The Expanse Catch-All

If you haven't listened to the Short Story, The Churn, you are missing out. Amos remains my favorite character followed by Avarsala.

Think I've done all the novellas but one. They do a good job in filling in parts of the story.

Yeah, if you want to know where Amos' "Have you ever talked to a pedophile?" line came from... read The Churn.

I liked Gods of Risk, too. Bobbie focused, and gives some of what happens out of the normal book narrative.

mr_n00b wrote:
Asterith wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:

The season premiere's product placement might be one of my favorites ever.

It took me a second to remember what that was. Hahahah yeah, so good.

I definitely giggled when I saw that, haha

Ha, I just (finally) watched the premiere episodes last night. When I noticed the placement, I still had a WTF moment until I remembered that it was mentioned here.

It seems to me like the show has picked up with the same quality & intensity as where it left off.

It's still weird to be in a position where I've read enough of the books to be ahead of some of the TV show plot lines but behind others.

I haven't watched the TV episodes yet, but having read Babylon's Ashes:

Spoiler:

I can't wait to see which direction Franck and Abraham take the series with their supposed last two novels (they used Babylon's Ashes to tie up a lot of loose ends). Surely the ending of the Solar System human conflict will mean that we will be taken to some of the other thousand worlds or so beyond the Rings. But I feel like there may be a Mass Effect 3 ending moment with Holden (having Miller interface) with the precursor race and some deus ex machina resolution that will spoil the conclusion of the series.

Marco's defection was pretty obvious from a writing perspective; I felt like it was a bit like giving Peaches enough time and pages to redeem herself.

On the flipside, I was surprised they decided not to do the whole Alex-Bobbie thing; or maybe they are saving it for the last two books (as I think Amos and Peaches will pair off eventually).

I'm not fully caught up on the show yet, but I just finished Babylon's Ashes and two of the novellas. The Churn was phenomenal. Also loved Gods of Risk because I want more Bobbie in my life.

Bfgp wrote:
Spoiler:

I was surprised they decided not to do the whole Alex-Bobbie thing; or maybe they are saving it for the last two books (as I think Amos and Peaches will pair off eventually).

Spoiler:

I so, SO want Alex and Bobbie to get together because I loves thems so much. Amos (who's pretty much become my favorite character) and Peaches also needs to be a thing.

I'm torn on who is my favourite character.

Spoiler:

On the one hand Avarasala is awesome with her crude speech (the anal play line was a gut buster) and cranky lady without tea thing, but so is Bobbie the space marine Amazon with perfect proportions and Amos the churn survivor.

Bfgp wrote:

I'm torn on who is my favourite character.

Spoiler:

On the one hand Avarasala is awesome with her crude speech (the anal play line was a gut buster) and cranky lady without tea thing, but so is Bobbie the space marine Amazon with perfect proportions and Amos the churn survivor.

Spoiler:

Amos.

maverickz wrote:
Bfgp wrote:

I'm torn on who is my favourite character.

Spoiler:

On the one hand Avarasala is awesome with her crude speech (the anal play line was a gut buster) and cranky lady without tea thing, but so is Bobbie the space marine Amazon with perfect proportions and Amos the churn survivor.

Spoiler:

Amos.

Spoiler:

I bounce back and forth between Alex (I've always a fondness for pilots), Bobbie and Amos. Currently it's Amos.

Spoiler:

Between Miller and Naomi for me, though I love the crap out of Bobbie, Alex, and Avasarala

I'm having a really hard time with the Gunny. I think its mostly due to the fact that most of the military sci fi I have been reading lately portrays Gunnery Sergeants as the solid dependable force that is the rock of any service and she's .. not that.

Considering I am from Baltimore, my choice is pretty easy.

I love Holden because I think I have the most in common with him, in both a good and bad way.

Infyrnos wrote:

I'm having a really hard time with the Gunny. I think its mostly due to the fact that most of the military sci fi I have been reading lately portrays Gunnery Sergeants as the solid dependable force that is the rock of any service and she's .. not that.

I'm...not sure how to respond to that...

Paleocon wrote:

Considering I am from Baltimore, my choice is pretty easy.

Hah, that was part of my reasoning as well!

Veloxi wrote:
Infyrnos wrote:

I'm having a really hard time with the Gunny. I think its mostly due to the fact that most of the military sci fi I have been reading lately portrays Gunnery Sergeants as the solid dependable force that is the rock of any service and she's .. not that.

I'm...not sure how to respond to that...

He's not wrong. She's stern, all business, and she's demonstrated that she's strong, but something about her performance feels off. I don't entirely buy it, but instead just roll with it because I want to like it.

It's probably just because they're new to the series, but the marines feel like the weakest part of the show at the moment.

Spoiler:

The opening scene of Season 2 had that cheap, made-for-TV battlefield feel, not unlike the Battle for Serenity Valley in Firefly. Bobbie took off on a jog while her squad talked about what was happening around them and repeated themselves throughout the sequence. Overall it was just unconvincing. I guess it helps that it was just a simulation.

At least they're giving more insight into Martian backstory. Maybe it'll get better over time. It took a little while for the survivors of the Canterbury to warm up, too.

Paleocon wrote:

Considering I am from Baltimore, my choice is pretty easy.

Born there, agree 100%.

buzzvang wrote:
Veloxi wrote:
Infyrnos wrote:

I'm having a really hard time with the Gunny. I think its mostly due to the fact that most of the military sci fi I have been reading lately portrays Gunnery Sergeants as the solid dependable force that is the rock of any service and she's .. not that.

I'm...not sure how to respond to that...

