# Book Review: Use of Weapons by Iain M Banks



## Coolhand

*Short Version:* Fascinating, funny, dark and smart. But not quite smart enough to get away with it.

*Long Version:*

*HERE BE SPOILERS! ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!*​ 
I should probably start this review with a disclaimer. 
I’m a thicko.
A moron.
A complete numpty.

As a result, I don’t “get” much of what’s classed as genuine Literary fiction at all. You should never let me anywhere near Literary fiction for much the same reasons as you should never let a chimp anywhere near a loaded Kalashnikov: Neither of us know what it’s for, neither of us understand how to make it work and in the unlikely event that we do figure it out, the result will probably be lots of screaming, panic, and tears before bedtime.

So this might explain why although I am going to say some really good things about this book, I’m also going to bitch about it, because as I understand it Iain M Banks’ work is both SF and “Literature,” meaning my opinions should be suspect from the word go. 

Right? Cool.

Use of Weapons is set in Banks’ Culture universe. For those not in the know, the Culture is an ultra advanced, anarchistic and hedonistic civilisation who’s occupants pass the time engaging in orgies, building starships with funny names and generally screwing around with the politics and development of the less civilised worlds. Imagine what Star Trek’s Federation would have been if they’d let Kirk write the founding charter whilst he was smoking a spliff and trying to get a leg-over with Yeoman Rand. Yep, there you go. And if that sounds like a criticism, it isn’t. The Culture is fascinating and I loved reading about the little details of life within its walls. So that’s a good thing.

There’s a nice use of humour as well, both bizarre and dark. We get to meet a vast starship that downloads its mind into a big cuddly teddy bear and wanders around its own corridors asking for hugs. We get to look at a party for rich snobs who use the latest medical tech to cut pieces off themselves and stick them onto other party guests, a scene both eye poppingly perverse and very funny. And there’s a great gag involving a hat, the main character and a drone called Skiffen Amtishaw. 

There is also some pretty nasty, horrific stuff in here, and it comes out of the blue a lot of the time, jarring oddly with the almost whimsical humour and sequences in other areas of the novel. There’s one section towards the end of the book that I actually found so horrible and disturbing I had to put the book down for a bit and wander off to stroke some cats, visit Pretty Starbucks Girl to get a coffee and generally make myself feel happy again. That’s good. Full marks to Banks for getting under my skin like that. That takes serious skill and one sick mind, and I salute both.

So we come to the story…
Errr.
There isn’t one, really. 
It’s probably best viewed as a series of vignettes about the life of one Cheradenine Zakalwe, an operative for Special Circumstance, a kind of Culture Black Ops unit. We get to see him topple or support various regimes for the Culture and raise interesting questions about how much of a force for good that Culture actually is. We get flashbacks of his past revealed and we also get to see him arse about on a beach and think about life, the universe and everything in a manor that’s not as interesting as it seems to think it is. The problem here is that many of the vignettes could actually be cut out of the text and not affect our understanding of the tale or characters one iota, and some of them feel very much like padding or self indulgence on the part of the author. There’s no real driving narrative to this book, no plot or overall story to follow. And in a book with no real plot, things start to become more about the characters, and there’s some cracking ones on display here, right?

Errr, well, sort of...

See, I didn’t find most of the characters in this book that well drawn or deep. They’re by no means terrible cardboard people, but they’re certainly not interesting enough to hang an entire novel on. They’d do just fine in a book with a driving plot, but we don’t have that here, so suddenly they’re required to carry a far heavier load and they’re just not up to it. 

In fact, this brings me on nicely to the second of my major moans about Use of Weapons. The BIG moan. A moan so big that I actually assumed I’d read the book wrong and started a thread in the Iain M Banks part of the forum to ask about it. With the assistance of the helpful chrons denizens, I came to an answer of sorts which I felt explained the issue to my satisfaction. I sat down to read the book again with my renewed understanding.
And realised that the explanation still doesn’t work.

See, there is a surprise at the end of the book, a major twist. But it requires a character to act in a way that totally and utterly inconsistent with their previous behaviour. Nothing we have seen from this character even remotely suggests that they would behave in the manner the twist requires. Nothing. And this isn’t a minor problem, this is the big, pivotal scene that is supposed to snap the whole book into focus and make you think “Ah, so THAT’s what everything I’ve just read was all about. NOW I see, whereas before I was blind.”
But because it’s so inconsistent, so out of character, it just made me pause, blink, re-read think: 
“I read a whole book for THAT?”
The more I think about it the more it annoys me. Nothing in the book shows you how this person got from point A to point B. And because of this, what should be a clever move from the author just comes across as a ludicrous cheat thrown in for cheap shock value. It strikes me as one of those endings that thinks it’s far smarter and more profound than it actually is, which is a shame because it _is_ a clever book, just not quite as clever as it needs to be to pull off this final trick. And as a result, the whole thing pretty much collapses.

