u/AmesCG

I'm a huge fan of Richard Swan's work; he writes creatively but with a solid grounding in history and even political theory, making his novels feel relevant and urgent. Konrad Vonvalt, the roving judge torn between the law and capital-J Justice, is a great character for our day and age. And Claver, the demagogue who ascends on charisma before having his movement coopted by dark forces beyond his control, is, well, let's say, "timely." Swan is an ex-lawyer who thinks a lot about the rule of law, and that shows up in his work.

Steel Gods is Swan back at his best after what felt like a stumble in Grave Empire. The plot moves briskly, the threads and points of view braid together well, and the dark arcane mystery of the first trilogy is better than ever. It's a highly enjoyable story, well told, featuring some of what makes Swan's work distinctive and fun. (This review elsewhere in the subreddit is right on target.)

Curiously, though, the von Oldenburg plot, the political and legal heart of the book, doesn't land for me and I wonder if I'm not alone in that. >!Grave Empire doesn't adequately set up the fragility of the Haugenate monarchy and, while we see von Oldenburg scheming about how he'll whip the public into a frenzy, we don't see it happen or understand why they'd be whipped into a frenzy so easily. Instead, we see von Oldenburg committing horrifying crimes that any half-sane person would run the other way from. Swan may reply that he's making a point: leaders in finance and industry countenance horrors today, in our own day and age. Is it really hard to believe they'd tolerate von Oldenburg, too? No; that part I get, even if it's a little heavy handed by Swan's usual standards. But it's hard to understand the general public's motivations for going along with those atrocities. And we need to understand that to understand why our villain is able to bring Sova to a fever pitch so easily.!<

Part of the problem is: I'm not sure von Oldenburg's motivations are ever drawn clearly in the first book. By the time we meet him he's already a sociopath, but why? What drives him? Claver came through clearly as a rising star bumping up against the constraints of a dying institution, resentful of those who believed themselves to be his "betters," directing that rage into his oratory and movement. Very real. I don't quite get the same clarity of character for von Oldenburg, though.

Another part might be that we never, as far as I know, get a thorough backgrounder on what's happened with Nemanism since Vonvalt's >!time as Lord Regent!< at the end of Trials of Empire. But it matters significantly for understanding von Oldenburg and Sova's fragility. We know there's Conformism, which is essentially the Nemanism of Vonvalt's time. We know there's Victorianism, which centers Nema. Why? Why is Helena from the first books >!a saint!< and Vonvalt completely unmentioned? We know there are serious divisions along doctrinal lines; what does that look like on the streets? There's no shortage of historical antecedents to draw from. Byzantium occasionally saw literal riots over Christian doctrinal debates. It would help to see some of that here, rather than having it alluded to offscreen.

I hope we get more background and "lore" in that vein in the third book. Swan is great at subtle worldbuilding. I'm just missing it when it comes to this one plot.

Hey folks, is anyone else waiting for a shipping notification on their Goblin Storm deck?

I have sleeves on the way and a few upgrade cards already pulled, so I’m anxiously awaiting its arrival!