Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.0 AVERAGE
4.0 AVERAGE
emotional
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
My feelings toward Katabsis changed greatly over the process of reading it - I initially found the characters immensely difficult to root for, and being in their heads because of it was tough. As shown in her previous works, however, RF Kuang writes beautifully and engagingly - by the of the novel I was completely emotionally invested, caring deeply about Alice and Peter depiste their (seemingly apparent) flaws. The ending was almost heartwarming, in a strange way.
The mental health representation here is spot on, and because of that I would give a large trigger warning. I’m also unsure if I would ever re-read it - I felt positively grimy at times during this reading experience. The slow unravelling of the different perspectives, and how even those with a supposedly “perfect” memory coloured their experiences with their own subjectiveity, was really interesting - but I do wonder if it would be most effective first time round.
A phenomenally well-executed book, Katabasis gave my brain lots to chew on, and my heart plenty to feel - but I am unlikely to revisit it any time soon.
Thanks to HarperVoyager and Edelweiss for the ARC.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Suicidal thoughts
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
adventurous
challenging
dark
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
ugh review didn’t save so rewriting
quick summary
- i’ve been super hyped for this book since i learned the premise
- i was worried i overhyped it + i was seeing some mixed reviews
- im so glad i read it because it was amazing i got thru it in like 2 days genuinely could not put it down
now for more coherent thoughts
first i love how this book started off and got right into the action with alice going into hell. i’m so glad there wasn’t a bunch of exposition because i really enjoyed learning about the details of her motivations as the book went along. like from the onset of the book i feel like i viewed alice as a straightforward protagonist— she was determined to fix her mistakes and seemed like a clear victim of the professor. but i feel like as the book goes on and we get to know her better she becomes more morally gray to a certain affect. and then by the end i think she overcomes the flawed parts of herself and it really circles back to being excellent character development. i will probably come back to her later. but next i want to acknowledge how cool the presentation of magic was in this book. i’ve read a couple books where it is presented in a scientific way but the imagining of it as paradoxes and logic puzzles was so beyond cool like rf kuang your brain… it felt just so innovative and creative that i can’t help but gush about it. i feel like most other authors would leave details like this in the abstract. but kuang just explained every one of the tricks and i feel like it made the world so much more immersive. being completely honest i didn’t understand most of what was being said (it was very vibe based) but i feel like it struck the perfect balance between being too complex and too simple. i thought it was cool how alice and peter skull set was divided between linguistics and math. speaking of alice and peter. many thoughts. first peter would honestly def be my type 🙁 and i cannot blame alice one bit #oxfordstudyatcambridge . like my girl was so down bad for him and i could really just relate to her sm because i would also pine after a guy for a long time but never actually properly communicate my feelings (even after he offers to sacrifice himself while we are in an unbreakable trap). next, i didn’t necessarily feel giddy reading any of their scenes but i did root for them a lot. it was a little frustrating for them to have the miscommunication trop with the “if alice” but i can see why it would make sense in alice’s head. like i would also be offended if i got accused of eating out of someone’s hand. i will say i was a big fan of the toxicity between the two. sometimes in enemies to lovers books, the girl perceived the guy as the enemy while the guy is just clueless and in love w her. and that’s cute sometimes but also makes it seem like women r errational. but there are genuinely times where both peter and alice are mean to each other (alice more so) but i think it makes their reconciliation stronger. i will say that alice was giving femcel vibes sometimes and idk if that’s even fair to say but honestly she was just being real 🤷♀️ like certain times she would talk abt peter or other women w such resentment that it bordered on being a little problematic. this transitions into my thoughts on the next major theme of the book, alice’s relationship w professor grimes and being a victim. i don’t think ive ever been so utterly floored by how power dynamics in a book have been written. because of the amount of romance i read i feel like there tend to be a good amount of books where a character has dealt with predators in their backstory. however it was a really central point of this story and it was done masterfully. when the book starts out, i thought that alice would kind of get over her idealization of grimes pretty quickly. and then as the book went on, u just witness the incredible lengths that she goes through to protect and defend him. at first u obviously feel bad for her because it’s so clear how much his manipulation has worked. then as you learn more and more about how alice herself disregarded women continuously and passed judgement on them, you almost start to give up on her. like ok fuck u have fun with ur creepy professor. i feel like u can almost compare