|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1250847214
| 9781250847218
| 1250847214
| 4.00
| 22,121
| May 11, 2023
| Nov 28, 2023
|
Source of book: NetGalley (like a million years ago, sorry) Relevant disclaimers: Instagram mutuals. Please note: This review may not be reproduced or q Source of book: NetGalley (like a million years ago, sorry) Relevant disclaimers: Instagram mutuals. Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. --- So my personal favourite piece of Arthuriana is the 14th century poem, Gawain and the Green Knight. I think I mostly like it because nobody can super agree what it's about or, at least, what it represents. The basics of the poem go like this: a young chad King Arthur is having a cheeky Nandos with the lads, but he declares that nobody is allowed to dive into their peri peri until something exciting and knightly, worthy of the tales of old, has happened. What a lege. Conveniently, a big green bro rides into the hall and invites everyone to participate in a fun game of decapitation. Top lad Gawain is up for it, on the understanding that he gets to be the active decapitation partner first. Unfortunately, once decapitated, the green bro retrieves his head and invites Gawain to visit him in a year and a day so he can decapitate him back. The rest of the knights enjoy this top bants and life goes on. Eventually Gawain remembers he kind of has an obligation to fulfil and sets out, reluctantly, on his quest. He has a bunch of adventures en route that the poet does not deign to share, and eventually comes to a magnificent castle, inhabited by a fellow top lad, his fit wife, and a random old lady? This new top lad tells Gawain that the place where he's meant to be meeting the green bro for a little flip-decapitation is about two days ride and invites him to stay in the mean time so they can get Dominos. Gawain is well up for this. At which point, his host proposes a new game and Gawain, who has apparently not a learned a fucking thing from the Decapitation Incident, blithely agrees: every day the knight is going to go out hunting and Gawain is going to Netflix and chill, and at the end of the day they exchange what they've respectively managed to obtain. First day, the knight's wife does her level best to bang Gawain but bros before hos and all that. Gawain barters her down to a kiss, which he duly gives to her husband in exchange for the double pepperoni passion he picked up on the way home. Second day, the wife once again tries to sheath Gawain's sword for him, and he, once again, barters her down to two kisses, which he exchanges with her husband for whatever he caught on his hunt (a boar I think?). Third day, however, the wife offers Gawain her underwear (okay technically a girdle is outerwear, but still) which will apparently protect him from any harm like, for example, getting his head cut off. Gawain takes this and instead of giving it to her husband, spontaneously ponies up three entirely heterosexual smackeroos. Finally the day comes Gawain has to go get decapitated and he trots off to meet the green knight. First time the green knight swings his axe, Gawain flinches like a big ol' sissy and the knight takes the piss. Second time the knight doesn't strike and Gawain is like "dude, stop fucking around, just cut my fucking head off." Third time, the knight leave a tiny nick on the back of Gawain's neck as punishment for being creepy with his wife's intimate garments, and it turns out the green knight was the top bro all along, just cursed by Morgan le Fay, who--TWIST--was the random old lady staying at the castle. Gawain goes home, full of shame, having determined to wear the green girdle for the rest of his life to remind him of the importance of being honest with your mates. The other knights are all like cool story bro. Look, it's a really weird poem. And, like, is it about survival versus honour, is it about Christianity versus paganism, is it anti-Arthurian and anti-heroic, is about friendship and accepting each other failures, is it about gender, is it about ethics, is it about masculinity, is it feminist (given the sexual agency of the green knight's wife), is it GAY (I mean Gawain is reasonably indifferent about the green knight's wife trying to bang his brains out and surprisingly blase about snogging her husband when he returns from the hunt). And the green girdle is sort of emblematic of all this. It's this protean garment, that can be tied and untied, and shifts its meaning depending on context and perspective. Sorry this got really long and tangent-ey, even for me. Where I'm going with my bullshit on this occasion is that Gwen and Art Are Not in Love is a gorgeous green girdle of a book: it's intricate and intriguing and multi-faceted, and I continue to watch Lex Croucher's career, especially their ever-growing confidence as writer, with rapt admiration. Set in a kind of Medievalish AU where the legacy of King Arthur is closer to history than myth, Gwendoline (not Guinevere) is the royal princess of a fractured, factionalised, partially catholic England. She has been inescapably engaged to Arthur, the son of a powerful local lord (and Arthurian cultist) since infancy. There is, however, a major problem here: Gwen and Art are not in love (title drop, boom). Actually there are bunch of problems: there's Arthur's scheming father, there's the hot lady knight Gwen has a crush on, there's the seething resentment between Gwen and Arthur, there's Gwen's brother Gabriel, and his determination to be the perfect king irrespective of the personal cost, and, of course, there's the gathering threat to the kingdom. As you can probably tell from the summary, this is a book with a lot going on. It is, in fact, ambitious as all hell and, mostly, I felt those ambitions paid off. Unlike Croucher's Regency-set series (which I deeply adore), where the POV tends to be close single person, this is dual-POV between Arthur and Gwendoline. Given their flaws, their blind spots, and their insecurities, as well as the girdle-esque knot of relationships that lies at the heart of the novel, it's ultimately a story of competing perspectives. Of learning to see things--and yourself--as they truly are. I mean, there's even a cat one character calls Merlin, and another character calls Lucifer. I see you & your feline-themed, multi-purpose metaphors, Croucher: just as the kingdom is torn between its Arthurian past and its Catholic present/future, so must the characters navigate the tensions between who they feel they're supposed to be and who they are, and thus we end up with a cat called Merlin AND Lucifer, comfortably both. Like the Regency-set series, Gwen and Art is also a book about growing up. While, on the surface, Medievalist-ish Arthurian AU would not be something I'd naturally reach for as an allegory for queer adolescence, in practice it works extraordinarily well. It's a deeply fractured world, burdened with a history that has shaped the present in the way the current generation are not responsible for but nevertheless live with the consequences of, where pursuit of selfhood is situated oppositionally to duty, familial harmony, and social good. I mean, I can't speak for anyone else, but that's what being seventeen was like for me. More broadly, there's something about Croucher approaches queerness that I connect with in a very ... a very personal way. I don't know if it's because we're both British or because--if Croucher's sense of humour is anything to go--we were exposed to similar media at impressionable ages but I always feel very seen by Croucher's books. And because identity is (and should be permitted to be) a complex and subjective thing, that feels like a rare and special gift from an author to a reader. I think what Croucher does for me, that's honestly difficult to do, is they approach queer joy and queer pain with equal depth and boldness. Aware as I always vaguely am of The Disk Horse, I feel we're in in this quite specific place at the moment in terms of the "how" of presenting queer identity. I mean, I've spent most of my career defiantly putting queer joy page (something that continues to be devalued by supposedly queer and queer-supporting institutions, especially in the UK) but that doesn't mean I want to pretend to queer pain isn't real or doesn't exist. Of late, though, I've begun wondering if the pendulum might be swinging the other way, at least in the genres I'm interested in, because I've been seeing increasingly strong pushback from certain groups of readers about the inclusion of literally *any* conflict, bad feels, or compromise required from the characters. Don't get me wrong, it's nice that there are books that are, essentially, just chill queer vibes and I'm glad such stories exists, but they're not the "right" or the "only" way to represent queerness in fiction, but I don't think the cultural answer to a past of too much queer tragedy is the complete rejection of all queer pain. Not to put too fine a point, the idea that we are somehow "past" all that is a deeply privileged perspective because, while I love that so many young folks are apparently growing up completely accepted and unchallenged in who they are, that isn't a universal situation. And dismissing texts, or art, or media or, indeed, *people* who are still grappling with pain and shame is essentially to double reject those have already likely experienced rejection. Essentially I think I would like to reach a intracommunity equilibrium where we accept that the celebration of queer joy does not require the abandonment of those who are, or who have experienced, suffering. To bring this back to Gwen and Art, while it can be very joyous to be queer in Croucher's books, it is not always easy--and, maybe I'm just contrary, but I find it reassuring to see that explored with tenderness and care. For me, one of the most devastating and complicated moments in the book (mild spoilers ahead) is when Gwen attempts to come out to her brother (who is also queer) and he (unable to accept himself) rejects her. They do later reconcile, of course, but ooof. What a moment. It's probably one of the hardest hitting moments in the whole story (although it is lightly foreshadowed by Arthur and Gwen *also* attempting to use recognition of the other's queerness as a weapon) just because it goes to places that aren't always easy to discuss or admit to ourselves i.e. that a sense of queer community isn't as perfect or as resilient as we would wish it to be (or are often pretending it is). On a purely personal note, I found it hard to forgive Gabriel during this section of the book but I don't think that was about the character. Given what Gabriel is dealing with on his own account, it's understandable he wasn't in a place to be the perfect brother just then and Croucher really does set up and resolve this particular conflict with skill and nuance. It just reminded me of every time my own fear, shame or pain has prevented me from being there as I should have been for someone else struggling in their queerness. Anyway, in case I'm making this book sound terribly heavy and srs, Croucher, as ever, approaches their subject matter and their characters with a wonderful blend of darkness and light. For all the angsty gripping of my heart I did while reading this, I also laughed out loud several times and I am not, as a general rule, a laugher-out-louder. I smile, I may issue a small chuckle. But Croucher makes me *laugh*. Not necessarily a great compliment, if I'm honest, because I have an incredibly immature sense of humour: ‘The last time you were here,’ the king said finally, ‘you set fire to something.’ *snarfles* To be completely fair, as I try my best to be, I think sometimes the dark/light balance isn't always completely struck for me in Croucher's work and Gwen and Art are not exception here. It didn't diminish my admiration for the book, nor my pleasure in it, but some shit goes down in the final 25% and, while it was clearly being set up to go down from the get-go, it ended feeling both like a lot and not quite enough. By which I mean, the stakes get very high very suddenly and are resolved almost too quickly for the nature of those stakes. What does really come together, however, is the character work that Croucher has done in the first 75% of the book. It is genuinely lovely to see how the characters have grown and developed through their interactions (romantic and otherwise) with each other, and for that growth to manifest in the strength to navigate the crisis that rocks the kingdom. But, you know what? This is obnoxious of me because one critiques the art in front of you, not some art that exists only in your head, but I honestly feel there are two books in Gwen and Art. Book 1 is creating all these personal connections and allowing the characters to grow into the best and strongest versions queer AF versions of themselves (i.e. the first 75% of Gwen and Art) and book 2 is putting that to the test (i.e. the final 25% of Gwen and Art expanded to really pay off all the previous work). Except also: that's just me. Maybe I'm just pining after two books instead of one because I adore all these characters and want to indulgently spend more time with them. Maybe I'm just the kind of helpless nerd who loves a well-built world and wanted more of that. Who knows? Let me make it super clear, though, that the fact there is only 1 book of Gwen and Art is not damaging to the book as it stands. I think it's more that, to me, there was scope here for 2. Especially because there were some plotlines that got wrapped up pretty hastily and some really big moments--like Gwendoline riding into battle towards the end--that didn't get the chance to land as hard as they potentially could. I also felt poor Arthur got short shrift at times, especially when it came to his relationship with his terribly abusive father. It's not that I needed that to be resolved exactly (although it sort of was), it was just it ended up feeling emotionally siloed from everything else going on in the book because it's never something that anyone else interacts with or ever has opportunity to truly acknowledge. And maybe there's an element of dark realism to that--some abuses, after all, never go acknowledged--but I guess I just wanted ... more for him from the people he loves. There's also a moment where the plot demands everyone believes Arthur has betrayed them, while also not allowing him any opportunity to clear up the misunderstanding, which I found slightly frustrating. It kind of reminded me of the political intrigue equivalent of those 80s romances where the hero arbitrarily decides the heroine is a whore on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. Arthur does nothing, the whole book, to make anyone suspect him of malfeasance. In fact, he mostly out of his way to help people. I do understand that plots have to happen but I wish there'd been a way to bring about the same set of circumstances without completely devaluing however-many-hundred pages of Arthur's emotional labour. But, honestly. I think most of these minor rough patches are the book falling victim to its own scope and ambition. Like if you are going to write a book about three separate romantic couples, whose participants independently have (non-romantic) relationships with each other too, set that book in a complex and fascinating world, take on a bunch of complicated ideas about gender, queerness, identity and self-agency, engage meaningfully with several pieces of Arthuriana, and then throw in some well-constructed political intrigue AND A WAR something, somewhere is going to give. The fact that Gwen and Art has all this going on, remains structurally and emotionally coherent, and is besides deeply moving and funny as hell, is an incredibly impressive achievement. It took me away too long to make the point, but I meant it when I said this book was a green girdle. It's so clever with its interweaving of its characters and its plot and its themes, and its ending is a delicate knot, full of equal parts of hope and uncertainty, which is my personal favourite kind of ending. Basically, Gwen and Art is a unique, bold and special book, and if a hot lady gives it to you, you should definitely risk decapitation to keep it. PS - I also can't believe I wrote an entire review without finding space to mention Lady Bridget. PPS - Also, this is a "take your meds mate" style nitpick but I am unreasonably irked by the fact the book is called Gwen and Art Are Not In Love and hardly anyone calls Arthur Art for the entire book. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 05, 2024
|
Jul 05, 2024
|
Jul 05, 2024
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
1662509456
| 9781662509452
| B0BGQ5ZCMD
| 4.00
| 5,654
| Nov 15, 2022
| Nov 15, 2022
|
Source of book: KU Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent fr Source of book: KU Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. ******************************************* This is another one of those short stories that it’s impossible to talk about without negatively impacting the reading experience for others. Put it this way, though, Undercover is quintessential Muir: oblique worldbuilding that gradually coheres into something meaningful, toxic lesbians being gloriously toxic, a general air of wilfully unaddressed horn, a twist you saw coming and then a twist you didn’t. Moreover (like The Six Deaths of the Saint) the story is expertly crafted to use its own form and structure to advantage: it feels right for its length, rather than straining at the limits of it. In other words, I enjoyed the godalmighty fuck out of this. It didn’t fully blow my socks off the way Saint did, but my socks were definitely left in a highly precious position by the final pages. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 29, 2023
|
Dec 29, 2023
|
Dec 29, 2023
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
166250957X
| 9781662509575
| B0BGQ9B7LF
| 4.33
| 22,127
| Nov 15, 2022
| Nov 15, 2022
|
Source of book: KU Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent fr Source of book: KU Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. ******************************************* Fuck off. No, seriously. Just fuck off. Fuck *right* off. This short story is so brilliant, so beautiful, so overwhelmingly, painfully, devastatingly perfect that I had too many emotions for toxic masculinity to cope with and now I’m angry. I mean, no, I’m not sincerely angry. I’m humbled to live in a world where this exists, and I got to read it. I don’t want to tell you anything about it because I want the experience of reading The Six Deaths of the Saint to be to you what it was for me. Like… it’s an exploration of exploitation. It’s a story about finding yourself. It’s a story about making choices when you’ve had all your choices stripped away. It’s story about greed and cruelty, and hope and freedom. It’s a love story of almost unbearable tenderness. It might be one of my favourite things like, ever? Ever ever ever. Stop reading this. Go and read that. I’m busy. [image] ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 27, 2023
|
Dec 27, 2023
|
Dec 27, 2023
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
0994047169
| 9780994047168
| B0CCZRFGTD
| 4.26
| 5,484
| Nov 15, 2016
| Dec 15, 2016
|
