Iron Flame (Chapter 21)
STATS
Title: Iron Flame
Series: The Empyrean (Book 2)
Author(s): Rebecca Yarros
Genre: Fantasy (Epic)
First Printing: November 2023
Publisher: Red Tower Books
Rating: 1/10
SPOILER WARNING
Heavy spoilers will be provided for the entire story up through the end of the content covered in this part. Mild spoilers for elements later in the story may be provided, but I will keep the first paragraph of each section as spoiler-free as possible. Heavy spoilers from later in the book will be confined to clearly labelled sections.
SPECIAL EDITION
We’re going to be doing this part of bit differently from the previous. As mentioned in the conclusion of the previous part, there are two major points to discuss within this chapter:
Theme and commentary in the first scene of the chapter
The confrontation between Violet and Dain in the second scene of the chapter
There is also a third, minor point that comes at the very end of the second scene, after the confrontation concludes.
After reviewing this chapter, I realized that there are no developments worth discussing that are not already covered by discussing these three points. There are a handful of points that double down on existing issues (like how Masen gets Red Shirted off-screen - you remember Masen, right? Good old Masen), but I’d just be repeating myself if I went into them.
Therefore, rather than breaking down Story, Plot, Character, Worldbuilding, Theme, and / or prose as a whole, this part will consider each of the three topics individually, exploring whatever elements of storytelling are most relevant within those topics.
THE CRINGE DEBATE
Disclaimer
In order to properly dissect the handling of theme and commentary, I will need to break down the message that Yarros is presenting here.
I do try my best to avoid delving into topics that exist outside of the media I am reviewing. Exploring these topics is simply not the purpose of this platform. I also don’t feel like a blog is at all conducive to healthy dialogue, by sheer virtue of the fact that I am literally in control of the platform.
That said, to properly understand why the themes and commentary that Yarros attempts here don’t work, I will need to assess the merits of the arguments that she is presenting. This will include the internal logic of those arguments, the context of the fantastical world in which these arguments are being made, and potential allegorical elements.
My purpose in doing this is not to actually argue for whether Yarros’s message is correct or not. I do not care whether any members of my audience agree or disagree with it. Frankly, I don’t care whether I agree or disagree with it. Instead, the purpose of this analysis is to explore exactly how Yarros failed in her goal. While this exploration will include me countering the arguments she posed, I will only be doing so to lay bare writing flaws. Therefore, I ask that everyone please keep an open mind as we move through through this section. No statements that I make for or against Yarros’s intended message is intended to preach to, speak for, or alienate any of you.
Story
Violet’s History class has a substitute teacher: Professor Devera, the Good Teacher from Battle Brief. “Most of the leadership”, including the regular History professor, has run to the flight field, called to engage in battle on the eastern border. Rather than continue the current topic of study (which she does know - it’s “the second Cygni incursion from year 328”), Devera decides to run the class like Battle Brief and host a debate about the Unification, the process by which Navarre developed a homogenous culture at its founding. What follows is a very shallow back-and-forth about linguistic diversity.
During the Unification, the language already used by three of its six newly established provinces was chosen to be “the common language” (which is … Navarrian? “The modern language”? I assume it has to be one of the two languages mentioned in the framing device we discussed back in the prelude). All six provinces consented to both this common language as well as other unspecified practices of cultural unity - except for Tyrrendor, which did not mesh well with the others. (According to Violet, acknowledging that simple fact makes me an “asshole”, and according to Devera, it also makes me a threat to the unity that she is about to encourage criticism of anyway.)
The Unification is blamed for limited travel beyond the borders of Navarre. I’m not sure how this works, when the point of the Unification was apparently to homogenize culture after the borders were sealed, but this appears to have been included mainly so that Violet could gripe about Navarre closing its borders.
Violet and an unnamed rebel child complain about how much culture was literally lost in translation by choosing a common language. When it is pointed out that none of this culture was actually destroyed, Violet responds that one can’t simply walk into the Archives and access it at one’s leisure.
Rhiannon gripes about how folklore from different provinces are not shared with one another and how the oral traditions from the original languages are fading over time.
