Glen Cook's The Black Company Discussion

[Nerds_feather]

I want to share something my friend Jemmy wrote and use it as a springboard for discussion of Glen Cook and his contribution to fantasy fiction.

Gritty or "grimdark" fantasy is arguably the genre's center of gravity at the moment. George R. R. Martin, Stephen Erickson, Joe Abercrombie, KJ Parker are among the many writers who have been associated with the turn away from Tolkeinic tropes and good/evil dichotomies towards a "dark realism" of human violence and grayscale morality.

Now I've been critical of some aspects or manifestations of the gritty turn in fantasy, and remain so, but nevertheless feel that, when done well, it can be highly exciting and thought-provoking. And Glen Cook's Black Company novels are just about the best gritty fantasy I've ever read. In Jemmy's words:

The Black Company is gritty fantasy at its grittiest. But there is no hint of grimdark for shock value; it is grimdark done right in every respect. The world, granted, is extraordinarily violent, with much of the northern continent is embroiled in a violent uprising pitting the forces of "good" (epitomized by the League of the White Rose) against the forces of "evil." But the reader soon learns that most who support the League of the White Rose are no less prone to violence, murder, and sacrifice in the name of their broader cause. But this violence is no mere splatterporn. Instead, it is the violence of Homer or the Eddas, where the deaths, the struggles, the burnings, beheadings, and overwhelming brutality are lenses through which the author explores the issues of morality, virtue, and duty in human nature. And it is this violence that convinces Croaker, the Black Company's physician and Annalist, that there is no good or evil in the world. There is only power: those who have it versus those who do not.

This focus on power subverts a major trope among fantasy authors, many of whom remained wedded to overarching battles between light and darkness. And it allows for the author to explore a more complicated morality that has become commonplace in modern-day dark fantasy. For the 1980s, however this was revolutionary.

I have more extensive thoughts of my own, but I'll reserve those for later in the discussion. So...have you read The Black Company? If so, what did you think?

 

[thaddeus6th]

I have. I quite liked it, but the sequel (Shadows Linger, I think) was much better. Marron Shed's [sp] character development was fantastic (although I've probably got his name wrong).

 

[Brian G Turner]

I think the entire argument against "grimdark" is simply that - traditionally - there has been a clear delineation of who is "good" and who is "bad".

Therefore "good" characters can massacre who they like, but that's fine, because they are "good", whereas "bad" characters cannot massacre who they like, because that is "bad".

What we have more recently is a moral relativism, where character violence cannot be presumed to be "for good" or "for evil", but instead judged on its own context.

At least Joe Abercrombie has barely touched sexual violence which otherwise seems perfectly respectable in traditional fantasy.

As for Glen Cook - the violence of Homer? That statement needs supporting. But, indeed, Cook does apply moral relativism. If anything, I found Glen Cook to be much closer to German military writer, Sven Hassel, whose series about a penal company of soldiers was very popular in the 70's and 80's. TBH, when I read Cook, I thought I was simply reading a fantasy version of Hassel.

 

[Nerds_feather]

I think the entire argument against "grimdark" is simply that - traditionally - there has been a clear delineation of who is "good" and who is "bad".

Therefore "good" characters can massacre who they like, but that's fine, because they are "good", whereas "bad" characters cannot massacre who they like, because that is "bad".

What we have more recently is a moral relativism, where character violence cannot be presumed to be "for good" or "for evil", but instead judged on its own context.

I think that's a bit reductionist, Brian. Sure some people come at it from that direction, but more present limited and situational critiques. Like specifically criticizing manifestations of misogyny and depictions of sexual violence against women (a la Liz Bourke or Foz Meadows). Or coming at it the way I did many months back, and criticizing the cheap iterations of grimdark, while maintaining that it can be (and has been) done right.

To put it another way, a lot of people are fine with there not being clear delineations of good and bad, perhaps even preferring it that way, but nevertheless have issues certain trends within the (sub) genre.

To me, Glen Cook is the epitome of "grimdark done right." It's very well-written, tightly focused on characters, morally relativistic in an intriguing way, isn't excessive in the ways some other books can be, includes interesting meditations on power and is actually quite funny too. And he was doing this in the 1980s, years before Martin, Erickson, Abercrombie or any of the others popularized the style.

But beneath the veneer of fantasy, The Black Company books are really about Vietnam and Cook's experiences there. This is what separates these books from the glut of fantasy in my mind. As unreal as the setting can be (it's positively drowning in magic), they have a certain, undeniable authenticity and immediacy to them. And I think if you compare Cook to someone like Tim O'Brien, the parallels are striking.

 

[Brian G Turner]

But beneath the veneer of fantasy, The Black Company books are really about Vietnam and Cook's experiences there.

Ah - now that's probably why he reminded me of Hassel.

 

[Mark_Lawrence]

To me the 'shock value' critique is an empty-headed one and I can pretty much see the lips moving to 'will no one think of the children?' every time it's tossed into play.

Shock value is an accusation levelled when the people involved are shocked and unable to see past that. This seems unlikely to be the aim of any writer hoping to tell a story. Shock value is the cry that goes up whenever the particular sacred cow of any given person is butchered. The trouble is that the cows you choose to be sacred and the lines in the sand you draw, are not necessarily those of the next woman or man.

 

[Nerds_feather]

To me the 'shock value' critique is an empty-headed one and I can pretty much see the lips moving to 'will no one think of the children?' every time it's tossed into play.

Shock value is an accusation levelled when the people involved are shocked and unable to see past that. This seems unlikely to be the aim of any writer hoping to tell a story. Shock value is the cry that goes up whenever the particular sacred cow of any given person is butchered. The trouble is that the cows you choose to be sacred and the lines in the sand you draw, are not necessarily those of the next woman or man.

