Seven Blades in Black. Or something. Because though I’ve read over 650 pages about it, I don’t care.
Akward names, awkward settings. It’s steampunk, but you don’t get the aura. If your steampunk is just about machines and guns, and if references trying to emulate the given epoch are so vague, than it’s no steampunk. I had similar feelings about Anthony Ryan once, I read his book just because I wasn’t the DNF team. I am not, still.
So, the plot is that Sal the Cacophony seeks revenge but gets caught by an officer of the Revolution (yeah, it’s the name of not only a system, but of a country, too). And then she recalls, and recalls her doings… In a pace so quick that it’s hard to be invested in the story, or to get any vibe of the setting.
So we get some queer representation because Sal has a girflriend. Nice. Really nice. But we don’t know their backstory well, we don’t have time to observe them on a daily basis, we don’t have any time to form any bond with those character. So in the end, I don’t care.
Some authors are good at writing fast-paced stories and making them character-driven at once. Some aren’t. Some authors are good at creating vague and yet very evocative settings. Some aren’t. And at least to my mind, Sam Sykes is the second category.
He works on very simple dichotomies. Magic vs machines, feudalism vs colectivism, humans vs monsters. And when you make such dichotomies, it’s nice to make some clear references, too. What is the Empire in his novel and what is the Revolution? Which empires and which revolutions are they based on? The Russian Empire? The Empire of Napoleon? The Holy Roman Empire? The English Revolution? The American Revolution? The Bolshevik Revolution? And who is the Great General, damn? Which historical figures inspired him? Stalin? Napoleon? Mao? Who knows… Your vague steampunk setting won’t tell you much. Historical inspirations can be a mess, especially in the fantasy genre. Why not? But you need skills to make a beautiful mess.
Sam Sykes’ mess isn’t beautiful. It’s just boring.