u/Educational_Fall3742

Hey all, this winter I was accepted into Baruch’s Online MPA program (I live out of state). I was and am very excited to get started as Baruch’s reputation as a school with a strong emphasis in social justice is what led me to apply here. To get everyone caught up on my current thinking, I am a bit dismayed that 1) as an online student I won’t be able to easily pursue the needed electives to get a social justice specialization and 2) that I am on a cohort schedule and won’t be able to graduate faster than three years. Perhaps I am underestimating the time it will take, and truly I am busy what with two jobs, three kids plus a new born, but I was really planning on finishing in two as I am extremely excited and hungry to earn this goal.

My question for those who have some experience with Baruch’s MPA program (online or otherwise) is, broadly, how do you feel about the school and the quality of education it provides. More specifically, is there a feeling of social justice being emphasized even in the core curriculum? Really, any insight will do.

Thanks.

This will have minor spoilers, but my purpose here is twofold: one to post appreciation for the world of The First Law and its many characters. Two, to give insights to those who have thought about reading The First Law but are not yet convinced. Also, I am not an expert on this series. Just a fan. With that being said, there can’t help but be minor spoilers, but major plot points and twists will be left out. The beauty of the world that Logan, Caul, Bayaz, and others live in isn’t so much in the what, but it’s in the who and the how they interact.

I have been reading fantasy for well over 30 years (thank you Redwall and The Chronicles of Prydain) and it’s enjoyable finding the many corners of the tent that we joyfully reside. The First Law has rightfully claimed one area of the tent that is in a grim dark corner by being built upon the strength of character development. What I find joyful is richness of a world not built upon magic, the supernatural, or the grotesque (although there is plenty of all three), but how each character is viewed through the lens of others, reliably or not, and how that image shapes both the story and fills in the world.

The First Trilogy offers a baseline in character development, and more impressively, character perception. We primarily follow four characters: Logan Ninefingers, Glokta, Jezal, and The Dogman. Each gives insights to the world around them that you, the reader, can accept or dismiss. For instance, Glokta is convinced the reason people avoid him is due to his physical appearance that’s the result of being tortured for two years. He never considers it is because of his status as a torturer and being a scary as hell person despite his physical abnormalities. These characters present the world and its inhabitants as they view them - not necessarily as they are. Jezal personifies this the most from book one to book three. Through certain events, his outlook on life drastically changes, and thus his outlook on the world and his fellow passengers. Further, the first trilogy shows us characters that we see further developed in later novels. This makes rereads continuously entertaining. In some fantasy novels, you reread to better understand or try to make sense of prophecies or dreams. There is little of that in First Law. Yes, Bayaz and his motives are still a source of debate among fans, but the real joy in diving back in is understanding the people of the world and how they fit into it.

Anyone who is a regular reader of fantasy expects characters to fit at least somewhat nicely into a category. First Law plays with this notion. Logan is the barbarian, sure. But is there a barbarian who is more realistic about himself and who he is? Of all the characters in the initial trilogy, he is the most reliable narrator of himself and the world around him. Until, of course, he’s not. He’s then very realistic but in a different manner. Jezal is the dashing young knight. It takes only a chapter or two to understand what exactly this means in this world. He’s perhaps the most static character initially, but his arc is tremendous in books two and three. Glokta is a dark Hercule Poirot. He’s the character who has the most happen to him, and he is continually reacting to events, trying to make order from chaos. He’s smart, cunning, and as often wrong as he is right. Again, he’s deeply flawed in how he sees the world, but he’s also smart enough to adapt, and adapt he does. The Dogman is refreshing in that he doesn’t fit easily into any archetype. He isn’t a warrior in the classic sense. He isn’t brilliant, and he isn’t feared. He’s liked. He’s respected. He is a leader that people trust because that is rare in this world. Between him and West, they are a welcome relief to deceit and carnage (with the notable exception of a brutal scene from one of them).
The first book lays out the world and the themes. The second book is the fellowship of the ring-esque journey, and the third book is a resolution that creates more questions than it resolves. For those reading this for the first time: it’s important to understand that these books aren’t as much about the story as they are about the characters. To me, that makes a much more enjoyable read.

The Standalone Trilogy is my favorite writing for any fantasy I have yet read. Each story is a different theme. Each story, despite not really taking place in the same region as the first trilogy (The Heroes takes place far to the North, so that is the closest locale), advances the character arcs fantastically. This is where legends of the world are felt. There are certain characters who resonate throughout the entire world, and as a reader, seeing them merely mentioned or referenced is exhilarating. There is a scene in The Heroes where just the mention of a legend is enough to turn the tides of a battle. It’s one of those scenes when reading it that you feel your adrenaline increase as you turn the pages and it leaves you smiling in astonishment.

Of the three, favorites are personal preferences, but they’re all fantastic in their own way. Best Served Cold is my favorite. I loved the idea of The A-Team meets Get Smart in a Tarantino Reservoir Dogs type setting. Imagine if Murdoch double crossed Mr T using a gadget gone wrong invented by Maxwell Smart. It’s fun. The story moves along wonderfully and it’s gritty and suspenseful and, ultimately, satisfying. Also, this is where another legend is born that resonates deeply through the rest of the series.
The Heroes is probably the best of the three. Here you see many familiar characters and they are fleshed out in a way that impacts this standalone novel and the rest of the series while giving weight to events in prior books. It’s a tale of war without glory.
Red Country is a classic western ala John Wayne’s The Searchers. Again, great characters, great action sequences, and a mesmerizing display of legends and the legacy they both live in and leave.

The Age of Madness trilogy introduces new characters, some with familiar surnames. The past being a reflection of tomorrow is a reoccurring theme. Shadows loom large, and this trilogy is Mr Abercrombie weaving a multilayered story told through character development better than any author I have read, fantasy, literature, or otherwise. These books run a bit slower, especially if you read them directly after the standalones, but I enjoyed the plotting as I felt each sequence was purposeful in its prose. If there are future books, and I’d be delighted if there were (and we are made to believe that the story isn’t complete), I can see how characters introduced in The Age of Madness will be the next generation of legends referenced by those who come next. More than in The First Law Trilogy, the world is noticeably different from the first page to the last page. Further, it’s easy to imagine how much different the world will be if we are fortunate enough to be invited back into this hellscape. The previous books hinted at this being a big world - The Age of Madness showed it to be.

I have seen a fair criticism that in the first trilogy women do not play a big role. That is rectified in the rest of the novels. For books built around characters, that is a noticeable flaw within the first three, and its course correction, starting with Best Served Cold, makes each novel all the more richer.

I appreciate these books. I appreciate the story driven by characters. I get excited each time a minor character reappears (whether they be a famed soldier of fortune or not), or when we’re introduced to meek Lamb like characters that are so rare in this world and that become oh so memorable. The humor is dry, the tension is high, Bayaz is unfathomable, and the writing is consistently great. Please, whether you have read these books or are cracking the spine for the first time - enjoy them. Appreciate them. They may or may not be my favorite series, but they are a series that will still be alive within me for many years to come.