You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.58 AVERAGE
3.58 AVERAGE
Some VERY LIGHT, hopefully very vague spoilers ahead:
Charlie Jane Anders does a wonderful job of building a world big enough for both the dreams of scifi and fantasy. She creates well-developed, thought out fully-human characters that are as flawed as they are endearing. I'd give this a five-star review, but for me the ending fell flat on its face. I'm having a hard time processing why. Anders laid all the groundwork for it quite well, but when it all came out on the page, it just did not work for me. It's a solid book, and I hope Anders dives into its past eventually, but the central conflict felt like it wrapped up because it had to, not because it had actually earned the resolution.
Charlie Jane Anders does a wonderful job of building a world big enough for both the dreams of scifi and fantasy. She creates well-developed, thought out fully-human characters that are as flawed as they are endearing. I'd give this a five-star review, but for me the ending fell flat on its face. I'm having a hard time processing why. Anders laid all the groundwork for it quite well, but when it all came out on the page, it just did not work for me. It's a solid book, and I hope Anders dives into its past eventually, but the central conflict felt like it wrapped up because it had to, not because it had actually earned the resolution.
Oh my, gentle reader! 'All the Birds [ARE] in the Sky'! I think this is the most snarky tongue-in-cheek novel I have read this year! It is done with genuine love, reader, only with love. Do not fear.
Charlie Jane Anders, the author, clearly is enjoying the challenge of knowingly including every science fiction and fantasy trope common to both genres in this book, and she wants the reader to laugh with her! However, because Anders is going for a post-modern literary joke in my opinion, her story suffers from what I think is common to high-end books like this - failing to engage the readers emotionally with the characters. The wink-wink is so pronounced, readers are as aware as the author that the mechanics of writing are going on under the hood. Readers can sit back and enjoy it, although some undoubtedly will feel annoyed.
The book seems like a palimpsest to me. Besides including every popular trope in Science Fiction and in Fantasy genres, maybe also underlying the top story is, I think, a snarky takedown of various famous feuds between famous Science Fiction and famous Fantasy writers, as well as reminding me of heated exchanges between the arty literary critics who despise the Science Fiction/Fantasy genres and famous SF/Fantasy writers who defend their genre as literary fiction. Plus, the author, by including every trope in the genre, has highlighted that those tropes can be a bit tired and trite, but are yet beloved and completely traditional to all YA Fiction now.
I am in a quandary as to how to rate the book as a result. The story is creatively interesting and at the same time incredibly silly because it is loudly conscious in skewering literary tropes while seriously including what every MFA and Creative Writing writer learns as important genre literary devices in creating a story and character and plot development. The story is 3 stars for me, but as a loving underhanded literary criticism of the two genres and as a writing mechanics tour de force, the book is a ten-star satire!
I loved genre fiction way longer and earlier than I did literary fiction, so I became familiar with the disrespect of literary critics towards genre fiction! 'All the Birds in the Sky' can be taken as a fun pushing back against those snobs. I have subscribed to Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine, Analog, and Science Fiction & Fantasy Magazine for decades, and openly read them during lunch at work, even though some laughed at me! ; )
I haven't described the plot, have I?
When Patricia Delfine and Lawrence Armstead were in middle school they both, separately, became very familiar with thrown water balloons directed at their heads and being set up as the patsy for cruel practical jokes. Sadly, Patricia's and Larry's parents are either too self-centered or more concerned about enforcing conformity on their children than they are in encouraging any talent or helping them solve the bullying issues, but Theodolphus Rose, the assassin counselor (get it?), had a vision of the future so he knows the two children are genuine talented geniuses by nature. But the school counselor, normally only a simple evil assassin of children's dreams of being all they can be, also has a personal agenda of destroying Patricia and Larry.
The middle-school students believe the two to be weird worthless nerds, but Patricia is a real witch who can talk to animals and ancient tree spirits, while Larry is a science and math savant. One would think these two have nothing in common. Well, they don't, although Patricia tries to make nice with Larry. Larry is unable to tolerate the reality of Patricia's magical powers, but he reluctantly endures her friendship. They have no one else willing to be a friend, especially the Establishment. So, they try to accept each other in their adjoining shelves, so to speak, but clearly the more fantasy-world Patricia wants hard-science Larry to be a friend to her more than he wants for awhile.
Uncomfortably, they unite at certain key moments, though, after they grow up. They discover by working together they are greater as a sum than they were as (a)part. Perhaps, they can save the world, which is environmentally failing. A growing lack of potable water and poisoned Nature is causing humanity to sicken. Diseases and poverty are debilitating many countries, which are being destroyed by environmental disasters and riots. Both Patricia and Larry ran away from home in separate events as children, and both joined secret organizations dedicated to their respective skills. Both characters still are activists for their organizations as adults. When the two protagonists eventually run across the other's path, sometimes it is as enemies, and sometimes it is as partners. But is it possible for diametrically opposed characters to be OK on the same page? (Pun intended.)
Those of us genre readers who are also purists often argue the point Science Fiction and Fantasy Fiction are completely different and authors risk outraging their support base by mixing the two, especially those who are science-fiction purists. I have seen, gentle reader, reviewers scream for the doom of many authors because they dared mix fantasy within a science fiction novel. However, personally I am not purist for the record. Like Patricia, I resent that Fantasy is supposedly guilty of "Aggrandizement" in comparing itself to the intellectualism of science fiction plots! As I think Anders is so adroitly pointing out in this book, both genres use many of the same tropes and plot development schemes!