Source of book: KU Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent fr Source of book: KU Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. ******************************************* This is a trans memoir that exists as deconstruction of memoirs and trans memoirs in particular, spinning experiences of transfemme identity, race, found family, intergenerational trauma, love, sex and violence into … I think the term—originally coined by Audre Lorde—is biomythography? All of which is to say, Fierce Femmes and Notorious Liars is a piece of writing that feels true in every sense but the actual. And that is, y’know, very much the point. Let me just quote the opening wholesale to show you what I mean: I don’t believe in safe spaces. They don’t exist. I do, however, believe in dangerous stories: The kind that swirl up from inside you when you least expect it, like the voice of a mad angel whispering of the revolution you are about to unleash. Stories that bend and twist the air as they crackle off your tongue, making you shimmer with glamour, so that everyone around you hangs on to your every intoxicating word. The kind of stories that quiet mad girls dream of to bring themselves comfort after crying themselves to sleep at night, that made your poor starving grandfather cross an entire ocean in search of the unbelievable riches someone once told him were waiting on the other side. The book opens with the heroine, the eldest child of Chinese immigrants, leaving her family’s crooked house in the town of Gloom in order to make for the City of Smoke and Lights. Once there, she finds something like a home on Street of Miracles, where other dangerous femmes have created a community in defiance of a world a world that does not always treat them kindly or understand who they are. Honestly, it's kind of impossible to talk about the plot of Fierce Femmes and Notorious Liars because it's not important. This is not a book about what happens. It's a book about what things mean. Whether that's a group of vigilante femmes seeking retribution for the murder of one of their own, dealing with a body full of killer bees, watching mermaids dying on a beach, or receiving an orgasm from a ghost. It's all woven together from stories--ones that speak to the heroine's experiences, one that speak of the experiences of the people around her--from poems, and from letters home to her sister. The effect is dizzying but in the best possible way. Profoundly moving. And as blissfully freeing as one would expect from the greatest escape artist in the world. Confabulous as it is, this is not a story that shies away from violence, cruelty, and exploitation, nor the impact of those things on deeply vulnerable people. But it's also about learning from hurt and finding in hope in the power to make choices. Even if--especially if--those choices run contrary to what it's assumed you should want or what your story has to look like. In case it isn't obvious, I am passionately in love with Fierce Femmes and Notorious Liars. It's this gorgeous, unapologetic act of pure exhilarating defiance, even to the form it takes, challenging almost every assumption a reader might have about what a book is or should be. Y'know, just as the heroine challenges the expectations and limitations the world brings to...yes, yes, you get it. In any case, I don't think I've ever read anything quite like it. And, while I'm not a big re-visitor of texts in general, I'm pretty sure I'll spend the rest of my life coming back here to drown in the exquisite fury of the prose: And then she kisses me, a kiss that is deep and ferocious. A kiss about the shock of the impact of bodies, slamming together. A kiss about warrior femmes, bodies painted bright for combat, about writhing snakelike on the dance floor of the battleground. About catching the fist before it hits your face and twisting back the arm that tried to hurt you till it breaks. About refusing ever, ever to forget all the femmes that fought and died before us, about screaming their names to the distant stars. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 25, 2023
|
Dec 25, 2023
|
Dec 25, 2023
|
ebook
| ||||||||||||||||
173644588X
| 9781736445884
| B09Q287DMB
| 4.43
| 79
| unknown
| Feb 22, 2022
|
Source of book: KU Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent fr Source of book: KU Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. ******************************************* This is a sequel to The Double Vice. While it stands alone and does a good job (perhaps too good a job because the directness of the recapping at the beginning made me slightly impatient) of filling the reader, I would still recommend reading the first book, y’know, first. Basically this is … more of The Double Vice. Meaning it contains everything I really enjoyed about The Double Vice and all the things I personally found less successful about it. The writing continues to be an uneven mix of pulpishly brisk, a little rough around the edges, and—at its most polished—delightfully sharp: She glared at him. “Why are you always in a fix? Didn’t they teach you anything at that High Hat Academy?” The world-building, similarly, is as deft, detailed and convincing as it is in the first book—guiding the reader expertly through the marginalised communities of prohibition era New York. And the mystery, once again matching its predecessor, is extremely engaging and well-constructed. A little more ambitious, perhaps, than The Double Vice for it's actually two mysteries (who is contaminating a crimelord’s liquor supplies, what caused the death of wild child socialite Rosalie Frazier). One of them, admittedly, is fairly transparent compared to the other (I’m not sure how I feel about a crimelord who can’t spot the obvious traitor behaving traitorously right in his face) but they dovetail beautifully. Where, I think, a second book can offer opportunities to enrich the first is in returning the reader to people and places that feel familiar. The Blind Tiger is no exception to this. I found myself genuinely thrilled o be back with Dash Parker and his queer compatriots (shoutout to Finn Francis, who is a delight on any page he graces), as well as privy to the latest scandal from the theatre next door as heard through the wall of Dash’s apartment, and whatever slick suit Dash happened to be wearing today. I also appreciated that Dash has not escaped the previous book entirely unscathed. We find him plagued by nightmares, unstable and erratic, and rejecting intimacy with his on-again-off-again-now-mostly-on-again boyfriend, Joe. Unfortunately, while I appreciated this emotional arc for the hero I noted felt a little under-developed in the previous book, it didn’t, in the end, quite come together for me. While both books have excelled at dialogue (mostly), sense of place (always), and presenting an intriguing mystery for the reader, they tend to come unstuck a little around emotional dynamics. And, you know, this is—on one level—fine. They’re mysteries, not romances, and the mysteries are absolutely fantastic. Plus, as a protagonist, Dash tends to have a lot more to deal with than smoochies. However, I do feel that Dash’s romantic relationship with Joe is supposed to be important or it wouldn’t be included. In a world of crime, shame, oppression and secrecy, intimate connections are a form of resistance. Moments of hope and joy that cannot be stripped away from people who otherwise have very little. All of which just makes me wish these sequences landed better. For example, there’s a really lovely scene in the final third of the book where Joe finally confronts Dash about his erratic behaviour and the fact he’s been so distant. It ends with Dash confessing that he doesn’t feel he truly belongs anywhere and Joe asserting that Dash belongs with him, which is hugely significant for both of them (and does far more to establish their relationship than the lacklustre bonk scene in the first book). Except it also doesn’t feel quite earned. As I think I said in my review of The Double Vice, Dash is ultimately a utilitarian protagonist – yes, he is in danger sometimes, and in over his head fairly often, but mostly he is there to move the plot forward and, because of this, he’s rarely directly vulnerable to the reader (even when he’s admitting to trauma flashbacks). And maybe this is entirely intentional, either because noir protagonists tend to be rather oblique—the Continental Op isn’t exactly wasting paragraphs on his feefees—or to grant additional weight and meaning so the fact that Dash confides in Joe and only to Joe. The problem is that, while I see both of these as coherent narrative possibilities, the scene itself still kind of came rather out of left field. I can also, if I squint, see that Dash’s emotional distance as a protagonist could perhaps have been building to this confrontation, where he admits he fears is not likeable (nor loveable), but I wish both The Double Vice and The Blind Tiger had just done a tiny bit more work to put that on my radar as intentional and part of Dash’s journey over the course of the books. It also probably doesn’t help that (and, yes, I know I’m the last person to take someone else to task for phonetically rendered dialogue) Joe’s Irish brogue doesn’t feel quite … convincing to me? It ends up coming across as very “top o’ the morning to ya”, for example in lines like this: “Ya,” Joe muttered, “I can’t believe ya told ’em, lassie.” Or: “Wait a moment, lads,” Joe said. “What cockamamie scheme are ya cookin’ up?” It might just be because I’m more familiar with a range of Irish accents than I am the various American dialects that feature in the book, which means I trip over Joe when I don’t trip over other characters. But the only voice it seems possible for me to read his dialogue as written in seems to be that of a cartoon leprechaun. This does not make him a great love interest from my perspective. And has had the side effect of driving me fictionally into the deadly arms of Nicholas Fife, the gangster introduced in the first book, who only gets sexier in this one. God I need more therapy. On the one hand we have a strong, gorgeous, dependable, kind and loyal man with an awkwardly presented accent. On the other a purring murderous touchy-feely criminal with a set of peacock lamps. And I am fucking mad about him. Seriously, he can put a straight razor to my throat or creep into the bath with me any day of the week. (My own dreadful in taste in men aside, I do actually think he has far more on page chemistry with Dash than Joe, not that I really think Dash should date him.) In any case, irrespective of any flaws these books may or may not have, I really admire what this series is doing and am consuming it with unabashed glee. Me to Nicholas Fife: [image] ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 2023
|
Nov 19, 2023
|
Nov 19, 2023
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
1547045191
| 9781547045198
| 1547045191
| 4.19
| 8,941
| Jun 05, 2017
| Jun 05, 2017
|
Source of book: Bought by me Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit Source of book: Bought by me Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* So, I have complicated feelings about my review of Sea of Ruin: because I had a tremendous amount of fun with the book and I had a tremendous amount of fun writing the review … but I occasionally worry it comes across as sort of … ill-intentioned or bad-faithy. And I’m worried that writing a review of another of this author’s books just looks like I’m deliberately setting out to be trollish or dickish. But the thing is, I just had to sign 7500 bits of paper in 9 weeks, it has consumed ALL my time that hasn’t been given over to other work, I haven’t read a single book in those 9 weeks, which has been absolutely miserable making … and I was desperate to read something I knew would be unabashedly high octane outrageously sexy fun. So Pam Godwin it was. And if my thoughts about her work come across as anything other than wholly appreciative that is on me. I read books like this because I enjoy the fuck out of them. And today I needed what this book was delivering, and it delivered that thing exuberantly, masterfully, in exactly the sort of the way I needed it delivered. I will say this, though. For better or worse (depending on your perspective), One Is A Promise is measurably less bananas than Sea of Ruin. There’s no dangling women off the sides of boats by their pussies, there’s no hilariously convoluted citrus allergy themed shenanigans, nobody shows the same degree of commitment to furtive enhancement-assisted self-pleasure as my beloved Ashley Cutler. By Sea of Ruin standards, One Is A Promise is positively tame. But—honestly—that’s probably for the best. For starters, there’s a lot more, err, consent here? Even if some scenes hover (deliberately) on the edge of “say no right now or I’ll bang your brain out” dubcon. Before I get into it, though, I should probably just mention a couple of story elements that may not play super comfortably for some readers. And let me just emphasise that I’m mentioning these not because I’m any sort of expert, or because I want to be the political correctness pope, but because our subjective capacity to embrace bonkersness is sort of predicated on the bonkersness not taking us somewhere that feels personally hurtful. So the heroine is a dancer, who teaches and choreographs and specialises in a variety of styles—all of which is pretty cool, but the aspect of this that may well be an unavoidable squick for some readers is that her main source of income is performing as a … I’m going to use the term the book uses here … bellydancer at a Moroccan restaurant. As far as I can tell, the heroine herself is … white? Well, her name is Danielle Angelo so I guess the implication is that she’s of Italian American descent. But she has blonde hair and grey eyes and an explicitly *tiny* frame and she performs this style of dancing in a way that is, you know, the seductive, exoticised heavily westernised interpretation that—as I understand it—runs contrary to how the dance is performed in the countries of its origin. This isn’t something the heroine or the book acknowledges: but then it is supposed to be a sexy romp about a woman torn between two extremely alpha men who love her beyond reason. Detouring into the complexities of cultural appropriation in the sphere of professional dance is sort of beyond its scope. As it is beyond mine. I should also probably mention that the heroine’s dance partner is Caribbean, and his dialogue is written like this: “Waz up with you, hoss? […] You need to grease dat waistline.” Again, it’s not on me to comment on this, especially because I, too, occasionally represent dialect phonetically in books. However, I’m not sure this would be a dialect I personally felt it was appropriate for me to render and so I leave this to your personal taste as a reader. He’s not in the book very much: like all men who are not the hero(es) his main role is to be less good at sex than they are and get punched in the face by a real man like the beta male cuck he is. As an aside I will say I’m occasionally mildly … something-ed … not quite troubled … but somethinged by the way every man in a Pam Godwin book is either a rampant alpha or a sexually inadequate worm. This tendency to judge men solely by their capacity to manifest a particular brand of masculinity is, honestly, borderline femcelish. But I also find it fun to read about for some reason? And clearly it’s working in terms of storytelling? So? [image] Anyway, as I mentioned earlier the deal here is the heroine is a dancer. She’s three years deep into grieving the love of her life—a tatted up bad guy with an enormous dick—who went away on a mysterious government job and died. Then she’s offered an outrageous amount of money to dance in a casino by the cold, buttoned up, clearly obsessed with her man who owns the casino. And omg, his name is actually Trace. Which maybe codes differently in the US but in the UK is … um. The name of your best friend’s mum’s best girlfriend? Trace, short for Tracie. She’s kind of loud and can’t read a room to save her life but is ultimately well-meaning. There are a lot of stories that begin “you’ll never guess what Trace did/said this time.” Anyway, Trace is the first man sufficiently alpha to stir Danni’s loins since the other guy … so most of the book is a compellingly fucked up romantic/sexual cat ‘n’ mouse game between the two of them. The thing is, though, I’ve read of Sea of Ruin. So I already know Trace is basically Ashley Cutler except a casino owner (I do have this terrible weakness for repressed alphas – WHY?! Where did this come from?! And nobody writes a repressed alpha quite like Pam Godwin). And I know the guy Danni is grieving is … the guy who was not Ashley Cutler. All of which said, One Is A Promise—perhaps because it’s a trilogy—does a slightly job of making the one who is not Tracie Cutler a bit more textually present. The book moves between Danni’s memories about The Other One and her present developing relationship with Tracie Cutler, which helps a lot. Although I still personally found it about as hard to care about this version of The Other One than I did about The Other One Who Wasn’t Ashley Cutler. This might, of course, come down to personal taste, but I think it’s also because, both in Sea of Ruin and One Is A Promise, the heroine’s connection with The Other One is always this instant amazing forever feeling. While her relationship with Some Version Of Ashley Cutler is complicated and messy and mutually vulnerable-making, and ultimately involves a significant emotional journey for both of them. Also the Tracie Cutler character has to work for the heroine, bring down his walls, respect her agency and personhood: The Other One just turns up, puts his magic dick in her and the deal done. That’s nowhere near as interesting to me. Anyway, there’s a twist at the end of One Is A Promise. That, given this book is a trilogy and basically just contemporary Sea of Ruin, is sort of … inevitable really. I am, however, kind of intrigued to see what can be done with these arcs and dynamics when extended across three books. But if we don’t end up with a situation where the heroine gets to be with both men, and they with each other in a way that somehow isn’t at all queer, I will eat my own enormous alpha dick. In any case, there was a lot I felt worked better than Sea of Ruin terms of characterisation and consent. There’s just more time to unfold the story and the Trace version of Ashley Cutler, while he’s just as fucked up and doesn’t exactly treat the heroine well, treats the heroine a lot less badly. Or at least it feels that way. I mean, for whatever reason, paying someone an amount of cold hard cash so ludicrous they can’t really say no to dancing at your casino is basically the modern-day equivalent of kidnapping them onto your ship there’s still clear blue water between that and the literalities of abducting someone. On top of which the contemporary setting means the heroine spends zero time in sexual or physical danger. She’s randomly objectified a fair bit but she’s given plenty of scope to sass about it without that leading to immediate assault. I mean, I know life wasn’t exactly great for women in the seventeenth century, but it did seem a bit like Sea of Ruin had decided that only way to portray this was by subjecting Wosserface to constant misogyny and molestation—making the whole book a bit complicated as an escapist sex fantasy. In One Is A Promise, though, the heroine is super clear about what she’s into (huge possessive slightly toxic alpha men) and is very direct in seeking it out. For most of the book, in fact, she’s the one pursuing Tracie Cutler while he retreats and represses. While alpha heroes aren’t usually my bag there’s still something I find really compelling about a heroine who is allowed to be this direct about exactly what she wants and have this much agency in seeking it. Basically I might not agree with what a heroine wants, but I defend to the death her right to get it. I also appreciate (and it feels weird this should still be something that strikes me as notable when we’re talking about romance in the 21st century) the heroine’s sexual liberty—obviously she’s been exclusive with Cole, and she mostly spends the book with Tracie Cutler, but she’s pretty direct about her sexual needs and preferences, and the fact she’s had plenty of lovers and experiences in the past. Also unlike Sea of Ruin, this book is a lot less weird about anal. Danni is into it and it’s no big thing. Which is, again, a nice thing to see in m/f. Not that I think there’s any obligation for m/f books to include anal sex—some people are into it, some people aren’t, and that’s fine—but I think it still tends to get shunted into a queer box or else used primarily for shock value/punishment. Which is, y’know, a bit nonsensical. It’s just sex people. Although she does end up having anal sex in a hot balloon at one point, which—having been in a hot air balloon—I personally found quite … hilarious? Especially because the hot air balloonist has to stand with her back to them and headphones on while the … analisation is going down. Like, how much did that hot air balloonist get paid for that? NOT ENOUGH if you ask me. Anyway: if you’re into this kind of thing, or if even if you’re not and you think you might be, you could do a lot worse than One Is A Promise. The emotions are turned … not even to eleven, I’d say at least fourteen, the sexy is certainly going for it, the dialogue is deliciously sparky, and the characters—especially the heroine—are well-realised. Obviously there’s elements of the book or elements of the dynamic that might not be for you and that’s fine too. But, for me, this was the right book at the right time, and I enjoyed the hell out of it. PS – this piece of weirdness doesn’t quite live up to Ashley Cutler smuggling lube out onto the back of his ship so he can masturbate as fiercely as he needs but here’s a piece of dialogue that brought me up short: “They wouldn’t be able to pierce your clit anyway. Yours is too tiny.” “ I mean, what even? Firstly, I think he probably means the hood, rather than the clit itself. But also: what is going on with this guy that he’s been internally performing some kind of comparative clit analysis of the clit-owners with whom he has been sleeping? Dude, that’s just incredibly, incredibly odd. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 25, 2023
|
Feb 25, 2023
|
Feb 25, 2023
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||
0063243326
| 9780063243323
| 0063243326
| 3.80
| 953
| Feb 07, 2023
| Feb 07, 2023
