_Ilario_, Mary Gentle
Andrew Plotkin
"Doesn't like people very much. This includes her readers." The
characters in _Ash_ and _1610_ were colorful -- even fun -- but not,
mmm, sympathetic. They were dramatically flawed people, and the flaws
were so carefully etched and brilliantly lit that I couldn't get near
them. Maybe this was the point, in which case I am in denial about how
flawed everybody is. Too bad for me, then. But I still had trouble
with the books.
But I kept reading Gentle, because her story conceits -- particularly
in _Ash_ -- were so breathtaking that I couldn't refuse to read them.
Then there was a novella called "Under the Penitence", which was set
in the Carthage of the _Ash_ books. And that was pretty damn bitter,
too. It ended positively, but the meat of the story was Ilario --
painter, slave, hermaphrodite -- and his/her horrible mother.
Now "Under the Penitence" has been expanded into a novel, _Ilario_. It
isn't bitter at all.
It's optimistic. The first section, "Under the Penitence", begins
horribly and ends positively. The rest of the book is never bleak. I
mean, it's a *story* -- bad things happen -- but the good people have
friends (and parents) and these things hold them up. The awful people
are considered and dissected and are, yes, flawed -- but not in a way
that makes me want to be of a different species from them. That's what
I'm trying to get at.
It's *thorough*. About parenthood: Ilario has five or six parents of
various definitions and genders. All of these relationships come into
the plot and examined. About sex: Besides Ilario the man-woman, we
meet eunuchs, transvestites, women living as men, men living as women,
queers of all stripes, a Pharaoh-Queen (wearing the Pharaonic strap-on
beard)... this book takes the notion of gender and, and I use this
metaphor carefully, knocks it down and fucks until it squeaks.
It's a story. I say this because my previous favorite Gentle novel was
_Rats and Gargoyles_, which wasn't particularly bitter but wasn't
particularly coherent either. It was a giant wonderful ball of
*bent*, and I recommend it; but I couldn't tell you more than half the
things that happen in it, and I'd get those out of order. _Ilario_
doesn't have that problem. It's smooth and tight and neat, and if you
think it's zig-zagging around, just wait -- everything ties up.
And it's got some *breathtaking* conceits of storytelling.
(You do not need to have read _Ash_ to read _Ilario_. On the other
hand, you may need to order overseas: it won't come out in the US
until July. Having stared at book sites for twenty minutes, I honestly
can't tell whether it'll be split up for US publication, or whether
the book I read has an upcoming sequel. Help! It sure *seems* like a
standalone...)
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
If the Bush administration hasn't subjected you to searches without a warrant,
it's for one reason: they don't feel like it. Not because you're innocent.
Howard
>
> Now "Under the Penitence" has been expanded into a novel, _Ilario_. It
> isn't bitter at all.
>
> It's optimistic. The first section, "Under the Penitence", begins
> horribly and ends positively. The rest of the book is never bleak. I
> mean, it's a *story* -- bad things happen -- but the good people have
> friends (and parents) and these things hold them up. The awful people
> are considered and dissected and are, yes, flawed -- but not in a way
> that makes me want to be of a different species from them. That's what
> I'm trying to get at.
>
>
That's a nice summation of what works about the book for me. I
enjoyed it immensely, but couldn't put into words why it felt so
different from Ash and 1610 (which I also loved). If there's a flaw,
it might be that there's a bit too many "I'm going to do this...."
"No, you're not...", "yes i will.." discussions.
jha...@cub.kcnet.org
Andrew Plotkin wrote:
> >
> (You do not need to have read _Ash_ to read _Ilario_. On the other
> hand, you may need to order overseas: it won't come out in the US
> until July. Having stared at book sites for twenty minutes, I honestly
> can't tell whether it'll be split up for US publication, or whether
> the book I read has an upcoming sequel. Help! It sure *seems* like a
> standalone...)
>
I think reading _Ash_ first though will add to the story. Gentle
really jumps right in
on some of her alternative history in a way that might be slightly
confusing
otherwise.
>From what I can tell, Eos is printing it in at least two trade
paperback volumes.
The first in July as _The Lion's Eye_ and the second as _The Stone
Golem_
in Sept. Going by the titles, I have no idea if Eos is going to drag
it out into
three or not. They might want slimmer volumes for when they take it
to mass market.
---
JSH