it to trad wives. like on one level, i empathize with you as a victim of a world that convinced u that ur role as a woman was to serve a man. but on the other, i dislike them for furthering their narrative on to other women and defending their situations. like the way alice talked about feminists was insane to say the least and i honestly found some satisfaction in seeing her get humbled by that female professor. at the same time, it was also insane to see her get just brushed off when she asked for help. i think the ultimate lesson was very much reminiscent of “i never thought the leopards would eat my face.” alice thought she would be the one to rise above all the messiness of womanhood but in the end, she couldn’t escape it. i think the insane length of this character development just made the ending so much better. like her finally sacrificing professor grimes was the best payoff for an incredibly grueling journey. i think that one thing that was handled a little bit questionably was the food. like there are very clear themes of eating disorders here and i think they connected pretty well to my thoughts above. but like, there was just so much discussion about it. how alice was so much better at surviving hell because she had grown accustomed to better food and how amazing it felt on earth to go long periods of time without eating. this plot line was ultimately resolved as we saw how she eats the jaguar (?) and rats. and i think it is cool how there was the implicit lesson that she became more strong when she was actually nourished. i understand that the glorification of the hunger was a result of the unreliable narration but it just felt a wee bit triggering to read. god my fingers hurt from writing this much and i’m incredibly sleepy. but i think i wanna finish off by saying that i loved the character of elspeth and how alice kind of came to understand her despite originally disregarding her. like idk every reveal was so crazy. i remember my jaw actually dropping when i learned what alice was going to do to grimes. and that ending was amazing and im so glad it was happy even though it should not have been. amazing book 10/10 i could literally keep gushing about it if i wasn’t abt to pass out from sleepiness.
quick summary
- i’ve been super hyped for this book since i learned the premise
- i was worried i overhyped it + i was seeing some mixed reviews
- im so glad i read it because it was amazing i got thru it in like 2 days genuinely could not put it down
now for more coherent thoughts
first i love how this book started off and got right into the action with alice going into hell. i’m so glad there wasn’t a bunch of exposition because i really enjoyed learning about the details of her motivations as the book went along. like from the onset of the book i feel like i viewed alice as a straightforward protagonist— she was determined to fix her mistakes and seemed like a clear victim of the professor. but i feel like as the book goes on and we get to know her better she becomes more morally gray to a certain affect. and then by the end i think she overcomes the flawed parts of herself and it really circles back to being excellent character development. i will probably come back to her later. but next i want to acknowledge how cool the presentation of magic was in this book. i’ve read a couple books where it is presented in a scientific way but the imagining of it as paradoxes and logic puzzles was so beyond cool like rf kuang your brain… it felt just so innovative and creative that i can’t help but gush about it. i feel like most other authors would leave details like this in the abstract. but kuang just explained every one of the tricks and i feel like it made the world so much more immersive. being completely honest i didn’t understand most of what was being said (it was very vibe based) but i feel like it struck the perfect balance between being too complex and too simple. i thought it was cool how alice and peter skull set was divided between linguistics and math. speaking of alice and peter. many thoughts. first peter would honestly def be my type 🙁 and i cannot blame alice one bit #oxfordstudyatcambridge . like my girl was so down bad for him and i could really just relate to her sm because i would also pine after a guy for a long time but never actually properly communicate my feelings (even after he offers to sacrifice himself while we are in an unbreakable trap). next, i didn’t necessarily feel giddy reading any of their scenes but i did root for them a lot. it was a little frustrating for them to have the miscommunication trop with the “if alice” but i can see why it would make sense in alice’s head. like i would also be offended if i got accused of eating out of someone’s hand. i will say i was a big fan of the toxicity between the two. sometimes in enemies to lovers books, the girl perceived the guy as the enemy while the guy is just clueless and in love w her. and that’s cute sometimes but also makes it seem like women r errational. but there are genuinely times where both peter and alice are mean to each other (alice more so) but i think it makes their reconciliation stronger. i will say that alice was giving femcel vibes sometimes and idk if that’s even fair to say but honestly she was just being real 🤷♀️ like certain times she would talk abt peter or other women w such resentment that it bordered on being a little problematic. this transitions into my thoughts on the next major theme of the book, alice’s relationship w professor grimes and being a victim. i don’t think ive ever been so utterly floored by how power dynamics in a book have been written. because of the amount of romance i read i feel like there tend to be a good amount of books where a character has dealt with predators in their backstory. however it was a really central point of this story and it was done masterfully. when the book starts out, i thought that alice would kind of get over her idealization of grimes pretty quickly. and then as the book went on, u just witness the incredible lengths that she goes through to protect and defend him. at first u obviously feel bad for her because it’s so clear how much his manipulation has worked. then as you learn more and more about how alice herself disregarded women continuously and passed judgement on them, you almost start to give up on her. like ok fuck u have fun with ur creepy professor. i feel like u can almost compare it to trad wives. like on one level, i empathize with you as a victim of a world that convinced u that ur role as a woman was to serve a man. but on the other, i dislike them for furthering their narrative on to other women and defending their situations. like the way alice talked about feminists was insane to say the least and i honestly found some satisfaction in seeing her get humbled by that female professor. at the same time, it was also insane to see her get just brushed off when she asked for help. i think the ultimate lesson was very much reminiscent of “i never thought the leopards would eat my face.” alice thought she would be the one to rise above all the messiness of womanhood but in the end, she couldn’t escape it. i think the insane length of this character development just made the ending so much better. like her finally sacrificing professor grimes was the best payoff for an incredibly grueling journey. i think that one thing that was handled a little bit questionably was the food. like there are very clear themes of eating disorders here and i think they connected pretty well to my thoughts above. but like, there was just so much discussion about it. how alice was so much better at surviving hell because she had grown accustomed to better food and how amazing it felt on earth to go long periods of time without eating. this plot line was ultimately resolved as we saw how she eats the jaguar (?) and rats. and i think it is cool how there was the implicit lesson that she became more strong when she was actually nourished. i understand that the glorification of the hunger was a result of the unreliable narration but it just felt a wee bit triggering to read. god my fingers hurt from writing this much and i’m incredibly sleepy. but i think i wanna finish off by saying that i loved the character of elspeth and how alice kind of came to understand her despite originally disregarding her. like idk every reveal was so crazy. i remember my jaw actually dropping when i learned what alice was going to do to grimes. and that ending was amazing and im so glad it was happy even though it should not have been. amazing book 10/10 i could literally keep gushing about it if i wasn’t abt to pass out from sleepiness.
adventurous
informative
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
While I enjoyed parts of the narrative and the character dynamics between Prof Grimes and Alice and Peter, I felt a lot of important character moments were explained through exposition and jarring flashbacks, and in particular I felt that until we got a big background dump on Peter his character was held at an arm’s length and the reader was given no opportunity to really glean his inner nature.
A lot of the narrative also felt very loose in its construction, a lot of what makes a good journey to me is the travel needs to be done with sufficient intent, but it felt that a lot of the time the characters were really just meandering and dragged along with the plot, instead of driving it.
What I enjoyed the most was the commentary on the internalised misogyny not just in academia but really in all parts of society. It was what I found the most interesting.
A lot of the narrative also felt very loose in its construction, a lot of what makes a good journey to me is the travel needs to be done with sufficient intent, but it felt that a lot of the time the characters were really just meandering and dragged along with the plot, instead of driving it.
What I enjoyed the most was the commentary on the internalised misogyny not just in academia but really in all parts of society. It was what I found the most interesting.
adventurous
inspiring
mysterious
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:
Complicated
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
3.75/5
Kuang's intellectual prose and innovative worldbuilding were the two parts of this book that stood out to me. I utterly adored the excerpts of fictional essays on magick, chalk and other such unique magical creations. I think Kuang truly shines when leaning into this denser, academic style of writing. The world itself was very interesting; I loved the logical and mathematical fuel of magick, I loved the shifting paradoxes and the ephemeral nature of magick as an entity. I found all of these factors incredibly compelling, I've never read a magic system quite like it, it was fascinating. And, as a concept, I loved the idea of navigating through the courts of Hell.
Where I think this novel stumbles into problems, for me personally, is in the set up and the character building. As I mentioned, I adore the concept of this book and I truly did enjoy Kuang's take on each circle of Hell and the philosophical bargaining at each point. Yet, as a plot, it was never that exciting. I don't mean that as a complaint of little action, I love a slow-paced, character-driven narrative, however the characters plodding through each court became tedious as their motivations for doing so unravelled.