So, sparse plotting, inconsistent characterisation, but some great ideas and loads of fantastic individual scenes. Best viewed as an opportunity to explore the Culture, and enjoy some great humour and twisted sickness.

Now, if you’ll excuse me I’m going to sit in my chimp cage, eat a banana, fling some dung and try to work out which end of this Kalashnikov is safe to chew on.


----------



## iansales

Ah, but the whole point is that Zakalwe is _not_ Zakalwe... so he actually acts entirely in character.


----------



## Coolhand

EEEEEKKKK!!! SPOILER!!!!!!!!!! Everyone just scroll past Ian's post quick! 

And, er, scroll past this one as well. I'll white text my reply below to protect anyone who hasn't read the book yet.


The issue I have is that we don't see the journey from what he was to what he is. As Ethiomel he was a monster, but by the time we've met him he's become a remorseful, soulful man who muses about right and wrong, and gets upset by the cruelty and death he sees around him. 

Now, that's like going from being Pol Pot to being Ghandi, and Banks doesn't show us that story arc, just expects us to buy that it happened because he tells us that it did. It's the old trap of telling instead of showing. That's what blew it for me. I went over the book again and again before I posted this review and I just couldn't see where this change becomes believeable.

Mind you, like I said, I am a bit thick when it comes to understanding literary subtlety.


----------



## iansales

It's been a while since I read the book, but I don't recall encountering the problem you're having. Perhaps I should read it again. Sigh. Another book on the mile-high TBR pile...


----------



## Coolhand

iansales said:


> Sigh. Another book on the mile-high TBR pile...


 
Heh heh. Dude, I know the feeling...


----------



## gully_foyle

I totally agree with Coolhand. The book was Banks at his best. The little stories did lend a narrative and structure to the book overall. I love The Culture, it seems like a civilisation founded on dinner parties. But the twist didn't do much for me. I just thought, well what's the point of that? Your correct, there is no link between the man we read about and the man he turns out to be. Also, I may have missed it, but I'm not terribly clear on why The Culture conscripted him as he was dying on the iceberg in his first mission. And for that matter, and please message me if you know the answer to this one, why did Ethemiol kill Darckense in the first place? I know he was kinda pissed at his cousin, but I still don't know why he took such a drastic measure.

On the subject of literariness.... If you have ever seen Madagascar:
*Mason the Chimpanzee*: [_Mason and Phil have just escaped_ _from the zoo_] I hear Tom Wolfe's speaking at Lincoln Center.  
*Mason the Chimpanzee*: [_Phil, a mute, signs frantically_] Well, of course we're going to throw poo at him!


----------



## bobbo19

Just wondering if _I _am the only one who thought The Player of Games is better than Use of Weapons.


----------



## AE35Unit

Interesting. I've only read Consider Phlebas so far but it sounds like Zakalwe is a changer like Horza in that first book?


----------



## The Procrastinator

No, he's not a Changer, but he's an "outsider figure" not unlike Horza in some ways. And rather unlike Horza in other ways. 

I both agree and disagree with your review, Coolhand. I loved all the vignettes etc - I felt they added to the picture of the main character in a very interesting way, structurally speaking. So I don't think they were padding - I loved the way the book was put together. In fact I love the book, its a compelling read and one of Banks' stronger Culture books

But: (text is whited due to spoilers)
I'm with you, Coolhand, I just don't get the character arc. Not only do we not see how Elethiomel became Zakalwe, we don't see why Elethiomel became the Chairmaker. The whole Chairmaker thing is so shockingly extreme. I do like how Zakalwe keeps getting "flashes" - in keeping with trauma, possible mental illness - but its still not really enough for me to feel convinced that the character is both Elethiomel and Zakalwe. It "wowed" me on first reading, but it also jarred, and it has never ceased to jar. It just doesn't scan for me - not quite. I still enjoy the book though.

And, bobbo, I think _Player of Games_ is better too. _Use of Weapons_ is more ambitious in many ways, and I admire a writer who reaches for the stars, even if his reach exceeds his grasp slightly - just the fact that he wrote this book is a big plus, I think. But I do like _Player of Games_ better.


----------



## Allegra

For me it's quite impossible to compare it with _The Player of Games_ or Consider Phlebas. I love them all. May be when I read more I can look back and see more light. 