Another game is afoot in these pages, too, gentle reader! Almost every other paragraph or three includes a sly word or reference to a beloved science fiction or fantasy character or world. Happy sleuthing!
Charlie Jane Anders, the author, clearly is enjoying the challenge of knowingly including every science fiction and fantasy trope common to both genres in this book, and she wants the reader to laugh with her! However, because Anders is going for a post-modern literary joke in my opinion, her story suffers from what I think is common to high-end books like this - failing to engage the readers emotionally with the characters. The wink-wink is so pronounced, readers are as aware as the author that the mechanics of writing are going on under the hood. Readers can sit back and enjoy it, although some undoubtedly will feel annoyed.
The book seems like a palimpsest to me. Besides including every popular trope in Science Fiction and in Fantasy genres, maybe also underlying the top story is, I think, a snarky takedown of various famous feuds between famous Science Fiction and famous Fantasy writers, as well as reminding me of heated exchanges between the arty literary critics who despise the Science Fiction/Fantasy genres and famous SF/Fantasy writers who defend their genre as literary fiction. Plus, the author, by including every trope in the genre, has highlighted that those tropes can be a bit tired and trite, but are yet beloved and completely traditional to all YA Fiction now.
I am in a quandary as to how to rate the book as a result. The story is creatively interesting and at the same time incredibly silly because it is loudly conscious in skewering literary tropes while seriously including what every MFA and Creative Writing writer learns as important genre literary devices in creating a story and character and plot development. The story is 3 stars for me, but as a loving underhanded literary criticism of the two genres and as a writing mechanics tour de force, the book is a ten-star satire!
I loved genre fiction way longer and earlier than I did literary fiction, so I became familiar with the disrespect of literary critics towards genre fiction! 'All the Birds in the Sky' can be taken as a fun pushing back against those snobs. I have subscribed to Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine, Analog, and Science Fiction & Fantasy Magazine for decades, and openly read them during lunch at work, even though some laughed at me! ; )
I haven't described the plot, have I?
When Patricia Delfine and Lawrence Armstead were in middle school they both, separately, became very familiar with thrown water balloons directed at their heads and being set up as the patsy for cruel practical jokes. Sadly, Patricia's and Larry's parents are either too self-centered or more concerned about enforcing conformity on their children than they are in encouraging any talent or helping them solve the bullying issues, but Theodolphus Rose, the assassin counselor (get it?), had a vision of the future so he knows the two children are genuine talented geniuses by nature. But the school counselor, normally only a simple evil assassin of children's dreams of being all they can be, also has a personal agenda of destroying Patricia and Larry.
The middle-school students believe the two to be weird worthless nerds, but Patricia is a real witch who can talk to animals and ancient tree spirits, while Larry is a science and math savant. One would think these two have nothing in common. Well, they don't, although Patricia tries to make nice with Larry. Larry is unable to tolerate the reality of Patricia's magical powers, but he reluctantly endures her friendship. They have no one else willing to be a friend, especially the Establishment. So, they try to accept each other in their adjoining shelves, so to speak, but clearly the more fantasy-world Patricia wants hard-science Larry to be a friend to her more than he wants for awhile.
Uncomfortably, they unite at certain key moments, though, after they grow up. They discover by working together they are greater as a sum than they were as (a)part. Perhaps, they can save the world, which is environmentally failing. A growing lack of potable water and poisoned Nature is causing humanity to sicken. Diseases and poverty are debilitating many countries, which are being destroyed by environmental disasters and riots. Both Patricia and Larry ran away from home in separate events as children, and both joined secret organizations dedicated to their respective skills. Both characters still are activists for their organizations as adults. When the two protagonists eventually run across the other's path, sometimes it is as enemies, and sometimes it is as partners. But is it possible for diametrically opposed characters to be OK on the same page? (Pun intended.)
Those of us genre readers who are also purists often argue the point Science Fiction and Fantasy Fiction are completely different and authors risk outraging their support base by mixing the two, especially those who are science-fiction purists. I have seen, gentle reader, reviewers scream for the doom of many authors because they dared mix fantasy within a science fiction novel. However, personally I am not purist for the record. Like Patricia, I resent that Fantasy is supposedly guilty of "Aggrandizement" in comparing itself to the intellectualism of science fiction plots! As I think Anders is so adroitly pointing out in this book, both genres use many of the same tropes and plot development schemes!
Another game is afoot in these pages, too, gentle reader! Almost every other paragraph or three includes a sly word or reference to a beloved science fiction or fantasy character or world. Happy sleuthing!
I absolutely positively loved this book! Magic, technology, and fate. Love.
Doing the best you can isn't always good enough. It certainly isn't enough to make me care about these characters. Sure, they were adrift and confused, but they were also careless and selfishly short-sighted. The wacky aspects of this story did not appeal to me nor make up for the lack of character development.
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Maaaaaaaaan I really wanted to like this one. I loved the storyline and concept, but the execution fell super short. I was so disappointed. I felt like a lot of the story was disjointed and choppy and I didn't feel a strong connection to a single character.
adventurous
dark
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
OK, that was odd. The whole book seems like a buildup to how Patricia and Laurence are going to avert the scentific/magical apocalypse, but they don't. So many of their friends and family are dead and the world is one huge catastrophe, but Patricia and Laurence have finally found each other to love, so... yay?
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes