Take a photo of a barcode or cover
seabright22 's review for:
Metro 2033
by Dmitry Glukhovsky
adventurous
dark
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I liked it! It's such a shame the first 25% of this book is such a slog because once it gets going it's very good, with the action tense and at times properly horrifying and a lot more mysterious than I remember it being. It is however written clunkily (might be a translation issue) and is so heavy-handed with exposition that it feels like I was reading a wikipedia article at times.
Glukhovsky does his best to explore some extremely clear themes and narrative concepts; the place of humanity on Earth, the validity and use of faith, philosophy and politics in the face of armageddon and regular life, and the hero's journey among a few others. I loved the building of various myths around Artyom, and while it was a bit too on the nose with the hero's journey stuff I still really enjoyed the plot as a whole, the ending especially was great and one of the few times in the book you really felt like you were reading something properly breaktaking.
While it was nice to see a bit more depth that I was expecting from this book, it is exposited so awkwardly and explained so frankly that at times it became annoying, and he can't seem to allow the reader to think or develop their own ideas at all. An early section stood out to me after the first memory of his mother, where a nice little flashback is overexplained afterward and loses all mystery, another example being the little speech Artyom gives himself while examining his own free will. You have to trust and allow the reader to come to their own conclusions.
That section in particular was one of a few where you feel the fourth wall almost break, and it felt like the author really just wanted to have a rant about faith that frankly wasn't all that coherent given the surprising depth some of the previous chapters had given those concepts and the conclusion of the story. There was another particularly egregious section where Artyom refers to himself as the main character, and other where he directly names the "Odyssey" he has been on.
By far my favorite part of the book is the dreamlike exploration of the newfound use of telepathy on mankind, and how we see Artyom's journey in attempting to find a reason for this and his connection to the tunnels. I love that it wasn't overexplained and felt truly alien at times, the chat with the singular philosophers like Khan and the two old men at Polyanka about their relationships with this new entity of the Metro was fascinating. Tied to this the horror in the book is great, especially just as he begins his journey, thedeath of Bourbon is where the book turned around completley for me.
I wish the book had leaned into that feeling of mythology, spirituality and horror and away from the clunky political discussion and encyclopedic listing of train stations.
Glukhovsky does his best to explore some extremely clear themes and narrative concepts; the place of humanity on Earth, the validity and use of faith, philosophy and politics in the face of armageddon and regular life, and the hero's journey among a few others. I loved the building of various myths around Artyom, and while it was a bit too on the nose with the hero's journey stuff I still really enjoyed the plot as a whole, the ending especially was great and one of the few times in the book you really felt like you were reading something properly breaktaking.
While it was nice to see a bit more depth that I was expecting from this book, it is exposited so awkwardly and explained so frankly that at times it became annoying, and he can't seem to allow the reader to think or develop their own ideas at all. An early section stood out to me after the first memory of his mother, where a nice little flashback is overexplained afterward and loses all mystery, another example being the little speech Artyom gives himself while examining his own free will. You have to trust and allow the reader to come to their own conclusions.
That section in particular was one of a few where you feel the fourth wall almost break, and it felt like the author really just wanted to have a rant about faith that frankly wasn't all that coherent given the surprising depth some of the previous chapters had given those concepts and the conclusion of the story. There was another particularly egregious section where Artyom refers to himself as the main character, and other where he directly names the "Odyssey" he has been on.
By far my favorite part of the book is the dreamlike exploration of the newfound use of telepathy on mankind, and how we see Artyom's journey in attempting to find a reason for this and his connection to the tunnels. I love that it wasn't overexplained and felt truly alien at times, the chat with the singular philosophers like Khan and the two old men at Polyanka about their relationships with this new entity of the Metro was fascinating. Tied to this the horror in the book is great, especially just as he begins his journey, the
I wish the book had leaned into that feeling of mythology, spirituality and horror and away from the clunky political discussion and encyclopedic listing of train stations.