personally, I don't think it nearly knocks the plot all that much, mostly because it's
not that relevant to the plot to begin with.
Yeah, I'll say one thing more about I'll say two things more about this section.
One is that I'm annoyed that Daniel Polanski developed and used the idea of a noble who's
an incredibly good duelist and basically uses that to be a serial killer.
Because I had that idea, but I didn't write it down for Daniel Polanski.
So I'm quite annoyed about that.
Such a shame.
So, Jordi, I think we're getting the talks of world building.
I did have two criticisms here, Duncan, and this one is frankly unforgivable, which is
that Fair Beacon's Hunchman, what's his name?
It's also it's Beaconfield.
What I say?
Fair Beacon.
Right.
And yes, this.
All right.
Well, thank you, Duncan, for backing me up because the other guy, his name starts with
fair and it's fair be something.
And that's super confusing.
It's so frustrating and confusing because I'm like, come on, just just just tell me what
his name is.
Because they are impossible to keep straight.
Every time it mentioned one of them, I'd be like, wait, which one are you talking about?
These names are identical.
I've never complained about Sauron.
No, they're not.
One starts with a B, one starts with an F.
It's not that hard.
Fair Beacon and Brightfellow.
To me, these names are identical.
OK, they both start with a B. I'll give you that.
Well, they don't they're alternating F's and B's.
So it's not as close as I made it out to be.
But still, I could never.
It's Beaconfield.
Literally at one point, one of those characters dies and I thought the wizard was dead.
I'm like, OK, now get the nobleman.
But the nobleman was dead.
I just hadn't realized.
Do you have anything nice to say now?
So I think this is good fun to bring up to the wider world building because I actually
think this is quite a nicely put together world.
I'd say so.
Now, obviously one of the main elements in Lowtown is the idea of the classes and the
class divide.
So we just address the fact that there is this upper class that represented as this
debaucherous, rich folk who go to parties and have no cares for the problems of the
little people.
Fine.
We also get the fact, you know, but we also get when we get into Lowtown, the fact that
Lowtown is quite a multi-port of different cultures.
And I thought that was quite interesting.
Look at the fact that the way we're seeing the city is that I found it so kind of multifaceted
without being like going to like full on fantasy.
And since I'm trying to say that there aren't like fancy people, these are all people.
And it's something that I can sort of see.
It gives me very much that sort of 18th century London vibes, which I imagine is what Plandeski
was going for.
Well, I would say he's going for more of an 18th century New York vibe.
But I hear what you're saying.
And I thought this was actually really nicely.
But I felt like I understood who these groups were, where they were standing, what their
opinions and other groups were.
It is a bit of a shame.
I feel like this didn't play into the narrative as much, but I felt the fact that how it got
built through these interactions, for example, Warden doesn't just tell us about these parties
of the rich nobleman.
He gets to go to one whenever we're meeting new sort of groups in Lowtown.
It's not like he just goes down to the bar and Adolphus says, Oh, have you heard they've
come in on a boat this morning?
Like Jordan goes down there, you get to see how they live and then it will have sort of
a frame.
Often in the investigation, he'll have a little vignette.
We'll talk to them and they'll tell what would be about what's going on for them.
And I like that.
I think it adds a lot of flavor to that.
Yeah, like there's a bit where they say that, you know, like an island, like their most
popular trade is working in the Royal Navy.
And you're like, and then you have someone say like, Oh, well, my son's missing and he
will be for the next nine months and he'll be back and he'll be gone for another nine
months.
And that's a nice bit of in text world building.
And I think by kind of giving that kind of ledness to it, it then makes me care more
about this world, because the big threat to this, the sort of existential threat of, you
know, beside the murders is the plague.
So I think to have that actually have an impact or a sense of impact in the story, you need
to have a sense of this community.
I think that was what.
Yeah, totally.
I agree.
And when the story ends and Warden stood there and he's going off the walls are going to
drop the place going to return.
I felt it.
I was like, Oh my God, all these people that we've been interacting with, like this is
going to be devastating.
