TaT Re-read: Section Two, Chapters 4-6
Feb. 24th, 2019 03:57 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
ninedaysaqueen.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
queensthiefWelcome to section two of the Thick as Thieves community wide re-read. This week we’re covering chapters 4-6 (p86-181), that’s from lines: “We were more than halfway to Perf.” to “I dropped beside him.” All page numbers are from the 2017 hardcover edition.
If you were starting to get bored of Costis’s and Kamet's caravan jaunt through the desert, hang in there, because things are about to get dicey.
Chapter Four
In which Kamet fails at sword fighting, unknowingly takes refuge in an occupied lion’s den, and doesn’t laugh at Costis’s dad jokes.
Chapter Five
In which Costis earns his new moniker as a breaker of chains, takes a tourist’s interest in the local culture, and is told to pay a fastener.
Chapter Six
In which laziness is proved to cause fatalities, Costis goes beserk, and all the gold is lost.
I hope literary symbolism in your thing, because I’m about to talk a lot about that. Especially in regards to what I feel is a highly effective and skillfully written use of item symbolism--Kamet’s chain.
A Chain of Symbols
I was recently watching a literary analysis of the web series Rwby (a show you should absolutely watch if you never have) covering the topic of practical vs. psychological in literary narratives. Stated more simply, there is either a practical or a psychological motive for a character’s actions, but sometimes it's more interesting when there is both.
A surface examination of why Kamet continues to wear his chain reveal a number of practical reasons: it’s hard to inconspicuously sell, he wants to kept it so he can sell it after he escapes Costis, other people think he’s a slave so he has to, and so on.
I reluctantly agreed that we would need to part with the slave chain. (p131)
However, it is clear that Kamet has attributed deep psychological significance to his neck chain and Nahuseresh’s seal. Surprisingly, not all of them are negative. Kamet’s chain symbolizes his master’s trust in him, his position, even his skill. However, it also represents his otherness from his fellow slaves, his servitude, and his contemptible station in life.
This use of practical vs. psychological also extends to Costis. I really took note during this re-read that Costis hates Kamet’s chain. He wants to get rid of it from almost day one. There are practical reasons: it’s worth a great deal of money, it attracts attention; but there are psychological reasons tied up in there as well. Costis hates what the empire has done to Kamet. He hates Nahuseresh and what he did to Gen. To him, the chain only represents Kamet’s tragic backstory and a man he loathes.
The chain is a tangible symbol of where Kamet is in his journey. Not just of his physical journey, but his journey as a person.
How do you think Kamet progresses as a character during this section?
If QT were a Buddy Comedy
So, a lot of people like to compare this book to The Emperor's New Groove. Which I can’t even argue with (I love that movie), but I think it’s interesting how the humor in this book is different from other books in the series. Most of the series uses a combination of fatalistic black humor, self-depreciative humor, and humor in exaggeration.
TaT, however, has a distinct buddy comedy vibe that, at times, is comparable to The Emperor’s New Groove and The Road to Eldorado.
“Do you know any long prayers?”
“What? Ones to keep lions away?” (p96)
Considering the seriousness of the story and the gravity of the events, it’s surprising how well this style of comedy works. I mean, it’s almost a little slapstick at times. Costis even gets kicked in the you know where…
How do you think this style of humor reflects on the book itself?
Fond Memories of Drunk!Gen (p107)
I’m intrigued by the use of POV here. Kamet incorrectly interprets Costis fondly recalling that time drunk!Gen almost fell off the roof as malice. Not only is this really funny, but it’s a huge red flag that many of Kamet’s perceptions could be wrong or skewed in some way. Also, do you think Kamet is projecting his malice for Nahuseresh as Costis having malice towards Gen?
The Proxy Symbolism of Immakuk and Ennikar
There are two Immakuk and Ennikar poems in this section. I’ll go over them separately and how I choose to interpret some of their symbolic nature.
The Battle with Unse-Sek (p112-115)
What I want to draw your attention to here is Kamet’s eyes. Immakuk loses his eye during the fight with Unse-Sek. How did Kamet’s eyesight get so bad? From working in dark, smoky rooms for his master.
Jeffa was the one who warned me that I must be out in the sun every day if I didn’t want to grow blind as he had, that the dark room where we kept our accounts, the smoke of the lamp, would damage my eyes over time. (p139)
Perhaps, Unse-Sek represents Kamet's inner demons and struggles with his life as a slave--what damaged his eyesight. Ultimately, it’s Cosits’s counterpart, Ennikar, who saves Immakuk from the monster and kills it.
This, however, has consequences for Costis/Ennikar. For Costis, it’s his illness later on in the book. For Ennikar, it’s being captured by the Queen of the Night. In both instances, it’s Kamet/Immakuk who saves them in return from death itself.
