Take a photo of a barcode or cover
explikator's Reviews (76)
adventurous
hopeful
lighthearted
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
I don't think I'm a pedant, but this book gave me a huge problem right on the first page. Ryland Grace (Twin of Watney from 'The Martian') wakes up, can't move a muscle, especially states that he can't move his head, can't look around - but immediately knows he's lying on a bed with an oval shape. How?
I'm sorry, but I think this book was written in one go by the author and then massively edited afterwards by at least two different editors. My copy is filled with typos, exclamation marks and a lot of "hecks", and "what the hell". And the way that Ryland is NOT using swear words - unlike Watney - is very synthetical.
Mild spoilers ahead.That said "Project Hail Mary" was an entertaining read - I like first contact stories - and who can resist the dry sarcasm of a talking giant spider like Rocky?
In fact the alien creature is the most human character in this book, every human is a caricature. Russians are always stern and constantly drink wodka and even Stratt, who'd had enough time to develop, is not a living being with a soul.
Something with the pacing of this book is off the rail. The first problem are the chapters with his memories, constantly cutting the progress of the story in pieces. Second problem: The suspense is built by throwing technical problems at Stan and Ollie - sorry, Grace and Rocky, so the reader has to struggle to whole chapters of techno babble of the worst sort
The first third of the book are a little bumpy, the middle part is very entertaining and I was willing to forget my first impression, but the last third was just too far stretched, too much techno and not enough soul for me. Sorry.
I'm sorry, but I think this book was written in one go by the author and then massively edited afterwards by at least two different editors. My copy is filled with typos, exclamation marks and a lot of "hecks", and "what the hell". And the way that Ryland is NOT using swear words - unlike Watney - is very synthetical.
Mild spoilers ahead.
In fact the alien creature is the most human character in this book, every human is a caricature. Russians are always stern and constantly drink wodka and even Stratt, who'd had enough time to develop, is not a living being with a soul.
Something with the pacing of this book is off the rail. The first problem are the chapters with his memories, constantly cutting the progress of the story in pieces. Second problem: The suspense is built by throwing technical problems at Stan and Ollie - sorry, Grace and Rocky, so the reader has to struggle to whole chapters of techno babble of the worst sort
The first third of the book are a little bumpy, the middle part is very entertaining and I was willing to forget my first impression, but the last third was just too far stretched, too much techno and not enough soul for me. Sorry.
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Wow, did this one grab me! For the first hundred pages I thought I'm reading a new masterpiece. The language, the pacing, the mystery of it were breathtaking. Then things slowed down after that.
Newly introduced characters stayed rather blank and the ending was a dissapointment. "William Abbey" started with a deep message about death, identity and race and ended with outworn topics like revenge and murder. There was endless potential in Claire North's primary idea, but it was spent rather conventionally.
It reminds me of "Flatliners", that horror movie of the eighties. Cool locations, brilliant casting, fresh ideas - but ends like a dark Disney musical.
Thus said: I loved the first chapters so much! This is writing of today! Claire North has got talent and her very own voice. I really liked "Sudden Appearance of Hope", too and I will certainly check out every new book she'll write!
One personal thing:The love between Margot and William was one of the center topics. Yet, when he indirectly kills her, all the emotional response we get are some words in capitals. Yes, she turned into a monster, and it's explained why, but I didn't feel any desperation. Neither from Margot, nor from William.
Newly introduced characters stayed rather blank and the ending was a dissapointment. "William Abbey" started with a deep message about death, identity and race and ended with outworn topics like revenge and murder. There was endless potential in Claire North's primary idea, but it was spent rather conventionally.
It reminds me of "Flatliners", that horror movie of the eighties. Cool locations, brilliant casting, fresh ideas - but ends like a dark Disney musical.
Thus said: I loved the first chapters so much! This is writing of today! Claire North has got talent and her very own voice. I really liked "Sudden Appearance of Hope", too and I will certainly check out every new book she'll write!
One personal thing:
adventurous
emotional
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
"The king is pregnant". This book must have been like a revolution for Science Fiction, back when it was published in 1969. It's not "hard" sci fi at all, its concept is a thought experiment. What if there was an androgynous human race on another planet, where everyone is not a he or a she, but both? What if they develop libido only on three days a month?
This is the topic which made "The Left Hand of Darkness" so famous in its time. Now, fifty years later, where we discuss gender on a new level, its conclusions have not lost their appeal. One critic on this work was, back in 1969, that the protagonist labels everyone he meets as "he", even though "she" would have been sufficient, too. That's a good point, I guess. But 1969 was before the second wave of feminism and the heroes in science fiction still were mostly manly men. Other books published that year were "2001: A Space Odyssey", "The Man in High Castle", Slaughterhouse Five" ans "A Clockwork Orange" - no female characters with their own agency in these, yet they are called classics.
Soft spoiler:I was even more fascinated by the religion that had developed in Karhide and by the love story between the Terran named Ai Genry and Estraven. Their love was only possible because they were different. It's not a deep understanding of each other or a sexual tension binding them together, but the respect of the fact, that each one of them is an alien to the other.
This is the topic which made "The Left Hand of Darkness" so famous in its time. Now, fifty years later, where we discuss gender on a new level, its conclusions have not lost their appeal. One critic on this work was, back in 1969, that the protagonist labels everyone he meets as "he", even though "she" would have been sufficient, too. That's a good point, I guess. But 1969 was before the second wave of feminism and the heroes in science fiction still were mostly manly men. Other books published that year were "2001: A Space Odyssey", "The Man in High Castle", Slaughterhouse Five" ans "A Clockwork Orange" - no female characters with their own agency in these, yet they are called classics.
