Take a photo of a barcode or cover
rattletheshelves 's review for:
If It Makes You Happy
by Claire Kann
lighthearted
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
I have mixed feelings about this one. On the positive side: a Black, fat, queer MC in a QPR? Yes, please! I absolutely adored Winnie. I loved how confident she was in herself, her body, and her queerness. I loved the discussions about race and being fat, they were done so well. I loved Winnie's relationship with her younger brother, it was so precious.
I wish the same attention to detail was given to the QPR. First of all, because the book never gives you a definition, let me tell you that QPR is a queer-platonic relationship, which is often seen as an alternative to a romantic relationship. It's a committed relationship with the romance (and often but not always sexual element) removed from the equation. It's the second book I've ever read with a QPR (after Royal Rescue) and, since I'm aromantic, it meant so so much... but also it wasn't handled well.
In the book Winnie is in an open queer-platonic relationship, with an understanding that both parties might seek out additional partners. And that's what happens to Winnie, as she starts to spend more time with her long-time crush (crash? don't ask me, I'm aro, i don't know allo terminology) that she doesn't believe have any chance of becoming something more. However, it's obvious that her "ungirlfriend" doesn't want Winnie to have a romantic partner.
Now, that's a brilliant set up and it could have been done so well. It could have explored these insecurities and where they stem from (and they stem from the way romance is prioritized above other sorts of relationships in our society). Instead, for most of the book Winnie's "ungirlfriend's" insecurities are downplayed and presented in a pretty arophobic manner as she's painted as a villain. Yes, she does some horrible things and I really think these were unnecessary, it could have been handled way better. We get so, so few aro characters in books, we didn't need her to be a villain.
Because of this representation and the lack of explaination of the relationship between the girls, most of the reviews are arophobic. And it pains me especially coming from an aspec author who wrote one of my absolute favorites, Let's Talk About Love. Why couldn't we approach aromanticism with the same sensitivity as LTAL did for asexuality? Why aromanticism always has to be villanised?
My other issue was that I didn't understand the plot at all. Maybe I lack some vital US knowledge but I didn't understand what the kings and queens thing was about, I often lose track in plots like these.
All in all, I'm on the fence about this one. I finished it yesterday and I'm still not sure if I liked it.
***Thank you NetGalley for the audiobook! ***
I wish the same attention to detail was given to the QPR. First of all, because the book never gives you a definition, let me tell you that QPR is a queer-platonic relationship, which is often seen as an alternative to a romantic relationship. It's a committed relationship with the romance (and often but not always sexual element) removed from the equation. It's the second book I've ever read with a QPR (after Royal Rescue) and, since I'm aromantic, it meant so so much... but also it wasn't handled well.
In the book Winnie is in an open queer-platonic relationship, with an understanding that both parties might seek out additional partners. And that's what happens to Winnie, as she starts to spend more time with her long-time crush (crash? don't ask me, I'm aro, i don't know allo terminology) that she doesn't believe have any chance of becoming something more. However, it's obvious that her "ungirlfriend" doesn't want Winnie to have a romantic partner.
Now, that's a brilliant set up and it could have been done so well. It could have explored these insecurities and where they stem from (and they stem from the way romance is prioritized above other sorts of relationships in our society). Instead, for most of the book Winnie's "ungirlfriend's" insecurities are downplayed and presented in a pretty arophobic manner as she's painted as a villain. Yes, she does some horrible things and I really think these were unnecessary, it could have been handled way better. We get so, so few aro characters in books, we didn't need her to be a villain.
Because of this representation and the lack of explaination of the relationship between the girls, most of the reviews are arophobic. And it pains me especially coming from an aspec author who wrote one of my absolute favorites, Let's Talk About Love. Why couldn't we approach aromanticism with the same sensitivity as LTAL did for asexuality? Why aromanticism always has to be villanised?
My other issue was that I didn't understand the plot at all. Maybe I lack some vital US knowledge but I didn't understand what the kings and queens thing was about, I often lose track in plots like these.
All in all, I'm on the fence about this one. I finished it yesterday and I'm still not sure if I liked it.
***Thank you NetGalley for the audiobook! ***