Oh, Ring of Swords, definitely - out of all her stuff, it's where her style of plotting aligns best with the topics the book's dealing with. It's a really good read.
And, unfortunately, the same-sex bit is past the second quartet and in the standalone book that finishes off the series. So you have a ways to go. ;)
You're making me want to reread them now, to try to pick out what it is that's so bothersome. I think it's something about the worldbuilding, and how the characters interact with/are treated by the rest of the world. There's something very soft-edged about it... I want to say privileged, but I know that's not the proper word. Maybe it's layers of specialness? The main characters are way special, and the group of people they fall in with are specialer than other people, and named characters are specialer than unnamed? But I'm not sure exactly how to define 'specialness' in this context.
no subject
And, unfortunately, the same-sex bit is past the second quartet and in the standalone book that finishes off the series. So you have a ways to go. ;)
You're making me want to reread them now, to try to pick out what it is that's so bothersome. I think it's something about the worldbuilding, and how the characters interact with/are treated by the rest of the world. There's something very soft-edged about it... I want to say privileged, but I know that's not the proper word. Maybe it's layers of specialness? The main characters are way special, and the group of people they fall in with are specialer than other people, and named characters are specialer than unnamed? But I'm not sure exactly how to define 'specialness' in this context.