I'm actually really interested to see how this developed in the next tale.
I definitely agree.
I think that was something that works about this in a way that didn't work in the Gutter's
prayer is that I really do feel for the city and I really do feel like it's a living, breathing
place that has a character of its own.
I will say, I think that is somewhat helped by the fact that rather than creating like
fictional nations, it's just like China and Pacific Islanders and nebulous Africa, you
know?
Yes, that is definitely a part.
And I think also that kind of talks about some of the issues we talked about the very
side of this podcast, that first sort of black mark is to kind of get this through all these
different people, air quotes, efficiently.
We do butt up against archetypes and the vast majority I think stand on the right side of
the line, but I said there's that particular one where we're talking about sort of a standing
for like a Chinese culture where you're just like, oh, no, that went too far.
Yeah, exactly.
And it's not even like, say something like a book, which, you know, obviously I don't
like this for a bunch of reasons, but the Poppy War, you know, in that we get to go
to fantasy China and it gets to play with creating a fantastical sense of China using
a bunch of different ideas.
So you have like in that world, their version of China is divided up into 12 districts,
which are based on the different zodiac.
Okay, so we've taken an aspect of Chinese culture, we've made it a part of the setting.
In this one, it's much more surface level, you know, the dress is similar, you can tell
that he's taking inspiration from depictions of opium dens and something like, say, the
Nick or to go back to it again, Deadwood, where it's like, okay, we're going to have
like a Chinese ghetto, it's involved in crime, and they have these familiar elements in it.
And some of those elements are based on actual like disgusting racism from 19th century and
early 20th century America, and really shouldn't be repeated in 2011.
This is a lack of deafness in the author side, but I think I don't even know, I don't want
to really defend it.
That's how it's only comes across.
It's like, oh, how could you?
But we do move on.
And I don't think it's like a statement piece.
I accidentally ran into a quote I hate.
This is about a flashback to a coming war.
This genuine is the one moment I'm like, Daniel Polanski, what are your politics exactly?
As for me, well, spending your childhood fighting the rats for fresh trash doesn't do much to
inculcate, there's one of those $10 words, inculcate the middle class virtues of nationalism
and xenophobia that make you leap at the thought of killing people you've never seen.
Yes, of course, the famed middle class value of nationalism that definitely never has an
impact on lower class people.
Do you know what, Jody, sometimes when you rewiff into books like this, I then end up
going, gosh, do I need to feel bad for liking this?
I don't.
Listen, that line is so insane out of pocket.
And I'm not like running, I'm not running defense for the middle class here.
You know, Trump is just, at the time of recording this, we're like seven days into the second
Trump term.
It's not just one group of people who's voting for him, you know?
However, like this is just a crazy line.
Like what planet are you living on where you're like, you can just foist the idea, you're
writing a book where everyone in it except for the ultra wealthy is a poor person and
all of them are bigots.
Why would you write this line?
I was going to say, I don't think it lines up with the second book really looks into
this concept of like the war veterans and war veterans associations.
And I don't think it really lines up to the politics as portrayed there.
Oh boy, okay.
Hi, we've gone on video track.
There was a point I wanted to make.
Jody, okay, so at the end of this book, you have that situation with a war drop.
Yes, I'm going all the way back to that moment.
And yeah, it seems really interesting.
Can I tell you something that I really want to get off my chest, which does bother me?
Um, and I think I need to tell you now.
All right.
The plague isn't relevant to the next two books.
No.
Yeah.
What?
Duncan, that's ridiculous.
No, that can't be the case.
That's because that's the only thing.
That's the only thing that makes me think.
Yeah, I got to see how the next book shakes out because the characters made this pivotal
decision to save one life to potentially risk the thousands and thousands of people who
died from the plague.
You're kidding me that the plague isn't coming back.
Nope.
Duncan, I, uh, that's.
Okay.
So this is now a three out of 10, which is not fair.
Obviously I'm joking there because you have to, you should judge a book.
