Reviews tagging 'Racism'

Guns of the Dawn by Adrian Tchaikovsky

1 review

elsabet_of_eedis's review

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional reflective sad tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

4.5

I really enjoyed this book. Adrian Tchaikovsky is a first for me. A man who can write women and write them well. Speaking as a woman, Emily was a very relatable protagonist; her character is handled with a lot more subtlety than many women write these days, and I really enjoyed it.

This book was definitely written from a "historical" point of view, meaning a lot of the characters, even--and in some cases especially--Emily, hold points of view that were distasteful to me as a modern reader. (The way certain races were considered 'savages' or the opinions spouted about women, etc.) But honestly, I prefer it that way, because it's far more realistic to the time period the work is based off of. People did think and act like that once upon a time.

It's kind of a pet peeve of mine when characters from societies ingrained in racism and misogyny are somehow parroting some very modern ideas about these subjects, despite these characters never having had any way to interact with such countercultural ideas. Do I like to see character growth? Yes. I definitely like to see character growth! There was a little in this book, nothing massive, but it feels organic. I like to think that Emily keeps growing later on in her life, even if it wasn't all explicitly spelled out in this book. (One reason I'd love a sequel.) 

I didn't give this book five stars, because the ending had me very conflicted. I'm not going to give any spoilers, but...gosh, that ending really has left me quite unsure of what to think. There is a lot to unpack, and we don't even get to open that suitcase.

Also...the romance...
Look, I'll be real with you, I don't really like either of her love interests that much. One is a petty villain, very selfish and morally grey. The other is a pretty boy sorcerer who is the textbook definition of 'noble'. 

Of the two of them, the former is more interesting. Northway is very selfish, but he's also very open and honest, and he even has his own sort of tattered honor, but you wouldn't know it to look at him. I was honestly kinda rooting for him by the end, just because I felt so gosh darn bad for him.

Scavian was a lot more one dimensional. He was a sweetheart, and like I said, noble as all get-out, but at the end of the day, I found him a bit boring. On the one hand, he's usually the sort of love interest I'd approve of, because I actually like heroes that are genuinely, you know, heroic. But he was just too blindly patriotic in the end, and it was his downfall.

But...even though I didn't really like either of the options in the love triangle, I was okay with not liking either of them, because at the end of the day, it's definitely one of the more realistic love triangles I've read. Neither man is perfect, and there's going to be disappointment and heartache whatever the end result may be. Because Emily's life is messy, and there are still a lot of bumps in the road ahead. And I get it.


While we're on the subject of romance, can I just touch on the subject of Mallen? Can I say how  refreshing it is to have a 'hot' character that is not the love interest. He's cool, he's good looking, and did I alreqady mention just how freaking cool Mallen is, or should I mention it again, because he is awesome. And Emily notices. She definitely notices, but it never becomes a thing. And I appreciate that above almost anything else that I appreciate in this book. Not every 'hot' character has to end up being a love interest. 

The theme of destructive patriotism is something I would consider very relevant in this day and age, and I think it was handled quite well. It was something that the reader could see as glaringly obvious, but none of the characters seem to see.

This book doesn't portray either side as perfect. Lascanne is portrayed as being brutish; they use torture, are guilty of casual racism and mysogyny, and the main character was sexually assaulted twice while in the army. At first it looked like Denland was going to be a shining example of what the perfect society looks like. They treated their prisoners very well in comparison to Lascanne, and the way they tell it, they were not the least in the wrong when it came to the war. But in the end, how much of that was real, and how much was Doctor Lam putting a spin on things I wonder?
According to doctor Lam, the Denlanders didn't murder their king, it was the King of Lascanne who sent the assassins so he could seize control of Denland's throne, (something that is more or less confirmed by Northway later in the book) but it's not hard to imagine that there would be men in the parliament who would jump at the chance to commit treason and help off their royals if it meant they'd have a chance at power. It wouldn't be the first time. Also, in the end, Denland proposed work camps and death camps, so...not a particularly shining example of perfect righteousness after all.


So far as characters go, I really loved the main little bunch of side characters. Mallen is my favorite, obviously. I love him. And Tubal. Tubal is wonderful. I also really liked Mary. Mary was badass as heck. But Mallen is my favorite. (He reminds me vaguely of Frances Marion, who was one of my biggest childhood heroes, so of course he's my favorite.) 

Expand filter menu Content Warnings
More...