Return of the Thief

The first book in this series, [b:The Thief 30363359 The Thief (The Queen's Thief, #1) Megan Whalen Turner https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1475685365l/30363359.SY75.jpg 1069505], you can read as one novel and then stop, if you like; the rest of the series is really one story in multiple volumes, and if you read the second you'll probably want to read the rest, to find out what happens. At least, that was my experience.So I'll review the series as a whole here; I don't want to deal with each volume separately.Turner does a good job of world creation: her world is described vividly and in detail, a feat of sustained imagination—although it's not very different from other pseudo-mediæval worlds in fiction. The story is mostly gripping, though less so in the first volume. Characterization is quite good. The major characters are memorably distinct from one another; I had a little trouble in keeping track of all the minor characters.During the series she changes narrator from time to time, using first-person narration with different narrators, and sometimes dropping into third-person. I find this distracting and not a good feature, but it's only a minor irritation.I read the whole series in order to find out what happened, but I didn't actively enjoy it. Why not? Well, it's a subjective reaction that may not entirely yield to analysis, but I can identify a few factors:1. Many fantasy and sf stories involve some sort of society-level crisis, and I can cope with that. However, I get the feeling all along that this society is in a permanent state of crisis, forever threatened by wars both external and internal; and that this is unlikely to change in the long run. Furthermore, it's an unhealthy society, from bottom to top: people lack trust in each other, and lack trust in their own futures, which are all too likely to be blighted by malice or crisis. This is not unrealistic: such societies have existed and still exist in the real world. But it's not a kind of society that I enjoy living in, even as fiction.2. I don't take a real liking to any of the characters. Some of the characters are mildly likeable, such as Sophos and the queen of Eddis. The central character, Eugenides, is intermittently likeable, but not consistently. He almost seems to have wandered in from another world: he's not like the others. The character Pheris appears late in the series as a disabled child, and Turner seems to have awarded him his disability on purpose so that he can serve as a convenient narrator. If Turner is found dead someday with a knife in her, it may have been Pheris's revenge.3. The gods are the only supernatural element in the story (there's no magic); and I don't find them particularly interesting. They appear occasionally, do something good or bad to Eugenides, then disappear again. Rather like landing on Chance or Community Chest in Monopoly. Removing them would require some rewriting, but a very similar story could have been written without them.I originally gave the whole series three stars because it seemed well-made fiction; and yes, it is. But ratings are subjective and personal: I don't actively like the series or feel any motivation to reread it, so I shouldn't give it more than two stars.