Briefly getting back into Abercrombie's "First Law" world. I don't think I ever posted about this, but when I read the original trilogy I have to confess there was one thing I thought was a bit too much... It was making Yoru Sulfur an Eater.
I don't entirely and objectively oppose myself to it, but... The balance-seeking part of my mind can't help but being offended by what feels like doing way too much and thus ruining a perfect balance.
Bayaz and Khalul forme a very nice complementary duo for the trilogy. One very present and seen, one unseen and far away from the plot. One protagonist but revealed to be vile, one antagonistic but turning out to be better than one would believe. Both having their own way of dealing with the loss of magic and maintaining their political presence - money for one, religion for the other. And more importantly, each one breaking one of the rules - one by creating Eaters the other by using demonic powers.
Sure, Bayaz turning out to have broken two of the three laws is used to cement his role as the depraved villain, ultimate big bad and full hypocrite... But I feel it is just over-doing and over-weighing on a character that turned out to be worse than everybody and nicely vicious already. I don't believe there was a need to have Bayaz have Eaters himself - rather than making him an hypocrite for denouncing Khalul's Eaters-making, I believe it rather would have been truly funny if he was sincere in his revulsion when it comes to Eaters and being offended by Khalul breaking the Second Law... When himself he is far worse of a monster and is actively trying to break the First Law.
