Scan barcode
esskaysquared's review
challenging
medium-paced
- Loveable characters? No
I really did not like this book at all. The writing was very good, but I found the story confusing and hard to follow. I listened to the audiobook, and I couldn't tell if there were multiple narrators or what. I know that one reason I was so confused was that the book was just gross. I wasn't expecting body horror, but I can handle that. This was, of nothing else, more body horror than I could stand. Someone else said that the book was too vulgar and I thought, "I love swear words." It wasn't just swear words though (although there were a lot of swear words). The ideas were vulgar.
I also found the storytelling convoluted and confusing. There were definitely times when I was literally not able to follow the story because I was too distracted by some gross details about worms and stuff, but I also couldn't follow how this apocalyptic distopia came about in only twenty or so years. It was all very "somehow Palpatine survived" to me.
My sibling also tried to read this book around the same time I did, and they liked one of her earlier books. They couldn't make it even halfway through and said "it feels very MFA." I would agree with that.
Not only would I not recommend this book to people, I even told a friend not to read it.
I also found the storytelling convoluted and confusing. There were definitely times when I was literally not able to follow the story because I was too distracted by some gross details about worms and stuff, but I also couldn't follow how this apocalyptic distopia came about in only twenty or so years. It was all very "somehow Palpatine survived" to me.
My sibling also tried to read this book around the same time I did, and they liked one of her earlier books. They couldn't make it even halfway through and said "it feels very MFA." I would agree with that.
Not only would I not recommend this book to people, I even told a friend not to read it.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Injury/Injury detail, Torture, Gore, Self harm, Cursing, Acephobia/Arophobia, Body horror, Body shaming, Confinement, Sexual violence, Transphobia, and War
readingelli's review
challenging
dark
reflective
slow-paced
3.0
It was well written, and thought provoking, but I don’t think I liked it. Not really my cup of tea. Very body horror.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual violence, War, Sexual content, and Body horror
Post apocalypse, discussion of genitalia, reproductive horror, climate horrorjaswoahreads's review against another edition
dark
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
Could be good if the author wasn't weirdly obsessed with genitals
Content Warnings
Moderate: Body horror
jaimc's review against another edition
dark
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.25
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child death, Blood, Body horror, Torture, Death, Violence, and Infertility
Moderate: War, Suicidal thoughts, and Gun violence
booknug's review against another edition
2.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Body horror, Confinement, Injury/Injury detail, Transphobia, and Child death
johnawickline's review against another edition
dark
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Torture, Body horror, and Child death
Moderate: Murder
davyjones's review against another edition
dark
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
1.5
Don’t even know what to say because I did not like it. It sucked. The story barely had any footing, not even the Jeanne d'Arc "retelling" did, except for her birth place. There was so much pointlessness in half of the words, it was so unnecessarily vulgar sometimes, there was really no point to be made with the choice of words and on top of everything the very end was transphobic. Great. Well done. Round of applause.
1.5 stars because the second part looked like it was going to improve (which led me to falsely believe something good was coming up. Meep. It got worse than the first part.) plus the potential there was.
Like I guess I get it, it's a bit of a commentary on climate change, the pointlessness of war, we barely matter, love is important, we shouldn’t only and constantly look for and at leaders, etc. I get that. Sure. But it sucked anyway. There are better words for it and better stories.