And here we come to my main issue with the book; I could never wholly connect to the characters. Alice wasn't a particularly likeable character to me, however I can wholeheartedly love an unlikeable character if they're interesting or the story gripping enough—Kuang has proven this before herself—yet I never found Alice to be a character that fascinated me. As more about her was revealed, I could empathise with her and I definitely grew to like her more, but that spark of connection never drew me in. I think this is the main shortcoming that I encountered as I therefore couldn't care about the characters in any significant way.
Peter I liked far better, yet we weren't in his head as we were in Alice's and so I found our time with him a little sparse. I also found it to be lacking in interesting side characters. As we happened upon one I found compelling nearing the end of the book, it only became more apparent to me how much the rest of the book had suffered so for this.
What became increasingly tiresome to me were the characters' motivations, it felt more like we were journeying through Hell because it was what the story needed rather than because of any force actually driving the characters to do so. This dwindling drive is even written plain upon the text, but I don't find discerning it equal to reinvigorating the story. There were also several points of easily resolvable miscommunication and other factors that I couldn't make myself buy into. Of all the possibilities that could have been dreamt up in this world, of all the stories to tell, I simply found this one a little disappointing.
As this book comes out and people recognise the themes of academia swirling about it, they will inevitably compare it to Babel. I think this comparison is justified as it is Kuang's own work and I therefore want to make a few observations. The books share several differences—Katabasis is far more fantastical, far more philosophical, and focuses directly on the exploitation of students—but, I think, more important are their similarities. For I feel (and you are welcome to disagree with me) that Babel already says everything this book sets out to, but with more nuance, whilst also far exceeding the bounds of what Katabasis says. Babel emphasises academia's exploitation as an institution of colonialism, and that is clearly what its thesis focuses on, however I still think as a result of that it shows effortlessly how the people working within it are exploited also—especially when they belong to a group of marginalised people that the institution wants to mine for resources.
This is my long and rambling way of saying that I think Babel already covers these themes far better than Katabasis. That is not to say that this book doesn't hold merit of its own, I definitely found parts of the world and the theology interesting, however I think Kuang made several strange choices in its construction.
I do suppose I am being harsher than I would be for an author I like less, but I have come to adore R.F. Kuang immensely and therefore—fairly or unfairly—do hold her to a higher standard. I'm curious to see how others will feel, especially in comparison to Babel, I'm immensely interested in the conversations that will stem from this book and I do hope others enjoy it more. I do still think there is a lot of artistic merit in this book, but it unfortunately fell quite flat for me. I just never emotionally connected with it and that connection is such an important part of a book for me.
Thank you HarperVoyager for an arc in exchange for an honest review.
Kuang's intellectual prose and innovative worldbuilding were the two parts of this book that stood out to me. I utterly adored the excerpts of fictional essays on magick, chalk and other such unique magical creations. I think Kuang truly shines when leaning into this denser, academic style of writing. The world itself was very interesting; I loved the logical and mathematical fuel of magick, I loved the shifting paradoxes and the ephemeral nature of magick as an entity. I found all of these factors incredibly compelling, I've never read a magic system quite like it, it was fascinating. And, as a concept, I loved the idea of navigating through the courts of Hell.
Where I think this novel stumbles into problems, for me personally, is in the set up and the character building. As I mentioned, I adore the concept of this book and I truly did enjoy Kuang's take on each circle of Hell and the philosophical bargaining at each point. Yet, as a plot, it was never that exciting. I don't mean that as a complaint of little action, I love a slow-paced, character-driven narrative, however the characters plodding through each court became tedious as their motivations for doing so unravelled.
And here we come to my main issue with the book; I could never wholly connect to the characters. Alice wasn't a particularly likeable character to me, however I can wholeheartedly love an unlikeable character if they're interesting or the story gripping enough—Kuang has proven this before herself—yet I never found Alice to be a character that fascinated me. As more about her was revealed, I could empathise with her and I definitely grew to like her more, but that spark of connection never drew me in. I think this is the main shortcoming that I encountered as I therefore couldn't care about the characters in any significant way.
Peter I liked far better, yet we weren't in his head as we were in Alice's and so I found our time with him a little sparse. I also found it to be lacking in interesting side characters. As we happened upon one I found compelling nearing the end of the book, it only became more apparent to me how much the rest of the book had suffered so for this.
