Scan barcode
mxunsmiley's review against another edition
More soapbox than narrative. Way, way more soapbox than narrative. There is absolutely a way to address touchy subjects like detransition and trans parenthood without being so intrusive that it gets in the way of any actual plot or action. I also disliked how Peters just constantly spelled out what was going on in the characters' minds and the reasons for their motivations. It read more like extensive character studies than anything. To get to the characters: I really did not like or care about them. Both Ames and Reese were stupendously self-absorbed and selfish.
I also didn't like the structure. I really do not enjoy switching from present to past time over and over in such a way that it interrupts the flow of the story. I don't really know how to explain it, but I guess when it's split that way into chapters, it's very tiring and repetitive.
I was skeptical about the claims of misogynistic writing when I read some other reviews (because that would be a typical accusation of a trans woman) and I really want to give Peters the benefit of the doubt, considering she does spend a lot of time telling us her ideas of trans womanhood throughout the book. At the same time, she is very direct as I've said, so I don't know if she is indirectly presenting Reese as imagining a toxic kind of womanhood based on societal standards of womanhood in general. Peters does know how to make implications in her writing rather than state things outright at times, which is why I'm very confused as to how she just manages to write this entire book laying literally everything out for the reader. It's a slippery slope so I'm going to simply let it be and say that her portrayal of Reese was, at times, extremely uncomfortable and off-putting, especially at the start with her description of her relationship with Stanley and why it was so appealing to her.
Then the writing was all over the place. Some of it was laughable (describing a forest's smell as "foresty" like a dog's smell is "doggy"? Alright, I guess), other times unnecessarily pedantic. There was no clear style. It didn't read very pleasantly most of the time.
I do think there is such a good book to be written based on the issues she brings up. I just think that it would be so much more impactful if it wasn't like a long essay dressed up as a fictional narrative. It's also obvious that Peters has spent a lot of time online and directs a lot of criticism at the online sphere, which, in my eyes, really hurt the narrative and, paradoxically, made it seem very out of touch. Who cares what some personalities on Twitter or Tumblr have said about transness? In the future, will it really matter? Does it really define how everyone sees transness as a whole? There are some very interesting points made, a lot of arguments to be had, but again, it was just very awkward in a supposed novel.
I also didn't like the structure. I really do not enjoy switching from present to past time over and over in such a way that it interrupts the flow of the story. I don't really know how to explain it, but I guess when it's split that way into chapters, it's very tiring and repetitive.
I was skeptical about the claims of misogynistic writing when I read some other reviews (because that would be a typical accusation of a trans woman) and I really want to give Peters the benefit of the doubt, considering she does spend a lot of time telling us her ideas of trans womanhood throughout the book. At the same time, she is very direct as I've said, so I don't know if she is indirectly presenting Reese as imagining a toxic kind of womanhood based on societal standards of womanhood in general. Peters does know how to make implications in her writing rather than state things outright at times, which is why I'm very confused as to how she just manages to write this entire book laying literally everything out for the reader. It's a slippery slope so I'm going to simply let it be and say that her portrayal of Reese was, at times, extremely uncomfortable and off-putting, especially at the start with her description of her relationship with Stanley and why it was so appealing to her.
Then the writing was all over the place. Some of it was laughable (describing a forest's smell as "foresty" like a dog's smell is "doggy"? Alright, I guess), other times unnecessarily pedantic. There was no clear style. It didn't read very pleasantly most of the time.
I do think there is such a good book to be written based on the issues she brings up. I just think that it would be so much more impactful if it wasn't like a long essay dressed up as a fictional narrative. It's also obvious that Peters has spent a lot of time online and directs a lot of criticism at the online sphere, which, in my eyes, really hurt the narrative and, paradoxically, made it seem very out of touch. Who cares what some personalities on Twitter or Tumblr have said about transness? In the future, will it really matter? Does it really define how everyone sees transness as a whole? There are some very interesting points made, a lot of arguments to be had, but again, it was just very awkward in a supposed novel.
allisong82's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
hopeful
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.25
sea_empty's review against another edition
3.5
Intriguing premise that didn’t live up to its potential with silly soap opera-ish plot. Funny though
justgj's review against another edition
emotional
funny
lighthearted
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
maidenbaltimore's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
Torrey Peters remains one of my favorite authors with me now finishing this book. This caused so many deep emotions to be brought out of me. Hell, it even made me begin to consider getting bottom surgery. But that's not important right now. I had taken to the habit of sitting in the park near my apartment and reading this book and it always felt nice, until it would be a particularly intense moment and I would vocalize in some way, attracting attention from those around me.
Reese has got to be one of my favorite characters I have read in a while. I couldn't help but see of most all my transfemme friends and myself in her. Basically, this book is really good and I don't know what else to say. I can't wait to see what she comes out with next.
Reese has got to be one of my favorite characters I have read in a while. I couldn't help but see of most all my transfemme friends and myself in her. Basically, this book is really good and I don't know what else to say. I can't wait to see what she comes out with next.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Suicide attempt
zitasmall's review against another edition
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.75
sha's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
Content Warnings
Moderate: Toxic relationship, Miscarriage, Outing, Violence, Abortion, Death, Homophobia, Infertility, Lesbophobia, and Sexual content
supernumeraryemily's review against another edition
emotional
funny
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
I really enjoyed this read. Peters did a skillful job of weaving past and present, and digging into the motivations and experiences that have formed each character without feeling pedantic. The topics of queer and cisgender worlds colliding was fascinating, and Peters expertly captured moments of absurdity and confusion and unexpected understanding. I wish this book didn't end when it did--I could keep reading Peters writing these characters forever!
My one critique is that some of the secondary characters blended into each other for me.
My one critique is that some of the secondary characters blended into each other for me.