Take a photo of a barcode or cover
jpresteg's review against another edition
5.0
This book almost bested The Good Thief and that is saying a lot. Honestly, just the best book I have read in a very long time. How do authors do this on their first book out of the gate? I LOVED IT.
jen1126's review against another edition
5.0
Told from the point of view of a 14 year old girl who is very smart and quirky, this story drew me in from the very beginning. It might be called a " coming of age" story, however, I felt like it was more about family relationships, and how those relationships form how we view and interact with the world. As often happens when a story develops characters so fully, I didn't want the story to end because I wanted to keep knowing what is going on in their life. Great read.
jsmith2585's review against another edition
At 45% the story had not moved forward in several hours of reading. The way the teenager girl narrator spoke was not realistic
lolohedrick's review against another edition
dark
emotional
hopeful
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
ellenmrozek's review against another edition
5.0
Beautiful. Perfect. The only adult novel I've read this year that has actually made me cry.
bmwood614's review against another edition
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.0
This book took on complex topics and an interesting setting, but did not deliver. The author writes really nicely and I enjoyed her writing style, but the book didn’t go anywhere. Characters were not well developed and no plot. I would fall asleep for an hour or two and not even notice I missed huge chunks of the story because it was the same thing the whole time.
Complex feelings of first love, but make it weird. I get and would expect a well-executed protagonist being an outcast 14yo girl to come with some cringe, but this was beyond. Drawing parallels between a girl who has a crush on her uncle and a gay relationship kind of undermines the whole point of representing the gay community in a particularly hostile and volatile period in history.
It’s not particularly weird for a little girl to have a sort of a crush on her uncle, but the fact that she doesn’t grow out of it and then it continues to be validated… she could have just come to the realization on her journey that loving someone and being connected to someone does not mean romantic love, but it’s normal to confuse those feelings when you’re young.
This story has so much potential to be beautiful and heart wrenching coming of age/family drama, but instead it’s boring, goes nowhere, develops no one, and sprinkles in some cringe implications.
Complex feelings of first love, but make it weird. I get and would expect a well-executed protagonist being an outcast 14yo girl to come with some cringe, but this was beyond. Drawing parallels between a girl who has a crush on her uncle and a gay relationship kind of undermines the whole point of representing the gay community in a particularly hostile and volatile period in history.
It’s not particularly weird for a little girl to have a sort of a crush on her uncle, but the fact that she doesn’t grow out of it and then it continues to be validated… she could have just come to the realization on her journey that loving someone and being connected to someone does not mean romantic love, but it’s normal to confuse those feelings when you’re young.
This story has so much potential to be beautiful and heart wrenching coming of age/family drama, but instead it’s boring, goes nowhere, develops no one, and sprinkles in some cringe implications.
ladyash's review against another edition
3.0
The story was so evocative of that time period in New York, and particularly of the beginning of the AIDS epidemic and the fears and misunderstandings that went with that. That part brought back many memories for me, good and bad.
The rest of it was a let-down for me. I think the emphasis was jarring and repeatedly took me out of the story. Is the reader supposed to believe she actually had a great love by age 14? I initially thought that the author would clarify that this young adolescent had confusing feelings (as all young adolescents do), but then she repeatedly returned to that theme. I know there was some higher meaning, but I thought it really detracted from the story.
I thought the beginning was compelling and fascinating and different and the rest? Mostly meh.
The rest of it was a let-down for me. I think the emphasis
Spoiler
on her "romantic" love for her uncleI thought the beginning was compelling and fascinating and different and the rest? Mostly meh.
pippa_w's review against another edition
3.0
I felt like grabbing the paintbrush right out of his hand so I could color him in, paint him back to his old self.
This was a very effective, heartbreaking book about grief in the first decade of AIDS emerging and being recognized in society. It is extremely frustrating that Carol Rifika Brunt throws in a whole bunch of other stuff and ultimately drags down her skilled handling of the topic with a whole slew of half-baked complications.
There is so much Rifka gets right. She leads you through the guilt, bitterness, nostalgia, anger, up-and-down struggle of grief with a gentle but firm hand. She blends in the frustrating and entirely upsetting presence of extreme prejudice and ignorance beautifully.
I do not understand why Rifka clearly felt that her debut novel needed to be so much more than that.
There are arguments to be made, I suppose, for the idea that the main characters needed big back stories and side conflicts to be complete, well-rounded characters. Unfortunately those additional details and plots just did nothing for the main through-line. Whatsoever. It ended up feeling like a half-hearted way to bulk up what probably should've been a shorter novel or even a novella.
I thought about Finn. How he did whatever he wanted. Just like my mother said. He never let the tunnel squash him. But still, there he was. In the end he was still crushed to death by his own choices.
Also - I love Finn and Toby, and I felt intensely protective of them both throughout the book, but they... felt one-dimensional. They were the good, kind guardian angels, perfectly patient and perfectly there - very much like Angel in Rent. Instead of being genuinely complex characters, they are treated like cruel victims of a world for which they were simply too good. It just feels lazy.
This book should've been unmissable. I want to know what Rifka's editors were doing that led to the more bloated parts of the stories being kept in.
'Except... well, except we have AIDS instead of the plague.'
'They're not the same.'
'Well, not exactly, but—'
'Not at all. You couldn't help it if the plague got you. It was nobody's fault. It just happened. Nobody was to blame.'
This was a very effective, heartbreaking book about grief in the first decade of AIDS emerging and being recognized in society. It is extremely frustrating that Carol Rifika Brunt throws in a whole bunch of other stuff and ultimately drags down her skilled handling of the topic with a whole slew of half-baked complications.
There is so much Rifka gets right. She leads you through the guilt, bitterness, nostalgia, anger, up-and-down struggle of grief with a gentle but firm hand. She blends in the frustrating and entirely upsetting presence of extreme prejudice and ignorance beautifully.
I do not understand why Rifka clearly felt that her debut novel needed to be so much more than that.
There are arguments to be made, I suppose, for the idea that the main characters needed big back stories and side conflicts to be complete, well-rounded characters. Unfortunately those additional details and plots just did nothing for the main through-line. Whatsoever. It ended up feeling like a half-hearted way to bulk up what probably should've been a shorter novel or even a novella.
Spoiler
Like, seriously... the little story where June comes to terms that she was in love with her uncle?? Why?? Totally and completely unnecessary. It almost felt like the author was jumping on a soapbox to justify her own feelings for a family member...I thought about Finn. How he did whatever he wanted. Just like my mother said. He never let the tunnel squash him. But still, there he was. In the end he was still crushed to death by his own choices.
Also - I love Finn and Toby, and I felt intensely protective of them both throughout the book, but they... felt one-dimensional. They were the good, kind guardian angels, perfectly patient and perfectly there - very much like Angel in Rent. Instead of being genuinely complex characters, they are treated like cruel victims of a world for which they were simply too good. It just feels lazy.
This book should've been unmissable. I want to know what Rifka's editors were doing that led to the more bloated parts of the stories being kept in.
'Except... well, except we have AIDS instead of the plague.'
'They're not the same.'
'Well, not exactly, but—'
'Not at all. You couldn't help it if the plague got you. It was nobody's fault. It just happened. Nobody was to blame.'