A Not-so Nitpicky Reflection on “Fool’s Quest” by Robin Hobb
Who is who
Fitz Farseer—our protagonist
Bee—his younger daughter
Shun—Fitz’s ward
Chade—Fitz’s old mentor
Fool—Fitz’s buddy, a White Prophet
FitzVigilant—once Bee’s tutor
Dutiful—Six Duchies’ king
Elliania—his Queen Consort
Starling—a bard, once Fitz’s lover
Where is where
Six Duchies—our main Homely Kingdom
Chalced—west from Six Duchies
WARNING: SPOILERS
OK. This time, at least, it was funnier. It was your typical middle-book of a trilogy. The proceeding of action (plenty of it) was smooth, even if it took some time. Two hundred and fifty pages for Fitz to realize that Bee has been kidnapped by Evil Prophets (at least in my version of the book). Eight hundred pages until your classical Fantasy Quest has been formed. But, again, slow pace is quite typical for Hobb, so I don’t mind.
I just enjoyed how many things I managed to guess out. Bee being a Mary Sue chosen by Evil Prophets? Of course. Fitz not realizing that it was her and not “Fool’s son” who was sought after? Chade being Shun’s daddy? Check. Chade being FitzVigilant’s dad as well? Oh wait, that was a surprise, actually, and a bit… Disturbing. Also, wasn’t Chade already old—or at least middle-aged—fifty years earlier? Then, how did he manage to father children who are before their twenties? OK, I prefer not to inquire on. *Walder Frey sends his approval*
It gave me a lot of fun and actually, this time the enjoyable stuff prevailed. Because Fool’s Quest made me aware of something: Six Duchies is like home. It’s a home far—so far—from perfection, with rules you don’t necessarily appreciate and with family you can sum up as “Ok, feudal boomer”. But it’s home nevertheless. It’s a living place, changing over course of years, a place so vivid that you can literally touch and breath it. It’s power is mesmerizing, and stronger than any controversial stuff. Hobb is simply better at worldbuilding than your average YA writer, and than GRRM too. She’s invented a world having its own aura, concepts and customs. She’s invented lands which seem remote and uncanny, such as the realms of dragons, and lands turning stereotypes about (quasi)medieval times on their heads. You get colour-blind Kingdom of Six Duchies, you get copper-skinned matriarchal quasi-Vikings, human-dragons and pale fair-haired quasi-Himalayans. And guess what? I like all those concepts much more than the hysterical (and still not always accurate) history-ishness of Westeros. The Realms of Elderlings show that evoking the atmosphere of past isn’t about excluding, about barriers of look and complexion. It’s about the aura.
And it’s about introducing new terms and conceptions according to your universe’s logic as well. That’s why transgender and queer people appear in this book shifting or concealing their indentity; because such a way is understandable to their milieu. That’s also why some changes in the setting may seem too rapid—such as the fashion at Buckkeep court. From medieval tunics to Modern period wigs in fifty years… But, again—Six Duchies is in its own world. It doesn’t need to copy our trends and customs, in our understanding excluded to medieval/early modern West.
It doesn’t mean, though, that Elderlingsverse has been created in vacuum and that it doesn’t perpetuate sociological inconsistencies. Because, as I’ve mentioned, it was an enjoyable read. But many times, nevertheless, I would ask myself “Why do we need this?”
Do we need to depict the premarital pregnancy of one of the characters as such a scandal which needs to be covered? Are we in the nineteenth century England or in the kingdom where women are soldiers, bards and ruling princesses? Do we also need to go into the stereotype of moody irrational pregnant women? Do we need to make stock remarks about masculinity and “becoming” a man? *recalls Making a Dame out of Shun* Do we need to suggest that “simple” garments equal “elegant” and “opulent” equal “trashy”? Do we need to mock Starling, even if in a friendly way? Do we need to portray Queen Elliania as “hard-headed but actually right” instead of accepting her as her husband’s political partner?
Such things aren’t toxic. They are petty. But knowing the context of previous books, they may seem a bit uncanny as well.
Don’t worry, though. You can find silly and controversial stuff in Fool’s Quest as well.
The silly stuff is, as usual, the role of assassins in this realm, especially in Fitz’s recollections. Hobb, believe me—royal family isn’t like Soprano family. Royal family has executioners to kill criminals, not assassins. Assassins should kill inconvenient political opponents, not thieves, rapists and so on. Rapists, thieves and so on would be punished in public in your Average Medieval Kingdom—as an example, to show the common-born what not to do.
Also, I have a big problem with Shun. In this book, she is redeemed. And why? SPOILERS Because she was raped by the Evil Mercenaries of Evil Prophets and protected Bee from the same fate, telling her to pretend being a boy. SPOILERS
Assuming how she was portrayed in the book one, as a self-whining girl who likes flirting and Gaudy Garments, it’s very disturbing. If you suspect victim blaming here and accusing raped women because they wear “wrong” clothes and behave in a “provoking” way, then you are right. To some extend. Because such assumptions are made by Bee at some point. And nothing—nothing—can ever erase this awfulness. Neither the fact that later, Bee looks up to Shun in a way and cooperates with her, nor the compassionate appeal of Fitz. There are just words which should never occur in a book. Also, what’s happened to Shun is only a part of the problem. SPOILERS Because Evil Mercenaries raped hell bunch of servant women and one garden man during their attack at Fitz’s estate. SPOILERS And I’m strangely sure that if some other author, such as a YA writer, would write so much and in such a way about sexual violence, it would be find more than triggering.
The question of the said Evil Mercenaries of Chalced origin is another thing.
You see, if Six Duchies wasn’t colour-blind, depiction of Chalced people would look suspiciously orientalist. Cruel sexists and slave-holders versus quasi-medieval folk who treats women in a better way and believes in chivalry? We’ve seen it many times. But, oh wait, Chalced are blond-haired and brown-skinned and Six Duchies’ people are of very varying looks and origin. So don’t complain. Don’t analyze. Don’t mind that Chalced vs. Six Duchies opposition is actually about the moral whitewashing of the latter. Because if your opponents are utter sexists and classists, you can shine as an egalitarian feminist. Even if you aren’t so feminist and so egalitarian.
Left Hand of Fiction 