Transformation by Carol Berg

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

I have rather broad question.

In an interview, Carol Berg listed the elements she keeps in mind while writing a story. One of these was: 'an initial setting that feels like it could have been a part of our world at some time'.

I'd never really though of this aspect of fantasy writing very much - somehow it seems to bring fantasy closer to sf, in my mind, since what she is suggesting is that she views her fantasy worlds as possible extrapolations of our own. Is this a fair comment? Also, why is this important to her - since it is fantasy, why bother about such things?

You could re-phrase this if you like, her point struck me as intriguing and I thought it would be interesting to know more.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I would certainly like to ask about what advice she would give for aspiring novelists - if any.

 

[dwndrgn]

Back to our regularly scheduled discussion, after a pleasant interlude with the author .

LittleMiss - you brought up the 'seeing through impure people' concept that the Ezzarians use to keep themselves uncorrupted from those impure people. That didn't sound right, but you know what I mean (and this is why I don't write ).

I find it interesting that the children were so involved in this. I've found that children of many cultures (well, those that I have come into contact with) have a curiosity bump larger than their 'obey your parents' restrictions. Which means that no matter what adults say, children will try to satisfy their curiosity - this is how they learn. That said, I find that even should children be admonished to not 'see' people, they will have an overriding curiosity to find out why they aren't supposed to see these people and will attempt to get around the restrictions. Which means that I found it odd that not one person, adult or child attempted to 'see' Seyonne, including those he rescued from Aleksander in his animal form.

It also reminds me of religious eating restrictions here in our own world that I find to be curious. I'm not at all knowledgeable about such restrictions, and this is not the comparative-religions forums so perhaps we won't go there.

Any thoughts?

 

[Marianne]

The only thought I had on this was that the author was trying to show the extreme discipline of these people, even the children. It seems that the magic system the author employs requires many years of study, hard work and discipline. It would have to start at a young age.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

I just finished the book last night, so I'll jump in with my impressions.

What struck me is that the author has worked within the conventions of the epic fantasy genre - a middle-ages civilization, a feudalistic society, a battle against forces of ultimate evil - to deliver a striking and fresh story.

This is a novel of transformations indeed - from the transformation of Seyonne and Aleksander's realtionship from one of master and slave to trusted adviser and prince to the sort of transcendant partnership they eventually achieve, as well as the ways in which they transform each other.

There are more literal transformations to underscore this motif - Seyonne's transformation into a winged warrior in his battles within a posessed soul and Aleksander's transformation into a ravening beast under the influence of the devils spell.

The uncompromising realism (within a fantasy setting of course) of much of the novel scored high points with me. The depiction of a slave's life was unromanticised and convincing. The final face-off between the Two-Souled Warrior and the demon was a truly satisfying climactic moment.

OK, now come my cribs.

In the end, although Seyonne is freed, Aleksander is transformed into the better man he can be and Seyonne's people are made safe, there is no attempt to redress the overall problem of slavery. It seems as if that really doesn't matter now that our hero at least is no longer a slave. That did not sit well with me. Carol Berg missed out on the opportunity to balance the magical and personal transformations of the novel with a societal transformation, which would have been a natural development considering the veracity with which the autor portrayed the experience of being a slave.

I also agree with littlemiss' point that the villains seemed very one-dimensional in their evil. Similarly, Rhys' (sp?) various about-turns, especially the last, left me a bit unconvinced.

Well, that's my first-cut assessment. Overall, a very good tale with many interesting elements to it, but I think it stopped just short of really transcending generic limitations. Definitely a series I will follow up on, though. And you may know by now how hard it is to get me into a multi-volume series!!!

 

[littlemissattitude]

dwndrgn...I assumed as I was reading that the inability (refusal?) in the Ezzarian culture to see someone who has been deemed "impure" was probably so ingrained in the culture that it was taught almost subliminally from the time a child was born. It seems, after all, to be one of the key tenets of the culture. But, yes, I think you're probably right that it seems a bit unusual that the kids wouldn't be more prone to see someone who is supposed to be invisible.


knivesout...I didn't really pick up on the idea that nothing had been done about slavery in Aleksander's culture. I haven't read the sequels yet, so that may be addressed there. I'll have to think about this issue a bit more.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

Well, one of the reasons I want to read the rest of the trilogy is to see if that aspect is resolved somehow.

One day I want to read (or failing that, write) about a proper Worker's Revolt in a fantasy society! Tolkien in Red?!

 

[dwndrgn]

I don't see the slavery issue as a drawback. Nobody believes that slavery can be extinguished overnight and it would have seemed very false had she done something like this. Slavery is very complex in that it can effect many sectors of society and can be hard to weed out. It felt to me that it was an underlying theme - something that will continue to pop up and may eventually be resolved, but maybe not. Fixing the wrongs in the world doesn't happen with a snap of the fingers and I would have been very disappointed if she had done something like that. The fact that certain elements of the Derzhi society don't accept the practice hints to me that it may be on its way out naturally without intervention from Aleksander.

I was also impressed with the character (who's name completely escapes me at the moment) of Aleksander's fiance. Not only is she a strong woman, but feminine as well - sometimes author's can do one but not both at the same time. Judging by her personality, we haven't seen (or heard) the last of her yet.

Rhys' final actions bothered me a little as well, although it bothered me more after the second reading and that may be that I paid more attention to the secondary characters that time. It didn't seem to fit in with how he had been characterized.

 

[littlemissattitude]

One day I want to read (or failing that, write) about a proper Worker's Revolt in a fantasy society! Tolkien in Red?!

Well, that's your assignment then, knivesout. Actually, that might make quite an interesting story.

I was also impressed with the character (who's name completely escapes me at the moment) of Aleksander's fiance. Not only is she a strong woman, but feminine as well - sometimes author's can do one but not both at the same time. Judging by her personality, we haven't seen (or heard) the last of her yet.

Yes, as I mentioned, I really liked Lydia as a character and was a bit disappointed that she did not appear more. One would hope that she does figure more in the sequels - although, from the descrption I read of it on Barnes & Noble, it sounds like the second book deals much more with Seyonne than Aleksander. Have to see about that when I can get hold of those books.

Also, dwndrgn, I agree with your assessment of the handling of the slavery issue. The fact that there are those within the society (and fairly highly placed, seemingly) who don't hold slaves indicates that there is at least some sort of dialogue about it within the society that might be leading in the direction of abolition.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

Nevertheless, I am surprised that there was no overt dialogue about the slavery issue. I wasn't expecting an overnight resolution, but, I was surprised that even Seyonne did not seem to consider that findng a way to end slavery ought to be on his mind.
It was as if, having been a faithful retainer to his fuedal lord, and being granted freedom for himself and his people, all wrongs were righted. Perhaps I am more bothered about this other readers. I certainly did not get the sense that enough sections of Derzhi society were against it. When the ruling family itself endorses the practise, it would be hard to stop the practise.

On the other hand, Lydia may well be the key to resolving this conundrum. So I'll have to agree that I, too, look forward to her role in the remaining books.

I suppose that I am reading a book about people - specifically about Seyonne and Aleksander - as a book about a society, perhaps that is why I'm getting a bit stuck on this point?

 

[littlemissattitude]

Actually, knivesout, in one way, the fact that - as you say - Seyonne was satisfied with his and his own peoples' freedom, but didn't seem to worried about anyone else is fairly true to life. I live in an area where there are many people of Armenian descent. They are, rightfully I think, very concerned that the Armenian genocide by the Turks be recognized as a historical fact (something that the United States has never done, by the way). However, most of the Armenians I know aren't very concerned at all about getting recognition for the Cambodian genocide of the 1970s (I believe I've got the right decade). This isn't just a guess on my part; I've actually discussed this with some of my Armenian friends. What other people have suffered just isn't as important to them as what their own people have suffered. This is just one of many examples I might cite. I was just reading, for example, the other day about the fact that some Polish Christians who were victimized by the Nazis get very upset that they don't get as much worldwide recognition for their suffering as the Jewish victims of the Holocaust do. It is a strange phenomenon, and a sensitive one to discuss, but one I have noticed again and again.

Knowing this tendency of humans to value their own group more than those in other groups who have sufferend similar oppression may be, I suppose, one of the reasons why the lack of resolution for the slavery issue in "Transformation" didn't bother me that much as a plot point. I don't know. I'm willing to be convinced that this isn't what is at play here. It is really the only explanation I can think of to it, if it isn't indeed resolved in the following novels.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

I do agree with your points about human nature , littlemiss.

I suppose this is more a reflection of my own mindset and what I look for in a novel than anything else - I'm drawn to writers who explore different kinds of societies and particularly the transformation process in these set-ups (Cordwainer Smith and Ursula Le Guin are two examples of this sort of thing) and I suppose I was dissapointed that a novel called 'Transformation' did not carry an element of social transformation as well. I don't mean that I wanted a happy ending with freedom and liberty for all, but some aspect of setting in motion a larger process of social change. Still, those are MY concerns, not the author's and it is perhaps unfair for me to critique the book on this count?

Interesting. This discussion has shown me that I seem to care more about overall currents and directions than individual characters and their fates. Maybe I should spend more time reading history books!!!

 

[Brian G Turner]

Just moving this to the General Book Discussion board.