He's not wrong. She's stern, all business, and she's demonstrated that she's strong, but something about her performance feels off. I don't entirely buy it, but instead just roll with it because I want to like it.

She's just too angry and ruled by her emotions, that goes contrary to how Gunnies are depicted in what I've been reading lately.

maverickz wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

Considering I am from Baltimore, my choice is pretty easy.

Hah, that was part of my reasoning as well!

That and I think his decision making isn't too far from mine. Whereas Holden agonizes about shooting a genocidal dirtbag in the face, Amos would casually break the neck of a pedophile and go to bed with a clean conscience. That and the fact that he knows his limitations and makes allowances for the limitations of others. While others get pissed at Prax for being a pantywaste, despite the fact that he is a stone cold killer, he still shows remarkable empathy and patience for the frail old man.

In a lot of ways, he more than Naomi is the conscience of the ship.

Spoiler:

Avasarala is my true legal persona - dropping expletives with close contacts but otherwise like the buddha statue in front of clients and opponents.

Amos is fun because wysiwyg. We cheer for his conviction to do what he thinks is best for himself and companions damn the consequences, unlike Holden who takes it upon himself to worry about everyone else.

Bobbie is pretty dependable in the last several entries in the novels. Especially in Babylon's Ashes.

I get tired of Holden because his hopeless naivete gets people killed. Lots of people. Miller might be a bastard of a cynic, but his realism is preferable to Holden's blundering into stuff because he "feels" rather than thinking things through. If anything, his superpower is a combination of dumbass luck and plot convenience as any normal person who makes decisions as rashly would likely have died a thousand deaths.

He has to be my least favorite of the major characters.

I may be wrong, I don't think anybody really "likes" Holden. I suppose he's what Commander Shepherd would look like with conversation options defaulting to Paragon choices only and turned up to 11 out of 10. It's for the same reason I don't really enjoy Naomi's character - she's not the chaotic good alignment like Amos (heart is in the right place but doesn't care for institutions, laws or rules), she is more closer to the lawful good alignment that Holden is and cannot stray too far from Holden's archetype. That's what makes the morally ambiguous characters fun because you can't tell what they will do, whereas the strict virtuous ones will almost always try to do what they think is right.

Bfgp wrote:

I may be wrong, I don't think anybody really "likes" Holden. I suppose he's what Commander Shepherd would look like with conversation options defaulting to Paragon choices only and turned up to 11 out of 10. It's for the same reason I don't really enjoy Naomi's character - she's not the chaotic good alignment like Amos (heart is in the right place but doesn't care for institutions, laws or rules), she is more closer to the lawful good alignment that Holden is and cannot stray too far from Holden's archetype. That's what makes the morally ambiguous characters fun because you can't tell what they will do, whereas the strict virtuous ones will almost always try to do what they think is right.

Yup. Same deal regarding Naomi.

I guess I dislike the whole rigidly monodimensional moral matrix because the story is all about making hard choices involving real characters. Whereas Amos' motivations are largely about survival, loyalty, and doing right by those that matter to him, Naomi and Holden both seem to have a rigid morality that is indistinguishable from their own ego.

The irony is that Avasarala and Johnson are both HUGE egos, but neither of them lack the subtlety or depth of character that either Holden or Naomi have when it comes to weighing out big decisions. Johnson, particularly, is almost a set piece and he still comes across as more fleshed out than Holden.

Hell, even his big moral epiphany in the second book basically boils down to extrajudicial killing is bad because chicks don't dig it.

I really like Holden's idealism, I think it's important for a story to have some of that and I think he's a good counterbalance to the various "practical" people all around him. Good stories need heroes, I think.

I actually like Naomi quite a bit. She's an interesting take on the smartest person in the room trope. Typically characters in that trope tend to be socially ill-mannered men (your Sherlocks, your Houses, etc.) Naomi undercuts a lot of that in a really compelling way. She has charm, and her intelligence doesn't set her apart from other people - it drives her TOWARDS people instead. She doesn't go off on others for not understanding her genius, or let her genius be the sole thing that defines her. I also love how the books normalize her intelligence and make it unambiguously positive. Far too often we see stuff portray intelligence as this "curse" that sets you apart and romanticizes the intellectual outsider. In some ways these types of portrayals codify anti-intellectual sentiment. So it is refreshing to see a community driven intellectual, someone who is an invaluable part of the team - which is a lot closer to what most brilliant people I know are like.

I'm also a fan of Holden because I think there is direct effort on the writers' part to undercut the archetype of the protagonist. Yes, he's got all of the trappings of a typical protagonist, but there is an awareness and acknowledgement of his privilege. That's what sets him apart from your average Blandy McGoodguyson hero, IMHO. In fact, his privilege is what blinds him and makes him make mistakes. Typically writers writing a character with his profile wouldn't go anywhere near that at all, but the authors do good work in making that aspect of the character central to his flaws and to his growth throughout the series. This isn't to say that it is a flawless execution, or that there aren't pitfalls they smack into, but I do appreciate the novel take on a character archetype that is usually anything but novel. As a well meaning person of privilege who spent a lot of his youth blinded by said privilege and coasting on personal charm while not living up to his potential, I can definitely appreciate Holden. There's way more there than there usually is for a character fulfilling that function in a genre story.

Great post, Harpo. Agreed all the way.

Life goals like Alex tho.

I think the novels downplay the intellect necessary for space civ considerably or else we'd be stuck reading treatises on quantum physics etc. Like how Holden describes Amos (who lacks any formal education) as a rocket scientist because he keeps the ship running and maintains the fusion reactor and Epstein drive.

Well, Harpo said everything I was going to say, and much better than I could have, so... yeah.

(I haven't read the books, though.)