The only point presented in favor of a unified culture is … a unified culture, plus the opportunity for refugees to integrate into Navarre. Everyone but Violet verbally agrees that this was necesary to “keep the citizens of Navarre safe”. Violet dismisses this because the Unification somehow harms people outside of Navarre.
After reading and re-reading this scene, I believe that the worst of the problems are front-loaded, with progressively smaller (or, at least, easier to correct) issues stacked on top of it. We shall therefore work through these points in reverse order after we talk about the themes.
Theme
Immigration
Yarros starts to put a little more weight on the issue of open borders for refugees and immigrants in this chapter. I don’t think it’s quite enough weight yet to cause issues in the story overall, but it does cause issues in this scene in particular. Violet’s internal monologue about the evils of closed borders, along with the lines that Yarros used to prompt the monologue, makes it seem like Navarre closed its borders to enforce its cultural homogeneity, which contradicts what we actually know about the venin threat. Including this theme therefore muddles both the theme and the scene.
Cultural Diversity
Yarros leaves no ambiguity as to what the correct position is on this issue. All cultures are to be preserved, embraced, and celebrated in their original language. Translation is bad, as “things are lost in translation.” You are an “asshole” and of inferior intellect (we’ll get to that in a moment) if you disagree with this position.
At the same time, governments are responsible for handling this preservation. It is the fault of the government if local cultures fail to pass on their own traditions or if the children of those cultures abandon those traditions in favor of embracing the main culture of the land in which they live. The government is also responsible for helping cultures share their traditions with cultures that speak completely different languages - all without translating anything into those different languages, of course, lest anything be lost in translation.
I think that the handling of the cultural diversity message in this scene counts as a Category 1 virtue signal. Nothing else of substance is established in this scene. There are some worldbuilding elements that are pushed during the discussion, but nothing new that impacts the story. The Unification itself only seems to exist to be discussed in this scene. In short, this scene tell us Yarros’s position on the issue without contributing anything of substance to the actual story being told. The power fantasy, coupled with the subtlety issue identified back in Chapters 5 through 9, amplifies the signal. Yarros trips over herself in her effort to validate Violet’s viewpoint while demonizing anyone who disagrees with that viewpoint. She doesn’t even bother to do so through a scenario where the morally righteous person is rewarded while the unrighteous one is punished - she just has Violet brand the dissenting voice as an “asshole” while having the Good Teacher say things like, “All excellent points,” to validate anyone expressing the viewpoint that she wants to signal with.
Much like with the immigration issue, there’s not much in the text itself to point towards Yarros attempting to write an allegory or comment on anything specific. However, also like the immigration issue, I am not inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt on this. The way linguistic diversity is discussed here ties into modern-day identity politics in the United States, something she continuously virtue signals for with her tokenized characters. When coupled with the seemingly tangential commentary about closed borders, I get the impression that Yarros is trying to say something about immigrants to the United States needing to learn English to function in-country and lamenting how their native languages are lost over generations of integration.
Necessary Evil
The debate scene ends as follows.
“The question we must all ask ourselves is: are our sacrifices worth it to keep the citizens of Navarre safe?”
“Yes.” The answer is muttered all around me, some riders saying it louder than others.
But I keep quiet, because I know it’s not only Navarre paying the price - it’s everyone outside our wards.
I want to put a pin in the idea that the Unification keeps Navarre safe. I feel that there’s a better point to discuss it down the line. For now, let’s focus on how Yarros is trying and failing to tie this otherwise extraneous scene back into the existential conflict.
The Unification does not in any way make the venin threat worse. It is not even the reason that Navarre continues to be isolationist. It is a symptom of the early days of the isolationism, which is driven by the venin threat.
It makes no sense that someone as supposedly well-read as Violet is making the leap from “loss of linguistic diversity” to “we are all going to die.” I think that Yarros did this because she realized how extraneous this scene is. Rather than edit the rest of the book to properly incorporate the themes discussed here, she slapped in this leap of logic to try to latch onto the relevance of the venin conflict. It just feels so forced.
The Contradiction
I’m sure that some of you may have noticed a hole in Yarros’s argument, either during the initial presentation of points or my not-so-subtle phrasing when explaining the theme.
We are supposed to think that the Unification is bad because it established a common language. We are also supposed to think that it’s a bad thing that local folklore is not being spread among different regions that had different languages prior to the Unification. The issue here is that the language barrier would prevent the folklore from spreading. The establishment of a common language, and the translation of local lore into that language, is the most effective means to propagate that folklore. The alternative would be to require every single people to learn the language of another region just to explore its culture - and very few people are going to learn another language just to appreciate stories that they have no exposure to without already knowing that language.
Consider anime. I don’t care how superior Frieren: Beyond Journey’s End is compared to The Rings of Power. If someone did not provide me with English subtitles, I would have a hard time understanding what is happening. Anime has been able to spread across the planet in no small part because dedicated translators have put in the work to translate the 9th most-spoken language in the world (in terms of native speakers) into the eight languages above it. Without translation, anime would be isolated to the Japanese market and a few foreigners who have already learned the language. What’s more, because anime is not translated into literally every language in the word, many people rely on their understanding of one of the languages that it has been translated into - in other words, they are only able to appreciate these Japanese stories because of the existence of common languages.
Saying, “Things are lost in translation,” does not rectify this contradiction. Generally speaking, if the choice is between sharing culture while losing a few things in translation or letting that culture wither in isolation while maintaining purity, it’s a safer and more effective option to just risk losing a few things to catch the interest of outsiders and then educate those people on the lost bits once they are engaged.
Now, as I said in the disclaimer, I am not saying all of this because I actually want to argue against the message. (I’m also not reminding you of the disclaimer so as to virtue signal about agreeing with the message.) My point is this: when you are writing for theme, commentary, or outright allegory, do not contradict yourself this blatantly within the span of a single scene. It only serves to weaken your message.
Cowardice
Yarros has no faith in at least one of the arguments she presented here, so she chose to almost literally write, “I’m right, no one can possibly disagree with me,” and change the subject.
“Just because it’s not in Tyrrish doesn’t mean you can’t walk into the Archives and read whatever translated Tyrrish book you want.” It’s his haughty, arrogant tone that pricks my temper.
“No, actually you can’t.” I drop the fabric in my lap. “For starters, no one can just walk into the Archives and read whatever they want. You have to put in a request that any scribe can deny. Secondly, only a portion of the original scribes spoke Tyrrish, meaning it would have taken hundreds of years to translate every text, and even then, there are no historical tomes older than four hundred years in our Archives that I know of. They’re all sixth, seventh, or eighth editions. Logic dictates that she’s right.” I gesture up to the girl a few rows ahead. “Things are lost in translation.”
He looks ready to argue.
“Cadet Trebor, if I were you, I would consider the fact that Cadet Sorrengail has spent more time in the Archives than anyone else in this room, and then I would carefully consider an intelligent response.” She arches a brow.
The guy from Third Wing shoots a glare in my direction and sits back in his chair.
This is a massive middle finger to the audience. Rather than trusting us to naturally accept the desired conclusion, rather than considering that some of us may have valid counterarguments, Yarros chose to assert, by way of proxy, that no one opposed to her viewpoint can present “an intelligent response”. She might as well have turned to the audience directly and said, “I am more educated that you. You cannot possibly develop any effective arguments to oppose me. Sit down and shut up.”
To be clear, the very nature of literature is such that one can't have a true dialogue. The author is in full control of what characters believe and say. Any arguments made are purely rhetorical. Any opposition presented by the author to the desired takeaway is ultimately curated by the author and will be limited, whether intentionally or not, by the author's biases and experiences. Books don’t even have a comments sections to lend the illusion of an open forum.
However, as with so many other aspects of storytelling, a good author can hide the artificiality of the debate. She can actually explore the nuances of the opposition, rather than slapping strawmen. She can make the "correct" answer feel like a natural progression of human beings sharing ideas.
Bad authors instead resort to blatantly staging events so that they can assert their rhetorical argument without needing to acknowledge the obvious counterarguments.