Re the final twist, I found that even though it seems tricky and illogical, it certainly makes you review the whole book and try to understand the protagonist in a totally different point of view. At least that's what it made me. My thoughts are: 

The key issue of Elethiomel becoming Zakalwe is GUILT. That's why he had this chair-phobia all the time and desperately wanted to see Livueta - to ask for forgiveness; and that's why he tried to do good to redeem his sins. In fact somewhere in the middle Banks gave out a bit of hint (I think it was in some introspective thoughts of the man) which made me suspect Zakalwe was Elethiomel, though ditched the suspicion as quickly as it came. 

I think the ending is a brilliant shot. It gives the whole book a brand new meaning.


----------



## AE35Unit

Ah this business of making  text white doesn't work for me,it just shows as normal text when viewing on my phone!
Not to worry,by the time I get to read the book I'll have read several others and forgotten about any spoilers!


----------



## The Procrastinator

AE, you knew there were spoilers in this thread and yet you couldn't stay away...your mobile phone is an enabler.... MORE SPOILERS BELOW in case you are AE or someone similar.

Allegra, I agree with you about the twist, it certainly works in that sense. It makes you view the whole book from another perspective, its a marvellous twist in fact and just because in my view it doesn't quite scan, doesn't take away from my admiration for Banks in having thought of it and executed it as well as he did. Like I said, this is an ambitious book any way you look at it and it is very well done.

Whited: SPOILERS BELOW
I get all the little hints about the chair etc throughout, those are well done. And I remember reading the bit where the reader begins to suspect Zakalwe is not Zakalwe - also well done. But for Elethiomel to change from a clearly resentful, troubled youth to a full on psychopath - lets face it thats what the Chairmaker is - that is not fully believable to me. I can credit Zakalwe with being Elethiomel as he was painted in all the flashbacks _up to_ the act that made him the Chairmaker, but it doesn't seem consistent to me for either Zakalwe or Elethiomel to be the Chairmaker. Its a leap my brain isn't taking. I've reread the book several times (it is a very good book) looking for the bridges so to speak between the three, and of course Zakalwe is driven by guilt, of course the flashbacks and signs of trauma and derangement are there, but Banks has had to tread a fine line here - he is trying to represent Zakalwe ambiguously so that he seems traumatised by the Chairmaker, while at the same time leave the door open for the twist, that he _is_ the Chairmaker. The thing is, how can anyone be the Chairmaker and still present any kind of normal face to the world? It is the act of a monster, a truly psychopathic thing to do. Zakalwe is not actually a monster, not even a monster in hiding. He is a man driven to extremes, yes, but still he is a man. And Elethiomel doesn't seem like a monster either, nor is it ever explained how he became one. The act is pulled out of a hat and attibuted to this man very cleverly, but not plausibly in my view. I have never been able to find the bridge that leads Elethiomel to become the Chairmaker, and links Zakalwe with having been the Chairmaker. I cannot fathom where in his character this psychopathic, horrendously violent, intimately violent, barbaric act fits. This may just be my own shortcoming as a reader however.


----------



## Allegra

(not for AE, apparently.) 



The Procrastinator said:


> I have never been able to find the bridge that leads Elethiomel to become the Chairmaker, and links Zakalwe with having been the Chairmaker. I cannot fathom where in his character this psychopathic, horrendously violent, intimately violent, barbaric act fits. This may just be my own shortcoming as a reader however.


 
It's not your shortcoming because I didn't find the bridge either - there isn't one, I think... When I came to the horrible chair bit towards the end I also thought I must've missed out something from early flashbacks and went back to check but didn't find any clue about how Elethiomel became a chairmaker. I wonder if Banks left out the links on purpose or simply neglected it. Still a great book. Wish I can re read it soon.


----------



## Allegra

gully_foyle said:


> Also, I may have missed it, but I'm not terribly clear on why The Culture conscripted him as he was dying on the iceberg in his first mission. And for that matter, and please message me if you know the answer to this one, why did Ethemiol kill Darckense in the first place? I know he was kinda pissed at his cousin, but I still don't know why he took such a drastic measure


 
It seems The Culture randomly recruit agents who are in desperate situation, sort of making a deal. In the last chapter of the book _States of War - Prologue_ (another clever touch) Sma paid a visit to a mister something whose legs were amputated above the knees. She made a deal to have him working for the Culture and in return he'd get a pair of shoes that he's going to wear... What made me wonder was how the know-it-all Minds didn't check out the true identity of Zakalwe at the first place, but then obviously there won't be any story!