And maybe, just maybe, I'm not iNteLLeCtuAL enough to see the brilliance of this book but if you can’t appeal or get through to less fortunate readers, what's your story really worth.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Blood, Body horror, Child death, Confinement, Death, Death of parent, Fire/Fire injury, Gaslighting, Genocide, Gore, Grief, Infertility, Murder, Physical abuse, Self harm, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Sexual harassment, Sexual violence, Torture, and Violence
Moderate: Cursing, Excrement, Kidnapping, Medical content, Rape, Slavery, and Transphobia
Minor: Alcohol
alylentz's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
1.0
Read for a grad school class and I understand how this fits into the conventions of science fiction, but I don't think it's of value. The arguments it's making in regards to gender are convoluted, reductive, and harmful, in my opinion, not to mention the fact that the ultimate villain who is flaying people alive and mutilating people turns out to be--surprise!--a trans man! . Also, this author's style gets praised for being so elevated but there were multiple examples of sentences or comparisons made that were so over the top I had to roll my eyes. I also don't think the narrative was well-crafted: it really lacks momentum and if I wasn't reading this for school I absolutely wouldn't not have finished it. But maybe I'm too stupid for it! I don't know.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Self harm, Transphobia, Torture, Violence, Vomit, Sexual violence, Sexual content, Sexual assault, Sexism, Rape, Racism, Physical abuse, Medical trauma, Homophobia, Hate crime, Forced institutionalization, Genocide, Body horror, and Blood
micaelabrody's review
1.0
Towards the beginning of the book I thought the grossed-out feeling I had was maybe because of the extremely detailed descriptions of flapping skin grafts. Towards the end of the first third I thought maybe it was the constant discussion of sex and genitalia, the peculiarly violent way it treated sex even when the sex itself (or, stand-ins, since they don’t have any for real) wasn’t particularly violent (I guess).
At the end of the book, I realized what the issue was though, when Jean de Men was “revealed” to “be” a woman, which was “why” he was so obsessed with…. genital mutilation (which is gross!)?? Even though no one in the book is technically identified as trans, that “twist” and the extreme and graphic focus on genitalia (hate writing this word so many times), makes it hard to miss the heavy handed metaphor. (I am giving her a sort of backhanded benefit of the doubt I guess. Worse in my opinion would be her not understanding that there are real people in our real world who might read her real book who do not identify with a gender or who were assigned the wrong gender at birth.*) I'm aware I'm saying this in the context of a work of dystopian fiction that clearly tries to use different conceptions of gender, and I am aware I'm as a cis woman so welcome discussion with trans folks (especially trans men), but this book was unavoidably transphobic and TERFy, which is why I’m confused as to how anyone could consider this a feminist masterpiece (and that people I really respect like Roxane Gay (not to single her out) gave it a quote?).
There were other problems - the Trump metaphors were eye-rollingly heavyhanded (and of course, the Trump stand-in “turning out” to be a woman is… ugh). The timeline didn’t convince me: you’re telling me in only 10 years humans have lost all pigmentation? (Also, I guess when she says that CIEL is populated only by the rich, she means only the white as well? This happens when people make characters pale-as-a-personality-trait. Removing all race isn’t like, thinking about race.) They’ve not only surgically altered their genitalia but lost their entire reproductive system - not removed, but LOST?
Meanwhile, the entire Joan of Arc story, which going in I thought was, well, the point, was totally subsumed by the CIEL dystopia stuff, which I know was theoretically connected but stayed so vague and pretentious that it was hard to actually connect the dots. The idea of the song in her head was actually interesting, and when she first started playing a real role I felt palpable relief… but it was all so disjointed and hard to follow that the feeling dissipated sooner than later. I’ll admit I don’t know the Joan of Arc story particularly well, only the broad strokes, but I’ve enjoyed other adaptations of stories I don’t know very well with no problem. I believe you shouldn’t need prerequisite reading for a novel!
This book does a few things well; the prose is sometimes good, I actually didn’t mind the blending of supernatural elements and sci-fi, always love a good climate parable in these times, the moment of perspective shifting around 2/3 in was interesting. But it was all so steeped in this sour taste in my mouth, that I felt myself simultaneously avoiding this book and trying desperately to finish it so I could get it over with. It was a profound disappointment as the last book I read in 2018, and in the end I wish I had abandoned it, even though I’m always loathe to do that.
I usually don’t love starting or ending a review with a comparison but this one feels particularly apt: I recently read An Unkindness of Ghosts, which also pulls inspiration from history (the antebellum South), thinks extensively about gender and oppression, and even also takes place on a spaceship. It is a more nuanced, meaningful, and powerful story at literally every turn. Please read that instead, and avoid this book.
PS: Shoutout to this review, which says everything I want to say pretty well, and much more concisely.