The Cover-Up
It would have been very easy for Yarros to end the “lost in translation” discussion on the point that she wanted to end it on without insulting the intelligence of her audience. She just needed to tie the early termination of the discussion to character, rather than the topic being discussed.
Devera is a Good Teacher. It is clear, within the context of this scene, that she is on the same side of this issue as Violet. Rather than having Devera imply that there is no way to oppose Violet's argument, Yarros could have instead had Devera use her authority as professor to shut down the discussion. Yarros could have had Devera claim that the discussion was veering off topic, and that they needed to get back to the actually point of the disucssion (conveniently timing this to prevent an rebuttal to what Violet said). She could have had the "asshole" make an uncivil remark, thereby forcing Devera to terminate the discussion to restore order. She could have had Devera assert herself as a Good Teacher by explicitly saying that Violet's viewpoint is the correct one and unambiguously denying the opposition the chance for a counterargument. This last veers back over the artificiality line, but at least here, it would be less overtly antagonistic of the opposition.
Regardless of the method Yarros chose, the point is that she should have left the conclusion open-ended. She wouldn’t be telling the audience what to think - the discussion simply turns in another direction, leaving us to carry on what she started. Not only would this avoid the embarrassing scenario of ignoring an intelligent response that does indeed exist, but by taking a softer touch with the audience, she would allow people to think about the ideas she put forth and potentially come to agree with her on her own accord.
Intelligent Response
Ms. Yarros, per your instructions, I have considered an intelligent response.
First, while Violet is right about the issue of Archives accessibility, it is an irrelevant point. Trevor's argument was that the information still exists is in the Archives. That is true. The scribes are not a barrier to people getting to that information unless the information is classified, in which case, there are bigger things to worry about than what language it is written in. If needing to go through an intermediary amounts to information being inaccessible, then our real world has not gotten that memo, as we function just fine despite needing to deal with bookstore employees, librarians, and the Internet. At best, Violet is making a convenience argument, which is a separate issue to loss of linguistic and cultural diversity.
Second, Violet's argument about how few of the original scribes spoke Tyrrish, along with the point about books being newer editions, does not actually contribute anything new. She is just repeating the "things lost in translation" point with slightly different wording. If anything, her chosen phrasing is damning of the Tyrrish (and, by extension, every other provincial culture in Navarre that submitted to the common language). Why did the Tyrrish, upon agreeing to the common language, not make an effort to ensure that their literature and other documents were faithfully translsted into the common language? Why did they leave this to the official scribes? Did they not preserve original copies of this information for comparison during later translations? One of the reason the Vatican holds on to old versions of Scripture and other texts is so that they can keep modern translations as faithful to the originals as possible, rather than endlessly translating translations. If Tyrrish culture is so important to the Tyrrish, why have they not made similar efforts?
In other words, Ms. Yarros, Cadet Trebor is completely right. The information is accessible. All Violet has managed to establish is that the Unification is not to blame for the loss of cultural identity in the provinces. The blame for anything being lost falls upon the provincial cultures for not making an effort to preserve and pass along their culture to the next generation, as well as upon progressively lazier generations who clearly expect Navarre to do the preservation of their provincial cultures for them.
Speaking of the provincial cultures …
What Did They Actually Lose?
Prior to this point, the rebel child whom is involved in this discussion with Violet and Trebor says this:
“We lost major parts of our culture … Not just our language. Our songs, our festivals, our libraries… Everything in Tyrrish had to be changed. The only unique thing we kept were our runes because they’re in too much of our architectureto justify changing.”
Oh, do enlighten me, Lady of Tyrrendor. As the ambassador of your culture, to what, exactly, are you referring when you say things have been lost?
Between this excerpt and when Violet spouts her hollow argument, we get this:
“The books were all translated into the common language,” [Trebor] argues. “Festivals still happen. Songs are still sung.”
“And what was lost in translation?” the Tyrrish girl ahead of me asks. “Do you know?”
“Of course I don’t know.” His lip rises in a sneer. “It’s a dead language to all but a few scribes.”
