Legions of Fire, Book II: Armies of Light and Dark - Chapters 11-17

[ruuger]

This is the discussion post for chapters 11-17 of Peter David's Legions of Fire, Book II: Armies of Light and Dark. Spoilers for the whole of the series, including the spin-offs and tie-ins, are allowed here so newbies beware.

Next week, we'll be discussing chapters 1-7 of the third book.

Comments

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

So, conversation’s a bit dead, huh? Can’t blame everyone – the books are hard to track down, and not really worth it. I’ve got the books and I can’t really be bothered rereading them.

Still, there is one plot point I’d like to bring up because it’s been bugging me ever since my first (and, I believe, only) read of the series. Vir announces at one point that he’ll help fight the Drakh because he’s ‘invincible’, referencing Lady Morella’s prophesy. Now, ignoring the fact that taking prophesies at face value is a good way to end up very quickly suffering a very ironic death, never mind that he could still be could still be captured, tortured, mutilated, keeper-ed, and suffer other unpleasantness while still surviving to become Emperor… Well, does this sort of legalistic interpretation of prophesy sound like Vir at all?

I mean, alright, it wasn’t the real Vir in “The Very Long Night…” who pointed out that if a prophesy doesn’t come true, then it must have been a metaphor – but I’ll trust Londo’s subconsciousness’s interpretation of Vir over Peter David’s. For that matter – Vir thought the prophesy was a joke when he first heard it, and now he’s staking his life on it?!

The idea’s interesting enough, the reckless character who trusts they’ll be alright now because they know they’re going to be around later – but it’s sure not Vir. Considering Centauri have prophetic dreams of their own deaths, literally any Centauri character could have been used to play with this idea.

It’s always stuck in my mind as the most blatant example of how badly characterised every single character in the trilogy seems to be.

[selenak.livejournal.com]

Returning here to see if anyone else wrote reviews, since I still don't have the book on holidays with me: yes to trusting Londo's interpretation of Vir over Peter David's, and it being ooc for Vir to regard Lady Morella's prophecy as a life insurance. Also, why is this necessary? Vir joined Londo's initially one man conspiracy against Cartagia because it was the right thing to do, to save their planet, and he definitely believed he could die at any point then!

Do you have an opinion on the Mariel-gets-mindwiped subplot?

[4thofeleven.livejournal.com]

I honestly don’t remember much of the plots of the books – as I said, I’m pretty sure I only read them once, and skimming through them fairly quickly hoping they’d get better.

From what I remember, I think my impression was that the subplot was detailed enough to be profoundly creepy, yet seemed to be lacking in any resolution or context that would justify its inclusion. It felt to me like David thought he needed to establish Vir’s credentials as someone who could survive Centauri Prime’s intrigues, and since his characterisation of Vir is firmly stuck in the first season, he needed to have Vir choose to do something utterly ruthless and callous to counter his own mischaracterisation of him…

And, again, it relies on overly-literal interpretation of dialogue from the show. In context, Elric saying he knows “fourteen words to make someone fall in love forever” is pretty clearly a poetic way of saying he and the technomages know the secrets of a good life, “how to be rich, how to be poor”. Not, as the book interprets, that he’d memorised charm person as one of his spells for the day…

(Admittedly, once you get the idea in your head, it's hard not to think of the Technomages as D&D LARPers...)

[selenak.livejournal.com]

It felt to me like David thought he needed to establish Vir’s credentials as someone who could survive Centauri Prime’s intrigues, and since his characterisation of Vir is firmly stuck in the first season, he needed to have Vir choose to do something utterly ruthless and callous to counter his own mischaracterisation of him…

Yes, that's my speculation as well for the Doylist reasons why this subplot is there. And I dislike it for reasons even other than that. Like you I didn't take Elric's claim literally, not least because love spells definitely belong in the realm of fantasy, and the technomages supposedly accomplish what they do via scientific means. (I admit that I had no problem accepting the ghosts in "Day of the Dead", but there you go.) Moreover, while I'm all for characterising the technomages as a smug bunch of creeps as far as I recall the book doesn't mean to, i.e. we're supposed to blame Vir (who did not word his request carefully enough) for Mariel's fate, not them, au contraire, we're supposed to think they Taught VIr A Valuable Lesson About His Inner Darkness. The fact that they're still the people responsible for brainwashing a woman and the years of non-con that go with that are irrelevant. Ugh. (Didn't like it when the Prophets were revealed to have done it to Sarah Sisko and were still supposed to be good guys, don't like it here.)

Thirdly, Vir of all the people has canon reason (i.e. Londo and Morden) not to take any powerful person up on offers to do him a favour by striking at an enemy. I'm not saying Vir should be presented as incapable of making mistakes of his own. Just not this particular one.