PPS 1/11/24: every once in a while i come back and read reviews of books i disliked bc i’m a bona fide Hater™️ and this one by B.R. Sanders is particularly good. as i’ve grown and evolved i like to think i’d be able to enumerate my views and state them as well as this does if i wrote this today - but no need, since BR did a great job.
*Another book in which the metaphor was so heavy handed and offensive that part of me thinks that the author might just be so ignorant as to have missed it was The Silent History. Not that I want to defend that book, but "at least" that one wasn’t trying to be a masterpiece of anti-ableist literature, it was just stupid.
At the end of the book, I realized what the issue was though, when Jean de Men was “revealed” to “be” a woman, which was “why” he was so obsessed with…. genital mutilation (which is gross!)?? Even though no one in the book is technically identified as trans, that “twist” and the extreme and graphic focus on genitalia (hate writing this word so many times), makes it hard to miss the heavy handed metaphor. (I am giving her a sort of backhanded benefit of the doubt I guess. Worse in my opinion would be her not understanding that there are real people in our real world who might read her real book who do not identify with a gender or who were assigned the wrong gender at birth.*) I'm aware I'm saying this in the context of a work of dystopian fiction that clearly tries to use different conceptions of gender, and I am aware I'm as a cis woman so welcome discussion with trans folks (especially trans men), but this book was unavoidably transphobic and TERFy, which is why I’m confused as to how anyone could consider this a feminist masterpiece (and that people I really respect like Roxane Gay (not to single her out) gave it a quote?).
There were other problems - the Trump metaphors were eye-rollingly heavyhanded (and of course, the Trump stand-in “turning out” to be a woman is… ugh). The timeline didn’t convince me: you’re telling me in only 10 years humans have lost all pigmentation? (Also, I guess when she says that CIEL is populated only by the rich, she means only the white as well? This happens when people make characters pale-as-a-personality-trait. Removing all race isn’t like, thinking about race.) They’ve not only surgically altered their genitalia but lost their entire reproductive system - not removed, but LOST?
Meanwhile, the entire Joan of Arc story, which going in I thought was, well, the point, was totally subsumed by the CIEL dystopia stuff, which I know was theoretically connected but stayed so vague and pretentious that it was hard to actually connect the dots. The idea of the song in her head was actually interesting, and when she first started playing a real role I felt palpable relief… but it was all so disjointed and hard to follow that the feeling dissipated sooner than later. I’ll admit I don’t know the Joan of Arc story particularly well, only the broad strokes, but I’ve enjoyed other adaptations of stories I don’t know very well with no problem. I believe you shouldn’t need prerequisite reading for a novel!
This book does a few things well; the prose is sometimes good, I actually didn’t mind the blending of supernatural elements and sci-fi, always love a good climate parable in these times, the moment of perspective shifting around 2/3 in was interesting. But it was all so steeped in this sour taste in my mouth, that I felt myself simultaneously avoiding this book and trying desperately to finish it so I could get it over with. It was a profound disappointment as the last book I read in 2018, and in the end I wish I had abandoned it, even though I’m always loathe to do that.
I usually don’t love starting or ending a review with a comparison but this one feels particularly apt: I recently read An Unkindness of Ghosts, which also pulls inspiration from history (the antebellum South), thinks extensively about gender and oppression, and even also takes place on a spaceship. It is a more nuanced, meaningful, and powerful story at literally every turn. Please read that instead, and avoid this book.
PS: Shoutout to this review, which says everything I want to say pretty well, and much more concisely.
PPS 1/11/24: every once in a while i come back and read reviews of books i disliked bc i’m a bona fide Hater™️ and this one by B.R. Sanders is particularly good. as i’ve grown and evolved i like to think i’d be able to enumerate my views and state them as well as this does if i wrote this today - but no need, since BR did a great job.
*Another book in which the metaphor was so heavy handed and offensive that part of me thinks that the author might just be so ignorant as to have missed it was The Silent History. Not that I want to defend that book, but "at least" that one wasn’t trying to be a masterpiece of anti-ableist literature, it was just stupid.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Injury/Injury detail, Misogyny, Transphobia, and Body horror
genital mutilation
More...