Scan barcode
annalyle's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
kleonard's review against another edition
5.0
I cannot lie: I love Lauren Beukes's writing. It's fresh and different and raw and honest and makes me pay attention. Her creations--places, people, beliefs, ideas--are always relevant. This novel is no different. When men all over the world die from a specific cancer targeting them, the few men and boys who survive are hunted, tested, claimed by governments and corporations. Cole's got a 12-year-old son, she's stuck in the US and needs to get to her home country of South Africa; and she's got a sister wants to sell her son for millions. Cole does what any mother would do: she puts her son in a dress and goes on the run, traveling across America and trying to escape the government, her sister, and other trouble along the way. It's a fast-paced, exhilarating ride that includes truly thoughtful discussions of death, gender and identity, personal choice and bodily autonomy, the nature of belief and religion, and coping with family. It's smart and fun and I loved it.
tracyreadsandrambles's review against another edition
3.0
The book was crazy to read, with the knowledge that she wrote it before the actual pandemic hi t the world. Some pets for me were a little drawn out but it was not a bad find fo 1.50$ Canadian at Dollartree.
blairv's review against another edition
adventurous
hopeful
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
alexisrt's review against another edition
2.0
The setup: a virus causes an accelerated form of prostate cancer that kills off the vast majority of men (book's wording; you may prefer biological male). The males who survive appear to have some protective factor inherited from their mothers. In response, the world has enacted the Reprohibition: No babies allowed and sperm banks destroyed. The remaining men/boys, and their mothers (if available) are now very wanted.
Cole and her son Miles have been discovered and imprisoned by the US government, and she wants to return to her native South Africa. When she escapes with Miles, disguising him as a girl, her sister Billie comes after them.
Spoilers because I can't explain the problems I had without giving away major plot points.
Lauren Beukes is a propulsive writer and I kept going to the end, but she makes a LOT of bad choices in this novel. The chase setup doesn't allow her to explore her world as much as she could, and there would be a lot to say about this world without men! We get some hints of new religious cults, repressive governments, strip clubs, communes. A few excerpts from pretend news sources give some backstory (helpful). The novel has a fatal flaw baked in: the idea that she's going to be safe in South Africa. Now, I'm not saying this because I think SA is uniquely violent or that the US is paradise, but because if this is a worldwide pandemic and the Reprohibition is worldwide, is there any country that can truly be safe? Would other countries not also be engaging in questionable research programs, or restrict the activities of the few remaining males? Her motivations don't make sense. The virus doesn't entirely make sense either (how is it the mother that's determinant for protection if this virus links to something on the Y chromosome?) but the acknowledgements say she talked to researchers. Characters make poorly explained decisions. At one point Cole makes a major decision that makes the climax of the novel possible, but her change of heart is poorly explained. After talking about Billie so negatively and whacking her over the head with a tire iron, how can she contact her and want her to come with them? I didn't buy it. Miles was apparently in a facility for second rate males, but why? Brought up and unanswered.
It's a real shame because the writing is great; there's tons of detail; and the road trip doesn't get bogged down. (I read and enjoyed The Shining Girls.)
After I started this book, I saw some talk on Twitter that this book is transphobic. It's not my place to make that judgment as a whole, though I don't think that the basic idea (a virus that kills biological males and disguising a boy as a girl) is irredeemably transphobic, as some did. I will say that Beukes makes what I regarded as a poor and jarring choice. Shortly after disguising Miles, the 3rd person narration in Cole's chapters refer to Miles as Mila and uses feminine pronouns. Since "Mila" is merely a disguise, it seems inappropriate to me, and there didn't seem to be a good, well developed reason for its use. Was it supposed to say something about how Cole views Miles? In Miles' chapters, the narration uses male pronouns and his birth name. Trans people are mentioned briefly on a couple of occasions and the story does largely have internal consistency on this point (some of the criticism indicated that the readers had either not read or not finished the book because their points are answered, whether or not they agree with the answers), but it could have used a review.
Her treatment of race also feels poorly developed. Cole is white South African; her late husband Devon was Black American, and consequently Miles is biracial. But although some of the theme is sketched out--Cole's fears for Miles are partly because of his being Black in America--it isn't well developed. I didn't get a sense of Miles' own sense of identity. In addition, the idea of a Black boy being captured and used for his sperm hovers over the book without ever being poked. Cole's concerns for him are primarily presented as a maternal belief in her child's safety.
Cole and her son Miles have been discovered and imprisoned by the US government, and she wants to return to her native South Africa. When she escapes with Miles, disguising him as a girl, her sister Billie comes after them.
Spoilers because I can't explain the problems I had without giving away major plot points.
Lauren Beukes is a propulsive writer and I kept going to the end, but she makes a LOT of bad choices in this novel. The chase setup doesn't allow her to explore her world as much as she could, and there would be a lot to say about this world without men! We get some hints of new religious cults, repressive governments, strip clubs, communes. A few excerpts from pretend news sources give some backstory (helpful). The novel has a fatal flaw baked in: the idea that she's going to be safe in South Africa. Now, I'm not saying this because I think SA is uniquely violent or that the US is paradise, but because if this is a worldwide pandemic and the Reprohibition is worldwide, is there any country that can truly be safe? Would other countries not also be engaging in questionable research programs, or restrict the activities of the few remaining males? Her motivations don't make sense. The virus doesn't entirely make sense either (how is it the mother that's determinant for protection if this virus links to something on the Y chromosome?) but the acknowledgements say she talked to researchers. Characters make poorly explained decisions. At one point Cole makes a major decision that makes the climax of the novel possible, but her change of heart is poorly explained. After talking about Billie so negatively and whacking her over the head with a tire iron, how can she contact her and want her to come with them? I didn't buy it. Miles was apparently in a facility for second rate males, but why? Brought up and unanswered.
It's a real shame because the writing is great; there's tons of detail; and the road trip doesn't get bogged down. (I read and enjoyed The Shining Girls.)
After I started this book, I saw some talk on Twitter that this book is transphobic. It's not my place to make that judgment as a whole, though I don't think that the basic idea (a virus that kills biological males and disguising a boy as a girl) is irredeemably transphobic, as some did. I will say that Beukes makes what I regarded as a poor and jarring choice. Shortly after disguising Miles, the 3rd person narration in Cole's chapters refer to Miles as Mila and uses feminine pronouns. Since "Mila" is merely a disguise, it seems inappropriate to me, and there didn't seem to be a good, well developed reason for its use. Was it supposed to say something about how Cole views Miles? In Miles' chapters, the narration uses male pronouns and his birth name. Trans people are mentioned briefly on a couple of occasions and the story does largely have internal consistency on this point (some of the criticism indicated that the readers had either not read or not finished the book because their points are answered, whether or not they agree with the answers), but it could have used a review.
Her treatment of race also feels poorly developed. Cole is white South African; her late husband Devon was Black American, and consequently Miles is biracial. But although some of the theme is sketched out--Cole's fears for Miles are partly because of his being Black in America--it isn't well developed. I didn't get a sense of Miles' own sense of identity. In addition, the idea of a Black boy being captured and used for his sperm hovers over the book without ever being poked. Cole's concerns for him are primarily presented as a maternal belief in her child's safety.
rowanasm's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
funny
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
lostinagoodbook's review against another edition
1.0
Hmm, sounds promising. I LOVE The Handmaid’s Tale, and this book said it would focus on a different type of dystopia, one where men were the rarity. Unfortunately, this book failed to live up to its promise.
The relationships between the characters is affected by a very cavalier way of describing their communications. Their deepest emotions are constantly trivialized with an odd, impersonal attempt at humor through unending pop culture references. In one passage, a woman comes to a realization about death and her own weariness,
“Tired and numb, the grief woven through with anger. Worst friendship bracelet ever.”
She just undermined her own … jeez I just … never mind. Hashtags, inside jokes and references to Ed Sheeran, abound in this book and I don’t think it has the effect the author was striving for. For one thing, it will really date this book, imagine reading Afterland again in 20 years time and actually understanding any of this nonsense? It really takes the reader away from the moment. I found it hard to connect to any of the characters and I partially blame the glibness with which they are treated.
The one thing that made me literally toss my kindle away and officially DNF was one moment in particular. An 11 year old boy is asked by his aunt whether he is masturbating yet, because she would like some of the sperm to sell on the black market. His response is horror (obviously) and titillation. Now we are subjected to an entire paragraph about how he is fighting an erection. The author goes on to trivialize his reaction by sprinkling in word jokes about how thinking the word “penis” makes it react, and say “pat me”. WTF. It goes on from there. Sexual abuse is not freaking funny. You know, I didn’t put up with this kind of shit when Murakami was writing it, why would I do it now?