If you haven't read the next book to not know that it goes downhill.
I can't then judge it worse, but that's ridiculous.
That's insane.
It is an incredible thing.
I picked up the next book very quickly.
It's called Tomorrow the Killing and I got into it and I was like, oh, oh, the plague
isn't the focus off the bat.
It's this other mystery to do with like war veteran associations.
Okay, fair.
Maybe it's a slow burn.
Maybe this is like a, like a bit of a wheelspin hook of the plague's building in the background
and it's going to explode onto the scene in the third book.
Also, not the case at all.
It is never a threat to the city.
That's that's genuinely baffling.
I I'm I'm I'm just flummoxed.
I'm truly I can't believe you've told me this because I think it's worth noting.
And so I do tell, I want to tell people because I said, I like this book.
I think it does a lot, right?
It has a lot of fun with what it's doing, but this is one thing with the whole series
where this whole book, what matters in this first book doesn't seem to matter of the trilogy.
And I do think this is worth these highland people.
This trilogy of Lowtown really feels to me like very three distinct stories other than
Warden's relationship with Wren that definitely developed over a whole arc.
It's very three kind of distinct mystery events.
And I'm not going to read in this first book again.
I was once again going, wait, did I just miss it in the second book?
Did I just miss the plague subplot?
And I really can't believe when I read this book how much it definitively sets that up
as like this is what we're all about and then doesn't deliver on it.
And you're right, we shouldn't criticize a book for the sins of the sequel.
Otherwise, Children of Blood and Bone, I tell you now, would be getting slated.
Yeah, well, I mean, it would definitely factor into my recommendation because I was going
to end this episode by saying the one thing that makes me want to read next is it would
be interesting to see how the impact of a plague would impact the story.
But if that's not going to happen, I really lost a lot of faith in what this next book
even should be about.
I'm not necessarily opposed to it just being three completely separate mysteries, though.
That's what's great about detective stories.
That's what's great about Sherlock Holmes and Columbo is that you tune into any adventure.
You don't need to have read the previous one because it's about this mystery.
I would hope that the next story would actually just be about a mystery, though.
That's like you've set the playing cards up in this one.
Just have your fun in the next book.
Just have it be a really solid mystery.
And that's where I need to actually come out.
I've read this whole trilogy and I do think this first book for people picking this up
is the best one of the trilogy.
So to someone like you, Geordie, I think I have to be very honest.
I'm like, if you did not enjoy this book, you don't need to go further.
This is representative.
I like the second book, by the way.
It goes a lot into the background.
We get a lot more war flashbacks with Warden and Adolphus and really expands on their friendship,
to the point of which actually when I was reading this book, there's so many facets
of their friendship which I was surprised aren't in this book.
And I've seen they must all be introduced in the sequel.
I did like Adolphus and Adeline, so yeah, that's good.
I won't be reading that book.
I'm not interested in hearing more about his experiences at war.
I would probably just prefer to read a book that's about that instead of a book where
they're constantly looking back at the past.
So yeah, to be honest, if it's about corrupt veterans associations, just fucking read Jack
Ryan.
All right, Duncan, I've got time for one more complaint.
Lay it upon me and then I'll mount my final defense.
Before I do that, to be nice, I will read a quote which I found funny and I laughed
at.
You have any proof?
None whatsoever, but if you get his name and residence, you'll have a find a memento he
kept.
Maybe a piece of clothing.
You'll probably even find a few of them.
You don't even know his name?
I don't have time for these trivialities, Crispin.
I work in the private sector now.
I thought it was a good line.
I laughed at that.
It's fun.
I have quite a few fun moments and interactions throughout this book.
Yeah, I saw your highlights on Gendel.
One final complaint.
The fight scenes were shit.
I would also have to agree these are not particularly interesting things of combat.
There's not a lot of what I read in combat scene is a lot of thinking, a lot of reaction,
a lot of I'll do this, you do that, or, you know, treating it more like a puzzle and an
interesting application of the environment and our characters abilities.
