Scan barcode
A review by triplebriiii
You Feel It Just Below the Ribs by Jeffrey Cranor, Janina Matthewson
4.5
This was so close to 5 ⭐, I just needed it to be more.. subtle.
To begin, I really enjoyed the story format. I find stories where the narrator is talking to us from some future point in time, and telling us the story of their life to be super interesting. I love the little hints they give when shit's about to go down, their self reflections and ruminations on what they would or would not change. And all of that is very much present here, along with the unreliable narrator.
I was also really fascinated by the world and the changes that happened due to the wars and conflicts that occured in the early 20th century. Tbh, that part hit a little bit too close to home, but that could just bc i'm coming at this from a rather pessimistic stand point, what can i say. I found most fascinating the differences in society due to the implementation of the no-family policy.
In particular, I found it really interesting that gay marriage, as well as interracial marriage, was legal in the 1950s, implying that after decades of total world war, the dissolution of religion (presumably), and the family unit (definitely), humanity actually came to its senses and realized that it doesn't fucking matter. And that wasn't the only positve change that was brought about due to the specific circumstances of that reality. After decades of war, the world is quite literally entirely at peace, there is global cooperation and, from what it sounds like, prosperity.
It reminds me of that Apple TV show For All Mankind, where one slight change in history (in the show's case, Russia landing on the moon before the US, and in this book's case, a massive world war that lasted for decades and killed off 60% of the world's population [okay that might be more than a "slight" change 😅😅😅]), resulted in, arguably, a more just and equitable society.
But at what cost is the main moral and ethical question here.
But while I really enjoyed this (and I will be checking out the podcast), I felt like the story would have been stronger if they had leaned more into the unreliable narrator of it all and didn't make it so obvious. Maybe it's just me, but the fact that the annotator was just spitting pure and obvious propoganda, intentionally and not subtly disparaging and dismissing everything the MC was saying, just really re-enforced that the narrator was likely telling the truth, their conspiracies were indeed true, and in fact it's the annotator who is the unreliable one.
I think if there was more subtlety and the annotator had stuck with the historian-esque commentary, keeping things unbiased, presenting the memoir without trying to manipulate the reader into a certain understanding, it would have caused more doubt and hesitence in me to believe the MC. And that uncertainty over whether or not to believe the MC would have increased the horror vibes and I would have appreciated that.
I loved the use of motherhood as such a clear indication of the actual harm these policies have wrought.
To begin, I really enjoyed the story format. I find stories where the narrator is talking to us from some future point in time, and telling us the story of their life to be super interesting. I love the little hints they give when shit's about to go down, their self reflections and ruminations on what they would or would not change. And all of that is very much present here, along with the unreliable narrator.
I was also really fascinated by the world and the changes that happened due to the wars and conflicts that occured in the early 20th century. Tbh, that part hit a little bit too close to home, but that could just bc i'm coming at this from a rather pessimistic stand point, what can i say. I found most fascinating the differences in society due to the implementation of the no-family policy.
In particular, I found it really interesting that gay marriage, as well as interracial marriage, was legal in the 1950s, implying that after decades of total world war, the dissolution of religion (presumably), and the family unit (definitely), humanity actually came to its senses and realized that it doesn't fucking matter. And that wasn't the only positve change that was brought about due to the specific circumstances of that reality. After decades of war, the world is quite literally entirely at peace, there is global cooperation and, from what it sounds like, prosperity.
It reminds me of that Apple TV show For All Mankind, where one slight change in history (in the show's case, Russia landing on the moon before the US, and in this book's case, a massive world war that lasted for decades and killed off 60% of the world's population [okay that might be more than a "slight" change 😅😅😅]), resulted in, arguably, a more just and equitable society.
But at what cost is the main moral and ethical question here.
But while I really enjoyed this (and I will be checking out the podcast), I felt like the story would have been stronger if they had leaned more into the unreliable narrator of it all and didn't make it so obvious. Maybe it's just me, but the fact that the annotator was just spitting pure and obvious propoganda, intentionally and not subtly disparaging and dismissing everything the MC was saying, just really re-enforced that the narrator was likely telling the truth, their conspiracies were indeed true, and in fact it's the annotator who is the unreliable one.
I think if there was more subtlety and the annotator had stuck with the historian-esque commentary, keeping things unbiased, presenting the memoir without trying to manipulate the reader into a certain understanding, it would have caused more doubt and hesitence in me to believe the MC. And that uncertainty over whether or not to believe the MC would have increased the horror vibes and I would have appreciated that.
I loved the use of motherhood as such a clear indication of the actual harm these policies have wrought.