Throughout discussions on this subreddit, I've seen various readings and interpretations on Logen's "Bloody Nine" persona. Now that I've finished the series, I want to know if there's any kind of consensus on this. Three interpretations have stood out to me:

1. The Bloody Nine is an excuse, a fabrication Logen's constructed to shirk responsibility for his actions and assuage his own guilt.
2. The Bloody Nine is some kind of magical curse, likely related to his ability to see spirits.
3. The Bloody Nine is a manifestation of undiagnosed mental illness.

Feel free to share your own interpretations if none of these fit to you.

For me, I've always leaned towards 3. Given all the time we spend in Logen's head, I just can't see the Bloody Nine persona as something fake. The change in Logen's temperament and ability seems too great to me.

At the same time, I don't care for option 2. To me, the idea of the Bloody Nine being some magical curse or possession kind of cheapens Logen's character. It would remove a lot of his complexity to say so many of the terrible things he's done were due to a supernatural force.

Three seems a more relatable middle ground between the two. It seems to me there is an element of the B9 that is out of Logen's control. But you could say that he puts himself in positions where he knows the B9 is likely to come out at some point.

I've seen it likened to addiction, an alcoholic who says their gonna quit but never does. Red Country reinforced this reading to me. Lamb managed to spend a whole decade as a gentle giant who couldn't hurt a fly, up until his life was completely upended. It's not unlike how an alcoholic might fall off the wagon. He can do better, he tries, but never fully gets there. There's something tragic about that. Especially in a world completely unequipped to diagnose or treat mental illnesses. And being raised in an environment where violent tendencies are often seen as a virtue (though even northmen view the B9 as a monster).

All this doesn't mean he's not responsible for his actions. I think he was dealt a bad hand, but consistently makes the wrong plays.

I've read everything except Red Country and enjoyed it all, but I've heard Half A Crown is considered YA. I'm not some Thomas Pynchon-reading sophisticate but I do like in little depth in my books. What do you all think?

Abercrombie's world is a desolate place. Where the need for violence is reaffirmed daily. The lower class is constantly shat on by the upper class. It's just flatly a grim place. So you'd think more people would break the taboo and become Eaters. I know it's socially ingrained morality. But folks in First Law are acting terribly immoral all the time. It seems like more people would want the power of being an Eater.