Yeah.
A lot of the fight scene this I find tend to go down to one guy either gets the jump
or wails on one bloke and then one thing will happen and that other bloke normally warden
stands back up and then wails on the other bloke.
Yeah, for sure.
At the first time it shows up, the like the the first fight scene is just the Hey, did
you know my cool badass hero can beat people up and I'm like, uh huh, cool.
I haven't seen that before.
Just beats up some drug dealers who were on his turf because you know, it's whatever.
Just cringe.
But then the next and just frankly the most offensive one of all is this scene where he's
being chased across various rooftops by by like dudes of swords and this scene actually
starts.
I like the first exchanges.
I like the scene where he like has to jump through a window and after the dudes follow
him he's able to sort of pounce on them.
That all works pretty well until a dude has to like fight him one on one and like there's
no trickery here.
You just got to fight it out and at this point it's just so embarrassing.
You know, the first thing that he does is when he draws his sword, he says I drew my
sword and I held it backhanded and I just was like, don't do that.
That's stupid.
That's a thing you know you see in like video games and schlocky fantasy movies where people
hold swords the wrong way around and you're like that doesn't work.
You're just it's stupid.
It's cringy and then there's a bit where he he like he wins in this fight because he slips
his hand into his pocket and pulls out knuckle dusters and in an exchange he punches the
other guy and I think to myself like why didn't you just punch him normally?
You didn't need knuckle dusters to do that.
If you punched him in the face then he probably would have fallen over just like he did then
except you wouldn't have broken your hand because knuckle dusters are really bad for
you.
The knuckle dusters I let slide personally but the backhand sword every time I see that
I'm lich I have to like hold my own arm out and go wouldn't it be better if I could point
it towards the then.
I just don't.
Yeah exactly it's even a bit like so that the flash of the blade was against my arm
like that's great man except now your knuckles are literally pointing at your enemy and he's
just gonna chop your hand off.
It's like if you wanted to be nice to a person and not use the sword it also means that any
blade work though has to happen close to your body instead of far away.
And the dude had a longer sword as well he was using a saber and there's a bit even where
he says like and then he chopped him with a two-handed swing I'm like a saber's two-handed
I don't think they are why is he putting a second hand?
He's grabbing it round his his original hand.
The most offensive part is the last fight you know he has to fight potentially the best
swordsman in the world and his genius strategy for this is he puts a bomb on the other side
of the wall and he explodes both of them.
It is a high risk high reward strategy.
It's incredible he set up two bombs he's like in case the first one doesn't do a trick
I put a second bomb underneath.
Motherfucker if you thought you could end this with a bomb why did you put yourself
in the same room as him just blow up the room and then walk in.
Sorry yes that hadn't occurred to me or the very least I get the impression it's the
it's the wall that's like to the side of both of them not even the wall behind him.
No exactly the literally thing is he says like obviously I was knocked over too but
I'd been expecting it.
Oh but that's how it works.
Drop and roll.
It's so good I also one more one more trivial thing which is just such a nitpick oh two
more nitpicks um one nitpick is that in that same fight scene when he goes for him he's
he says I try to rabbit punch him in the throat.
Duncan do you know what a rabbit punch means?
Not clear.
A rabbit punch is a punch to the back of the neck you cannot rabbit punch someone in the
throat that's just a punch.
Okay one more one more there's a bit in the story at one point one more one more there's
a bit of a story at one point where he describes a character as having um uh red shot pupils.
Red shot pupils?
Yes.
Does he need to see a doctor I think it's blind.
Yeah you can't have red shot pupils a pupil is like the black bit in the middle of your
eye you have red shot sclerar the stuff the white bits around the iris and pupil.
You also just say red shot eyes like we know what you mean.
Yes exactly exactly and this is where you come down to him having to have just one step
above in this extra special flowery language because any ordinary person would totally
find saying this.
Genuinely.
So are we saying this is one step above the eye of our god?
