And she writes much better than J.K. Rowling... Yes, but most people do . . .
Ha! Now, I was being too polite to add that...
Yes, the thing that brought Boudica to mind was indeed your stated preference for characters who are morally ambiguous and "fucked in the head". Which is just the best description I can imagine for the way one of the characters develops - but greythistle reminds me that this occurs through the second and third volumes, so unless you are enjoying the books anyway, gratification may be deferred beyond what is acceptable.
What I like best about the books? I think it's that they are fantasy that feels like historical fiction : she has clearly gone to some trouble to write consistently with the historical facts, in as far as they are known, but within that space she has constructed a society which is almost entirely imagined. I also enjoy the sort of mad intensity with which she writes, so that everything is just that bit heightened.
no subject
Yes, but most people do . . .
Ha! Now, I was being too polite to add that...
Yes, the thing that brought Boudica to mind was indeed your stated preference for characters who are morally ambiguous and "fucked in the head". Which is just the best description I can imagine for the way one of the characters develops - but
What I like best about the books? I think it's that they are fantasy that feels like historical fiction : she has clearly gone to some trouble to write consistently with the historical facts, in as far as they are known, but within that space she has constructed a society which is almost entirely imagined. I also enjoy the sort of mad intensity with which she writes, so that everything is just that bit heightened.