We are supposed to thing Trebor is in the wrong for not knowing what was lost - but do YOU, the self-appointed defender of Tyrrish culture, have even the slightest idea what you are whining about? Can you tell me ANYTHING that makes your culture fundamentally different from any other province in Navarre? I'm not talking surface cultural details like architecture, runes, or that knot thing that Violet has been doing at Xaden's request (which I haven't brought up in this review because it has no relevance until Part Two). What is the deep culture of Tyrrendor? How does your worldview differ from the rest of Navarre? Can you explain to me what you are actually whining about losing, or are you just aware of a vague lack of specialness?
It does, to an extent, make sense that this whiny rebel child would not have answers to these questions. That was the entire purpose of the Unification, after all. Navarre wanted everyone on the same page. Inducing true cultural homogeneity would mean the loss of differences in deep culture.
The reason that this ultimately doesn’t work is that we are being asked to agree with said whiny child based purely on principle. Something precious may have been lost - that’s bad, right? Except for the fact that, thus far, no distinct cultures have been fleshed out for this world. Everyone, from every province, acts exactly the same, save for tiny differences that are due to individual personality rather than their province of origin. They worship the same gods in the same way, they engage in the same hedonistic behaviors, they share the same general perspective of violence and death. The fact that the rebel children and Tyrrendor in general get singled out is purely based on their connection to the rebellion, and none of the reasons we have been given for the rebellion had anything to do with culture. (Tyrrendor was, and still is, angry that they contribute so much to Navarre’s defense while receiving very little benefit in return, as Navarre cuts costs by trusting Tyrrendor’s geography to keep the gryphons out. Xaden’s father is implied to have exploited that discontent to recruit for his rebellion, rather than exposing the truth about the venin to all of Navarre).
There is simply no cultural gap. As the audience, we have no evidence to suggest that Tyrrendor ever had anything to lose by homogenizing with the rest of Navarre. Rather than empathizing with the victim of generations of cultural genocide, I find myself wondering why I should care about this self-righteous rabble-rouser who seems to just be looking for validation of her own specialness.
You cannot ask an audience to get invested in something that you have not yourself invested time or effort into establishing. Platitudes and principle can only carry a story so far. For Yarros to make us care about the loss of culture, she needed to show us that there actually was a culture to lose. At minimum, she would need to demonstrate some fundamental difference between the worldviews of the Tyrrish and the rest of Navarre that survived despite the Unificiation, which would at least hint to something of value having been lost.
Put another way, the driving force of this argument is about as hollow as if I were to one day starting whining about how immigrating to the United States has cost my family their Lithuanian roots. My ancestors chose to let go of those cultural ties. There is no longer anything to distinguish me as being of Lithuanian descent. I therefore would have no leg to stand on in terms of convincing people that I have suffered some injustice.
The Unification
It is established in this scene the Unification was a consensual process to establish a common language, and by extension, a common culture for the purposes of unity throughout the kingdom.
Do you know what isn’t established?
Anything that might constitute persecution or cultural genocide of those who want to hold on to their own traditions.
While making that contradictory argument about folklore, Rhiannon admits that her province still maintains its oral traditions. Chapter 18 exposed that the Tyrrish language still exists, and that snippet about architecture confirms that existing cultural artifacts were not destroyed. Navarre still keeps tomes of dead languages in the Archives.
It is not an acceptable substitute to say, “Our songs, our festivals, our libraries… Everything in Tyrrish had to be changed.” Translating everything that is available to the public into the common language so as to promote accessibility and cultural interchange does not necessitate destroying the originals, much like how translating the Bible out of Latin did not necessitate burning either the Latin or Greek texts. Again, the survival of oral traditions indicates that the original cultures were not actually destroyed, which makes this line outright nonsensical.
The provinces could absolutely have preserved their original cultures while embracing the common language so as to play ball with everyone else. Our own real-world history is full of stories of religious groups and insular cultures that survived for centuries or millennia in wildly different societies from themselves, learning the languages and obeying the laws of their hosts while keeping their culture alive in their own homes and communities (often while being actively oppressed for that culture). If the provincial cultures of Navarre have died, the fault therefore lies in the descendants of those provincial cultures for neglecting their legacies.