The Journey to the Grey Lands (p118-125)
I think this poem’s primary function is to foreshadow Costis falling in the well and his illness later on in the book. To summarize, the story is about Immakuk saving Ennikar from the consequences of killing Unse-Sek. Ennikar is captured by the Queen of the Night and taken to the underworld.
This story also seems to have something to do with the “Pay the Fastener” prophecy. In the poem, Immakuk doesn’t pay the ferryman, but tricks him in order to cross the river.
Do you think Godekker represents the ferryman? Why was it so important that Costis pay him?
The False Narrative of Sinabid and his Foolish Master
“So, you don’t like Sinabid jokes?”
The jokes about Sinabid and his master are not the sort of thing a slave tells to a free man. (p110)
The purpose of the Sinabid skits was something that eluded me during initial read throughs, but I’ve come to understand that their use is similar to the Immakuk and Ennikar poems.
There are two possible interpretations of Costis’s and Kamet’s relationship played up on the same stage from the very start of the book--the epic of two heros and the shenanigans of a witty slave misleading a foolish master. Both interpretations play into the narrative and one is ultimately proven false.
What do you feel is the significance of the Sinabid jokes?
Kamet’s “Otherness”
Another important topic in this section is Kamet’s “otherness” as a slave. He touches upon this while recounting his backstory. When his master learned he could write, he was given an extra cup of water and was set apart from the other slaves.
“I was something different.” (p138)
This also comes up when he helps the head slave being tormented by the other slaves at the cobbler’s stall. Kamet recognizes instantly what’s going on, and seems to commiserate out of personal experience.
How do you think this contributed to his “smarter-than-thou” attitude? Is it even possibly responsible for it?
Next week we will be covering chapters 7-10 and![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
whataliethatwas will be your lead. Happy reading!
If you were starting to get bored of Costis’s and Kamet's caravan jaunt through the desert, hang in there, because things are about to get dicey.
Chapter Four
In which Kamet fails at sword fighting, unknowingly takes refuge in an occupied lion’s den, and doesn’t laugh at Costis’s dad jokes.
Chapter Five
In which Costis earns his new moniker as a breaker of chains, takes a tourist’s interest in the local culture, and is told to pay a fastener.
Chapter Six
In which laziness is proved to cause fatalities, Costis goes beserk, and all the gold is lost.
I hope literary symbolism in your thing, because I’m about to talk a lot about that. Especially in regards to what I feel is a highly effective and skillfully written use of item symbolism--Kamet’s chain.
I was recently watching a literary analysis of the web series Rwby (a show you should absolutely watch if you never have) covering the topic of practical vs. psychological in literary narratives. Stated more simply, there is either a practical or a psychological motive for a character’s actions, but sometimes it's more interesting when there is both.
A surface examination of why Kamet continues to wear his chain reveal a number of practical reasons: it’s hard to inconspicuously sell, he wants to kept it so he can sell it after he escapes Costis, other people think he’s a slave so he has to, and so on.
However, it is clear that Kamet has attributed deep psychological significance to his neck chain and Nahuseresh’s seal. Surprisingly, not all of them are negative. Kamet’s chain symbolizes his master’s trust in him, his position, even his skill. However, it also represents his otherness from his fellow slaves, his servitude, and his contemptible station in life.
This use of practical vs. psychological also extends to Costis. I really took note during this re-read that Costis hates Kamet’s chain. He wants to get rid of it from almost day one. There are practical reasons: it’s worth a great deal of money, it attracts attention; but there are psychological reasons tied up in there as well. Costis hates what the empire has done to Kamet. He hates Nahuseresh and what he did to Gen. To him, the chain only represents Kamet’s tragic backstory and a man he loathes.
The chain is a tangible symbol of where Kamet is in his journey. Not just of his physical journey, but his journey as a person.
How do you think Kamet progresses as a character during this section?
So, a lot of people like to compare this book to The Emperor's New Groove. Which I can’t even argue with (I love that movie), but I think it’s interesting how the humor in this book is different from other books in the series. Most of the series uses a combination of fatalistic black humor, self-depreciative humor, and humor in exaggeration.
TaT, however, has a distinct buddy comedy vibe that, at times, is comparable to The Emperor’s New Groove and The Road to Eldorado.
“What? Ones to keep lions away?” (p96)
Considering the seriousness of the story and the gravity of the events, it’s surprising how well this style of comedy works. I mean, it’s almost a little slapstick at times. Costis even gets kicked in the you know where…
How do you think this style of humor reflects on the book itself?
I’m intrigued by the use of POV here. Kamet incorrectly interprets Costis fondly recalling that time drunk!Gen almost fell off the roof as malice. Not only is this really funny, but it’s a huge red flag that many of Kamet’s perceptions could be wrong or skewed in some way. Also, do you think Kamet is projecting his malice for Nahuseresh as Costis having malice towards Gen?