What became increasingly tiresome to me were the characters' motivations, it felt more like we were journeying through Hell because it was what the story needed rather than because of any force actually driving the characters to do so. This dwindling drive is even written plain upon the text, but I don't find discerning it equal to reinvigorating the story. There were also several points of easily resolvable miscommunication and other factors that I couldn't make myself buy into. Of all the possibilities that could have been dreamt up in this world, of all the stories to tell, I simply found this one a little disappointing.
As this book comes out and people recognise the themes of academia swirling about it, they will inevitably compare it to Babel. I think this comparison is justified as it is Kuang's own work and I therefore want to make a few observations. The books share several differences—Katabasis is far more fantastical, far more philosophical, and focuses directly on the exploitation of students—but, I think, more important are their similarities. For I feel (and you are welcome to disagree with me) that Babel already says everything this book sets out to, but with more nuance, whilst also far exceeding the bounds of what Katabasis says. Babel emphasises academia's exploitation as an institution of colonialism, and that is clearly what its thesis focuses on, however I still think as a result of that it shows effortlessly how the people working within it are exploited also—especially when they belong to a group of marginalised people that the institution wants to mine for resources.
This is my long and rambling way of saying that I think Babel already covers these themes far better than Katabasis. That is not to say that this book doesn't hold merit of its own, I definitely found parts of the world and the theology interesting, however I think Kuang made several strange choices in its construction.
I do suppose I am being harsher than I would be for an author I like less, but I have come to adore R.F. Kuang immensely and therefore—fairly or unfairly—do hold her to a higher standard. I'm curious to see how others will feel, especially in comparison to Babel, I'm immensely interested in the conversations that will stem from this book and I do hope others enjoy it more. I do still think there is a lot of artistic merit in this book, but it unfortunately fell quite flat for me. I just never emotionally connected with it and that connection is such an important part of a book for me.
Thank you HarperVoyager for an arc in exchange for an honest review.
adventurous
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
adventurous
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Firstly, the premise of going to hell because it’s easier than finding a new advisor is PRIME academic humor.
I struggle with R. F. Kuang’s characters as they tend to really frustrate me - which I understand is part of the point. I don’t think I’m the prime audience of enjoying this book, I think you’re either a fantasy lover with no logic/phil background and you reading a modern take on Dante’s inferno, or you’re an academic with an understanding of logic and an insight to what I’m sure are many clever inside references throughout the book. I am a weird middle ground between these two that left pieces of this books cleverness inaccessible. A+ for satisfying character development, without that this could have been a slog to read.
I struggle with R. F. Kuang’s characters as they tend to really frustrate me - which I understand is part of the point. I don’t think I’m the prime audience of enjoying this book, I think you’re either a fantasy lover with no logic/phil background and you reading a modern take on Dante’s inferno, or you’re an academic with an understanding of logic and an insight to what I’m sure are many clever inside references throughout the book. I am a weird middle ground between these two that left pieces of this books cleverness inaccessible. A+ for satisfying character development, without that this could have been a slog to read.
adventurous
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
Content Warnings
Moderate: Animal death, Chronic illness, Sexual assault, Suicidal thoughts, Toxic relationship
Minor: Suicide, Sexual harassment
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I told myself to lower my expectations when going into this. I had previously loved Babel, it's a book that means a lot me, but I'm someone who considers The Aeneid and The Iliad her favourite works of literature of all time, who loves mythology, and who sees katabasis as one of her favourite themes in classics. As such, here R.F. Kuang was writing about a theme I am intimately familiar with.
I never could have imagined just how intimate my reading experience with this novel would be. The traumatic experiences Alice faces in academia, the misogyny, the way she internalises so much and struggles to come to terms with her situation… it's all deeply realistic. Once again, R.F. Kuang has done what I consider her to be masterful at: reminding the reader of just how ugly our society can be, even when doing so through a fantasy setting.
It's not a nice or kind reminder. It's a reminder that can make us dislike many of the characters and want to scream at them. But, it's real and it's honest, and in this journey through Hell, the characters go through inner journeys as well. I never expected it to end the way it did.
It's painful and tragic, but it's also beautiful and well-crafted. While there's dozens upon dozens of references to classics, mythology, philosophers and logicians, and callbacks to katabasis-themed classics that I could go on and on about (I ended up with a list of references with over 60 entries and I'm sure I missed some), especially Dante's Inferno and mythological depictions of the underworld, in the end, R.F. Kuang's Katabasis is its own story and follows its own path, and it's an incredible one. I can't wait to give it another read.