In other words, we spent this whole scene listening to Violet, Rhiannon, that rebel children from Tyrrendor, and everyone else who agrees with them whining about a problem that is entirely their collective fault.
The lesson here is very simple: show, don’t tell, and if you must tell, make sure you actually tell what’s needed to support your rhetorical arguments.
EMBARASSING SHOWDOWN
Story
On the same day as the cringe debate, the rider cadets have a round of sparring tests. Dain attempts to talk to Violet during the tests, to resolve their differences, invoking their lifetime of friendship. Violet responds by running away, giving him the middle finger, and continuing to spite Dain with her usual vitriol.
Deprived of any other option, Dain uses his authority as wing leader to change the test assignment, forcing Violet to fight him. Everyone else begins screaming about how inhumane Dain is for doing this while Violet has a dislocated shoulder (something that happened off-screen prior to the start of this chapter, and which seems to have been included just so that people could scream at Dain), despite the fact that Dain makes it clear that he won’t actually harm Violet by discarding all of his knives while allowing Violet to keep hers. Violet threatens to slit his throat if he tries to take her memories. Dain then proceeds to immobilize her and … talk.
That memory that Dain stole? The one that led to the trap being set for Xaden? He took it by accident. And when he said goodbye to Violet on the flight field, right before the climax of Fourth Wing? He had no idea she was going into a trap. He was accepting that Violet had chosen Xaden over him. He also reveals that the scars on Xaden’s back were inflicted by General Sorrengail.
Violet responds by dismissing everything he just told her and reiterating that she blames him for the death of Liam and the other rider who died in the climax of Fourth Wing.
After the fight, Violet confides in Rhiannon that Dain has the ability to extract memories. Rhiannon gets close to the mark about what actually killed Liam. Violet breaks off the discussion by warning Rhiannon never to ask him about it again, then takes Aaric to the infirmary.
Redemption
So … Dain’s redeemed, right?
Accidentally Extraction
Here’s Dain describing how the events that led to the climax of Fourth Wing were set into motion.
“I told my father what I saw when I touched you -”
“When you stole my memory,” I correct him.
“But it was a flash of a memory. Riorson told you he’d gone to Athebyne with his cousin.” He searched my eyes. “Second-years don’t get leave for that kind of flight, so I told my father. I know you were attacked on the way there, but I had no way of knowing -”
That’s right. A “flash”. Not, “I did it for Navarre.” Not, “I wanted to know how I could get through to you.” Not, “I wanted to know what you wanted out of me.” He’s not justifying his action or making excuses. He is describing, in very plain terms, what happened, and what he is describing does not sound anything close to intentional.
And it can’t have been intentional. Upon revisiting the mechanics of Dain’s Signet for the purpose of this review, I found this line from Chapter 4 of Fourth Wing.
“I just put my hands on someone’s temples, and I an see what they saw.”
Do you know what Dain does not touch at any point in Fourth Wing? Violet’s temples. He touched her face a lot, but never her temples. This couldn’t possibly have been deliberate.
Is it possible that Dain lied about the range of his power? Unlikely. At that point in the story, he was still the Best Friend Love Interest, and judging by what was revealed in this scene, he still sees himself that way. He has never had any reason to lie about this.
A more likely possibility is that, much like Violet increasing the number of lightning strikes that she can execute in an hour, Dain’s Signet grew in strength without his awareness of it. He touched Violet’s cheek, something that should have been safe and non-invasive, and accidentally picked up a memory that was not in any way incriminating of Violet. He then asked his father a simple question, which unbeknownst to him, either launched an investigation into Xaden’s smuggling operation or confirmed existing suspicions of the rider leadership (as it is highly unlikely that the rider leadership would stage their trap solely because of a report of an unsanctioned flight).
Dain therefore did not violate Violet. He is innocent.
(This topic will come back up in Chapter 49. Oh, boy, we will get to that. Suffice it to say that what we learn there only confirms this conclusion.)
