Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.71 AVERAGE
3.71 AVERAGE
It is, by coincidence, Mothers Day as I’m finishing this, and a friend shared a tribute to those less feted on this day: mothers who have lost children and children who have lost mothers, children and mothers with strained relationships, those yearning to be mothers and those choosing not to be.
This book touches on most of these, and more: mothers who would rather not be, those who fulfill the role of mothers, those who mother (midwife?) knowledge and art into existence, and those who help others to choose whether they become mothers.
It does this with a light touch on the near-future dystopia. The states have ratified a Personhood Amendment, and a new federal bill bans IVF and adoption for single mothers. Canada turns pregnant girls away at the border. Abortion-seekers and abortion providers receive harsh prison sentences. It’s clear where the author stands, but this is not a a political story in that sense; the politics are a pretext for the stories she wants to tell.
This reading is also coincidentally timed in my life: I’m in a new job and a new city where most of my coworkers and friends have children, and I’ve just turned 35; it’s given me cause to contemplate how different my story could be if I’d made different choices. My own red clock is still not ticking, but this book gave me more stories to consider and try on and care about, and I am grateful.
This book touches on most of these, and more: mothers who would rather not be, those who fulfill the role of mothers, those who mother (midwife?) knowledge and art into existence, and those who help others to choose whether they become mothers.
It does this with a light touch on the near-future dystopia. The states have ratified a Personhood Amendment, and a new federal bill bans IVF and adoption for single mothers. Canada turns pregnant girls away at the border. Abortion-seekers and abortion providers receive harsh prison sentences. It’s clear where the author stands, but this is not a a political story in that sense; the politics are a pretext for the stories she wants to tell.
This reading is also coincidentally timed in my life: I’m in a new job and a new city where most of my coworkers and friends have children, and I’ve just turned 35; it’s given me cause to contemplate how different my story could be if I’d made different choices. My own red clock is still not ticking, but this book gave me more stories to consider and try on and care about, and I am grateful.
dark
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I felt fairly neutral about this book, which I found stronger in concept than in execution.
the concept is interesting, but i struggled to remain interested throughout the book since some of the characters just did not appeal to me and it felt like some of their stories needed more to them. susan’s plot line seems almost out of place, even though i understand why it’s there in the story’s universe but it just doesn’t flow well with the other characters or the central thesis of the book to me, which made it hard to read.
I didn't hate this book, but certainly didn't have much love for it. The plot was enticing, set in a future where abortion, IVF, and single-parent adoption are rendered illegal by a "Personhood Amendment". The most frightening aspect of this dystopian world is that it felt all too possible. Zumas definitely understands the current climate and the need for cautionary tales like this, however, it did not hold up to the gold standard of "The Handmaid's Tale" nor newcomers like "Vox".
I expected more from the 5 female perspectives and was left with chunky, overly scholarly, lengthy descriptions. I felt removed from the real hardships of these women's lives. The story could've been so much more.
I expected more from the 5 female perspectives and was left with chunky, overly scholarly, lengthy descriptions. I felt removed from the real hardships of these women's lives. The story could've been so much more.
TBH I was interested in listening to this book first because of the cover. I love the design and the colors. Then because of its comparison to The Handmaid's Tale, which I just listened to for the first time recently.
This book is not as good as Atwood's. It was hard to get through this story, with its unsympathetic characters and the one shitty main character trying to get pregnant via fertility treatments.I am glad that the Mattie didn't keep her baby and give it to Ro, though I did root for that a bit, being infertile myself. It was a neat punch that wasn't pooled. Despite this, I did not like this book and wouldn't want to read this author's work again.
This book is not as good as Atwood's. It was hard to get through this story, with its unsympathetic characters and the one shitty main character trying to get pregnant via fertility treatments.
“Thousands of years in the making, fine-tuned by woman in the dark creases of history, helping each other.” - pg 61
The interesting thing about the writing style of the book is how Zumas negated addressing the main woman by name, instead reducing them to titles (most that stem from relationships with others – The Wife, The Daughter… ), which was such a unique, powerful way of demonstrating the lack of agency woman have in this narrative. It honestly is a character study at it’s very finest.
I love the look at female competition and comparison – not just the nod to its existence, but the fact that the woman acknowledge it happening and struggle not to participate in it, even while recognizing the uselessness and toxicity. That even in a (not-so) dystopian ‘future’ where woman have even less control over their own lives, bodies and decisions, they are still conditioned to see other woman as competitors or yard-sticks, instead of relying on each other or coming together.
Such a phenomenal book, told is an intricate, nuanced way.
The interesting thing about the writing style of the book is how Zumas negated addressing the main woman by name, instead reducing them to titles (most that stem from relationships with others – The Wife, The Daughter… ), which was such a unique, powerful way of demonstrating the lack of agency woman have in this narrative. It honestly is a character study at it’s very finest.
I love the look at female competition and comparison – not just the nod to its existence, but the fact that the woman acknowledge it happening and struggle not to participate in it, even while recognizing the uselessness and toxicity. That even in a (not-so) dystopian ‘future’ where woman have even less control over their own lives, bodies and decisions, they are still conditioned to see other woman as competitors or yard-sticks, instead of relying on each other or coming together.
Such a phenomenal book, told is an intricate, nuanced way.
Beautiful characters. The world they live in is as terrifying as it is similar to our own.
To start, I actually really liked the format this story was told in. The split narratives have recently been something I've enjoyed in books and I think this book did it well. I particularly liked how each character was distilled down to a single word to describe them (i.e. daughter, mender) which echoed what the author was trying to say about society's treatment of women as a whole.
However, I get the overwhelming feeling that not much really happened in this book. We explored the social implications of a two-parent family law and the banning of abortions, but there wasn't a lot of plot. I prefer plot-driven over character-driven books, so while I feel like Red Clocks was well written and had something to say, it just wasn't delivered in my optimal way.
Edit: I also was not a massive fan of the very instant and random insertion of sex or vulgar language in one sentence with the story returning to "normal" in the next. Very jarring.
However, I get the overwhelming feeling that not much really happened in this book. We explored the social implications of a two-parent family law and the banning of abortions, but there wasn't a lot of plot. I prefer plot-driven over character-driven books, so while I feel like Red Clocks was well written and had something to say, it just wasn't delivered in my optimal way.
Edit: I also was not a massive fan of the very instant and random insertion of sex or vulgar language in one sentence with the story returning to "normal" in the next. Very jarring.
Red Clocks is set in a near future Pacific Northwest where abortion is outlawed and in the near future it will no longer be possible for single people to adopt. It is told in alternating chapters by 4 women all grappling with issues surrounding fertility: an herbalist, an unwed biology teacher, a high school student, and a stay-at-home mom.
I had a hard time getting into this book. The chapters are all fairly short, which makes it harder to get into the story and the characters. Eventually it gelled for me, and I liked it. I liked that it made me think and what and how it made me think. The format for me was never great though, and I hesitate to recommend it to others.
I had a hard time getting into this book. The chapters are all fairly short, which makes it harder to get into the story and the characters. Eventually it gelled for me, and I liked it. I liked that it made me think and what and how it made me think. The format for me was never great though, and I hesitate to recommend it to others.