Since this is a thread on Glen Cook and The Black Company, and not a general thread on gritty fantasy, could you please try relate these comments to the works in question?

More generally, have you read The Black Company? If not, I definitely recommend it. It's both very good (and well-written) and very important for the history of the genre. It's certainly gritty, and I think the term "grimdark" is quite apt in this case, since the darkness has a sort of Lovecraftian absurdity about it. But this is deployed in a clever manner--the books manage to be both dead serious and quite funny at the same time.

 

[Nerds_feather]

Ah - now that's probably why he reminded me of Hassel.

I haven't read Hassel, but I've read a lot of war memoirs and fiction, and you can certainly see that in The Black Company. One of the things I feel like it captures well is the "boredom punctuated by rapidly escalating moments of fear and tension" that Sebastien Junger describes in Restrepo (about Afghanistan). It also captures the surreality of a soldier's experiences that authors like Tim O'Brien and others explore in mimetic fiction, and someone like Lucius Sheppard has written about in SF.

I also liked the fact that Cook isn't heavy-handed in how he relates the stories to Vietnam. The connections are there for the reader to draw, but they aren't so obvious unless you are attuned to them.

 

[Mark_Lawrence]

Since this is a thread on Glen Cook and The Black Company, and not a general thread on gritty fantasy, could you please try relate these comments to the works in question?

You're trying to tell me how I should post?

a) no
b) you opened the very first post with a discussion of the alleged sub genre
c) no
d) just no

More generally, have you read The Black Company?

More generally it hasn't seemed a requirement for you to have read a book in order to roundly condemn it in the past. I doubt that I need to have read a book to hold an opinion on the discussion of the nature of books in the sub genre it supposedly belongs to.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Mark, I think Nerds Feather has written quite a lot on books he's read, and he's engaging us on that.

Also, let's try and keep focused on discussion of topics, as opposed to posters, thanks.

 

[Mark_Lawrence]

Mark, I think Nerds Feather has written quite a lot on books he's read, and he's engaging us on that.

Also, let's try and keep focused on discussion of topics, as opposed to posters, thanks.

My comment was entirely on the topic. My response to somebody responding to my comment with a bizarre off-topic attempt to control what I talked about was to say that that someone should practice what they preach. And also not preach. At least not to me.

 

[Nerds_feather]

Mark, I think Nerds Feather has written quite a lot on books he's read, and he's engaging us on that.

Also, let's try and keep focused on discussion of topics, as opposed to posters, thanks.

Thank you, Brian. I guess I should be flattered that a published author with a good deal of critical acclaim and a large fanbase cares so much about a blog piece I wrote almost a year ago. But I'd argue that I'm probably not deserving of all this attention. Besides, I posted this in the hopes that it might stimulate discussion of The Black Company--certainly placing this within larger debates, but still tethered to the work in question.

So in all seriousness...Mark, let me start off by saying that I highly recommend The Black Company. It's a very well-written, character-driven piece of war fiction and gritty fantasy that was and remains ahead of its time. Happy to discuss it further here.

Also, while you are here, allow me to go off-topic for a second to tell you that I thought very highly of your essay on writing about disabilities and special needs in SF/F. It was well-considered and thought-provoking.

Finally, I'm happy to talk about anything non-Black Company-related privately, if you like. Send me a PM anytime.

 

[Nerds_feather]

I have. I quite liked it, but the sequel (Shadows Linger, I think) was much better. Marron Shed's [sp] character development was fantastic (although I've probably got his name wrong).

I loved Shadows Linger, but actually prefer the first one! Of course all the books are great.

 

[AndrewT]

I loved Shadows Linger, but actually prefer the first one! Of course all the books are great.

Glad you started the topic despite a few flames because I have all the Cook books in omnibus form which I got free. I had heard negative things up to this point so I was about to sell them to a used store or donate to the book bus that comes around. Now maybe I will try them instead. How does he compare with Gemmell whom I have just started into recently? I am guessing Gemmell has less moral relativism but is still quite good.

 

[Nerds_feather]

Glad you started the topic despite a few flames because I have all the Cook books in omnibus form which I got free. I had heard negative things up to this point so I was about to sell them to a used store or donate to the book bus that comes around. Now maybe I will try them instead. How does he compare with Gemmell whom I have just started into recently? I am guessing Gemmell has less moral relativism but is still quite good.

Thanks for starting the thread back up again, and I'm glad there's still interest in Cook--I think he is criminally overlooked in discussions of modern fantasy.

Curious...what negative things had you heard about Cook?

My reason for not reading these until late in the game was an assumption on my part that they'd seem primitive in comparison to similar stuff being published today, like Joe Abercrombie or Steven Erickson. But that's not the case at all--the books could easily have been written yesterday and wouldn't seem dated at all. That said, though there is a lot of common ground (and an undeniable influence, whether direct or indirect), reading Cook is a very different experience--like I mentioned, Cook was in Vietnam, in that experience permeates everything about his fantasy novels.

I'd say the same about reading Cook vs. Gemmell. There's a good deal of common ground, but Cook's writing feels more, well, modern I guess. Gemmell to me is still more closely tethered to traditional notions of heroism, and a sort of "military-historian" eye for warfare. Cook dispenses with the very notion of heroism, and is more attuned to the soldiers' perspectives and experiences than to the actual battles and wars they are fighting. Does that make sense or am I rambling?

 

[Matt Rabbit]

Has anyone read Jonathan Strahan's - Swords And Dark Magic? Apparently it's a collection of books and Cook has short stories that will become the last 2 Black Company books in it... Curious how they are.