Scan barcode
A review by kell_xavi
Bitter by Akwaeke Emezi
4.0
This book is, unexpectedly, quite a bit better than Pet. Pet builds a world that cares, that is intentional, that believes:
We are each other’s harvest. We are each other’s business. We are each other’s magnitude and bond.
Bitter tries to explain how Jam’s parents, Bitter and Aloe, were made familiar with the capacity for creatures to be brought forth from her paintings. It also tries to explain how a city somewhere close to ours in white supremacist capitalist politics, but in the fight for equality, came to be the haven of Pet.
The history is, in some ways, disappointing, because it turns out that as much divine intervention as hard work goes into the answer; this novel doesn’t give hope like a bold of lightning, but in a trickle (but still there). There are moments, in willingness to talk after anger—in refusing the cure for a disability, in Bitter’s ability to find a safe space—that look like hope, monsters or not.
It was mostly resolved by the end, but parts of this book after Bitter brings something from a painting didn’t seem to quite fit with the first book. The roles Hibiscus and Ube inhabit, the way Bitter and others talk about change, the personality of the creature. It’s cohesive, such that I expect Emezi knew the whole timeline from the start, but some of the pieces didn’t line up for me.
Here’s what I loved: Aloe’s romance. Bitter’s art. The casual queerness. The way art is discussed as valuable. The phrasing around Bitter’s childhood. How true anxiety felt. Disability! How true anger and hopelessness felt.
Here’s what I wasn’t sure about: Assata. Eucalyptus. The utopic institutions were vague in ways, which was fine, but some of what was described felt a bit wonky, or else hollow. Population count for Lucille?
Here’s what I didn’t like: Perhaps necessary for the continuity, but I didn’t like how present the guilty party from Pet was here. Blessing’s outfits. The homogenous reaction the the scene in the public square: there’s a reductiveness to the immediate change everyone undergoes, and the discussion of punishment, anger, and terrorism ends up being sorely limited and ineffective as a result. I wanted concrete descriptions of what Assata is doing, a framework of what we’re fighting against: use of allegory would have strengthened Emezi’s ability to create a call to action through this work.
We are each other’s harvest. We are each other’s business. We are each other’s magnitude and bond.
Bitter tries to explain how Jam’s parents, Bitter and Aloe, were made familiar with the capacity for creatures to be brought forth from her paintings. It also tries to explain how a city somewhere close to ours in white supremacist capitalist politics, but in the fight for equality, came to be the haven of Pet.
The history is, in some ways, disappointing, because it turns out that as much divine intervention as hard work goes into the answer; this novel doesn’t give hope like a bold of lightning, but in a trickle (but still there). There are moments, in willingness to talk after anger—in refusing the cure for a disability, in Bitter’s ability to find a safe space—that look like hope, monsters or not.
It was mostly resolved by the end, but parts of this book after Bitter brings something from a painting didn’t seem to quite fit with the first book. The roles Hibiscus and Ube inhabit, the way Bitter and others talk about change, the personality of the creature. It’s cohesive, such that I expect Emezi knew the whole timeline from the start, but some of the pieces didn’t line up for me.
Here’s what I loved: Aloe’s romance. Bitter’s art. The casual queerness. The way art is discussed as valuable. The phrasing around Bitter’s childhood. How true anxiety felt. Disability! How true anger and hopelessness felt.
Here’s what I wasn’t sure about: Assata. Eucalyptus. The utopic institutions were vague in ways, which was fine, but some of what was described felt a bit wonky, or else hollow. Population count for Lucille?
Here’s what I didn’t like: Perhaps necessary for the continuity, but I didn’t like how present the guilty party from Pet was here. Blessing’s outfits. The homogenous reaction the the scene in the public square: there’s a reductiveness to the immediate change everyone undergoes, and the discussion of punishment, anger, and terrorism ends up being sorely limited and ineffective as a result. I wanted concrete descriptions of what Assata is doing, a framework of what we’re fighting against: use of allegory would have strengthened Emezi’s ability to create a call to action through this work.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Gun violence, Murder, Self harm, Grief, Police brutality, and Panic attacks/disorders
Minor: Child abuse, Rape, Ableism, Fire/Fire injury, and Death of parent