A review by wylaniswriting_
Babel by R.F. Kuang

challenging dark tense medium-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? A mix
• Strong character development? Yes
• Loveable characters? It's complicated
• Diverse cast of characters? Yes
• Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

 I will write the first half of the review spoiler-free, then indicate when I start talking about the book and the events in more detail. Please enjoy this probably very long review of my favourite book so far this year!

 

-

“That's just what translation is, I think. That's all speaking is. Listening to the other and trying to see past your own biases to glimpse what they're trying to say. Showing yourself to the world, and hoping someone else understands.”

I have never read something so purely brilliant, so informative but so, so emotive. Kuang has a way of writing that connects so irrevocably with the reader, despite many of the characters, if not all, being incredibly morally grey. In just the first few pages we meet Robin Swift, from whose perspective the majority of the book is told, and I immediately fell in love. His character development throughout the 500 or so pages is elaborate and complex, wholly justified considering the immense trauma he experiences. His friendship with Ramy was so important, and I found myself connecting a lot with both of them through that relationship. 

I loved Ramy, who I would have to say is my favourite character. Other reviews I read interpreted him to be selfish and immoral, and unreasonably prejudiced. I, however, can’t say that his or any of the other’s opinions aren’t legitimate, or at least understandable. Going into this as someone who is white and doesn’t have many of the same experiences as the characters, I found myself still connecting to them deeply, from Robin’s loneliness to Ramy’s passionate anger.

 

“What you don’t understand,’ said Ramy, ‘is how much people like you will excuse if it just means they can get tea and coffee on their breakfast tables. They don’t care, Letty. They just don’t care.”

SPOILERS START HERE

I was surprised, however, when reading a few more negative reviews, that the novel was sometimes interpreted to be anti-white, or unnecessarily prejudiced towards the white characters of the novel, principally Letty. Letty’s perspective was simply this: she and her friends had achieved their apparent goals and needs in life, and because of this, she no longer had to fight for the needs of others. I found everything more than reasonable, and Letty’s opinions to simply be representative of a significant number of white British people of the era. Letty, while growing incredibly insufferable, was difficult to hate. The novel was brutal, uncomfortable, and utterly necessary.

 

“Their entire system of trade is high-strung and vulnerable to shocks because they’ve made it thus, because the rapacious greed of capitalism is punishing. It’s why slave revolts succeed. They can’t fire on their own source of labour – it’d be like killing their own golden geese.”

 
Of course Robin was constantly thinking of how much he hated the British Empire; he was, after all, willing to destroy Oxford and Babel out of hatred and the need for his cause to be heard. Babel & the silver-working was a receptacle for which racism and colonialism could be communicated, as it expressed how many Western countries saw and still see those of other ethnicities as objects to be used, rather than humans. The British Empire saw foreign countries as places to take, or places to take from.

 

“And Robin found it incredible, how this country, whose citizens prided themselves so much on being better than the rest of the world, could not make it through an afternoon tea without borrowed goods.”

 
The book additionally, as the title suggests, dealt with the question: Is violent protest necessary? Personally, I found myself relating to Robin’s perspective, while also understanding Victiore and her disagreement with Robin’s opinions. I think that while holding the tower caused immense pain and suffering for the poor in addition to the rich, it was an important act that indeed showed the necessity of violence. It’s important to consider that although it was a clearly personal act for Robin, it was also so much bigger than that.

 

“This is how colonialism works. It convinces us that the fallout from resistance is entirely our fault, that the immoral choice is resistance itself rather than the circumstances that demanded it.”

I suppose that yes, one could blame the strikes and damage on Robin and the protestors. But is it not also, despite the weakness it would demonstrate, Britain’s own fault for not agreeing to their terms? They sat back and let ruin overcome the Empire, simply out of pride. It is the response to so many strikes and protests, because to accept defeat is to forfeit pride and accept humiliation.

Their concept of translating their cause into something the rich, white, citizens of Britain would perceive to be a threat was something I found very interesting, as I’d never really thought about it that way. It wasn’t enough to cause damage and pain, they needed to prove that they could permanently and significantly alter the course of the Empire, disparaging power hundreds of years old. Peace cannot exist without violence, and violence cannot exist without peace. The coexistence of the two is what may or may not have achieved Hermes’ goal.

 

“She learned revolution is, in fact, always unimaginable. It shatters the world you know. The future is unwritten, brimming with potential. The colonizers have no idea what is coming, and that makes them panic. It terrifies them. Good. It should.” 

Note: I saw a review on Goodreads after finishing Babel which read: "Booktok will hate Babel as it requires both the capacity for empathy for other people and the ability to read and understand stories that are not solely a bunch of tropes pretending to be plot." I HAVE NEVER LAUGHED SO HARD