The Sword and Laser discussion

I really love January's caretaker, Mr. Locke. He is written in such a nuanced way. I feel he generally is a good person, but the bias and prejudices from his position and status in society really force him to put January in some difficult and sometimes compromising positions. He really is written as a great character in this story so far. I am excited to see how his character continues to develop over the course of the book.

Yes, I agree - he’s written in a really nuanced way, making some bad decisions from a place of good intentions. Much more interesting than if he were actually callous and uncaring.

i seem to say this every month. but here I go again the character in TTDJ are very good. Locke is very believable feels like I've heard of this guy somewhere. I empathize with January greatly. even Ade Larson who we only hear about is very intriguing.

I'm about halfway through the book. I don't like Locke at all. Earlier in the book, January says he was always kind, but all I've seen him do is gaslight and groom January.

My perspective on Locke definitely changed over the course of the book! I don't know that I ever actually liked him, but I definitely think he is a good character - written in a nuanced, three-dimensional way almost the whole way through.

Leesa wrote: "Earlier in the book, January says he was always kind, but all I've seen him do is gaslight and groom January."

Might be why she describes him as loving and kind? In a gruff, detached way.

Leesa wrote: "I'm about halfway through the book. I don't like Locke at all. Earlier in the book, January says he was always kind, but all I've seen him do is gaslight and groom January."

Thank you! I'm honestly a little confused how anyone could see Locke as one of the good guys at any point in the book.

Good as in a well-written character, oh, absolutely

I had issues with the explanation for Lock's need to (view spoiler)[
close ALL the doors. I can understand why he might want to close some doors (especially the one(s) to his homeworld where he knew he was not the top dog and had a "legitimate" fear of a challenger appearing), but that did not seem sufficient to address all cases. This is especially confusing to me if we accept that he is symbolic of the colonial empires (which is hardly a stretch given that he was involved with the East India Company); I would have expected him to identify easily exploitable worlds and to control that access jealously so that he and the society could continue to exploit them to the fullest extent (beyond the handful of trinkets Julian was bringing back from his isolated ventures). I can even see him justifying virtually any action in these "weaker" worlds as it is for the purpose of funding the society's efforts to establish stability and locate and destroy those doors which present a threat. (hide spoiler)]
It seemed like a missed opportunity if I were to put on my villain's advocate hat.

that's an interesting point aaron. nice read! I know harrow was trying to nail home the destructive nature of close minded bigotry. but the historical truth is bigotry is more exploitive.

I would like to be clear here locke is a sh*tbag. but he is written at first in a sympathetic way. you can't just attack people historical flaws or they will either defend or shut down the conversation completely. what harrow does is show you enough good in locke then breaks him down. even though know from the beginning he is a bad guy you don't know how bad until the end.

Interesting how Locke seems to be somewhat of a divisive character. I never found anything to like about him. Even in the beginning when we don’t know of any other motives for adopting January, I didn’t see any kindness in it. It’s not like he was putting himself out in any way (money is no object to him, and he didn’t expend much if any personal effort in raising her.) And even though she believes he loves her, even from the beginning we see that her definition of kindness and love are warped by not knowing any better. Every mention of his interactions with her in her early life reference him treating her like an object in his collection. I didn’t even find that he was written to be a particularly complex character, though I did have a new appreciation for him near the end when we find out about his background. I actually found him to be more sympathetic at the end, rather than less, because of that information. But I’m baffled that others viewed him as having any sort of goodness or redeeming qualities and am curious as to what others liked about him.

Same here. Right from the start I figured Locke was a bad guy just pretending to be nice.

AndrewP wrote: "Same here. Right from the start I figured Locke was a bad guy just pretending to be nice."

Yup. A smooth asshole from the start.