And tears leaked from his eyeballs and he used the what was it like the pelvis bone
of a rat to punch a guy with and you know and we had the same argument surely because
you're punching without the bone makes any difference.
True oh you're right it is one step above the eye of argon.
Okay I need to um respond to a lot of job G's comments so earlier on I made a comment
about how maybe the character of warden has a certain attitude it's not a sliminess it's
not what cringe what he thinks is cool and I said it quite demurringly talking about
you know that would be a appeal to like a a teenager 14 year old teenager that's what
they think is cool.
Do I really to be honest the only real last offence I have with this is to just admit
something and that's that the 14 year old within me just really enjoyed all of that
crap.
I understand I do deeply I do you know there's a place in the world for trashy entertainment.
And I know you were laughing and like the fight scene she was right it's so stupid and
when he did the sword backhand I was there like oh that's so stupid and then he's like
yeah but the visual is kind of fun isn't it.
I'll tie it back into something that works you know who else does annoying stupid backhand
sword stuff the Witcher the Witcher TV show Geralt does that all the time.
Did I get annoyed when he did it there yes did it look kind of cool yes yes it did look
kind of cool.
I would say there's another book which obviously speaks to a very similar vibe of a noir fantasy
and obviously something that we haven't mentioned throughout this entire episode and that's
the Dresden Files.
Well there's a reason for that Duncan I haven't read one of them.
I have read one of them to be fair only one but I know that book has a massive fan base
and you read the early ones the main character is despicable in the sense that he is a pretty
big misogynist and like that's a massive detracting point but I have heard he gets bad for other
books and you know it has the same level of cringe you're trying to be cool or an off
and a similar argument I would say where it's like you know the author's trying to write
a character that's misogynistic and you know through a lack of finesse comes off a bit
worse overall and I think it's the same way of how Daniel Polanski is dealing with some
of his social issues in this book series and I'm not saying it's good or that you need
to hold it up as fine literature but I know there is other people out there that probably
like similar schlock as I do and it just speaks to just enough fun I like the fact that Polanski
is a cocky shithead because you're right there's a bit of me that does go along on that power
of fantasy and go yeah cool let's outsmart all of them and but then I do like the fact
that he has those sort of self-destructive moments when he goes back to Adolphus as well
I think that builds really nicely.
In this book Jordy I like the bits I always liked I refelt the disappointment over the
ending and knowing it does not go anywhere but ultimately the execution and the worldbuilding
this is something that goes all the way back to I think we spoke about malice ages ago
and I said how I never felt the crackling of the fire or that there was never a scene
where they all sit down and eat dinner that I really you know could taste the food.
In Lowtown I really feel like I could sense the environment I have such a strong idea
in this book like when they're in the tavern when he's drinking his bitter beer when he
has like hard you know eggs in the morning and the yolk isn't very runny and he goes
out on the street and the scents and the smells and the the feel of this city I really got
that after this book and I really drank that in.
I hear you man I do I really do and I think I felt some of that too it's just that I you
know Duncan I haven't done this for a while but for a good period of time when work was
done and I was really tired and I couldn't be bothered to go to the gym I would sit down
on the sofa and I would watch House and what works about House is that it has had this
smart but cruel very sardonic main character he's another like cynical take on Sherlock
Holmes and you watch him sort of be a tool and be pretty insufferable to his co-workers
throughout the whole of the first season.