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if I have good things to say. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book and then write a GR review about it would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* Oh well done me. Diligently wrote my review of this, put it to one side as we were advised to do during the Harper Collins strike … and now can’t find the damn thing. So let me try again. This turn out to be the definition of a complicated one for me. There was a lot I loved about it, I lot I found genuinely rather audacious, and some things that didn’t quite land for one reason or another, many of those reasons probably personal. Anyway to get into it: Cass, the heroine of Out of Character is a fat (using the language preferred by the book here) queer teenager who participates in an online roleplaying group based on her favourite series of books. Her homelife has recently undergone a bit of a shake-up, because her mother has moved out abruptly, leaving Cass’s previously very work-focused dad in place as primary parent. But her love life, by contrast, is looking up as she’s recently started dating Taylor Cooper, a girl she previously believed was out of her league. The more complicated Cass’s life becomes, the more she retreats into her roleplaying group, especially her complicated friendship with her, presumed straight, RP-partner, Rowan. So, as you can probably tell from the summary, Cass has as lot going on her life. We’re getting into very subjective territory here, because everyone wants to see different aspects of identity represented in different ways, but for me personally I really appreciated that by the time we meet Cass she’s very comfortable with the aspects of herself that could well be the arc, or even the conflict, in another book. Which is to say, while Cass does reflect on how being fat and queer alter her relationship to the world, and the world’s relationship to her, they’re basically her background reality at this point. She’s more concerned with the specifics of her life right now: her mother leaving, her maybe-crush on Rowan, and the fact that what should be a supposedly perfect relationship with Taylor kind of isn’t. I should probably also say that I went into this sort of … pre-wincing over the roleplaying theme while also wanting to read the book precisely *because* of the roleplaying theme. The thing is, I am always excited for books that centre niche nerd hobbies, but I also worry about those niche nerd hobbies are going to get depicted, especially if they wind up being a conflict point in the book. To give Out of Character credit, this is definitely an insider look at this particular niche nerd hobby. Right down to the fact there’s always someone controlling a plot-significant character who is flaky as fuck and treats the whole thing with barely concealed contempt. In general, it does a really good job of capturing how compelling it can be and feels loving—if clear-eyed—in exactly the sort of way you want someone writing about the dorky thing you do so sometimes let off steam to be both loving and clear-eyed. Where the wheels slightly came off for me was the way Cass’s increasing involvement in and dependence on her online roleplaying exchanges got entangled up in these very dog whistly “gaming addiction” type ideas. The background here is that, when she was younger, Cass got “addicted” to The Sims and her schoolwork suffered until her parents took the game away: so this makes her feel she is also “addicted” to her roleplaying life and worries about telling her father. And we’re probably straying into personal bugbear type territory here, but I wish “gaming addiction” hadn’t been bandied about so casually and so definitively. The thing is, there’s a real and meaningful difference between addiction in the behavioural or pharmacological sense and playing videogames a bit too much. Yes, Cass isn’t always able to find the self-discipline to balance school and videogames—which, don’t get me wrong, is non-ideal—but that doesn’t mean she has an addiction disorder. Young people, and indeed not so young people, can go off the rails slightly for all kinds of reason and it’s a pretty normal human impulse to seek refuge from our stresses in a hobby taken to excess. I mean, when I was kid I didn’t have much access to computer games because we were poor and also they were pretty rudimentary, so I read a lot of books instead. As in, actively withdrew from my life and responsibilities (such as they were) to hide in the local library and read books. But nobody suggested I was addicted to reading because I’d kept skipping school to read Middlemarch. Sorry, I’ve slightly gone off on one. I think part of the reason I got stuck on this particular aspect of the story was that it felt about plot, rather than about character. The book needed/wanted to have meaningful conflict about Cass’s online roleplaying that wasn’t “well, she needs to stop this embarrassing hobby” or “this embarrassing hobby will turn your children into gay satanists”, something that would give her real motivation to keep it secret from her parents. And the thing is, I think that motivation could still have been present, without inventing a prior case of Sims addiction, or acting like Sims addiction is a specific and recognisable condition that can only be treated by going into parentally-imposed Sims rehab. Similarly, there’s already a series of interesting conflicts around Cass’s roleplaying: her relationship with her friend group within it, the slow dissolution of a particular relationship as one of the players goes to college and essentially decides the hobby isn’t significant to her and neither are the people involved in it (this is pretty realistic and wrenching AF to be honest), Cass’s closeness with Rowan, the balance between allowing the hobby to be a meaningful part of her life without it taking over her life in times of stress or anxiety. Anyway, this aside—and I apologise for banging on it about it so much, it just bugged me, and it may very well not bug you in the slightest—there’s a lot I really adored here. Random addiction nonsense aside, I found the fandom/roleplaying sections incredibly charming. It doesn’t take over the book but it’s nice to get little glimpses of Cass’s roleplaying life, whether that’s managing the server, talking with her friends, or writing back and forth with Rowan. The books they’re fans of is fictional—err, fictional in the sense made up for the story—series about queer pirates and comes across as exactly the sort of series that would spawn an enthusiastic fandom while also not being presented as some kind of staggering work of heart-breaking genius. Obviously there’s nothing wrong per se with presenting something you yourself have made up as a staggering work of heart-breaking genius but I personally liked the fact that the book—the real book, I mean—was so willing to champion the value of stories that are loved by their readers over abstract ideas of literary merit or universal critical acclaim. I also really loved Cass as a character, and I thought there was a lot of nuance to her portrayal; the way the book was willing to allow her to be confident in some ways (especially about her body and her queerness) and messy AF in others. For example, she’s also anxious, introverted, inclined to hide from her problems, withholding and needy at the same time, slightly emotionally myopic and, err, treats her both Taylor and Rowan—Taylor especially—quite badly. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not *blaming* or *judging* Cass as a character for the fact she makes some poor decisions and isn’t a paragon (in fact, I think it’s very important that not every character has to be): but I did find her impressively wrong-headed sometimes. Being YA, Out of Character is mostly a maturation narrative, although it does have strong romantic elements too. And it was interesting to me, coming from the romance genre and mostly adult romance, just how … uh … misguided Cass was allowed to be. It’s very clear from early on that she’s not with the right person, but she clings to Taylor anyway, mostly out of fear and insecurity. And what makes this especially difficult is that Taylor is trying so hard—admittedly too hard—to be a good and loving girlfriend, while Cass lies to her and treats her as a chore. Again, I want to be very clear I’m not judging Cass for this; she’s flawed and human and imperfect, and that’s okay. Honestly, it was kind of refreshing to see this kind of arc from the perspective of the, uh, the mistreater not the mistreated. And I found it intriguing that the main romance arc of the book wasn’t so much the heroine falling in love as finding the confidence to recognise she wasn’t in love: Having a crush on someone who reminded me of a fictional character wasn’t enough. Having things in common wasn’t enough. Her being funny and cool and cute and smart and everything else didn’t matter if I didn’t actually feel something.. I realise I’ve sort of gone deep here. But while Out of Character is a book with serious themes, I felt it handled them deftly, and—in case I’ve made it sound overly intense—it’s also a genuinely charming, heart-warming read. It’s got a daft cat in it and a cast of well-developed characters, all with their own thing going on, Like Cass herself, they don’t always behave perfectly but that’s just human, you know? And it felt like real generosity, on the part of the book, that it was so consistently willing to allow people to make mistakes, and hurt each other, and yet still ultimately be understandable and well-meaning, whether this is Cass’s mother, who treats Cass rather selfishly (albeit on the context of a dissolving marriage), or the boy who used to bully Cass at school. For me, though, the real joy of Out of Character is that it genuinely captures the sense of true companionship that can develop around a shared love of the same thing. Also it treats one of my niche nerdy hobbies with very kindly indeed. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
0593200683
| 9780593200681
| 0593200683
| 3.86
| 100,479
| Sep 06, 2022
| Sep 06, 2022
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* Ah, this is just unabashedly good fun. The book opens with our four heroines, Billie, Helen, Mary Alice and Natalie celebrating their retirement with luxury cruise. The twist is, what they’re retiring from is the job of being an all-female assassination squad (that is, the members of the squad are women, not that they specifically assassinate women, that would be kind of creepy) working for a shadowy international organisation with benevolent aims and terminal methods. The secondary twist is that they quickly come realise they themselves have become someone’s target. And the tertiary twist is that the ‘someone’ is their own organisation. What follows is a frankly amazing game of “get them before they get us” as the four women attempt to secure their future by way of murder and uncover who has betrayed them. This is one of those books that’s difficult to review because a) I don’t want to spoil it and b) I basically manifested the Jessica Fletcher popcorn gif while I was reading, I was so gripped. It’s fantastically paced—offering us occasional glimpses of the past to contextualise the present—but, mostly, it’s just like … older woman competence porn with bonus violence? Tell me, what’s not to love about that? If I had to get picky—and, well, I don’t have to, but I’m going to anyway—I’d say that while each of the women gets their own arc and their moment to shine, Billie is very much the protagonist of the story and that the means the others sometimes get short shrift. Helen, recently bereaved and fragile, was probably the best characterised after Billie (or at the very least my favourite), but Natalie is mostly brassy comic relief and Mary Alice’s relationship with her wife is resolved mostly off page. I can see not wanting to drag down the story or compromise the suspense, but Mary Alice’s whole deal is that she’s been lying to her wife about her job (Akiko assumes she’s a spy not an assassin) and, once the truth comes out, they essentially have to bring Akiko (and Akiko’s cat) with them for safety. Understandably vexed about the whole situation, Akiko stops speaking to Mary Alice for a while but then just sort of … gets over … before the big confrontation. And, again, I can logically see why you’d probably want to reconcile with your wife the night before she might literally die but—and this might just be me wanting more queerness as point of principle—I do wish we’d been slightly more privy to the emotions in play in that relationship. There’s also a bit of an odd dynamic where one of Billie’s devotedly loyal personal contacts is this Lisbeth Salander type which means, between her and Akiko, you’ve sort of got a Ukrainian woman and Japanese woman who spend the whole book dutifully following four Americans around the globe. But, at the same time, between the past and the present, antagonists and allies, victims and ex-lovers, the book has a really sprawling cast, so its occasionally utilitarian approach to its secondary characters is perhaps to be expected. The final thing I’d say—and I don’t know how to put this tactfully, so I’ll just put it bluntly but … there’s always, I think, a slight concern with media that is specifically focused on women and empowerment to be … gender prescriptive at best and kinda TERFy at worst. And, obviously, I’m not here to say it’s wrong to focus on women and empowerment in whatever way an author sees fit, nor is it my place to approve or condemn particular approaches. For me personally, I felt Killers of A Certain Age offered a diverse cast for whom what being “happy, successful and a woman” meant very different things and who navigated both their identity and their place in a patriarchal society in different ways. Basically—and again, this is just my perspective—part of what made the book such a guilt-free thrill-ride, albeit one in which people get murdered a lot, was its accompanying sense of receptivity to many possible ways of living. Even if that’s being a woman in your sixties who can kill someone with your bare hands. An enthusiastic rec from me. I sincerely need this book to be a TV show. PS – There’s a bit of logistics in the beginning third of the book where the women have to travel to, from and about the UK in a way that won’t alert the people who are tracking them. Because I’m a total arse (and don’t trust Americans with my country) I actually looked up the various travel times, airports, and flight patterns and they totally checked out. That made me really happy. I do love discovering another author’s borderline pathological attention to detail. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 09, 2022
|
Dec 09, 2022
|
Dec 09, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
1804180025
| 9781804180020
| B09SHJR5RH
| 3.54
| 5,470
| Jul 21, 2022
| Jul 21, 2022
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: The author and I are social media moots; we have occasional bants. Please note: This review Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: The author and I are social media moots; we have occasional bants. Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* I’ve written before about how … complicated it can get when you love one book in a series, or one particular work by an author. Thankfully, in the case of Infamous, it’s not complicated at all because I loved it EVEN MORE than I loved Reputation. With hindsight, I think I loved Reputation for its potential: I adored its exuberance, it’s defiance, it’s capacity for both darkness and light, even if sometimes, especially towards the end, it felt a bit tonally unbalanced. Infamous, though, is very much the realisation of Reputation’s potential. It has everything I loved about Reputation but … y’know BIGGER, HARDER, FASTER. Basically, Infamous is Fury Road to Reputation’s Mad Max. And I could not be more delighted or more impressed. In my review of Reputation, I spoke a little of the ways it had the potential to be a little divisive among readers. I think it’s impossible, as an author or any creative professional, to completely insulate yourself from criticism, no matter how careful you are to avoid reader spaces. And, obviously, this too is complicated because if you refuse to accept criticism of any kind then that is ALSO a problem. It’s just public criticism comes at you with the randomness (and, occasionally, the brutality) of machine gun fire so it’s impossible to fully balance what is justified versus what is ill-intentioned, especially when aspects of the text will sometimes be perceived as flaws when they’re both fully intended and fully integral to what you’ve created. I should emphasise, that I’m not saying it’s wrong not to like something about what someone is doing. But, to put it in the bluntest possible terms, if what you didn’t like about Reputation was its irreverence, its queerness, its diversity and its deliberate use of anachronism then you aren’t going to like Infamous either. Because it takes all those aspects from Reputation and it does them MORE. I don’t like to over-speculate, or indeed speculate at all, about what drives other authors: but, to me, this doubling down on aspects of Reputation that were controversial to some readers did not feel spiteful, defensive or resentful. It felt like a writer committed to their vision. And that, in turn, was a pleasure to experience as a reader. (Although, speaking purely for myself, I do feel some kind of way about the general willingness to assert as just plain “wrong” books that use historical settings to explore marginalised experience, while texts that use historical settings to tell stories about straight white people are just assumed to be correct and appropriate, and never get called out on their biases.) Anyway, the deal with Infamous is that our protagonist, Edith (Eddie) Miller, has been raised ‘unconventionally’ by her loving parents, alongside her siblings. Her best friend, Rose Li, is by nature and upbringing somewhat less unconventional, although the two young women have been devoted to each other since childhood. As they hover on the brink of adulthood, however, their priorities have begun to diverge: Eddie has always known she wanted to be a writer, and Rose seems to want nothing more than a conventional marriage. Then, frustrated with Rose (especially her engagement to a boring man in his thirties who breeds rabbits) and mainstream society in general, Eddie runs into one of her heroes: the romantic poet Nash Nicholson. He is immediately taken with her, encouraging her writerly ambitions, and ultimately invites her on a artist’s retreat to his family home. The family home turns out to be a decomposing wreck on an island but Eddie, and the other artists, do their best to work amidst Nash’s constant whims and dramas. Except this is barely the beginning of Eddie’s journey. Because, holy shit, does she have a lot to learn about life, love, art and—most of all—herself. Much like Reputation, Infamous is a Bildungsroman and, while Eddie’s journey from innocence and ignorance to knowledge and understanding, doesn’t offer many surprises in its peaks and troughs, everything about it was, for me, pitch perfect. I should also take a moment to explain that I don’t mean “doesn’t offer many surprises” in a negative way: this is a story about growing up, it’s not a thriller, I wasn’t reading to be surprised, I was reading to be engaged. And engaged I was, deliciously and comprehensively. On top of which, Infamous’s adherence to the rhythms of its genre (a genre, by the way, was flourishing during the time the book is set) give the whole story a remarkable precision, both in terms of its arc and its pacing. Also, reading with my queer adult eyes, I got all the satisfaction of about a million fictional “I told you sos” and “I saw that coming” by the time Eddie figured her shit out. Speaking of Eddie, I adored her. She is not the most sympathetic of heroines, nor I think is she intended to be, because she is relentlessly flawed, self-absorbed, and short-sighted when it comes to the people around her. But, to me at least, she was profoundly, wonderfully relatable, as much because of those flaws, rather than in spite of them. Her mistakes, her misjudgements, and her occasional straight detours into obnoxiousness always came across more understandable than condemnable: she is, after all, a confused seventeen year-old with big ambitions, who is more vulnerable than she realises, and feels somewhat alienated by her society. I think there will be readers to whom Eddie does not speak. But, frankly, you are wrong and I will fight you. Okay, I won’t. I do, actually, get any frustration with Eddie. But I think there’s something very … queer somehow, about her particular brand of obtuseness. That kind of helpless, thrashing ‘who I am, what does it mean, where I do fit’ bewilderment that some of us, ahem, don’t figure out until their late twenties at least. The supporting cast is equally delightful. From Eddie’s lovingly rambunctious family (please give me a whole book about Beatrice, who became my instant favourite after this description: “a small girl with her dark hair gathered up on top of her head so that she resembled a very angry pineapple”) to Nash Nicholson’s circle of artists and radicals, there isn’t a single character who doesn’t fucking shine. Your mileage may vary, of course, but I personally really appreciated the fact that the world of Infamous feels very much a world where people have their own shit going on, shit that Eddie