On top of all that, I found the world building to be a little superficial. There was no real explanation for how and why culture, government and society changed. The world was just full of women now, and those women were distilled down to very predictable roles. I’m sorry, a world with an army now made up of all women women does not equal an army of only masculine women .. and I honestly dislike the inference that only a certain kind of woman will be in the military. It’s distasteful that non-binary people should be stereotyped into being just one type of person, or that they will all act in the same way. I feel like I don’t have the language to describe how annoying this is and I would hate to say something to offend, so I asked a couple of friends to help me arrange my thoughts… here’s what they came up with:
“The army is comprised of hyper-masculine women that play upon, both in behavior and appearance, harmful tropes regarding women who choose to present as masculine, lesbians and non-binary persons. Non-binary, rather than being removed from the binary as the word suggests and instead of providing a wide breadth of identity and expression, is used to pigeonhole characters into one type of person. In addition, the choice to make this army strictly beholden to a strict set of gender norms that forces the more masculine women or androgynous person into a role fit for ‘men’ is also a strange one to make in terms of what it says about femininity. The aesthetic appearance of a person, their hair, their swagger or style is not an inherent indicator of their skill as a soldier or how well they perform roles of manual labor often set aside as ‘male roles.’ The author has created a world without men which is still under the spell of patriarchal powers.” (thank you Cat & Eri for helping me with this!)
I feel the book showed a lack of real understanding of women and non-binary persons and how they should be portrayed.
This book made me actively angry, I’m annoyed thinking about it now. I know that sometimes a bad review might make some people more interested in reading it … more power to you. I hope you like it better than I did. Wholehearted DNF.
Disclaimer: I received this book free from Netgalley
The relationships between the characters is affected by a very cavalier way of describing their communications. Their deepest emotions are constantly trivialized with an odd, impersonal attempt at humor through unending pop culture references. In one passage, a woman comes to a realization about death and her own weariness,
“Tired and numb, the grief woven through with anger. Worst friendship bracelet ever.”
She just undermined her own … jeez I just … never mind. Hashtags, inside jokes and references to Ed Sheeran, abound in this book and I don’t think it has the effect the author was striving for. For one thing, it will really date this book, imagine reading Afterland again in 20 years time and actually understanding any of this nonsense? It really takes the reader away from the moment. I found it hard to connect to any of the characters and I partially blame the glibness with which they are treated.
The one thing that made me literally toss my kindle away and officially DNF was one moment in particular. An 11 year old boy is asked by his aunt whether he is masturbating yet, because she would like some of the sperm to sell on the black market. His response is horror (obviously) and titillation. Now we are subjected to an entire paragraph about how he is fighting an erection. The author goes on to trivialize his reaction by sprinkling in word jokes about how thinking the word “penis” makes it react, and say “pat me”. WTF. It goes on from there. Sexual abuse is not freaking funny. You know, I didn’t put up with this kind of shit when Murakami was writing it, why would I do it now?
On top of all that, I found the world building to be a little superficial. There was no real explanation for how and why culture, government and society changed. The world was just full of women now, and those women were distilled down to very predictable roles. I’m sorry, a world with an army now made up of all women women does not equal an army of only masculine women .. and I honestly dislike the inference that only a certain kind of woman will be in the military. It’s distasteful that non-binary people should be stereotyped into being just one type of person, or that they will all act in the same way. I feel like I don’t have the language to describe how annoying this is and I would hate to say something to offend, so I asked a couple of friends to help me arrange my thoughts… here’s what they came up with:
“The army is comprised of hyper-masculine women that play upon, both in behavior and appearance, harmful tropes regarding women who choose to present as masculine, lesbians and non-binary persons. Non-binary, rather than being removed from the binary as the word suggests and instead of providing a wide breadth of identity and expression, is used to pigeonhole characters into one type of person. In addition, the choice to make this army strictly beholden to a strict set of gender norms that forces the more masculine women or androgynous person into a role fit for ‘men’ is also a strange one to make in terms of what it says about femininity. The aesthetic appearance of a person, their hair, their swagger or style is not an inherent indicator of their skill as a soldier or how well they perform roles of manual labor often set aside as ‘male roles.’ The author has created a world without men which is still under the spell of patriarchal powers.” (thank you Cat & Eri for helping me with this!)
I feel the book showed a lack of real understanding of women and non-binary persons and how they should be portrayed.
This book made me actively angry, I’m annoyed thinking about it now. I know that sometimes a bad review might make some people more interested in reading it … more power to you. I hope you like it better than I did. Wholehearted DNF.
Disclaimer: I received this book free from Netgalley
cb613's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5