That's what this book reminded me of because you have this guy being smarter than everyone
else around him and none of them can like talk smack back to him because he's just too
clever what it doesn't remind me of is like season two and three of House because in season
two and three of House the other characters have sort of wised up to him and they are
shit talking him back and it's so much more entertaining when you get to have the genius
character actually have competition that he has to prove that he's so smart and that his
quips are just on point you actually have to have him fight to win and not just be automatically
correct this book wasn't there it wasn't at the point where I felt like the characters
cleverness was earned it never felt like he had actual competition the only times he got
to be wrongs when he was dramatically wrong when the story is set up for him to to just
not get it right take for example the bit where he goes to ask someone for help and
he thinks so little of this guy's capability that he just rules out the possibility that
this dude could ever get him the information he's after and that comes back to bite him
in the ass because that dude actually does provide him information that he needs and
he ignores it because he thinks that he doesn't require his help that was good that was one
of the better scenes in the book strong dramatic irony this book could have been more like
that and if it had I wouldn't be rating this as a five out of ten well I think that's a
nice point to end on I don't think I have anything else to add and I like that you do
highlight that those moments that do hint at that kind of greater depth this book isn't
completely bereft of them there just aren't many I'll say into the sentence there just
aren't many well Jordy I think I haven't I said no more to add when it comes to recommendations
I think it's pretty clear from my standpoint that the type of person who would like this
book is someone who already likes books like this if you are someone who has read like
the Dresden Files this is a golden recommendation and generally if you're someone that feels
like they can buy into a bit more of the cringe and the stereotypicalness of the sort of noir
detective story and likes the sound of having that put in this sort of 18th century New
York that's London world go for it I certainly think you'll get enough good out of this
that you will enjoy it if you're already sort of prepped and interested on a concept
level and like a premise level except you should just read this first book and not accept
you should probably just read this first book it's not serious no I would say listen read
this I recommend to everyone who is in that category read this first book be aware the
sequels do not go with this first book for this set up and in general I would make ask
you maybe to sit down again and ask yourself how much you really enjoyed this first book
before pushing on to the sequels I think if you're if you're at that five hour ten
stage you probably might want to take a step back because I do think the sequels kind of
drop a point we don't normally do points we've talked about them a lot this episode
the sequels do drop like a level for me there's this there are only three ratings for me one
out of ten five out of ten and nine point five out of ten those are the only times I
give scores that's why we do recommendations I think that means so much more than a score
can ever sum up so Jordy what's your recommendation do if you do don't read this book it'll waste
your time I feel heartily disagree so Jordy talking about a book maybe that won't waste
our time this was my pick I'm glad you read it what are you going to answer with where
are you taking us next Duncan we start off this year with a dark brooding take on fairy
tales we followed it up with a dark brooding take on an urban fantasy by turning it into
a noir detective story maybe it's time as we get as the days are getting brighter that
we we start up with a more light-hearted chipper bright story what do you think oh definitely
time for that is that I hear the flutter is Tay Pratchett on the cards are we are we going
full kind of comedy no it's February I hate February it's my least favorite month we're
reading the black company by Glenn sorry I wasn't expecting that set up yes the black
company another series that I have read through and oh my goodness Jordy there is grim dark
and there's the black company the all-father of the genre well I cannot wait yeah yeah
I'm excited I'm really excited to see where this goes because everyone says you know as
they say grandfather of grim dark yeah warhammer 40k wouldn't exist about this I'm excited
I think this is gonna be a dark but fun time that's what I'm expecting and I can promise
you you're gonna get half of that without a doubt so thank you everyone for listening
if you have read the straight to razor cure or have opinions on it and you want to share
if you're on my side or Jordy's or have a third way is yours let us know the best place
as always is our Instagram at this fancy podcast on on Instagram another great place to contact
us is our Gmail is the fantasy podcast at gmail.com love to hear from everyone it really
makes my day even when people just mess with you like hi I just enjoyed that most recent
episode I share with Jordy it makes both our days it just puts a smile on our faces so
please do it's your guys out it's gonna be a great place to see other additional tips
and information and the latest episodes when they are released so do that there also please
I need to take a breath there's a lot it's a long this sort of standard you gotta you
gotta get through all also please leave a review on your podcast listening profile of
choice it's that's the easiest option you just have to hit five stars on Spotify and
it makes us also very happy and maybe more people get to then listen to us so you really
you're just sharing the joy with other people it's charity it's a charity yeah it's basically
charity so how about that yeah it'd be amazing I look forward to seeing you again Duncan in
February to talk about the black company as always I've been your host Duncan Nicol and
I've been your host Jordy Bailey till next time till next time bye bye