learns to be less oblivious to as the book progresses. I think this felt particularly true, and important, for Rose. Obviously it’s not for me to make judgements about whether Rose is a successful portrait of a Asian woman in the Regency. While Croucher never elides issues of social injustice (one of the supporting characters, Oluwadayo Akerele, is an abolitionist) or pretends micro-aggressions don’t exist, this isn’t a book that constantly subjects its marginalised characters to cruelty and aggression in the name of the sort of “historical accuracy” I’ve already noted I personally find messed up and, to be blunt, actively inaccurate. On the surface, Rose seems a much more conventional character than Eddie. She wants to get married, she wants to be accepted by society, she cares about her reputation and, indeed, about being kind to other people, in ways Eddie just doesn’t. But we are also seeing Rose from Eddie’s exceptionally unreliable perspective. We learn, almost incidentally, that Rose’s father is deeply involved in helping Chinese immigrants find homes and jobs in England, and there’s a degree to which, I think, we are expected, as readers, to understand that Eddie can buck against her society precisely because there is no question that she belongs within it. Rose, by contrast, cannot take that for granted. I did not personally see this as Rose rejecting her Asian heritage so much as growing up with an understanding of the world that Eddie lacks. They are both in their way rebellious people, it’s just that Rose has learned to rebel in useful ways, to make compromises around her identity that create spaces for her to be safe and happy, whereas Eddie—at least at the beginning of the book—is just loud in her discontents. There’s no getting away from the fact that Eddie does less to ‘deserve’ Rose than perhaps she should or could. In terms of wake up calls, Eddie figuratively sleeps through about three different alarms over the course of the book. But, again, the book is a Bildungsroman: there’s romance in it (and a gorgeous HEA that made me literally hug my kindle), but learning is the key to the story. Reading between the lines of Eddie’s self-absorption, it’s pretty clear that Rose is doing plenty of learning of her own: it’s just she’s already knowing herself and knowing in the world, her journey looks very different to Eddie’s. Once again, your mileage may vary, but I was very much rooting for both of them. Eddie may have spent about half of the book clueless, but the connection between her and Rose is undeniable, with the sharply perceptive Rose perfectly able to hold her own against Eddie’s haphazard charisma, and their mutual chemistry … well *fans self historically accurately*. Since I’m talking characters, I should also spare a few lines for Nash Nicholson, little though he deserves them. Basically, with Nash, I think Croucher pulls off an almost impossible feat—which is to say, he’s a genuinely charming piece of shit, and writing genuinely charming pieces of shit is actually really hard. Mostly when you read about a piece of shit who is supposed to be charming, he’s not charming at all, and you suspend belief on behalf of the character being taken-in because otherwise they just look way too credulous. In the case of Nash Nicholson, while he’s clearly bad news from the outset, red flags flying high from every parapet (I mean, he insists on calling Eddie, Edie, not Eddie, and claims to see that she’s a talented writer without ever looking at a single thing she’s written), he’s also … he’s just annoyingly entertaining. “The library was enormous […] It had the air of a cathedral, something venerated and quietly holy - until Nash sneezed very loudly and then said, “For fuck’s sake.” I still resent the amount of times he made me laugh out loud—despite being a terrible person. It’s telling, I think, that even Nash’s dark backstory is ultimately a tragedy that belongs to other people. The only character I wished there’d been a little more to was Valentine, Nash’s nonbinary friend. They get, to be fair, some wonderfully funny lines and some rather heartbreaking ones, but mostly they just lounge around, providing exposition about Nash and his wife. Given, as I mentioned earlier, that the book seems to go out of its way to create a sense that its supporting cast, especially the most marginalised members of it, have their own thing going on, I couldn’t quite understand why Valentine seems to have nothing better to do with their life than follow Nash around, even knowing Nash is a complete cockweasel, who cheats on his wife, and exploits seventeen-year-olds. I mean, I’m not saying nonbinary people are morally bound to make sensible choices about their friends—and Valentine does admit to Eddie that they feel lost within their life in general—but there was never any explanation for their loyalty to Nash and they felt like the only character without a context of their own. And I’m well-aware how … awkward it is for me to be reflecting on this, given the author is themself nonbinary. I should make it clear that I’m not saying they did nonbinary wrong (that is not a judgement anybody gets to make about anything, regardless of identity): I just felt, in terms of their place in the narrative, that Valentine, for all they were delightful, seemed to have no life that wasn’t Nash. And while that could well have been a deliberate choice, it left me sad for them in ways I didn’t want to be sad, and in ways the book hadn’t prepared me to be sad. And, omg, I’m writing an essay here. The final thing I wanted to mention is that Infamous is, amongst its other themes, a book about art, and writing in particular. Being a writer who writes about writing is … complicated (and one of the reasons, I think, why I tend to write writers who are absolute hacks) because it can feel kind of crass to be exalting the thing you are yourself doing. Like everything else on the planet, how you feel about Infamous’s exploration of art is going to be subjective. Me? I really loved it. I think it helps that, while Eddie is talented and dedicated, she is never shown to be a extraordinary or particular genius. Most relevantly, writing is shown to be something she has to, y’know, *do*: it requires thought and commitment and, above all else, time, which reflects my own approach to writing and my experiences “as a writer” (whatever that means). It may, of course, not reflect yours. Even fucking Nash has his moments, like this annoyingly realistic little gem as he discusses trying to construct one of his poems: “Love, sex, Aphrodite, Eros, death . . . It might as well be an instruction manual about how to build a ship, I spent enough time studying vessel plans to eke out horrible little metaphors and turns of phrase that made me want to vomit.” I mean yes. That moment when you’re trying to say a thing that should be simple and so you research it half to death and then it ends up just completely sucking? That’s such a fucking mood. The other thing I really appreciated about Eddie’s writing was the role Rose plays in it. While others are only too willing to exploit Eddie or manipulate her relationship with her art, Rose—while not mindlessly uncritical (What on earth does this mean?? she had written next to a line that described somebody’s personality as ‘foaming’. ‘You know,’ Eddie said indignantly later. ‘Sparkling! Effervescent!’ ‘Eddie, if you write that she’s foaming, everybody is going to think the poor thing’s gone rabid.’)—is unfailingly supportive, encouraging, and honest. Basically, the best writing friend any writer could wish for, and I love that the book celebrates the value of that relationship. Because writing, in my experience, needs a Rose as much as it needs an Eddie. I need to wrap this up or I’ll break Goodreads. Basically, this book felt for me in so many ways. It made me laugh and clutch at it. I cringed and swooned and absolutely gloried in its wit, its compassion, its beauty, and its wicked sense of the absurd. In other words, I LOVED IT WITH MY WHOLE SOUL IT HAS MY WHOLE HEART which is the sort of thing I’ve always sworn I’d never write in a review. But I’m saying it now to show just how fucking serious I am about this book. If it was a person, I’d break up with my current partner to be with it. It also contains a scene in which a duck defecates on the head of small child. 10/10 ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Nov 28, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
B09T5GJ8BV
| 4.05
| 50,323
| Nov 22, 2022
| Nov 22, 2022
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: The author and I are social media moots. Please note: This review may not be reproduced or q Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: The author and I are social media moots. Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* Loving a book is a complicated thing. Because it can make you unfair in a lot of equally complicated ways. And, given I often see those complications from the other side, I don’t want to be unfair myself. But I also want to be honest so here goes: there’s a lot I loved about Astrid Parker Doesn’t Fail, but I didn’t love it quite as much as I did Delilah Green Doesn’t Care (though not loving something quite as much as Delilah still means I loved it a whole fucking lot). But, y’know what, I reckon that’s probably okay. Books should be different to each other. And they should speak to different people differently. We last saw Astrid, at the end of Delilah Green, breaking her engagement to her horrible fiancé and partially reconciling with Delilah as they both came to better understand the ways their childhood had separately damaged them. As Astrid Parker Doesn’t Fail opens, she’s in a pretty bad way: her design business is failing, she’s still emotionally entangled with her toxic mother, and her romantic future looks bleak. Then she gets an offer to work as the designer on a series of a reality TV show called Innside America, which focuses on renovating … inns? In American small towns? I don’t even know. Is this a thing for you people? Anyway, the job in question is the renovation of the Everwood Inn and it’s exactly what Astrid needs to re-establish both her reputation and her business. Unfortunately, on her way to the job, a hot carpenter flings coffee all over her and Astrid is—to my mind understandably—snappish about this. The carpenter is Jordan Everwood, heartbroken and recently divorced, and very unwilling to trust her family inn to a woman who was upset to have coffee flung over her. Needless to say, Jordan and Astrid start out in conflict, but soon they end up working together to save the inn and … y’know … maybe each other too? What I loved about Astrid Parker Doesn’t Fail was … well. Astrid Parker. I think I loved her more than the book was prepared for me to love her because the coffee flinging incident was meant to be her being unacceptably rude to a stranger. But like. I’ve never owned an ivory pencil dress but I feel if I did own an ivory pencil dress and someone tossed three cups of coffee up it … I would want to be compensated for the dry cleaning too? Unfortunately, my commitment to Astrid during Ivory Pencil Dressgate meant that Astrid and Jordan’s initial interactions frustrated me more than than intrigued me. Like, not only had this carpenter ruined Astrid’s frankly amazing-sounding dress, but she was treating Astrid badly too? Once I got over this, however, I did end up really enjoying Jordan and Astrid together: they have a lot of chemistry and it was wonderful to see Astrid finally letting go in the company of someone willing to do the work to get to know who she is. Letting go—in various ways and forms—is a major theme of the book and it really effectively unites the stories of the two women, along with the wider arc of how best to honour the inn’s past while making space for its future. I was also really happy to see the characters from the previous book—spending fictional time with them felt very much like meeting old friends. I was initially worried that some of Delilah’s “Delilahness” was being dampened by the need for her a play a secondary role in someone else’s story (in the first scene she’s in, for example, she does little beyond make lovestruck faces in Claire’s direction) but once the book gets underway, and Delilah gets to have some one-on—one scenes with Astrid, she felt like herself again. So yeah. In summary, a lot of what I admired in Delilah Green Doesn’t Care can be found here as well. Loveable characters, trying to navigate their damage, portrayed with care. Wonderful banter, between lovers and friends. Playfulness and passion between the leads. Nuanced emotional dynamics. Really gorgeous writing all round:
As for where Astrid Parker Doesn’t Fail ended up losing me in places… I honestly think it might simply come down to particular differences in perspective. And while I don’t think they made Astrid Parker a bad book or even a “less good” book than Delilah Green (that is absolutely not what I’m saying here), they did ultimately make this a book that spoke to me less. And I’m going to try to talk about the hows and whys of that, not because I am saying there’s anything wrong with Astrid Parker as a work of fiction, or wrong with the way it explores and presents identity, but because it’s easy to forget marginalised people aren’t monoliths. And it’s okay to have representations of marginalised identity that—for whatever reason—do not happen to reflect the experiences and worldview of every reader who shares elements of that marginalised identity. I think what it boiled down to, for me, was that identity was ultimately presented as something very … legible in the book. Whether that was every character entering the text with their race immediately flagged (which, I understand, is there to push back against the problematic ‘white as default’ view that white readers are inclined to bring to books—but, at the same time, it does mean that all character descriptions follow a pattern of [characteristic] [race] [gender] [optionally with x] which can feel uncomfortably homogenising and compresses all the complexity of racial identity into a single label, which not everybody of that identity will feel reflects them) or nonbinary people introducing themselves with their pronouns (which, again, I understand some nonbinary people do but here it feels like it’s being presented as a default rather than a choice). There’s even a scene where Astrid goes to borrow some romance novels from Iris and, despite not having read them yet, she is somehow able to rattle off the exact identities of the protagonists to the reader despite the fact that isn’t actually information that’s contained in the back cover copy. For example, Astrid (whose POV we are in at the time) describes Written in the Stars as “a Pride and Prejudice re-telling, queer, a bisexual woman and lesbian” and The Intimacy Experiment as being about “a male Jewish rabbi and a bisexual white female”. It’s pretty clear from the packaging of WITS that it’s an f/f re-telling of Pride & Prejudice but you wouldn’t know Elle was explicitly bi and Darcy explicitly gay unless you’d read the book; similarly you’d only know Naomi was bi if you’d read The Intimacy Experiment. And I’m not saying it’s wrong for either of these books not to carry this information in their packaging at all, I feel it would be detrimental if it did (it feels more important, to me, that we know Darcy is a grumpy control freak than exclusively attracted to women); I’m just pointing out that Astrid’s queerdar is so fucking honed she can discern the sexuality of even fictional people based solely on a hundred words of marketing copy. Or rather that this feeds back into a view of identity I find personally quite alienating. To me, identity isn’t legible, and perhaps shouldn’t be? It’s complicated and it’s not something that can easily find consensus because we’re all individuals, even when there are things to connect us. And I think what happened to hit the spot for me with Delilah Green is that Delilah herself is messy and so there was scope for the world around her to be messy too; steeped in queerness, yes, but a queerness that was rooted in individual character rather than this broad notion of identity that we find not necessarily in Astrid herself but in the world where Astrid has been placed: which is to say, something listable, discernible and consumable. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Nov 10, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||||
0316394319
| B09NVSBVCF
| 4.08
| 37,886
| Aug 23, 2022
| Aug 23, 2022
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: The author and I are social media moots and sometimes exchange bants. Please note: This revi Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: The author and I are social media moots and sometimes exchange bants. Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* This is a macabre, whimsical, unabashedly soft book. And I adored it. I guess it’s technically what the industry might be trying to call “romantasy” which is to say a fantasy where the romantic elements are as significant as the fantastical stuff. And I actually thought the way the central relationship was woven around the more conventional plot-like elements (the mystery of Hart’s parentage, where the zombies are coming from, what’s going on with Cunningham, the dodgy owner of a chain of funeral parlours) was pretty damn masterful. In any case, the basic setup here is … actually, it’s really hard to summarise. But essentially you have Hart, a lonely, zombie-fighter, demigod marshal, and Mercy, who works for her family’s funeral parlour: a mutual failure to understand the other has created an antagonistic dynamic between them that shows no sign of changing, until—each of them, in their own way desperate for emotional connection—they accidentally enter into an anonymous correspondence. Though, honestly, this is one of those attempts at a plot summary that barely touches on what the book is actually about … and that feels sort of right, because while Hart and Mercy is not explicitly a suspenseful read, unravelling its world-building is definitely one of its pleasures. This may well turn out to be one of those “your mileage may vary” aspects of the story—those accustomed to more traditional fantasy fare, where everything is explained to you the moment it appears, might balk at being thrown into the action like a corpse from the back of an autoduck. For me, though, it really worked. You see, the more you, ahem, scrape the surface of the book, the more you realise that Hart and Mercy inhabit a deeply weird and specific world (the best description I can manage is, a bit wild west, a bit Waterworld, a bit Six Feet Under) but it is also very much their world, one they take for granted as much as we take our own. And there’s a particular sort of immersiveness that comes from only having the details of a setting become relevant to the reader at the point they become relevant to the characters—for example, we learn about the zombies (drudges) and Hart’s work in containing them when he’s mentoring a new apprentice, and the history of the world, with its old and new gods, is only fully explored when Mercy goes to church to pray. In any case, as much as I came to the love the world-building, and how the book approached it, the true heart (heh) of Hart and Mercy is the characters, particularly Hart and Mercy themselves. I adored both of them, although I did end up feeling that Hart was the character with the greatest emotional depth and greatest emotional journey to, y’know, undertake. Mercy is quirky and charming (and enjoys reading romance novels in the bath—what’s not to love?) but the majority of her problems are external: her family’s funeral home is in crisis, her ex-boyfriend is a dick, etc. Hart, by contrast, has a lot of work to do in terms of understanding himself and his place in the world, and learning how to be open to both loving and living. There’s a lot about him that’s painfully relatable, I suspect even to people who aren’t, cough, profoundly damaged themselves. In fairness, though, I do also think that if both characters had equal degrees of the same sort of baggage to deal with it would have unbalanced the book in a different way and, while it was hard for me personally not to feel more connected to Hart than to Mercy, I deeply appreciated what the book was doing with its themes of love, trust and emotional vulnerability, and the way these are inevitably shaped by gender and gendered expectations. “Woman help man learn to emotion, man help women find self-agency” is kind of the unquestioned bedrock of a lot of m/f romance dynamics, and I’m certainly not challenging its value. But something I loved about Hart and Mercy is that the characters catalyse these journeys for each other but, ultimately, they sort their own shit out. Mercy does not need Hart to fix her family’s business—the family fix their own business by talking to each other openly about what they all want and need—and Mercy is never expected to perform emotional labour for Hart. Through the act of loving each other they essentially free themselves and that is a beautiful, beautiful