Book Review: Use of Weapons by Iain M Banks

[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]

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]

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?

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!