There are two Immakuk and Ennikar poems in this section. I’ll go over them separately and how I choose to interpret some of their symbolic nature.
The Battle with Unse-Sek (p112-115)
What I want to draw your attention to here is Kamet’s eyes. Immakuk loses his eye during the fight with Unse-Sek. How did Kamet’s eyesight get so bad? From working in dark, smoky rooms for his master.
Perhaps, Unse-Sek represents Kamet's inner demons and struggles with his life as a slave--what damaged his eyesight. Ultimately, it’s Cosits’s counterpart, Ennikar, who saves Immakuk from the monster and kills it.
This, however, has consequences for Costis/Ennikar. For Costis, it’s his illness later on in the book. For Ennikar, it’s being captured by the Queen of the Night. In both instances, it’s Kamet/Immakuk who saves them in return from death itself.
The Journey to the Grey Lands (p118-125)
I think this poem’s primary function is to foreshadow Costis falling in the well and his illness later on in the book. To summarize, the story is about Immakuk saving Ennikar from the consequences of killing Unse-Sek. Ennikar is captured by the Queen of the Night and taken to the underworld.
This story also seems to have something to do with the “Pay the Fastener” prophecy. In the poem, Immakuk doesn’t pay the ferryman, but tricks him in order to cross the river.
Do you think Godekker represents the ferryman? Why was it so important that Costis pay him?
The jokes about Sinabid and his master are not the sort of thing a slave tells to a free man. (p110)
The purpose of the Sinabid skits was something that eluded me during initial read throughs, but I’ve come to understand that their use is similar to the Immakuk and Ennikar poems.
There are two possible interpretations of Costis’s and Kamet’s relationship played up on the same stage from the very start of the book--the epic of two heros and the shenanigans of a witty slave misleading a foolish master. Both interpretations play into the narrative and one is ultimately proven false.
What do you feel is the significance of the Sinabid jokes?
Another important topic in this section is Kamet’s “otherness” as a slave. He touches upon this while recounting his backstory. When his master learned he could write, he was given an extra cup of water and was set apart from the other slaves.
This also comes up when he helps the head slave being tormented by the other slaves at the cobbler’s stall. Kamet recognizes instantly what’s going on, and seems to commiserate out of personal experience.
How do you think this contributed to his “smarter-than-thou” attitude? Is it even possibly responsible for it?
Next week we will be covering chapters 7-10 and
whataliethatwas will be your lead. Happy reading!
slavery
Date: 2/26/19 07:49 pm (UTC)It was really telling to me when Costis asked Kamet if he'd been a slave all his life and Kamet thought, "I considered what I should answer--yes, I had been beneath contempt since birth? Or, on the contrary, that I had once been a man as worthy as himself and had become less of one at some time in my life?"
no subject
Date: 2/26/19 07:58 pm (UTC)But were his actions with Kamet out of character? He's never done anything like that before. It seemed to me that hugging Kamet just then was kind of weird. Unless, maybe, there's an attraction there that we don't know about.
no subject
Date: 2/27/19 05:02 pm (UTC)I did think it sounded a little weird when I read this, but as I thought about, I think it may not be so out of character after all. Of everyone in Attolia's court in KoA, Costis was the one who was able to have sympathy for Gen's loneliness and be able to eventually see behind the facade (or at least the elements of his actual character Gen chose to display), and he seems to be remarkably tuned in to what's going on with Kamet throughout TaT. I've wondered how long Costis was in the emperor's palace before he 'runs into' Kamet in the hallway - how much did Gen tell him about Kamet's situation beforehand? Was he waiting for Kamet to heal from his beating before beginning their mission? He seems to know at least some of the situation, which I think would be easy ground for a lot of sympathy.
In what we see of Costis, he doesn't seem to desire soldiering purely as a 'fight all the things' or 'be the most awesome, worship-worthy soldier that everyone notices'. He seems to do it out of a sense of his own honor and to be a natural defender. I can see him having pretty instinctive inclinations to be a defender of the weak, which Kamet is in some ways (at least here with the Namreen).
He also seems to enjoy the brotherhood aspects of being a guard, and is a good leader. He's seen battle and has experience stitching up wounds on the go, so he's probably been in similar situations before and seen how to handle someone freaking out over their own blood.
Finally, he talks about growing up on a farm - where life and death is a regular reality - with cousins and at least one sister. I could see him being compassionate to younger cousins and especially siblings he cares about. Head wounds bleed a frightening amount, and I could absolutely see him behaving just like this with a sibling who cut themselves doing something stupid on the farm.