thing to watch unfold. The other thing I found incredibly touching about their relationship is the degree to which communication plays such a significant role. Although, to be honest, there are a very few problems in this book that can’t be solved by a good faith attempt to communicate with someone else—which, again, I found kind of lovely. In any case, it is miscommunication that originally puts Hart and Mercy on the path to mutual hostility, letter-writing that brings them together, a lack of honesty on Hart’s part (he knows his anonymous correspondent is Mercy before she realises he is hers) that brings about their third act reversal, and honesty that brings them together again. Knowing Hart is … not lying exactly … to Mercy is a little difficult read, but it also feels true to where he is, emotionally speaking, at that point in the book. Something I had less patience for personally, though, was when Mercy told Hart she never wanted to see him again and then later complained that he didn’t love her enough to … I don’t even know what? Disregard her? Disrespect her wishes? Compromise her agency? This sudden requirement that Hart be telepathic was an odd note for me in a book that is so otherwise committed to the notion that love, whether it’s love of family, work, strangers, partners, is something you build deliberately and specifically in words and deeds, not something that just happens magically. I’ve spent most of this rambling excuse for a review talking about Hart and Mercy, but I should also mention how much I enjoyed the side-characters too. From Mercy’s rambunctiously loving if not always entirely helpful family to the extremely camp magic owl who delivers the mail. Hart’s assistant, Penrose Duckers, is also a goofy delight although I wish his relationship with Mercy’s baked-good loving brother had been more fleshed out. Queerness is a very comfortable part of Mercy and Hart’s world, which I appreciated, but Duckers and Zedde basically take one look at each other and are then boyfriends? Obviously, they’re secondary characters (and mostly comedic secondary characters) so it makes sense their relationship wouldn’t / couldn’t have the depth of Hart and Mercy’s but it felt jarringly shallow. Especially, as discussed above, in the context of all the other complicated, messy loving relationships within the book. Of course, it’s totally fine for relationships to be shallow and I can see a reading of Duckers and Penrose as a celebration of connections that are nothing but banging and baked goods … except I also got the sense that I was being asked to take them seriously as long-term romantic partners. Which felt, honestly, unearned. I do half-wonder if they got stuck in a sort of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” twilight zone, in that if they’d been allowed to be young daft horny fuckbuddies (which is probably a more accurate reflection of their one-page connection—I mean, Zedde picks Duckers up with the line “well hello” like he’s Kenneth Williams or something) it might have looked like the book was implying queer relationships, or mlm relationships, were physically driven and superficial compared to non-queer ones. Although there is a happily married lesbian couple in the book so who knows? Minor gripes aside, Hart and Mercy really is the most loving book, and its understanding of love so expansive and resilient that I teared up at about the 14% mark and later escalated to bawling on public transport. Given that it’s partially set in a funeral parlour and that Hart kills zombies for a living, death is also a major theme—but even death, in the context of this book, is a soft and loving thing, one that offers continuance, and opportunities for kindness, rather than merely the inevitability of ending. Emotions, in general, are handled with such tenderness here—especially, the unglamorous ones, like fear and, most significantly, loneliness. Not everything is easy in the world of Hart and Mercy, not everything is easy for Hart and Mercy either, but their story still felt like a safe space somehow. Somewhere that I myself could be a little vulnerable the way Hart learns to be. And that is such a gift of a thing for a book to give you. PS - it’s also a genuinely funny book. I should have found a way to work that in earlier, but I was too deep in my feelings. But the levity is the perfect complement to the sweetness and some of the more wrenching moments. For example the phrase “horny illogic” has definitely made its into my personal idiolect. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
not set
|
Nov 09, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| |||||||||||||||||
0743417321
| 9780743417327
| 0743417321
| 3.92
| 21,568
| 1988
| Jan 01, 2001
|
Source of book: Bought by me Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit Source of book: Bought by me Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* Now this is more like it. I’d say Cabal is slightly closer in genre to dark, very dark, fantasy than horror. But it also has some fairly intense horror moments so who knows? Does it even matter? As a fantasy novel, however, especially since a lot of Barker’s other works of fantasy are absolute doorstoppers, it’s intriguingly slight. I normally end up feeling quite ambiguous about novellas and short stories, trying to figure out to what extent they actually needed to be longer or whether I just felt that way because I greedily always want more of things I like. With Cabal, though, I think its length is almost perfect. There’s enough here to sustain a longer story, certainly, but that just creates an impression of depth—like there’s layers to the world you only partially get to see—and I found the breakneck pacing pretty exhilarating. Also, readers of my previous Barker reviews will surely be pleased to learn there are no boastful plums or fur divides herein. Cabal is very much a “call a genital a genital” book, which I appreciated. Anyway, the book opens with the protagonist Boone, a deeply unhappy man suffering from an undisclosed mental illness, in the process of being convinced by his therapist—a slick fellow called Decker—that he’s murdered eleven people in a fugue state. Having cut off contact with his lover, Loris, Boone initially intends to turn himself in, but a suicide attempt gone awry leads him to hospital instead, where he counters an equally unwell man called Narcisse who reminds of a place called Midian, where those who do not belong—who are not quite human—are rumoured to find sanctuary. Boone turns up at Midian, gets bitten by a monster, then killed by the police, who are working under Decker’s auspices, and finally arises as one of the Nightbreed: one of the flesh-devour, sunlight-avoidant denizens Midian was originally established to shelter. And that’s only the first fifty pages. From here, we get Boone’s lover, Lori, searching from him in Midian, despite the news of his death, the not-really-revelation that Decker was the serial killer all along, a prophecy of destruction and rebirth from the agonised pieces of god suspended in flame, and the routing of the Nightbreed by the local police force. It’s … it’s a lot. But in a good way that, to me, never felt too much. The characters felt slightly more dimensioned after The Hellbound Heart, although to be fair it’s a longer and more sophisticated book. While Lori, like Julia and Kirsty before his, is mostly motivated by what’s going on with her man, she gets a lot more agency within that narrative arc—particularly as she somewhat fills a reader-substitute type role, firstly trying to figure out what’s happening and then trying to figure out how she feels about it all. Boone, by contrast, is a little bit of a damaged blank but seeing him through Lori’s eyes makes him perhaps more intriguing than he might otherwise want: She dreamt of him often though, scenarios that were unequivocally sexual. No symbolism here. Just she and Boone in bare rooms, fucking. Sometimes there were people beating on the doors to get in and see, but they never did. He belonged to her completely, in all his beauty and his wretchedness I mean, hashtag relatable, amirite. (No, seriously, wanting people to belong to me in all their beauty and wretchedness is a big mood for me). Although I will just add that Boone slightly suffers from what is an on-going issue with male Barker protagonists, which is that they end up on this path of chosen oneness almost entirely centred around the fact that they fucked everything up in the first place (I’m looking at you Gentle). But the flipside of this is that Barker’s work has a kind of inherent instability to it that I’ve always appreciated. One of the things that can frustrate me about fantasy as a genre is a tendency towards setting up great changes to the world state and those changes never really coming or, if they do, circling us back to the status quo. At least with Barker, he’s never afraid to rip things apart and break them down: in fact, the inevitable of change, destructive or otherwise, is kind of one of his major themes. Speaking of change, at the heart of Cabal lies conflict between modes of horror. The Nightbreed hark back to the monsters of Victorian gothic, defined as much by their outcast status as their monstrousness. Decker, by contrast, is a thoroughly twentieth century creation: a serial killer who poses as a psychiatrist and covers his own weakness with a mask. And then there is the local police force who Decker, attempting to cover his own crimes, incites against the Nightbreed. There is an inescapable (and deliberate) banality to the antagonists: Decker is a generic psychopath and the police chief is an unimaginative bigot. By contrast the Nightbreed are frightening and fascinating, each a unique individual (for all that we do not meet many and the ones we do are mere glimpses). Though I should add that Barker is careful to avoid a straightforward oppressed versus the oppressors narrative, and—while I think the Nightbreed appeal to the alienated and the othered parts of us—they are not offered as stand-ins for marginalised people. While none of them kill on page except for survival, they do eat the meat of humans. He had no way to describe the breed that were not the old ways. They didn’t belong to hell, nor yet to heaven. They were what the species he’d once belonged to could not bear to be. The un-people, the anti-tribe, humanity’s sack unpicked and sewn together again with the moon inside. In any case, this has been my favourite so far of my Barker re-visitings. With its sweeping story, its exploration of monstrousness and otherness, its embrace of both cynicism and beauty, its genre-slipperiness, encompassing as it does aspects of the gothic, fantasy, horror and romance, I can very much see why it meant so much to teenage me. And, given present day me was made from teenage me, why it continues to mean something to me now. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 22, 2022
|
Oct 22, 2022
|
Oct 21, 2022
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||
Vo, Nghi
*
| 1250784786
| 9781250784780
| 1250784786
| 3.55
| 17,540
| Jun 01, 2021
| Jun 01, 2021
|
Source of book: Bought by me (well, technically bought *for* me by a friend) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced o Source of book: Bought by me (well, technically bought *for* me by a friend) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* This book is an exquisite, brutal masterpiece, and absolutely confirms my post Siren Queen conviction that Nghi Vo is simply one of the finest writers in SFF. Or likely any genre she cares to turn her hand to. The Chosen and the Beautiful has elements recognisable from Siren Queen—dazzling prose, assured world-building, complicated characters, gorgeously depicted queerness—but it is also wholly its own thing. And the fact that I loved it as passionately as I did (as passionately as I loved Siren Queen) I am honestly inclined to attribute to infernal sorcery on the author’s part because, listen, words cannot express how viscerally, how profoundly, how soul searingly I despise The Great Gatsby. I mean seriously. The American Dream is an illusion and now you’re sad? That’s it? That’s the book? Are you fucking kidding me, Francis? Oh, and the American Dream is going to be represented by a woman because, oh do you see, women are just LIKE the American Dream: we think they are so beautiful and so pure and we want them so badly and so we ruin ourselves in our pursuit of them, but in reality they’re just going to plough down someone in our car and leave us to take the fall. And let’s throw in some racism and antisemitism too? SUPER FUN. Except wait. What’s that you say? The Great Gatsby is queer. Why yes, yes it is. But it uses queerness explicitly to represent moral decay. That is not … that is not a good thing. Like, it genuinely fucks up my heart that we are so desperate to see ourselves in fiction that we eagerly embrace even texts that are actively hurtful to us. Francis Scott Key is not on our side. The Great Gatsby may include us, but it is not for us or about us. And, honestly, it has kind of weirded me out—now the book is in the public domain—that there’s been this rush to re-write Gatsby as a queer romance. Especially because to do that, you kind of have to wilfully ignore so much of the central text, like Nick’s unreliable dreadfulness, Gatsby’s rapacious desires, and the way queerness is used quite deliberately to underscore both Nick’s unreliable dreadfulness and Gatsby’s rapacious desires. I mean, I don’t know, maybe turning into that lovestory is subversive or reclamatory or something? But if I had my way we’d just throw the thing out the window and never think of it again. Except then we wouldn’t have The Chosen and the Beautiful. Which, while it hasn’t reclaimed Gatsby for me, has at least made me glad that The Great Gatsby exists. Because if we didn’t have The Great Gatsby, we couldn’t have The Chosen and the Beautiful. And I swear to God, The Chosen and the Beautiful is the only good thing about that fucking book. Err, in case I haven’t made it clear, The Chosen and the Beautiful is a Gatsby take. The narrator is Jordan Baker (you remember Jordan Baker, right, she’s the lesbian-coded golfer Nick has a nearly-thing with, and pretty much the only semi-decent person in the whole book), re-imagined as both explicitly queer and also Vietnamese, “rescued” from her family by the Bakers and brought to America, where she has been raised in a western context. Jordan, therefore, makes the perfect narrator for a Gatsby re-telling, someone who is genuinely “within and without” as Nick—a straight-passing cisgendered white man—hilariously claims for himself in the original. The Gatsby/Daisy/Nick plot proceeds almost beat-for-beat like the original, but Jordan offers us a whole new perspective on them, one that develops alongside her own shifting perspective of her own identity. Honestly, there are so many layers to this book, it feels kind of diminishing to be categorising it as a Gatsby re-telling. I mean, it couldn’t exist without the source material, but the way it engages with the it was so fascinating to me that I stopped in the middle of The Chosen and the Beautiful to re-read The Great Gatsby (about which I think I’ve made my feelings very clear). As with Siren Queen, Vo weaves magical elements deftly and naturalistically into her setting. I know there are some readers for whom this lightness of touch (she very rarely explains her magic to readers, simply allowing it to exist for her characters) runs counter to the expectations of the genre but it really works for me: it allows the magic to *feel* magical in its mysteriousness, as well as to carry allegoric weight within the text itself. In The Chosen and the Beautiful we have several “kinds” of magic referenced, all of which serve to evoke the same tensions between the old and the new, the marginalised and the powerful (to say nothing of the chosen and the beautiful, oh do you see) that are riven, albeit with less awareness, through the original. Gatsby, for example, has connections to a demonic underworld (one whose greed, whose drive towards literal consumption, holds up a mirror to the devil bargain’s the original Gatsby has struck with capitalism). Jordan possesses magic of her own—the power of creating life, or a semblance of it, from paper representations—but it is a magic she does not understand, and somewhat fears, rooted as it is in her heritage. Daisy, by contrast, dabbles in glamours, whimsy and illusion. In one of the early chapters, she and Jordan take a charm that allows them to fly around the house—a sly literalisation of Nick’s description of their fluttering white dresses in The Great Gatsby. The literalisation of Fitzgerald’s metaphors (“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness…”) is a device The Chosen and the Beautiful returns to on several occasions and, while initially presented playfully as in the flying sequence, ultimately underpins some of the book’s darkest themes in incredibly effective (and disturbing) ways. God, what else can I say about the sheer brilliance of this book. The characterisation is superb, at once true to the original text, while building on its assumptions and implications in fascinating ways. All of the characters are allowed to glitter with their own awful charisma, though none quite as awfully nor as charismatically as Gatsby himself: When I looked at famous Jay Gatsby, soul gone and some terrible engine he called love driving him now, I could see that for him, the world was always ending. For him, it was all a wreck and a ruin, and he had no idea why the rest of us weren’t screaming. It was Vo’s take on Nick, though, that I initially struggled with the most. In the original text he is, of course, a pretty appalling person (anybody, fictional or otherwise, claiming honesty as one of their primary characteristics should give you all the red flags) but it’s clear that interpretation wouldn’t work here because, unlike in The Great Gatsby where Nick’s love affair with Jordan is little more than a background distraction, that relationship is central in The Chosen and the Beautiful. The Nick of the original text is not the kind of person that this complicated, fully-realised Jordan could realistically love. What The Chosen and the Beautiful chooses to work with, then, is the strange blankness and malleability of the character and, by the end of the book, I was fully sold. Especially because allowing Nick and Jordan to experience a genuine emotional connection—however doomed (and don’t come at me with complaints about spoilers, that’s how it goes in the original Gatsby and that book was written in 1925)—gives depth and nuance, and a bittersweet poignancy, to the whole text. Instead of just “wow, everyone is ghastly, oh now one of them is dead”—which is what the original offers. There’s also, and I don’t want to over-focused on this, because The Chosen and the Beautiful excels in so many ways, an absolutely stunning sex scene between Jordan and Nick at the midway point of the book. It’s intimate, its sexy, it’s queer, and utterly embedded in the emotional dynamic between the two characters—the sort of thing the romance genre could (and frankly should) learn from. “That messy entangling anger had gone out of him, leaving him sweeter and more pliable. I didn’t mind the sadness; he wore it like a girl might wear a becoming if old-fashioned veil. It left him open in a way he hadn’t been before, raw and pretty and intriguing.” I’ve peppered this review with quotes, just so you can see the writing speak for itself. Like, Holy God, can Vo turn a gorgeous sentence. I am usually a restrained highlighter but my copy of The Chosen and the Beautiful is nothing but highlighting. I don’t think there’s a misplaced word in this entire book: Crossing from the main road through the gates of his world, a chill swirled around you, the stars came out, and a moon rose up out of the Sound. It was as round as a golden coin, and so close you could bite it. I had never seen a moon like that before. Seriously, it could give me Stendhal syndrome, I felt so giddy on it sometimes. Of course, much like in the original Gatsby, the beauty is a trap. There is a lot of ugliness at the heart of The Chosen and the Beautiful. In TGG, of course, that ugliness is the possibility that a white man can’t get the woman (or the America) he dreams he has a right to. For Jordan, for all she does her best to believe it won’t affect her due to her connections, it’s something called The Manchester Act: an anti-immigration bill, inspired I think by some real pieces of legislation like the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, aimed at expelling Asian people from America. This passes the day Gatsby dies (again, not a bloody spoiler, he dies in the original story), and serves as a stark reminder that the disillusionment with America, and the American Dream, the original text represents can only exist in a world that allows you to believe those things ever belonged to you at all. Thankfully, at this point in The Chosen and the Beautiful, Jordan has already begun to reckon with who she is and her place in western society. Through Khai, a Vietnamese man she meets providing entertainment at one of Gatsby’s party, she is offered a glimpse of everything that her American family have stripped from her. While Jordan is, in her way, as decadent, selfish and cynical as her peers, she is neither cruel nor careless in the way they are. This is not a story for happy endings but it is a story for making choices and, by the end of the book, Jordan—with great knowledge of herself, as a queer Vietnamese woman—has more than she started with. Like Gatsby, she has her green light. But while, for Gatsby, it represents something nostalgic and unattainable, for Jordan it offers a kind of hope, something that can, indeed, be sought after: hope for a world of family, belonging and love that exists beyond the gaze, or the grasp, of white privilege. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 10, 2022
