Entry tags:
January Meme: Concerning Fannishness in Rivers of London
I promised ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
falena a Rivers of London meta, but I wanted to read Lies Sleeping, the latest novel, first, and I didn’t have the chance until now. Btw: the novel very much has a series or season finale feeling, wrapping up several storylines – prominently the Faceless Man and why Lesley did what she did -, and as such is pretty action-packed. It also provides background on one of the earliest villains of the saga, uses London architecture as well as ever and Peter Grant remains one of the most likeable suburban fantasy protagonists around. In conclusion: I liked it very much.
However, the reveal of the Faceless Man’s masterplan also got me thinking about something that nipped at me in the previous novel, The Hanging Tree, where we find out the Faceless Man’s identity as well. To wit: one of the several qualities which make Peter so likeable is that he’s an unabashed geek and fanboy, throwing out the references quick and fast. Asandraste recently pointed out re: Murderbot novels, this seems to become an increasing thing in fantays and sci fi – the fellow fan protagonist. Otoh, it’s worth pointing out that the Faceless Man is as big a fan, especially heavy with the Tolkien references, and his ultimate master plan is very much a fanboy thing (the most fanboy thing in an ongoing popular series since the Trio were the main antagonists in Buffy‘s sixth season), and so I wonder whether Aaronovich, while continuing the fannish love declarations via Peter, also pulls off a critique of (part of) fandom, some trope setters and indeed current day Britain alike.
To wit: What Martin Chorley (aka the Faceless Man) wants to do, and what caused Lesley to go darkside beyond wanting her face back, is a two-fold plan: kill Mr. Punch, the first novel’s main villain who possessed her, nearly killed her and ruined her face, and using the mystical energy released by said death (which, since Punch counts as a 2000 years old deity, is a lot) to engineer a reality in which not Arthur but Merlin comes back. That, as Peter points out, there likely never was an Arthur or a Merlin is besides the point for Chorley since the goal is to create a new reality in which they could exist and have done.
Now, Aaronovich, who used Arthurian lore for his most famous Seventh Doctor era story, is presumably as fond of those tales as he’s of Tolkien, but it’s not too much of a speculation on my part to assume he’s also keenly aware of the deeply conservative, retro nature of the tropes they trigger – achieving the ideal of a world/Britain that never was by the refusal to acknowledge reality and risking reality to go haywire in the pursuit o fit (since no one really knows what would happen if Punch is killed but most characters seem convinced there wouldn’t be much of London left, for starters) has some obvious contemporary parallels. Otoh, it’s hard to say Lesley is entirely wrong when she tells Peter „This world is shit“. (Mind you, Lies Sleeping takes place several years pre Brexit and Trump; early on, we get a reference to the First Lady visiting a London school in a mainly Muslim area and before I could do „Melania does what?“ Peter continues, re: who gets to be on the police detail fort hat, „and that’s why Guleed has a selfie with Michelle Obama and I don’t“. Upon which yours truly goes „right, much less time passes within the novels than it did in rl between book publications“.)
Rivers of London is a series justly praised for its diversity of characters both in terms of ethnicity and religion, but while it uses its history – the backstory of Mr. Punch in the last volume goes back to Roman Britain and Boudicca’s rebellion and sacking of Londinium, for example -, one thing it pointedly avoids doing is making its central protagonist any type of Chosen One or Rightful Heir supposed to fulfill a prophecy or several. Chorley, who is enough of a Tolkien geek to be fluent in Quenya and Sindarin, sign his bombs with dwarfish runes, provide his captive with The Silmarillion to read and loves (his idea of) the Middle Ages, otoh, definitely is into that entire storyline. And his idea of how a reality-shifted Britain should be like conforms to it. Now, Chorley is the undeniable villain of the novel, but imo it’s clever and honest of Aaronvich to make Lesley, who is a character both the narrative and our narrator still have sympathy for, fall for the idea as well. Because yes, reality can be truly awful, and in need of change. It’s just that when the change isn’t achieved via honesty, collaboration and trying to work with what exists but by deception, promises of something that never existed and looking strictly back, not forward, that the fannishness for it becomes poisonous.