About whyEthemiol killed Darckense, I think since Zakalwe was so desperately trying to save his sister, Ethemiol just want to - not only p*** him off but destroy him with this 'lethal weapon' - which proved to be successful. They were childhood rivals and it was mentioned his true love was Livueta... etc. Make sense?

Just my 2c.


----------



## Tillane

Allegra said:


> It seems The Culture randomly recruit agents who are in desperate situation, sort of making a deal. In the last chapter of the book _States of War - Prologue_ (another clever touch) Sma paid a visit to a mister something whose legs were amputated above the knees. She made a deal to have him working for the Culture and in return he'd get a pair of shoes that he's going to wear... What made me wonder was how the know-it-all Minds didn't check out the true identity of Zakalwe at the first place, but then obviously there won't be any story!


I kind of agree with this, Ally - however, I'd go further.  *Gets out white pen*
To my mind, there's nothing random about the Culture's recruitment policy.  They deliberately recruit characters like Elethiomel because they know people like him will do whatever is necessary to get a job done.  The Culture, we should remember, are pretty pragmatic about these things.  They believe in redemption for people, even if they've done terrible things - but at the same time they know that these kinds of people are exactly what they're looking for in agents.  If the people they recruit are - like Elethiomel - driven by their guilt to make amends, then all the better.


----------



## Allegra

Hmmm... So the Culture knew from the start that Zakalwe was in fact Elethiomel... Of course... only Sma and the drone didn't know (better for the task)... Gosh that makes so much sense and it all seems more intriguing and interesting... Very insightful analysis of the Culture's nature, Till.


----------



## Tillane

Well...I certainly think Special Circumstances would very closely check out every agent they pick, and they certainly aren't shy about keeping their own operatives out of the loop.  It's a theory, and one I think fits the novel - but I know many will disagree.

I actually did one of my politics essays at uni on the Culture - specifically the Culture as mixture of utopia (for those living within it) and dystopia (for those societies meddled with - accepting the point that the Culture meddles in order to do "good") - and spent an awful lot of time trying to wrap my brain around stuff like that.  It's one of the reasons I've always found *Use of Weapons* a much more satisfying book than _*Player of Games*_: the latter is (IMO) far too preachy, as well as being much more simplistic and written with much more bias toward the Culture's point of view - again, accepting the fact that the society into which Gurgeh inveigles himself is a pretty nasty one.  It's always read to me like Banks on his political soapbox: *Use of Weapons*, for all its faults, has always seemed a more subtle tale better told.


----------



## Allegra

I agree with your comparison of the two books. While I like them both, *Use of Weapons* has more depth, is darker, more complex and thought provoking. I think it's one of the best books I've read.

I'm also fascinated by the Culture's politics, social structure, moral status and 'foreign' policy & strategy such as use of (human) weapons. I found after *Use of Weapons* it's rewarding to read *The State of The Art* in which speculations of Culture's utopia (and dystopia) and the earth's dystopia were expressed quite directly. While I love the Culture and wish to hell to be a denizen of it - I don't mind to be ruled by machines though they (specially the Special Circumstances) can be devious and ruthless but at least they are sane and fair and trying to do good (not to mention I'd love to have a drone like Skaffen-Amtiskaw!), I think Linter's view is not entirely unreasonable: where there is all good and no bad, there is no hope and it's boring! (I so admire Banks' idea of disposing Linter's body into the Sun, poetic and touching).


----------



## Tillane

Allegra said:


> not to mention I'd love to have a drone like Skaffen-Amtiskaw!


 But very definitely _*not*_ Mawhrin-Skel...

What always astonishes me is that _*Use of Weapons*_ was Banks' _*first*_ Culture novel - first novel, in effect - and was apparently infinitely more complex in its initial drafts.  One of those things I'll always thank Ken McLeod for - if not for him, the novel would never have seen the light of day.


----------



## Allegra

Oh no definitely _not_ Mawhrin-Skel! That little nasty...

I didn't know *Use of Weapons* was Banks' first Culture novel. I wonder if I'd think of it any differently had I read it first, perhaps even more impressed? It's really masterfully structured and beautifully written. Apart from the dark, shocking side some passages are poetic and his wry humour is always there. There's something about his voice that just sounds so good to my ears.


----------



## Tillane

It was the first written - Banks apparently had completed drafts of it as far back as 1974 (at which point he was only 26, which I still find kind of depressing) - but was mothballed and only finally published in 1990 after much cajoling and advice from McLeod.


----------



## Allegra

Wow, that's truly amazing because his writing is so sophisticated. May be he's been *genofixed*?


