Scan barcode
A review by elerireads
Ace Voices: What it Means to Be Asexual, Aromantic, Demi or Grey-Ace by Eris Young
challenging
hopeful
informative
reflective
slow-paced
2.5
This was just quite good. Not brilliant but not bad either. A bit meh? There were a few interesting ideas discussed, a few insightful points made and some relatable experiences raised that I didn't realise were actually a common thing. So on the whole I think it was worth reading. The section on gender in particular I thought was quite illuminating, especially the discussion about the prevalence of "gender ambivalence" among a-specs, and the parallels between discomfort around being sexualised and gender dysphoria. This section I think gained a lot from the author's perspective as a non-binary person. I also enjoyed the chapter on the future of relationships.
I feel like I should preface my criticisms with a little disclaimer that this book was actually very readable Because I have a lot of criticisms. So I think this review may end up weighted more towards the negative than is actually reflected in my feelings about it.
First, where was the structure? I have a major pet peeve about nonfiction seeming to be exempt from any expectation to be enjoyable, gripping or have a narrative-flow-like structure. It needs to be going somewhere! I don't care if it's supposed to be a bitty book about various different aspects of the ace community, you can still have a common thread that's leading up to some kind of conclusion. This wasn't even just a problem between chapters; within chapters it was just jumping about all over the place. I listened to the episode of the Sounds Fake but Okay podcast where they interviewed Young and I can't remember the exact phrase they used but essentially they described the process of putting it all together as a haphazard mess or something like that. And I thought WE CAN TELL! Think about what you want to say and how the ideas fit together, plan out the structure and then write it. Honestly.
Secondly, who the hell was the target audience for this? If it was a-spec people who are already familiar with the common terms and concepts, then er I think there's way too much waffling about stuff they'll already know. I was bored a lot of the time and at some points a bit incredulous at some of the things Young mentioned never having come across before starting to write the book. On the other hand, if the target audience was people who aren't familiar with any of that stuff then this was terrible! The chapter called 'Who Are We?' which explained the basic terminology was by far the worst chapter in the whole book. It was vague and confusing as Young tied themself up in knots trying not to say anything definitive at all in order to avoid excluding people who use certain terms slightly differently or who think that such and such is actually the same as such and such etc. etc. The definition of asexuality was given in a single sentence that was absolutely terribly constructed - I went back and found it before writing this review and I was genuinely confused by it. So if you don't already know what asexuality is before reading it, god help you. This is a pretty bloody major problem for a book subtitled "What it means to be Asexual, Aromantic, Demi or Grey-Ace"!!!! I'd have thought that chapter would be a fairly critical one to get clear and understandable, and there must be a way to do that that's still inclusive.
Third problem: although I liked having lots of direct quotes from interviewees etc. and enjoyed all the different perspectives, I really really would have liked to be able to keep track of who was who. The system using initials really didn't lend itself to that and I just think that was a big opportunity missed to make links between individuals' answers on different topics. It was kind of like "I interviewed 40 a-spec people about gender and here's what they said" then "I interviewed 40 a-spec people about relationships and here's what they said" and very little attempt to capitalise on the fact that they were the same 40 people and to draw out links between their answers to different questions. It just upsets me to have so much data like that and not be making full use of it.
All that said, I do think this book is worth reading and it's a step in the right direction in terms of adding to the books out there about a-specs beyond basic introductions and myth debunking. However, if it's unknown territory I'd strongly suggest starting at the back of this book where there's a long list of online resources, all of which explain the basics 100x better than this book does. Have a read of those and then have a go at this.
I feel like I should preface my criticisms with a little disclaimer that this book was actually very readable Because I have a lot of criticisms. So I think this review may end up weighted more towards the negative than is actually reflected in my feelings about it.
First, where was the structure? I have a major pet peeve about nonfiction seeming to be exempt from any expectation to be enjoyable, gripping or have a narrative-flow-like structure. It needs to be going somewhere! I don't care if it's supposed to be a bitty book about various different aspects of the ace community, you can still have a common thread that's leading up to some kind of conclusion. This wasn't even just a problem between chapters; within chapters it was just jumping about all over the place. I listened to the episode of the Sounds Fake but Okay podcast where they interviewed Young and I can't remember the exact phrase they used but essentially they described the process of putting it all together as a haphazard mess or something like that. And I thought WE CAN TELL! Think about what you want to say and how the ideas fit together, plan out the structure and then write it. Honestly.
Secondly, who the hell was the target audience for this? If it was a-spec people who are already familiar with the common terms and concepts, then er I think there's way too much waffling about stuff they'll already know. I was bored a lot of the time and at some points a bit incredulous at some of the things Young mentioned never having come across before starting to write the book. On the other hand, if the target audience was people who aren't familiar with any of that stuff then this was terrible! The chapter called 'Who Are We?' which explained the basic terminology was by far the worst chapter in the whole book. It was vague and confusing as Young tied themself up in knots trying not to say anything definitive at all in order to avoid excluding people who use certain terms slightly differently or who think that such and such is actually the same as such and such etc. etc. The definition of asexuality was given in a single sentence that was absolutely terribly constructed - I went back and found it before writing this review and I was genuinely confused by it. So if you don't already know what asexuality is before reading it, god help you. This is a pretty bloody major problem for a book subtitled "What it means to be Asexual, Aromantic, Demi or Grey-Ace"!!!! I'd have thought that chapter would be a fairly critical one to get clear and understandable, and there must be a way to do that that's still inclusive.
Third problem: although I liked having lots of direct quotes from interviewees etc. and enjoyed all the different perspectives, I really really would have liked to be able to keep track of who was who. The system using initials really didn't lend itself to that and I just think that was a big opportunity missed to make links between individuals' answers on different topics. It was kind of like "I interviewed 40 a-spec people about gender and here's what they said" then "I interviewed 40 a-spec people about relationships and here's what they said" and very little attempt to capitalise on the fact that they were the same 40 people and to draw out links between their answers to different questions. It just upsets me to have so much data like that and not be making full use of it.
All that said, I do think this book is worth reading and it's a step in the right direction in terms of adding to the books out there about a-specs beyond basic introductions and myth debunking. However, if it's unknown territory I'd strongly suggest starting at the back of this book where there's a long list of online resources, all of which explain the basics 100x better than this book does. Have a read of those and then have a go at this.