Scan barcode
A review by candleniights
Boyfriend Material by Alexis Hall
2.0
Whatever semblance of plot there was at the beginning of this book quickly got buried under tropey interpersonal conflict resolved as quickly it had started. Major plot points get dropped with very superficial resolutions. But fair enough, maybe that's what this book was supposed to be like.
Aside from that, most characters are either fairly unlikable or caricatures of themselves. They are very 'quirky' bordering on problematic when you realise many of their 'comedic' behaviours are exaggerated neurodivergent traits that are consistently treated as the butt of the joke.
I'm really conflicted about the author's approach to various social issues, too. Topics such as vegetarianism/veganism or judging people based on sexuality are portrayed in a way which presents a counterargument to what I would've expected from an openly queer book. While the arguments themselves are not incorrect - people shouldn't be discounted as potential relations based on their sexuality; if someone doesn't eat meat out of concern for the environment and the unwillingness to contribute to meat production then they could technically still eat it if it's already been purchased by someone else - queer people are not generally accepted by the society and vegeratianism/veganism are still treated unkindly by many. In that case, trying to broaden that discourse by presenting counterarguments to those arguments seems counterproductive - straight people don't need protection from queer people's wariness, for instance, and it's still too early to try and push for that kind of agenda while queer rights are consistently being undermined.
At the same time, concerns such as the rich profitting off the poor, while condemned in-text, are glossed over and turned into a joke, and one that reads as friendly banter, too, as opposed to other jokes (about nonbinary identities, veganism etc.), which, ib-turn, read as geniunely mocking.
Aside from that, most characters are either fairly unlikable or caricatures of themselves. They are very 'quirky' bordering on problematic when you realise many of their 'comedic' behaviours are exaggerated neurodivergent traits that are consistently treated as the butt of the joke.
I'm really conflicted about the author's approach to various social issues, too. Topics such as vegetarianism/veganism or judging people based on sexuality are portrayed in a way which presents a counterargument to what I would've expected from an openly queer book. While the arguments themselves are not incorrect - people shouldn't be discounted as potential relations based on their sexuality; if someone doesn't eat meat out of concern for the environment and the unwillingness to contribute to meat production then they could technically still eat it if it's already been purchased by someone else - queer people are not generally accepted by the society and vegeratianism/veganism are still treated unkindly by many. In that case, trying to broaden that discourse by presenting counterarguments to those arguments seems counterproductive - straight people don't need protection from queer people's wariness, for instance, and it's still too early to try and push for that kind of agenda while queer rights are consistently being undermined.
At the same time, concerns such as the rich profitting off the poor, while condemned in-text, are glossed over and turned into a joke, and one that reads as friendly banter, too, as opposed to other jokes (about nonbinary identities, veganism etc.), which, ib-turn, read as geniunely mocking.