----------



## Tillane

Heh, yeah, that would explain it - especially as my maths was somewhat out on his age.  In '74, he'd actually have been 20!


----------



## Allegra

More antidepressant on demand...

Are you sure it's not '84 or perhaps just before _The Wasp Factory_?  I mean, 26 is incredible as far as talent goes, but 20 is - unbelievable!


----------



## Tillane

He's definitely used the '74 date in interviews, but exactly what was in these early drafts, it's difficult to say. He certainly had lots of problems with the original version (the one he mothballed) and he's joked that you couldn't understand it "without thinking in six dimensions" - but whether this is a reference to its complexity or the fact that it was a mess, I don't know. The Wasp Factory was definitely written in the very early 80s, prior to its publication in 84, and Consider Phlebas was written directly thereafter as I understand.

There's an interview with him here where he mentions the writing of Use of Weapons, along with some general stuff on the Culture and his writing.

I'd certainly prefer to think that it was 84 rather than 74: I'd feel a wee bit less inferior...


----------



## Allegra

Okay now I believe you, and thanks for the link - highly enjoyable especially the last bit!


----------



## Rodders

This was the first Iain M. Banks book that i read. It really is great and a superb ending. Still preferred the Player of Games though.


----------



## bobbo19

*Allegra- I love the Culture and wish to hell to be a denizen of it.*

I'm in the same boat as you it would seem!


----------



## bobbo19

Rodders said:


> This was the first Iain M. Banks book that i read. It really is great and a superb ending. Still preferred the Player of Games though.


 
For me _The Player of Games _was more enjoyable also.I might even go as far to say _Consider Phlebas_ was better than the _Use of Weapons_, but it too close between those too. Maybe it the bias coming in the the first culture novel i read was _Consider Phlebas._


----------



## Coolhand

Tillane said:


> He's definitely used the '74 date in interviews, but exactly what was in these early drafts, it's difficult to say. He certainly had lots of problems with the original version (the one he mothballed) and he's joked that you couldn't understand it "without thinking in six dimensions" - but whether this is a reference to its complexity or the fact that it was a mess, I don't know. The Wasp Factory was definitely written in the very early 80s, prior to its publication in 84, and Consider Phlebas was written directly thereafter as I understand.
> 
> There's an interview with him here where he mentions the writing of Use of Weapons, along with some general stuff on the Culture and his writing.
> 
> I'd certainly prefer to think that it was 84 rather than 74: I'd feel a wee bit less inferior...


Yowsers! I mean I've got my problems with the book but it's still a damn fine piece work, and to find out that he wrote it in 1974...serious talent that man!
I wonder if the original drafts expanded more on the development of the protagonist from what he was to what he is?



bobbo19 said:


> For me _The Player of Games _was more enjoyable also.I might even go as far to say _Consider Phlebas_ was better than the _Use of Weapons_, but it too close between those too. Maybe it the bias coming in the the first culture novel i read was _Consider Phlebas._


Since reading Use of Weapons I’ve read Against a Dark Background (which I really enjoyed. It never quite scaled the awesome heights Use of Weapons hit but it didn’t trip up quite as badly as Use Of Weapons either) and Look to Windward (which I actually found very tedious and didn’t finish.) Player of games seems to have a good rep so I’ll try that one next.


----------



## msticninja

Finally got around to reading this one, so I'm a bit late to the discussion, but I have what I believe to be a new possible explanation. 

Spoiler:
In the beginning, Contact recruits "Zakalwe" in a near-death state in the middle of nowhere. I submit that Elithiomel was captured somehow after General Zakalwe's suicide, either by rogue agents, or by losing the war, despite winning against Zakalwe. The captors beat, shot, etc. Elithiomel and left him for dead in the afore-mentioned middle of nowhere. The injuries cause amnesia, and during his recovery, his subconcious reverts to a younger self(known to happen to amnesia victims) and, horrified by the memories that start to seep in (specifically of him becoming the Chairmaker), his subconcious attaches his identity to a well known person from their reverted memory, such as his cousin, young Zakalwe(also known to happen to amnesia victims). Then all it would take for the story to make sense is Liveuta never telling him the truth, that he isn't Zakalwe. Watch Pandorum for a close parallel. Very good movie. Except I just Spoilered it. Sorry.

Please let me know what you think.


----------



## J-WO

Nice idea, but personally I don't need it to explain Elitihiomel's behaviour. As the whole book hints, his ability to make anything a weapon far outstrips his morality. He does what he does with the the chair because he's the ultimate tactician and doing so will allow him to win. Only after does he realise its something he'll always have to live with.


Welcome to the site, BTW!


----------