|
Oct 10, 2022
|
Oct 10, 2022
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
B09ZPVRXNC
| 4.65
| 48
| unknown
| Sep 08, 2022
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* This is a really entrancing piece of autobiographical writing from David Hodge (formerly, the Very Miss Dusty O, the drag ‘Queen of Soho’ who held sway over the club scene for several decades). It takes us from his lonely childhood as a ginger queer kid through rise and decline of Soho itself and finally to Hodge’s decision to separate himself from the persona that had brought him so much fame and success it had almost taken on a life of its own. The tone is exactly what you’d hope for this kind of autobiography: confiding, gossipy, a little bitchy, but sincere when it needed to be. It’s a fascinating look at what feels like a piece of lost time, especially because so many of its brightest stars burned themselves out quite tragically. But for all the glitter and glitz, and celebrity name drops, there’s still something grounded here. It’s a bit of a cliché, I suppose, to juxtapose success and celebration with insecurity and loneliness but, while Hodge writes with candour about people and events who hurt him (for example, the teacher in his youth who condemned to sit by the window in class, or the neighbour who attacked him in his own house), he manages to do so—for the most part—with humility and a lack of self-pity. It also helps, I think, that the experiences Hodge writes about are not *just* glitz and glamour: he mentions calling the London Lesbian and Gay Switchboard as a confused teenager, for a while he worked at The Lighthouse and, even though doesn’t mine the AIDS crisis for tragedy, the losses he suffered in it echo gently through the text as a whole. As is probably inevitable, Hodge’s most nuanced character portraits are reserved for those closest to him. His relationship with his mother is particularly fascinating, as it evolves from mistrust and rejection (on her part) to something genuinely supportive despite the almost irreconcilable incompatibility of their worlds. Less successful, perhaps also inevitably, are the sections acknowledging Hodge’s friendship with Boy George—reading between the lines, it’s clear that these are two very complex men whose relationship is, likewise, complex, but mostly Hodge seems to want to elide that. I mean, I can see why, if Boy George was my complex friend, I wouldn’t want to piss him off either, and gossiping about him in your autobiography would be pretty fucking unclassy. The effect of this understandable tact is slightly emotionally flattening, however. There are a couple of odd notes here and there—a random grumble about “wokeism” that felt decontextualised and unnecessary … complains Alexis Hall, wokely. Seriously, though, “wokeism” is something invented by the right to paint people asking for nothing more than the same rights as everyone else as reactionary and irrational. And, yes, there’s assuredly discourse to be had about how the language of social justice is often used as a mechanism of social control targeted *at* marginalised people (often by people marginalised along different axes) but … I kind of think comes after we deal with the whole “my entire country is dangerously transphobic now” thing. Similarly, Hodge laments the retiring of “Trannyshack” as a brand identity, insisting it was meant only in love. And, you know something? I completely believe that. But times move on. Also it’s interesting to me that Hodge speaks so eloquently about the wounds caused by having slurs flung at him by strangers (something that starts in the playground for most queer kids, and Hodge is no exception) without recognising that other people are receiving exactly the same wounds, just from a different set of words. I think my personal conclusion on all this is that we can reclaim terminology for ourselves, but not on behalf others, and we are too quick to insist things are “just words” when they don’t directly affect us. Also I’m pretty sure at least *a* club with that name is still knocking around. So ehhh? Basically, though, this is a super engaging read. I think a good autobiography often feels a conversation with the person writing—I mean, on their terms, of course—and I got that sense here. I genuinely enjoyed Hodge’s company, his wit, and his honesty (while he doesn’t dwell on them indulgently, he’s unflinching in acknowledging his own bad choices), and a glimpse into a time I have a weird and unjustified affinity for, considering I was either non-existent or an actual child for most of it, and it was probably, in reality, quite grim to live through. That quite a lot of the era’s notable figures seem to have spiralled into destruction gives an added poignancy to Hodge’s experiences. It is genuinely lovely to see him happy and creatively fulfilled. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 2022
|
Oct 2022
|
Oct 01, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||||
B09XL6JWZ8
| 3.63
| 7,263
| Mar 07, 2023
| Mar 07, 2023
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: We are Twitter moots and occasionally have bants. This author was invited by one of my edit Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: We are Twitter moots and occasionally have bants. This author was invited by one of my editors to blurb one of my own books in the past. Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* I liked this tremendously. I sometimes think the Holmesian riff market is oversaturated (and I say that at someone who once wrote a Holmes riff and would write more Homles riffs like a shot given half a chance) but then I read a good one and I remember, no, I just fucking love this stuff. Because there’s so much you can do with the dynamics, the setting, the particular type of detective story that the original Homles typified, especially when you leave all the Victorian nonsense behind. In this case, we’ve left it so far behind we’re on Jupiter. The basic premise of The Mimicking of Known Successes is that our greed and selfishness have wrecked the earth—so far so plausible—and that what remains of humanity as a species is eking out a more careful existence on the gas giant, with people essentially living upon platforms attached to a planet-spanning rail system. When a man disappears from a remote railcar system, we have our mystery, and the story begins. Our Holmes and Watson analogues are both women and former lovers: the former, an independent-minded investigator called Mossa, the latter, Pleiti, academic, who is working on a project to reconstruct Earth’s lost ecosystem. It’s a restrained take on both characters, with Mossa retaining some of Holmes’ methodology and emotional distance, and even a bit of his arrogance, but she’s infinitely less obnoxious. Pleiti, similarly, is neither as obsequious nor as horndoggy as the original Watson, but she is loyal and resourceful in the way that Watson is loyal and resourceful. And I’m aware this is probably coming across as unnecessarily spiteful about the original Holmes and Watson But they’re straight white Victorian men, written by a straight white Victorian man. That’s like ground zero for awfulness. Not that I’m trying to cancel a dead Victorian, or anything: I’m not disputing the value of Conan Doyle’s work, but it’s work that is (inevitably) a product of its day. And the advantage of reworking these stories with modern values is that they can be a product of … well … our day. Anyway, I really loved this take on Holmes and Watson. Like Holmes, Mossa is brilliant, but frustratingly oblique, often declining to explain her thought processes until already proven, which evokes the atmosphere of one of those Holmes stories where Holmes is constantly out and about and will—at some point—deign to explain himself to Watson, probably over breakfast. But, unlike Holmes, Mossa is not an abstract figure of patriarchal genius: she is very much a whole person and, if you’re willing to pay attention, a person with strong and specific feelings. There’s an extent to which I think Mossa can be read as non-neurotypical but it is never the focus of the text, nor something that is posited as a romantic or personal obstacle for her. Pleiti and Mossa’s re-kindling of their relationship has nothing to do overcoming or addressing Mossa’s non-neurotypical ways: it is simply about both of them learning how to better recognise each other’s needs and expressions of care. This isn’t the sort of detective story you can play along with at home, but Conon Doyle isn’t Agatha Christie. There is, however, an element of puzzle solving offered to the reader in terms of Mossa and Pleiti’s relationship. In typical Watson fashion, Pleiti can be quite a coy narrator and, because Mossa and Pleiti already know each other, there is a lot that goes unspoken between them. This doesn’t mean it’s not romantic, though. In fact, I found it deeply romantic, precisely because of its quietness, the way it belongs to Mossa and Pleiti in ways the reader (as an external observer) can only partially access. Also, I’ve just realised I’ve spent most of my review of a detective story talking about the people. The mystery is … interesting and has some excitingly outlandish twists to it (there’s a bit where Mossa and Pleiti are attacked by a caracal). By the end, the stakes are pretty damn high, but I do wish I’d understood fully what they were before, and who was involved, before we reached the point of villain monologues and fisticuffs. I don’t want to spoil anything but the role of Pleiti’s department becomes quite significant: there’s hints throughout of intra-academic conflict (but does any academic institution not have intra-academic conflict?) as well as potential conflict between those who, y’know, work for the institution and believe in its cultural value and those who would maybe like to do something more directly useful for a broader range of people with the platform-space that has been given over to the ecology project. But I think, given the nuances of the setting, I would have liked just a little more cultural context and maybe to have spent more time with the villain before I learned he was the villain? Of course, some of this is simply detective story personal preference: in most of the Holmes stories, the villain is whoever has size eleven feet and smokes a particular brand of tobacco. And the mystery—for all I would have like a bit more emotional connection to its various participants—is well constructed and well paced. The setting, though, I found it super fascinating. It’s evoked with depth, detail and genuine thoughtfulness—quite an achievement given the fact The Mimicking of Known Successes novella. It’s kind of weird that “everyone is stuck on a hostile gas giant with no life of its own” could come across as … cosy? But somehow, between the trains rattling about, Pleiti’s scholars rooms, the links to academia, and the foggy 19th century London vibes of a planet where you literally can’t breathe, it does. Of course, the fact we have left Earth a fucked up ruin behind us does cast a gentle melancholia over the text. The trauma of this is occasionally referenced—its impact undeniable—but, mostly, people are just getting on with their lives as best they can. There’s something especially bittersweet about this, I think, especially in the wake of a global pandemic. But there’s still a sense of hope here; an implication that change is always possible should we simply care enough. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 23, 2022
|
Aug 23, 2022
|
Aug 23, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||||
1496737296
| 9781496737298
| 1496737296
| 3.80
| 58,681
| Jan 24, 2023
| Jan 24, 2023
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: none Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: none Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* What a beautifully *expansive* book. I usually think of Kate Clayborn’s as being a focused and detail-orientated (that’s not any sort of backhanded compliment, it’s a …a … front-handed compliment because it’s something I really love and admire about her work) writer but there’s something undeniably sweeping about Georgie, All Along. I think in the emotional sense, more than anything, because it also retains the tight character work and intricate writing that has characterised all of KC’s previous books. Georgie, All Along is basically a “returning to your small American hometown” story—which, I will say right now, is not my favourite trope because I simply lack the required cultural touchstones. But, hell, if KC writes it, I’ll read it, so here we are. And, don’t get me wrong, I’m pretty sure she’s *doing something* with the return-to-hometown trope/premise, because the hometown is itself complicated (it’s currently reinventing itself from backwater to tourist trap) and the characters have complicated relationships with it. In any case, our heroine Georgie (not short for anything), the daughter of amiably chaotic parents, has always had a reputation in Whereveritisville for being flaky, unreliable, and unmotivated. Since leaving, she’s worked as an executive assistant in LA, where she is known for her dedication and efficiency. Her boss, Nadia, however, has spontaneously retired, and Georgie—facing up to the reality that she’s never really known what to do with her life—has decided to temporarily return to the town where she grew up. There’s things for her to do there, of course: support her best friend, Bel, who is married and pregnant, and has just moved back herself, and housesit her parents plants. But there are complications too, for example, the presence in her childhood home of Levi Fanning and his neurotic dog who Georgie’s parents have managed to double-book with Georgie (something that feels like plot necessity initially but makes perfect sense when you meet them) and the re-discovery of the “friend fic” Bel and Georgie created before high school—a repository of all their hopes and dreams that Georgie feels might somehow help her unlock her future. As you can probably tell there’s a lot going on here. There’s Georgie’s relationship with Bel, Georgie’s relationship with her family, Georgie’s relationship with the town, Georgie’s relationship with herself, her past, and her future, and—finally—Georgie’s burgeoning relationship with the initially closed-off Levi. And, because of this, there are times when the book feels a little sprawling and structurally chaotic (although there’s a degree to which this is very reflective of its heroine, so I’m inclined to see this is a feature, not a bug) but, ultimately, all these connections come together absolutely beautifully---rendering this one of the most emotionally kind of nourishing? romances I’ve read for a very long time. It's not a book without hardship—there’s genuine suffering in Levi’s background and Georgie’s sense of herself as blank and ambitionless can be hard to read at times—but it’s mostly a profoundly warm, hopeful, and accepting book. I’m a bit surprised its scheduled for a January release because I read it on a piece of decking overlooking the Cherwell, with the sun pouring over me, and my hair trailing in the water to keep me cool, and I felt very much connected to Levi and Georgie on *their* decking overlooking *their* river. Perhaps I’m just over-invested in the sunshine/grumpy dynamic of the central couple but it seems so fundamentally a summer read to me. Although probably come January we’ll all need a little literary brightness in our lives—in which case, Georgie, All Along will be a balm so, y’know, get it on pre-order ASAP. There’s a lot I could talk about with this book, but I’m worried about spoiling it. Not that it’s really built on mysteries, exactly, (although there’s a bit of “why is Levi so grumpy all the time”) but it genuinely feels like a journey best shared with its characters. But in summary some of the things I loved: both Georgie’s and Levi, with all my heart, the gorgeous, gorgeous writing, the setting, Georgie’s benignly chaotic parents, Georgie’s relationship with her best friend, Bel, which is deeply loving and supportive but also complicated as most long-standing friendships are, the broader cast who are mostly characterised just enough to feel fully-rounded, Levi’s neurotic dog who constantly farts at inopportune moments, the way that, while the book sort of has a villain (or at least an antagonist), the character is never centralised in the lives of the people he’s hurt, the fact that Georgie and Levi’s relationship is simultaneously quiet and breathtakingly romantic, the conclusions Georgie comes to at the end of the book and the book’s broader exploration of its themes and questions. There are, however, a couple of specific things I want to get into specifically, just because I think I can celebrate them without wrecking the book, and also because they meant a lot to me personally. One: the writing. Just, the way KC writes consistently rocks my socks. Compared to something like, say Love Lettering, which has a more self-consciously artful style, reflecting the way the heroine perceives the world, Georgie, All Along has a deceptive simplicity to it which means it bounces along very readable and very funny (dropping lines like this like they’re nothing: " 'Okay, so,' I finally say, which everyone knows is the agreed-upon code for best friends when one of them is about to drop some kind of bomb." I cackled uncontrollably) and then just catches you right in the feels with its unabashed emotional clarity: “I clench my back teeth, letting a wave of old, familiar embarrassment pass over me. I thought I’d let go of the shame about this part of my life, the way I was basically medicating myself twenty-four hours a day. It’s no different from what millions of people do, good people who are in pain or unsure of where to turn; good people who need a break from everything in this world that’s hard and sad and unforgiving.” I know there are some people for whom the self-conscious carefulness of KC’s writing can sometimes jar. I am, like, a gazillion not one of those people. Gimme all your wild stylistic experiments, I want to roll around in them and call them daddy. But this book … I honestly think there’s a kind of magic in it: the writing is just this perfect balance, I think, reflective of its two protagonists and effortlessly resonant to the reader. If you’ve bounced off another KC book, this might be your re-entry point. Okay two: I’m always nervy of over-talking about this because I’m sure there’ll be people to whom it comes across as mansplainy or like I’m somehow trying to make broader statements about women writing men or whatever. These are literally just my personal feelings as an individual who has experienced life in a particular sort of way and responds to books in ways that inevitably shaped by that. I don’t think there are good or bad, or wrong or right ways to write men (or people in general): I just happen to really like the way KC writes romance heroes. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s 100% okay to write a hero who is some walking abs, whose penis bobs up and down like it’s not waving but drowning, and who maybe has a feeling in the final 10% of the book. But I think, for me, what KC balances exceptionally well is a hero who can exist both as successful object of desire (Levi does manual work, for God’s sake, guy is ripped like woah) and is a fully rounded, emotionally nuanced human being in his own right. And what I find it particularly fascinating the way she tends to use typical hero “tropes” (the hero of Luck of the Draw is a taciturn alpha, Reid in Love Lettering is Mr Buttoned Up, and Levi is, of course, Grumpy) to gently interrogate the way socially constructed gender codes shape and affect her heroes. To put in super blunt terms, the fact that it’s damage and toxic masculinity that creates these paradigms we are taught to find so desirable and admirable. Ultimately her men are always so much more than their tropes and, by the time she has peeled back the layers of them for us, we realise it is no longer the trope we are finding attractive but the person, with all his complexities and frailties and rough human edges. All of which contributes to some (I mean, in my opinion, your mileage may vary) really delicate explorations of vulnerability, especially male vulnerability, in KC’s books, and Georgie, All Along is no different. I’ve burbled on before about the romance genre complicated relationship with vulnerability. I think, to me, one of the strengths of the genre is that it does create safe space in which vulnerability can (and should?) be explored. But where exploration ends, and fetishization begins, especially when if it’s the vulnerability of people who may not share an identity with the writer, is … I mean … that’s a line so thin as to be invisible, and is necessarily hugely subjective. I do think, however, there is a tendency, especially in m/f romances, for male vulnerability to almost be … a prize that is offered to the heroine, either in penance for the hero treating her badly, or as proof that she’s “the one” for this particular man in that he has dared to show weakness in front of her. For me—and again, I am speaking purely personal—there’s something very natural about the presentation of male vulnerability in KC’s writing: it may be shared with the heroine (and, indeed, the reader) but it always ultimately belongs to the character and the text treads as gently as the heroines do around these socially-charged exchanges of intimacy. Levi is potentially one of KC’s most vulnerable heroes—he has gone through a lot, and made some bad choices, although this part of his history is never dwelled upon or treated casually—but I loved how carefully he is treated. While Georgie always calls him on his bullshit, when his damage begins to negatively impact her, she never pushes him for more than he is able and willing to share, and the reader, likewise, is encouraged to interact with Levi’s past in a similarly respectful way. Romance is a genre of emotion and connection, but there are times to allow characters privacy. I never felt that I needed more from Georgie and Levi than I was offered—I felt terribly close to both of them by the time I finished the book and full of tenderness—but I also deeply appreciated the text’s willingness to draw away as well as pull my close. And finally three: this is another complicated one, because aren’t they always. Listen, I love KC’s writing, I sincerely do, and I read romance for *romance* not sex (although, obviously, sex can be part of romance). But for me personally, I’ve never super connected with the sex scenes in the other KC’s books I’ve read. I mean, they’re fine, but they always felt oddly heteronormative to me as well as occasionally disconnected from who the characters. Like in Luck of the Draw where Zoe and Aidan bang in a shower they have explicitly described as gross on several previous occasions and, let’s be real, shower sex is bobbins even when the shower isn’t gross, or Love Lettering, where the heroine has had issues, in the past, with reaching orgasm through PIV but the hero hammers it straight home. And I recognise it may sound weird to be “complaining” about heteronormativity in books that are ostensibly about straight people but, well, heteronormativity is like the patriarchy. There are people it is doing very direct harm, but basically it’s hurting everyone. And I should add that it’s not wrong to want to either have or read about heavily PIV-cantering sex. It’s just neither the only nor always the best way for a P and a V to interact, and the problem with all sex scenes hinging on this specific act, and a specific version of this act (he enters her in one smooth thrust, she is immediately internally stimulated by this, he whams himself back and forth, they both come simultaneously) is that it confers a universality on what is actually a fairly, um, atypical way to guarantee satisfaction for both parties. Anyway, where I’m going with this, is that Georgie, All Along has some really lovely sex scenes (including one where the heroine gets herself off, and the hero doesn’t) that both reflect the characters involved and contribute meaningfully to the emotional trajectory of their relationship. Err…okay. So that’s a lot. But hopefully testament to how much I loved this book, and how rich and satisfying I found it. There were a couple of things that didn’t wholly land for me—I honestly found the whole friendfic concept a bit twee, but that’s a me thing, and I felt it worked in the context of the book of the whole, there’s a nonbinary character who literally has zero personality apart from being a waiter and having they/them pronouns (I’m all for inclusion but this strayed perilously close to tokenism for me—again, your mileage may varied), Levi is absurdly coy about the existence of his own aroused dick, no idea why (probably another me thing, just I’m a call a spade a spade kind of person, and it strikes me as weird in contemporary-set books to have characters who will contort themselves into linguistic pretzels rather than name a body part, unless it’s directly part of their character that they will), and there’s a scene at the end between Levi and his estranged brother that is really cathartic and powerful but also involved two men discussing feeling weak and being strong very explicitly. As in they say the words weak and strong about six times between them in a single page of text which … err … is a lot. Don’t get me wrong, the scene as a whole works wonderfully, but those are such significant and loaded words, especially for these two characters, especially at this moment, so their overuse makes the scene emotionally and thematically blunter than it needs to be. But this is also the kind of thing that might well be caught in a proofing pass, since it’s not about the scene itself, it’s about literal word positioning: so another mileage may vary / might actually not exist when the book comes out type situation. Long story short, and this was—looking back—an incredibly long story (sorry): Georgie, All Along is an absolutely phenomenal book. It’s not my favourite KC—Love Lettering takes that spot, simply because it speaks to me very personally—but I think it might be her best work to date. There’s an ambition and a boldness to it that belies the smalltown setting and the quiet connections it celebrates, and above all such a non-obnoxious sense of hope. This is a book that is not afraid to be messy sometimes and—like its heroine—is only the more beautiful for it. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 2022
|
Aug 2022
|
Aug 18, 2022
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||
4.12
| 634
| 2016
| 2020
|
Source of book: Bought by me (for an outrageous price) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or Source of book: Bought by me (for an outrageous price) Relevant disclaimers: None Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* So, uh. You probably know whether this book is relevant to you simply by the fact that it’s a collection of essays about Dark Souls (i.e. a video game). True to form, I’m an absurdly late latecomer to Dark Souls obsession. Ironically, the fact that everyone and their dog was playing Elden Ring (the latest and, perhaps, most ambitious game from the studio who made Dark Souls, its spiritual prequel, and its two sequels) was what finally propelled me to go back to the beginning (well, nearly the beginning, I skipped Demon’s Souls) and try to … “get” whatever it is about these particular games that generates such devotion in fans. And, err, I did indeed get it. I got it hard. To the extent that Dark Souls (along with Dark Souls II and III), its vistas, its puzzles, its challenges, its stories, has occupied a permanent corner of my brain. Don’t get me wrong, I have always been one of those idealistic fuckers ready to embrace the artistry of gaming as a medium. The games I love linger for me the way books and movies and other forms of art do. But Dark Souls. Holy fuck, there is nothing like Dark Souls. Except this is not a review of Dark Souls. It is a review of a book about Dark Souls. And because I am a person overwhelmingly obsessed with Dark Souls right now (and probably forever) reading a book about the thing I am obsessed with was, needless to say, a deeply satisfying and friendly experience. I am boring about Dark Souls in day-to-day life. I have to try very very hard not to talk about Dark Souls because most people do not want to hear about Dark Souls. They definitely do not want to hear about Dark Souls for the length of time I am capable of talking about Dark Souls. So spending 353 pages in the company of writers as eager to talk about Dark Souls as I am was highly cathartic. The book is divided into a series of accessible, well-framed essays about the game and the community around the game. There’s pretty much everything you’d expect here—a potted history of the game’s development, a study of Hidetaka Miyazaki, drawing on several of his interviews, some personal stories (lovers who met in the game, someone the game helped through a difficult time), some more technical pieces on the way certain players have attempted to understand the game’s more obscure mechanics, the interview with VaatiVidya that is apparently required for any piece of Dark Souls media—and I sincerely enjoyed the range of perspectives presented. The way the game can encompass so many different sets of experiences and is richer because of it. I’m not really the sort of person who cares a lot about what creators think of what they’ve created (and the same goes for work I have myself created) but, weirdly, I ended up kind of fascinated by the quotes from Miyazaki that pepper the book. It’s a well-judged amount, not allowing the author/creator to dominate reactions to their own text, but I appreciated Miyazaki’s resistance to auteur-ship and his willingness to allow his game to be … interpretatively expansive, I guess? Dark Souls is in some ways an incomplete game, and I like to think that it has been completed by players, by their discoveries as they moved along. I’d love to say that the nature of this incompleteness was completely deliberate. But it is both deliberate and by accident, in different ways.” This is all so very Barthesian … the game itself, now I think about it, so very Barthesian … that it’s no wonder that I am so besotted. In any case, the essay sections of the book are interspersed with beautifully written reflections on each area you encounter in the game, and I adored them fiercely because they were a way to reflect upon my own emotional reactions (still fresh from my semi-recently completed playthrough). Part of my on-going love affair with video games has always been about the places and there are no video game places quite like Lordan. I will say, however, that that the book came out in 2016 and the version I read was a 2020 re-release: all of which means, it’s inevitably a little dated. There’s nothing, really, in this book that you couldn’t get from a curated collection of YouTube video essays or by Googling “Hidetaka Miyazaki interview English”. Plus the VaatiVidya chapter is a little strange—dwelling on the sharpness of his cheekbones and velvety voice, for example, which felt unnecessary and reminded me slightly of that cringe-making Vanity Fair profile of Margot Robbie. Except over an Australian dude who makes Dark Souls lore videos? Whatever floats your boat, I guess. Not that I really think people should be floating their boat in quite those ways: I mean, you’re supposed to be interviewing someone, not objectifying them. I was also—and oh God this is excruciatingly nerdy of me—slightly disappointed that there was relatively little on the, uh, lore and story aspects of the game, and what there was lacked a bit of depth. Like, I feel an absolute knob end for taking issue with the interpretation of Seath of Scaleless, a character in a video game from 2011, in a book from 2016. But he is definitely in *despair* not rage as the immortal dragonscales of his brethren crumble to dust in his claw: [image] ANYWAY: dated or not, there is still something pleasurable about the existence of this book. I guess—rightly or wrongly—a book feels … substantive and loving in a way a collection of YouTube essays (regardless of their quality) might not. I honestly just enjoy the fact this exists. It felt like sharing something I love with other people who love it too. And you can’t really do better than that. Minor addendum: I read this in the 2020 Tune and Fairweather edition, which is to say, the fancy hardback with the beautiful new-book smell wafting from the pages. It’s a glorious artefact, exquisitely typeset, printed and bound, with the beautiful supporting artwork and Miyazaki’s words printed in red so you can always jump to the quotes. Basically, it’s an incredible aesthetic experience—and would grace any bookshelf or coffee table—but it’s an absolute pig to read. It’s way too heavy, and I had to literally brace it against my desk or my knees in order to turn the pages. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 13, 2022
|
Aug 13, 2022
|
Aug 12, 2022
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||||||
1250855128
| 9781250855121
| B09V3FWJ87
| 3.54
| 65,655
| Oct 25, 2022
| Oct 25, 2022
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: none Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: none Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* Spoilers for the first book. Very small ones for the second. Well, I say this every time: middle books in trilogies are hard. But the truth was, I was deeply, mortifyingly happy to be back with this impossible collection of people. There’s part of me—the part that’s in my mid-thirties—that is, I think, on some level aware that they’re all obnoxious beyond reason: unnecessarily articulate, unnecessarily appealing, unnecessarily obsessed with each other, even when they’re pretending not to be, unnecessarily self-absorbed, unnecessarily shaped, driven and helpless in the face of their own trauma. But the part of me that devoured The Secret History as a teenager, who genuinely hoped I would grow up to be brilliantly and beautifully damaged (as opposed to just in need of therapy), who was so terribly needy in every way it is possible for a human being to be needy … that part of me? To that part of me, these books are a fucking feast. And y’know, it kind of pleases of me that I can put aside the ironies and detachments of having grown the fuck up just to revel in them. I don’t read YA very often because it tends to make me feel old. The Atlas series make me feel young. Because I can (mostly guilt-free) gleefully splash about in all the shit I was desperate to experience as a teenager—anything that would make me feel special and interesting, basically—and then quietly put the book down and go back to the very banal life I adore and fought to have. So, the actual book. Well. Something I noted in my thoughts on The Atlas Six was that I wasn’t sure if the sequel could maintain the same propulsive tension when there wasn’t a murder game happening. And I’m afraid—though your mileage may vary—I might have been correct. The Atlas Paradox has some fantastic set pieces in it (usually confrontations between the various characters) but, as a whole, it felt just a touch directionless. We also get a broadening of perspectives—including more from Gideon, Ezra and a few other characters—which is … interesting, but I missed the sense of emotional claustrophobia—the snarled yarn ball of endless unreliability—when it was just the central six (especially because when we did break away from them in the final section of the first book it was like such A Moment). Ultimately, for me, broadening the scope just made the story feel more fragmented, especially because (following the events of the first book) Libby is elsewhere for the entire book and the other five feel more isolated within their own private narratives: Reina, angry with Nico, is fucking with the archives, Nico is trying to get Libby back, Callum is falling into substance abuse, Parisa is still pursuing Dalton, Tristan is … being Tristan, which mostly involves nebulous adventures in self-loathing. (Nebulous Adventures in Self-Loathing is also the name of my autobiography, btw). Of course, part of the point is that the group is genuinely unbalanced without Libby. She’s always been a character study in exquisite irritation, but I missed her deeply. And, honestly, I also missed everyone trying to fuck and/or kill each other all the time. I mean, yes, there’s moments where so-and-so is full of deep, murderous rage towards so-and-so but I never really believed anyone was actually going to try to knife anyone else. Unlike the first book, where I was pretty much convinced it was going to happen at least once a chapter. On top of which, the ending of the first book—in which the scope of Atlas’s plan is revealed—kind of led me to expect significant changes to the world state in book two? And … well … there aren’t any? Like Atlas is still planning the same plan, but he doesn’t seem to be any closer to achieving it than he was at the end of book one. The Forum is still out there but they don’t do anything except … attend a party? And the remaining five researchers mostly sit around, um, putting together research proposals? Which in academia terms too real, man, too real. In terms of a story about sex, power, trauma and someone who literally wants to create a new universe … bit disappointing? We do get a shifting of alliances within the five, following the events of the first book, and those character dynamics continue to be wholly fascinating. Put any of them in a room in any configuration to fuck or get in a fight and I was RIVETED. In terms of development, however, we only really get more insight into Reina and Callum, while Nico, Parisa and Tristan continue to act mostly as they always have. In some ways, I suspect, this was necessary because Reina and Callum were the least developed in the first book, Reina because she was so locked down, and Callum because he was portraying himself as a cackling supervillain, but the fact that we finally begin to understand Reina and Callum more makes the others feel static in comparison (as much I adore them). Similarly, Libby does make a really significant series of choice in this book, even though she’s not on page very much, but we’re not going to see the impact of them—either on the world or Libby herself—until the next book. But here’s the thing. The reason I’ve foregrounded these issues is because … kind of … in a very real sense … I don’t give a fuck? Like, I’m aware that there are ways in which this book doesn’t quite do enough on its own to drive the whole story forward—it’s mainly treading water, set-up, and just enough new information to keep you curious—but none of it stopped me eating The Atlas Paradox right up and still being ravenous for more. I think at this point we might be in a style over substance place (something that may very well change in the third book) but … hell, the style is dazzling and it’s a pleasure, sometimes, to let yourself be dazzled. The characters are all godawful (I mean, as people, they’re wonderfully written) but I’m obsessed with them and the books themselves are just so shamelessly charismatic, their tendency towards extravagant self-indulgence always expertly balanced by this thread of dark humour. I mean, academics psychically feeding themselves to a sinister, potentially sentient library to access knowledge … that’s just fucking delightful (cf. too real, man too real). Basically, if you loved The Atlas Six, The Atlas Paradox is more of the same. You might think it could have done with being a bit *more* more of the same. But, equally, if you’re as into the same as I apparently am then you won’t be disappointed. Less coherent thoughts: --I know Nico/Gideon is supposed to be, like, THE ship but Callum/Tristram? Come on. It’s not real love unless one of you might be an actual sociopath and the other has tried to literally murder you --I have never wanted anyone, real or fictional, with the intensity I want Parisa --I have a new appreciation for Libby --Still #TeamCallum. All the way. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
Jul 30, 2022
|
Jul 30, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
1728214971
| 9781728214979
| 1728214971
| 3.46
| 747
| Jan 26, 2021
| Jan 26, 2021
|