Chivalry of the Defeated Knight
“You said ‘I’ll miss you.’” It comes out in a hiss. “And then you sent me to die, sent Liam and Soleil to their deaths. Did you know what was waiting for us?”
“No.” He shakes his head. “I said ‘I’ll miss you’ because you chose him. I told you I knew things about him, that he had reasons you don’t know about to hate you, and you still chose him. I knew I was saying goodbye to any chance of us on that field. I had no clue gryphons were waiting to ambush you.”
I, too, thought Dain was sending Violet to her death in that scene from Fourth Wing, but it turns out that is not the case. The only thing Dain was doing was letting go of Violet romantically. The fact he is so mature and level-headed about it, then and now, is really an example that all men should aspire to.
Damnation
Violet’s wanton spite at the start of the scene, before the fight, is consistent. I find it very hard to get invested in a character who is this blatantly malicious while simultaneously refusing any effort at resolution, but the fact remains that this is simply who Violet is. However, when presented with this information that so fundamentally shifts the audience’s understanding of Dain’s actions and involvement in the climax of Fourth Wing, surely Violet, the “rational woman”, should recognize that her previous perception of the situation is no longer valid and that her judgment of Dain needs to be revised. If nothing else, the self-aware beacon of maturity shown to us in Chapter 1 should be able to acknowledge that she understands that her emotions are not aligning with rationality.
Of course, that would require Violet to be wrong about something involving her emotions or morality. That would disrupt the power fantasy. Yarros couldn’t have that.
What’s more, even after the fight, Violet continues to act as if Dain sexually assaulted her. This was irritating before, when we were supposed to just go along with it despite a lack of anything to indicate an analogous degree of harm. Now, it is infuriating. This is like finding out that the guy who lightly grazed your breast on the bus really did just lose his balance when the bus hit that pothole, only for you to turn around and scream even more loudly that he should be registered as a sex offender because of it.
And, lest we forget, the deaths of Liam and the other rider who died in the climax of Fourth Wing are still Xaden’s fault. He built the squad with the intent of committing more treason during a supposed training mission. He decided to engage the venin, when his refusal would almost certainly have convinced Liam to flee as well.
In the conclusion of Fourth Wing, I said that I would not map any of Violet’s flaws back onto Yarros, despite Violet being Yarros’s self-insert Mary Sue. I am happy to call out elements of her own life that Yarros is trying to crowbar into the story with no care as to whether they fit, such as her blind hatred of whomever Dain is supposed to be. However, Yarros herself is off-limits.
Thanks to that boundary line, I can say whatever I want about Violet, and Yarros should be able to not take it personally.
Violet is the most spiteful, deluded bitch I have ever had the displeasure to read about or see in any form of visual media. She is so devoted to dumping all of her negative emotions onto one person and demonizing that person that facts like guilt and innocence no longer matter to her. Daleks are building altars to this woman for the sheer divinity of her hatred. The Red Lantern Corps are trying to send her a ring. I’d say that the God-Emperor’s Most Holy Inquisition would have a job for her, but that would require her to redirect her hatred towards the xenos, the heretic, or the demon, and frankly, they’d probably just drop a cyclonic torpedo on her head before her hatred can supercharge Khorne.
And yet, this is the same person who serves as this story’s axis of morality.
AARIC GRAYCASTLE ESCAPES THE CASTLE
We haven’t talked about Aaric since Chapter 8. This is because, despite the emphasis put on his introduction, he faded back into the same obscurity as the Red Shirts. I don’t think this would be a problem in a shorter or less bloated book. Yarros made it clear that he’s supposed to be important, so putting on the shelf for a while isn’t unworkable. I just feel like his reintroduction in this chapter is rather reminiscent of the poor setup of the venin threat in Fourth Wing.
Story
As mentioned above, Violet escapes the discussion with Rhiannon by taking Aaric to the infirmary (he broke his wrist during his sparring test). While they walk, the two of them discuss where Aaric’s father, the king, thinks he is right now. Aaric then broaches the subject of the venin with Violet. It turns out that he is aware of the threat.