Again, a lot of this could also be a starting ground or explanation for that attraction if that's the way you interpret the story as well.
no subject
Date: 2/27/19 08:44 pm (UTC)Huh. I never considered that before, but it's certainly a possibility. He may have had a great deal of sympathy for Kamet before they even met. I wonder, too, if Kamet's small size and deferential attitude made Costis a bit more older brotherish towards Kamet, whereas Gen's snide and bratty demeanor toward Costis kept Costis from those warm feelings until much later in their relationship.
no subject
Date: 2/28/19 06:14 am (UTC)I've been thinking about this all week, but the age of sickness is upon us here, so I apologize if nothing that follows is coherent or well reasoned. As always, when I'm writing in a hurry and trying to respond to everything, I struggled to keep the word count down and I'm just going to split this in two or else I'll never manage to respond.
How do you think Kamet progresses as a character during this section?
As it often does, rereading one book prompted a reread of the series, and I've been working through the other books this month. One thing that's stood out this time around is how often each book echoes themes or scenes from previous books.
In this case, there is an ongoing theme of characters facing loss and upheaval in the direction they expected their lives to go and having to make some measure of peace with it (Gen, Helen, Irene, Sophos, Costis, etc.). I think actually letting go of the chain is a big step in Kamet's finally taking some beginning mental steps toward seeing himself as, and acting like, a free man. I love the mental rush he gets from flexing an unused mental muscle in helping a slave he with whom he sympathizes.
How do you think this style of humor reflects on the book itself?
I haven't heard the Emperor's New Groove/TaT comparison, but I love it. Where all the other books feel like full-length action-packed dramas, I could see TaT being turned into a spinoff comedic buddy-venture TV series. The Road to Eldorado strikes my funny bone even more, mostly because of the mild 'they think we're gods?' parallels.
The humor is an important inclusion by the author as it helps keep the story moving - this book is more consistently action-packed than many of the other books in the series, but the real action of the story isn't the travelogue or the fights, and I think the humor is important in keeping that action progressing and highlighting some of the character and friendship development. Also, part of what makes Gen and Irene's relationship work on paper is that their unique brands of humor manage to blend and complement each-other. It's frequently off-putting or confusing to other characters in the story because it is "self-deprecating" or "fatalistic black humor". I think for TaT to come across as an epic tale of two (or two and two) friends, the humor and interactions need to be more generally relatable.
Also, do you think Kamet is projecting his malice for Nahuseresh as Costis having malice towards Gen?
Throughout TaT, Kamet has a hard time getting outside of his world view about the way things are and the hierarchy that exists in his modern, educated world. I think it would be hard to see another way but his Kamet-colored glasses and is an interesting reflection of his continuing views of master/servant relationships. I love Costis' attempts to help Kamet see 'my king' the way he has learned to in KoA.
no subject
Date: 2/28/19 06:15 am (UTC)I hadn't ever considered it, but I do see a strong case for Godekker represnting the ferryman. While in the original it was more an act of trickery than I see happening with Godekker, he did help them under some false pretenses, even if partially self-inflicted. There's probably some more practical vs. psychological elements here, like Godekker being initially motivated by what he can get out of the situation, or Costis continuing his strong personal moral code. I also wonder if this action might prove to be important in another book. We may never see it, but there is a line on p. 269 (muse of poetry) that says "Maybe he'll help some otheer runaway." I don't really see how that would come into play, but it's possible the choice to pay him now will have some result in the next book.
I also wonder if there's a slight bit of a guilt payment here, that while Godekker is more on the despicable, wretched end of the pitiful spectrum, but he is still a pitiable human being reduced to miserable circumstances because of the Mede empire (I assume anyway). Goddeker is left there while Kamet is taken away because he's the important goal of this mission.
What do you feel is the significance of the Sinabid jokes?
Honestly, this is one of those story elements that I acknowledged as being a reflection of Kamet's initial attitude toward masters/slaves and Costis, and then moved on. I hadn't considered it an ongoing foil to the Immakuk/Ennikar bro-venture.
I think it also is a reflection of Kamet's ongoing guilt and feeling he is in that role of a slave leading an unwitting master by the nose becuase of his ongoing obsession with his dishonesty and trying to keep Costis (and thus Gen) in the dark about Nahuseresh's death. It is a continuous counterpoint to the developing friendship and Kamet's progression toward being a wise Immakuk vs. a witty slave.
How do you think this contributed to his “smarter-than-thou” attitude? Is it even possibly responsible for it?
It's got to be a really weird place to live mentally, being treated like privileged dirt, or a valuable --and actually well-behaved-- tool - quality, but powerless in and of himself, only wielded by a master or only wielding a master's power. I think this is very responsible for his rigid need to maintain the structure of his life, his place in the Medeanhierarchy, and his identity in the Mede Empire, in Attolia, and when his life is in chaos and his identity is in flux.
no subject
Date: 3/3/19 03:57 am (UTC)