Source of book: Bought by me Relevant disclaimers: Share an agent, share a publisher, sometimes share Twitter bantz. Please note: This review may not be Source of book: Bought by me Relevant disclaimers: Share an agent, share a publisher, sometimes share Twitter bantz. Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* I’ve been on a bit of a re-read kick recently because I read a bunch of books during the pandemic before I decided I missed being able to talk about books more than I cared about people telling me I shouldn’t be talking about books and came back to GR in earnest. In any case, Big Bad Wolf is a polarising, complicated and, for me, completely fascinating read. Looking back, I think BBW is a book at a double-crossroads, both in terms of the genre, and in terms of the way we, as authors and readers and humans in general, respond to trauma. More than any other genre, with the possible exception of YA, romance is trend driven and I don’t mean that in a disparaging way: the rise and fall and return of particular tropes and settings never ceases to intrigue me. When I started writing, PNR/UF was just coming to the end of its reign as the big thing but, much like a punch-drunk boxer, it’s kind of got to the point that it is (or was) due to a comeback. And, while I’m not by any means an expert on the market, I think there were one of two ways this comeback would happen: it was either spinning out of romcom or it was spinning out of social justice. As it turned out, it’s spinning out of romcom—hence the flood of books called things like Basic Ass Witch or The Joy of Hex (somebody please write me one of those witchy romcoms called Basic Ass Witch, please and thank you)—but if the genre had spun out of social justice instead, I think BBW offers a glimpse of what it could have look like. PNR was, to my best recollection, kind of the place where the more … shall we say … problematic tropes went to play: fated mates, alpha men, dubconny dynamics, etc. What BBW attempts—and, for my money, mostly succeeds at—is re-framing them to suit an ever-evolving and increasingly self-aware audience. There is nothing, after all, inherently wrong with enjoying big alpha men and dangerous sexual encounters, it’s the way they abut real social contexts that render them difficult to navigate. To put it in the bluntest possible genre terms (not terms that specifically apply to this book, I hasten add but terms from which all our interactions with difficult tropes can to some degree be seen to flow): rape fantasies aren’t by themselves problem. They only become a problem because rape culture exists. Big Bad Wolf, then, is set in a post 2016 America even more Dystopian than the, uh, the reality we all remember? New York is a surveillance state, civil liberties—especially those aimed at protecting marginalised people—are under constant threat, oh and supernatural creatures exist, their rights barely acknowledged in what feels like an increasingly and perhaps irredeemably polarised world. What’s especially interesting about the way supernatural creatures are positioned within this setting is that they’re not stand-ins or analogies for marginalised people. Rather, they specifically exist alongside them and act as a kind of lens through which the book, and consequently the reader, can explore the vulnerabilities faced by marginalised people in the world as we currently inhabit it. The central conceit of BBW is almost, in that context, a dark joke: that the reality faced by marginalised people post 2016 has become so inescapably threatening that you can throw literal monsters into the mix and they still end up quite low down on the list of things to worry about. It's a brilliant take, both on the whole “what to do with vampires and werewolves etc” thing and on PNR as a genre. And—given where the world seems to be going as regards trans rights, reproductive rights, and human rights in general—remains bleakly prescient. Bleakly relevant. As I said in my introduction, we respond to trauma in different ways. I can sort of see why this was not the book many people were looking for in the middle of the pandemic and that’s fair enough, but I feel it deserves a re-examination. I would never diminish the value of escapism but escapism can't be our only answer to Bad Shit TM. Sometimes it’s necessary to get angry. Big Bad Wolf is an excellent book to get angry alongside. And, unlike real life, at least offers the consolation of sex, catharsis, and a happy ending for its protagonists. The plot is somewhat labyrinthine as you might expect from a book with this particular blend of PNR/romsus DNA. But it opens with the heroine, Neha Ahluwalia, sitting in on a client meeting with two partners from the law firm where she currently works. The client is Joe Peluso: a werewolf who was arrested for killing (in human form) six members of the Russian mob. Joe is a surly, aggressive, locked-down mystery who will do nothing to help his own defence. Neha, a trained lawyer and psychologist, has been brought on board to figure out Joe before they go to trial. From this premise, things unravel rapidly. Soon Joe and Neha are on the run from the law and the mob, trying to bring down the Russians with the assistance of Third Shift—a human and supernatural run private security company. As ever, PNR makes a lot of demands in terms of world-building and, for the most part, I think BBW succeeds in communicating what it wants to communicate, but—and I don’t think there’s a single first book in a PNR series I’ve ever NOT said this about—the need to introduce a large cast as well as establish the setting slightly overwhelms the romance. In that regard, it’s almost a book of two halves: the initial meetings between Neha and Joe, which have a bit of a Hannibal Lector / Clarice Starling vibe to them, and the second half of the book which is a balls-to-the-wall high-stakes action fest. I did manage to adjust to what the second half was doing—I can’t remember the last time I read a PNR that felt so legitimately dangerous and scary—but the introductory scenes between Neha and Joe are so emotionally compelling and UST-saturated that I was kind of disappointed when they were over. Neha and Joe are interestingly complicated characters. Neha, in particular, is all kinds of amazing: she’s sharp, she’s smart, she knows she’s hot as hell. I wish there’d been more opportunity for her to use her actual professional skills—which is not to say she’s not determined and resourceful throughout, but the climax of the book is mostly a super tense infiltration followed by a massive fight, which doesn’t give much opportunity for a lawyer/psychologist to shine. Where it’s becomes slightly more difficult, I think, is how the book attempts to reckon with her attraction to (and later love for) Joe: a literal murderer. I think part of the issue here might be that there IS that reckoning. Literal murderers are pretty much par for the course in romance, both in PNR and beyond it (I’ve read histroms, for example, where the hero is a multiple murderer and it’s just, like, coolbeans shrug), and mostly this is just kind of brushed under the ethical carpet so the reader never really has to think about it. Whereas the reality of what Joe has done is always front and centre in BBW and, the truth is, there is no way—really—to deal with that. Except in this slightly nebulous “well, sometimes a heroine will fall in love with a mass murderer and as a strong-willed, independent woman that’s her choice and she shouldn’t have to justify it” kind of way. I really respect BBW for grappling with this, even if I think the result is somewhat messy. I think part of the problem is not with the attempt to take on the trope itself so much as the structure of the book around it, in the sense that Neha and Joe spend the second half, on the run, getting kidnapped, popping dangerboners, or angsting about whether Joe is worthy of her. This sort of leaves no space for them to really talk, or rather all their talk circles the drain of Joe’s low self-esteem without much resolution, when actually Joe’s context as the book establishes it is hugely significant, not only to who he is and how he feels, but the why and the wherefore of his … y’know … murdering. And I don’t just mean the literality of what he did into the army on top of his having shot six Russian mobsters in retaliation for their having killed his (entirely innocent) best friend / little brother figure. Like, in terms of the book and Joe's character, this wasn't a triumphant act of power or justice or even revenge truly (although it may have started out that way): it was despair. The thing about Neha is that she’s a clever, educated woman with loving parents and a strong community around her. Whereas Joe, while he ticks all the boxes of the traditional alpha (right down to his yo-yo erection), is an incredibly socially disempowered hero. He’s blue collar in the … uh … real sense? Not the romance genre sense of a soft-spoken manly man who maybe does wood carving and can fix your plumbing for you. Having been raised in the foster system, Joe is not particularly well educated, he has no support structures, no real future, and as such is rife for exploitation by the government or pretty much anyone else who feels inclined to use him for their own ends. He joined the army as a young man, was a prime candidate for their “hey, let’s make monstrous super soliders” programmes (this programme, btw, is called Apex, which is fucking perfect) and—fitted with a chip so he can’t transform—was finally cast back into civilian life with nothing but a history of bloodshed behind him. When pretty much his only actual friend was killed, he had no recourse for justice, or help, even for emotional support. And now he’s prison, an institution hardly renowned for helping people improve their sense of self-worth. Yes, Joe is white and male, aspects of identity we normally associate with power, but his economic class has left him profoundly vulnerable. His whole life he has been told he is worth nothing but the violence he can perform. It’s no wonder he reacts to grief and loss by killing six mobsters. And it’s no wonder he doesn’t feel worthy of Neha, who represents everything he has been told he can’t have and doesn’t deserve: love and community, and hope for a better life. Frankly, the fact that Neha can see this man who has been literally reduced to something subhuman by the army and the state, and the world around him, and find him admirable and loveable and capable of being a better person … that only reflects well on her as a person and a heroine. And it’s all there in the book, established during their first conversations and implied by the dynamics of their relationship, but I really really wish it had been more directly on the page because otherwise it’s too easy to dismiss all of Joe’s “I am not worthy of you, small human female”-ing as tropey and repetitious. And I'm probably making it sound like the book doesn't fully come together but it’s more, I think, a case of a book that buckles slightly under its own ambition. And I am always personally here for a book that buckles slightly under its own ambition—because it’s books like this that invite us to think about what the genre is versus what it has the potential to be. While there arguably slightly too much going on in BBW, it still utterly fascinates me as a unique take on PNR. I love what it's doing with its setting, I love how it handles supernatural creatures (I mean, thank God, we're moving away from "they're basically like queers or POCs" take) I love its effortlessly diverse cast (I don’t think there’s a single character in here who isn’t marginalised along one axes or another), I love its take on the alpha hero, I love its bleak world and the way community (whether that’s your human/shifter security firm or a bunch of South Asian aunties getting shit done) acts as both mitigation of and resistance to that bleakness. Plus, as you might expect from a Suleikha Snyder book, the writing is incredibly sharp and engaging, and there’s lots of consent-driven, heroine-centring sex—even while the book remains true to its PNR roots and has the hero and heroine banging at frankly ludicrous times. PNR and romsus make me increasingly concerned about how I’m going to cope if I ever find myself on the run from the mob, stranded on an alien planet, or someone takes a hit out on me, because I just don’t function down there if I’m SCARED FOR MY LIFE. Like the love interest will be trying to get in one last needy, sweaty fuckorama before we die and I’d be like, can I just use my meditation app for a moment please? Is there any Valium in this bunker? In any case, I can see why Big Bad Wolf ended up being divisive book. For me, though, I admire the fuck out of what it’s doing. Basically, it’s like its hero: as long as you’re willing to you accept it for what it is, understand where it's coming from, and meet it where it’s at, then it’ll surprise and intrigue you and, ultimately, prove itself very worth your time. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jun 22, 2022
|
Jun 22, 2022
|
Jun 22, 2022
|
Mass Market Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||
B09CNFL3W7
| 4.41
| 64,733
| Jul 12, 2022
| Jul 12, 2022
|
Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: none Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without Source of book: NetGalley (thank you) Relevant disclaimers: none Please note: This review may not be reproduced or quoted, in whole or in part, without explicit consent from the author. And remember: I am not here to judge your drag, I mean your book. Books are art and art is subjective. These are just my personal thoughts. They are not meant to be taken as broader commentary on the general quality of the work. Believe me, I have not enjoyed many an excellent book, and my individual lack of enjoyment has not made any of those books less excellent or (more relevantly) less successful. Further disclaimer: Readers, please stop accusing me of trying to take down “my competition” because I wrote a review you didn’t like. This is complete nonsense. Firstly, writing isn’t a competitive sport. Secondly, I only publish reviews of books in the subgenre where I’m best known (queer romcom) if they’re glowing. And finally: taking time out of my life to read an entire book, then write a detailed review about it that some people on GR will look at would be a profoundly inefficient and ineffective way to damage the careers of other authors. If you can’t credit me with simply being a person who loves books and likes talking about them, at least credit me with enough common sense to be a better villain. ******************************************* So everything I loved about A Psalm for the Wild-Built is present in A Prayer for the Crown-Shy. By which I mean, this is a gentle, healing, beautiful book that also doesn’t shy away from the reality of sadness and lostness, or the general complexity of humans and human relations. Like, Psalm for the Wild-Built the plot is largely incidental: having returned from their trip to the wilderness, Sibling Dex is now Mosscap’s guide and companion as the pair of them tour the local villages so that Mosscap can ask the question it has been tasked with: what do humans need. Also like Psalm, the book has a light, picaresque quality that makes it a swift, accessible read—though that accessibility should not be taken for simplicity because Prayer builds upon, and is still wrangling with, the same philosophical and existential ideas that gave Psalm such depth and resonance. Sibling Dex’s mental health—their inability to allow themselves the peace it was once their calling to give to others—continues to play a significant role in the narrative and, once again, I was really comforted by the way this was handled. I think anyone who has ever suffered with any sort of mental health type thing will be familiar with deep alienation that accompanies it: it can very much feel like you live in a perfect world, surrounded by people who love you, and yet there is still something gracelessly, ungratefully wrong with you. For Sibling Dex, of course, this is literally true in terms of the setting itself (a utopia in all but name) but, for the reader, it’s a perfect of allegorical reflection of a very specific mental health moment. I know I spoke about this a little in my review of the first book, but I need to reiterate it here because it’s so important to me. Without context, it seems bizarrely negative to say I loved that Sibling Dex has mental health issues and exists in a world where human unhappiness is real and allowed to be real, despite the fact that humanity as a whole has learned to live in harmony both with the natural world and (mostly) with each other. I’ve used the word utopian a lot, but I guess the setting would more accurately be described as aspirational. But there’s a danger, in general, I think when we talk about utopian/aspirational settings to kind of *flatten* individual humanity into a kind of consensus of assumptions about what moral virtue is or how happiness can best be found. Which kind of ends up leading to this situation where, say, people with mental health issues have just sorta been … written out of our vision of an optimistic future? And I mean, like, thanks? I don’t think my existence is oppositional to a more compassionate and functional society. And once you’ve ditched the mentally ill you’re in this whole eugenics-ey groove without even noticing how you got there: I mean, what about people with disabilities, and queerness is kind of complicated, and would it just be easier all-round if everyone was white. Whereas a truly aspirational society—an aspirational society that we don’t need to live on a fictional moon in an nebulous future after a robot uprising to works towards—is one that can accept humanness and humanity as a multifaced thing. Not one that reduces us to less than we are. Anyway, if I had to say something even remotely evaluative about the book, I’d say it suffers mildly—like a mouse’s squeak of mildly, that’s how mildly—from having a less well-defined journey than the first book. Psalm is a series of strung-together scenes leading to the specific end point at the abandoned hermitage. In Prayer, because Sibling Dex and Mosscap are visiting villages mostly at random, the story is more a collection of incidents. I did come up with a slightly stretched metaphor about the first one being like a series of beads upon a rosary and the second more like a collection of psalms but then I remembered the first one is Psalm and the second one is Prayer, so I was talking nonsense. Point is: this one, arguably, maybe, if you give a damn, might feel a tiny bit less structured than the first one. I didn't give a damn. I loved it anyway. Also on a purely personal note—because I am obsessed with robots—I was kind of hoping to meet more robots, or at least learn a little more about them … but ultimately, like all books about robots, these are books about people, and it wouldn’t ultimately make sense for the narrative and emotional arcs of the story to introduce more robots to us. So that isn’t really a complaint, just a random public confession about my intense feelings for robots. Sorry about that. But if, like me, you're secretly hoping to meet more robots, you won't. You honestly won't really feel like you're missing anything, but temper your expectations regardless. We do meet a diverse and interesting collection of humans, though, including a … I hesitate to say love interest … a friendly casual sex interest for Sibling Dex (the way this encounter is handled is so well done: there’s attraction, honesty and mutual respect on both sides, and breakfast, but no expectation of anything more or different between them at this time), a representative of group of humans who have chosen to reject all technology (again, this is handled with the delicacy that is typical of this author’s writing) and we get to meet Sibling Dex’s family. Who are A Lot in the best/worst way. Much like Psalm, Prayer isn’t really a book in which anything happens per se: there’s no drama, any conflict is resolved through care and conversation, and—as such—as there isn’t really a climax, at least not in the traditional sense. What there is, though, is a intentional non-resolution of the emotional journey of both characters, a non-resolution that encompasses both their togetherness and their individuality, and a non-resolution that is so stunningly tender, so exquisitely hopeful, that I cried when reading it and I am literally crying right now trying to write about it. Which is making it fucking hard to type. Also I don’t mean to speak of it so vaguely, but I genuinely don’t want to spoil it. Just trust me when I tell you it is perfect, it is beautifully judged, and—if the first book spoke to you in any way—it is everything you need. The other only thing I’ll say is that I’m going to try to stop thinking of myself as a neurotic, damaged, mentally ill introvert. I’m going to try and say simply that I’m crown-shy. And remember that, once upon a time, an author I’d never met and will never speak to sang a psalm and whispered a prayer for me and everyone like me. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jun 2022
|
Jun 2022
|
Jun 17, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4.00
|
Jul 05, 2024
|
Jul 05, 2024
|
|||||||
4.00
|
Dec 29, 2023
|
Dec 29, 2023
|
|||||||
4.33
|
Dec 27, 2023
|
Dec 27, 2023
|
|||||||
4.26
|
Dec 25, 2023
|
Dec 25, 2023
|
|||||||
4.43
|
Nov 19, 2023
|
Nov 19, 2023
|
|||||||
4.19
|
Feb 25, 2023
|
Feb 25, 2023
|
|||||||
3.80
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
|||||||
3.86
|
Dec 09, 2022
|
Dec 09, 2022
|
|||||||
3.54
|
not set
|
Nov 28, 2022
|
|||||||
4.05
|
not set
|
Nov 10, 2022
|
|||||||
4.08
|
not set
|
Nov 09, 2022
|
|||||||
3.92
|
Oct 22, 2022
|
Oct 21, 2022
|
|||||||
Vo, Nghi
*
| 3.55
|
Oct 10, 2022
|
Oct 10, 2022
|
||||||
4.65
|
Oct 2022
|
Oct 01, 2022
|
|||||||
3.63
|
Aug 23, 2022
|
Aug 23, 2022
|
|||||||
3.80
|
Aug 2022
|
Aug 18, 2022
|
|||||||
4.12
|
Aug 13, 2022
|
Aug 12, 2022
|
|||||||
3.54
|
Jul 30, 2022
|
Jul 30, 2022
|
|||||||
3.46
|
Jun 22, 2022
|
Jun 22, 2022
|
|||||||
4.41
|
Jun 2022
|
Jun 17, 2022
|