Soft spoiler:
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The first page I opened features a map. Which is unreadable on a kindle. Then there is a family tree which means there are a lot of characters in this story. That made me very suspicious!
But the story is told from the perspective of one narrator only and easily enough to follow. It is told in the convincing voice of a sixteen year old girl called Candace, heir to the famous Sinclair family. Soon you anticipate something very dark hidden behind her ramblings and her crippling migraines. And you are right.
This was a very surprising read for me and very gripping. The story is well written and constructed with great expertise. You always get just that bit of information you need in that specific moment. At the end everythings explains itself perfectly. It's a whodunnit in a sense and the fact that it's classified as YA undermines its potential as a psychological thriller.
There is one problem: Because you can not trust anyone while the mystery unravels, you don't relate to them as you should. This ruined the emotional ending of the book for me.
Massive spoiler:Candace is an unreliabe narrator, because she suffers from a massive trauma. When her family begins to crumble, she and her cousins and her lover - the liars - decide to burn down the homestead itself. This seems to work, but in the end we learn that this rebellion did cost the lives of everyone involved but Candace.
But the story is told from the perspective of one narrator only and easily enough to follow. It is told in the convincing voice of a sixteen year old girl called Candace, heir to the famous Sinclair family. Soon you anticipate something very dark hidden behind her ramblings and her crippling migraines. And you are right.
This was a very surprising read for me and very gripping. The story is well written and constructed with great expertise. You always get just that bit of information you need in that specific moment. At the end everythings explains itself perfectly. It's a whodunnit in a sense and the fact that it's classified as YA undermines its potential as a psychological thriller.
There is one problem: Because you can not trust anyone while the mystery unravels, you don't relate to them as you should. This ruined the emotional ending of the book for me.
Massive spoiler:
adventurous
challenging
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
"Please don't sing!". This is the best part of the trilogy, but the differences are small. When the first part was female and the second one male, part three is craker. Or pigoon. The world is not ending, something new is emerging. MaddAddam is a book about how spirituality is a part of conscience. Believing comes naturally. If they cannot sing, they are not intelligent.
As much as I liked the writing and the concept, I also have to admit, that the pacing was uneven for me. It's as if Atwood's work was bent to fit into Campbell's story structure by sheer force. "Margaret, you do need a showdown. You need a final confrontation with the bad guys."
As much as I liked the writing and the concept, I also have to admit, that the pacing was uneven for me. It's as if Atwood's work was bent to fit into Campbell's story structure by sheer force. "Margaret, you do need a showdown. You need a final confrontation with the bad guys."
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Thoroughly plotted, masterfully told and with great characterization of everyone that plays a role. Even supporting acts like Lucerne work really well. The only thing that irritated me was the pacing. Up to 75% into the book I really didn't know why I should be invested into Ren or Toby, just as I didn't care too much for Crake or Jimmy in the first book.
But I guess that's only me. Still the best dystopia since 'Parable of the Sower' last year. If only all books that I read were written stylistically so well!
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Masterfully crafted and with a slow burn and an open end. Without any question the best of all the dystopian novels I read since Octavia Butler last year. I've no idea why so many found their way into my list, but right now I'm more than saturated.
Maybe this is why I can only give a 3.5 for Margaret Atwoods work here. But I will find my way through the whole trilogy - I expect it to get better. I trust her.
emotional
hopeful
lighthearted
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
This should be a modern classic. At least that's what Chuck Palahniuk said in "Consider this!". It's from 1983, as I learned later, and that sums it up somehow. The dialogue is quick and witty, like in "When Harry met Sally", which Nora Ephron wrote six years later. Though the overall tone is comedic, you can feel the pain of Rachel Samstat when she divorces her husband Mark.
But things have changed in fourty years. Ephron writes that all women want to marry, but all men do not want to. The best thing feminism had achieved, Rachel states, is the Dutch treat. That may have been funny 1983, but it doesn't stand the test of time.
But things have changed in fourty years. Ephron writes that all women want to marry, but all men do not want to. The best thing feminism had achieved, Rachel states, is the Dutch treat. That may have been funny 1983, but it doesn't stand the test of time.
funny
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
A book about writing with biographical background. Palahniuk teaches his personal version of "dangerous writing", a concept invented by Tom Spanbauer. I really liked the advice given, but I'm not sure if it'll influence my work or if I do want that to happen at all.
Thus said it was an entertaining read and it is a very honest book.
Thus said it was an entertaining read and it is a very honest book.
mysterious
tense
fast-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
A romance novel that tries very hard to be a thriller. That explains why it's filled with professionally crafted sex scenes and endless inner monologue of the heroine - the murder cases are only a spice, not the meal.
The language is always efficient, the story flows exactly as fluid as the author planned exactly - I felt like the unneccesary part in the equation. When the final scenes are happening - too late - I was relieved, but not surprised.
The antagonist's psychopathology - Verity's herself - is slowly constructed, chapter by chapter. In the end we loathe her. But experienced readers know - at the 50% mark - there will be a reversing twist in the end. And it was.
The language is always efficient, the story flows exactly as fluid as the author planned exactly - I felt like the unneccesary part in the equation. When the final scenes are happening - too late - I was relieved, but not surprised.