“Oh shit.” My chest feels like it is caving in as I grab hold of his good arm, halting our steps before the tunnel. “You know, don’t you?”
He lifts a brow, the mage lights catching on those royally green eyes. “Why else would I be here?”
Plot
This development is contrived nonsense that exists only so that Aaric can serve a utilitarian function in Chapters 32 through 34.
First, this is how Aaric explains him figuring out this secret that is so classified that Navarre censored all written folklore to bury it.
“They haven’t hidden it all away as well as they think they have … It’s easy to figure out if you know what you’re looking for. Personally, it was the daggers my guards starting carrying that tipped me off … The ones with the little metal discs.”
For all of the incompetence of the rider leadership, this still doesn’t make sense. It is a repeat of the circular logic that allowed Jesinia to figure out something sketchy was going on.
Aaric is tipped off by the fact that his guards started carrying new knives. That’s it. Remember, there is nothing overtly strange about these knives. Yes, they look different, and yes, they are imbued with magical power, but that does not inherently reveal their true purpose. Literally all that needs to be said to explain them is that they are a new development in weapons technology.
The only reason for Aaric to be tipped off by the knives is if he is already aware of the venin threat. He would need to know the lore, he would need to have an intimate understanding of the alloy and the wards, and he would need adequate cause to connect the dots and realize that the venin are a clear and present danger (rather than, say, these knives being a tool to allow a human to kill a gryphon). In other words, the only way this should tip him off to something suspicious is going on is if he knows something suspicious is going on.
Why not just say that, as a son of the royal line, Aaric is made aware of the venin? That would make a lot of sense. Perhaps only the heir to the throne is supposed to know about it, but after the death of the second prince, the king became paranoid about the security of his line and told Aaric. Aaric could then act on that knowledge. There was no need to contrive this situation to pretend that Aaric is clever (one which backfires when one considers that Violet, who is supposed to be even more clever, got handed this information for free).
Also … “Why else would I be here?” No, Aaric, why WOULD you be here? Why would you make yourself subordinate to the military dictatorship that preserves the secret? Why would you bond yourself to the dragons when logic dictates that they support the secrecy? This information is a reason for you to, say, run off to Tyrrendor and try to reignite the rebellion (or join the Aretia rebels, when you find them). It is not an excuse to enter this death trap of a school.
Worldbuilding
There is something perversely admirable about how dedicated Yarros is to destroying the integrity of her own world.
“He can’t do shit after Threshing. Dragons don’t even answer to kings.”
We now have a member of the royal line acknowledging that the monarchy has no practical means to enforce its authority over the dragons or, by extension, the rider leadership.
How, exactly, is this monarchy in power?
This is particularly important due to the nature of Aaric’s utilitarian role. Without getting into heavy spoilers here, Violet is going to need to access a secure location that only a member of the monarchy can enter. This location, for the record, is a military location that the king supposedly has direct control over and that he can access at his leisure. This is explicit confirmation that the monarchy is, on paper, the highest authority in the setting.
Why, then, Ms. Yarros, do you insist on reminding us that the monarchy should be no more than limp figureheads compared to the power of the riders?
PURE TORTURE
Chapters 22 through 25 detail the second of the RSC exercises: the first exploration of torture.
This is a rather strange sequence. As mentioned way back in the content warning, the handling of torture at this point in the book is so laughable that it makes me seriously question this intimate understanding of pain that Violet - and, by extension, Yarros - supposedly possesses. It also is very strained in terms of driving the plot forward. That being said, these chapters represent the first meaningful development, in either this book or the previous, of Violet’s accessories. It also includes the first incident of Violet’s EDS actually having some weight on the story.
Chapter 25 and 26 also unveil a plot twist - namely, the payoff to what Nolon is doing in the infirmary. It is a colossal, nonsensical waste of all that buildup. Like so much else, Yaros tries to milk this for tension. She fails. Not only is the reveal too limp to matter, but the mountain of questions and contrivance needed to bring this twist into existence crushes whatever tension might still have been present into powder.
It’s coming our way on March 29th. I hope to see you all then. Have a good week.
