Scan barcode
madzie's review against another edition
I really wanted to like this book, considering my love of literature and poetry, but somehow Byatt makes these beloved topics dull. I was going to plow through when I realized there wasn't anything I was actually enjoying about this book, so I best let it go. The characters are pompous and annoying, and while that may be the point, they make me not want to read them more than another writer or novel may make me want to study their behaviors. The plot drags on, and though I've heard it gets better with a twist at the end, my personal opinion is if a book does not get good until the end, the book is not that good. It needs to read well throughout. It seems as though Byatt is very heavily trying to lead you the way she wants you to go and then throwing on useless information (I don't need to know backstories about random characters) to make it seem like she's not.
Maud and Rolland's romance, enemy-to-lovers, and will-they-won't-they set up is gak—boring and overdone. I feel like the tone of the novel directly opposes the romantic tropes Byatt is attempting to lean into, not to mention the entire lack of development and enjoyment in the relationship makes me not care about what they do with their lives or within the story. Byatt sets up some great themes that would be very interesting to explore, but I can't get passed the typical lack of perspective in feminist writing; it feels very pin-point focused on those with privilege. Although this could be overlooked with the publication year, I simply cannot read another piece of "feminist" literature that only considers some of the population and suggests anyone or anything outside is less desirable or even horrifying. If you only see your view as correct, how can you accurately comment on a fundamental part of society? How can you dismantle something without seeing the entire reasoning and harm of its construction? It seems counterintuitive to me. I'd rather spend my time with books that better explore the human experience to make more useful commentary on society, gender, and human sexuality. In the end, I rarely like romance anyway, so perhaps the writing was on the wall from the beginning. Other themes definitely seem more thought-out, but I can't get through to enjoy them.
Maud and Rolland's romance, enemy-to-lovers, and will-they-won't-they set up is gak—boring and overdone. I feel like the tone of the novel directly opposes the romantic tropes Byatt is attempting to lean into, not to mention the entire lack of development and enjoyment in the relationship makes me not care about what they do with their lives or within the story. Byatt sets up some great themes that would be very interesting to explore, but I can't get passed the typical lack of perspective in feminist writing; it feels very pin-point focused on those with privilege. Although this could be overlooked with the publication year, I simply cannot read another piece of "feminist" literature that only considers some of the population and suggests anyone or anything outside is less desirable or even horrifying. If you only see your view as correct, how can you accurately comment on a fundamental part of society? How can you dismantle something without seeing the entire reasoning and harm of its construction? It seems counterintuitive to me. I'd rather spend my time with books that better explore the human experience to make more useful commentary on society, gender, and human sexuality. In the end, I rarely like romance anyway, so perhaps the writing was on the wall from the beginning. Other themes definitely seem more thought-out, but I can't get through to enjoy them.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Acephobia/Arophobia and Homophobia
More...