The other days
falena a Rivers of London meta, but I wanted to read Lies Sleeping, the latest novel, first, and I didn’t have the chance until now. Btw: the novel very much has a series or season finale feeling, wrapping up several storylines – prominently the Faceless Man and why Lesley did what she did -, and as such is pretty action-packed. It also provides background on one of the earliest villains of the saga, uses London architecture as well as ever and Peter Grant remains one of the most likeable suburban fantasy protagonists around. In conclusion: I liked it very much. However, the reveal of the Faceless Man’s masterplan also got me thinking about something that nipped at me in the previous novel, The Hanging Tree, where we find out the Faceless Man’s identity as well. To wit: one of the several qualities which make Peter so likeable is that he’s an unabashed geek and fanboy, throwing out the references quick and fast. As
andraste recently pointed out re: Murderbot novels, this seems to become an increasing thing in fantays and sci fi – the fellow fan protagonist. Otoh, it’s worth pointing out that the Faceless Man is as big a fan, especially heavy with the Tolkien references, and his ultimate master plan is very much a fanboy thing (the most fanboy thing in an ongoing popular series since the Trio were the main antagonists in Buffy‘s sixth season), and so I wonder whether Aaronovich, while continuing the fannish love declarations via Peter, also pulls off a critique of (part of) fandom, some trope setters and indeed current day Britain alike. To wit: What Martin Chorley (aka the Faceless Man) wants to do, and what caused Lesley to go darkside beyond wanting her face back, is a two-fold plan: kill Mr. Punch, the first novel’s main villain who possessed her, nearly killed her and ruined her face, and using the mystical energy released by said death (which, since Punch counts as a 2000 years old deity, is a lot) to engineer a reality in which not Arthur but Merlin comes back. That, as Peter points out, there likely never was an Arthur or a Merlin is besides the point for Chorley since the goal is to create a new reality in which they could exist and have done.
Now, Aaronovich, who used Arthurian lore for his most famous Seventh Doctor era story, is presumably as fond of those tales as he’s of Tolkien, but it’s not too much of a speculation on my part to assume he’s also keenly aware of the deeply conservative, retro nature of the tropes they trigger – achieving the ideal of a world/Britain that never was by the refusal to acknowledge reality and risking reality to go haywire in the pursuit o fit (since no one really knows what would happen if Punch is killed but most characters seem convinced there wouldn’t be much of London left, for starters) has some obvious contemporary parallels. Otoh, it’s hard to say Lesley is entirely wrong when she tells Peter „This world is shit“. (Mind you, Lies Sleeping takes place several years pre Brexit and Trump; early on, we get a reference to the First Lady visiting a London school in a mainly Muslim area and before I could do „Melania does what?“ Peter continues, re: who gets to be on the police detail fort hat, „and that’s why Guleed has a selfie with Michelle Obama and I don’t“. Upon which yours truly goes „right, much less time passes within the novels than it did in rl between book publications“.)
Rivers of London is a series justly praised for its diversity of characters both in terms of ethnicity and religion, but while it uses its history – the backstory of Mr. Punch in the last volume goes back to Roman Britain and Boudicca’s rebellion and sacking of Londinium, for example -, one thing it pointedly avoids doing is making its central protagonist any type of Chosen One or Rightful Heir supposed to fulfill a prophecy or several. Chorley, who is enough of a Tolkien geek to be fluent in Quenya and Sindarin, sign his bombs with dwarfish runes, provide his captive with The Silmarillion to read and loves (his idea of) the Middle Ages, otoh, definitely is into that entire storyline. And his idea of how a reality-shifted Britain should be like conforms to it. Now, Chorley is the undeniable villain of the novel, but imo it’s clever and honest of Aaronvich to make Lesley, who is a character both the narrative and our narrator still have sympathy for, fall for the idea as well. Because yes, reality can be truly awful, and in need of change. It’s just that when the change isn’t achieved via honesty, collaboration and trying to work with what exists but by deception, promises of something that never existed and looking strictly back, not forward, that the fannishness for it becomes poisonous.
The other days
no subject
To me that's what makes her even more dangerous than Chorley. She won't try to replace the world with something she thinks is better because she can't imagine anything better. She'll just destroy it outright in an attempt to assuage her own hurts along with it. And now she doesn't have anyone she can position herself as 'the good bad guy' relative to, to moderate her choices...
Oddly enough, Beverley doesn't have much that sticks in my mind as fannishness either, but then she has other avenues for creation. Even Nightingale has his rugby, and Molly her Jamie Oliver cookery, but Lesley and Beverley don't map to the concept of fannishness in my mind.
no subject
no subject
no subject