Scan barcode
hippolyta_vi's reviews
145 reviews
A Tempest of Tea by Hafsah Faizal
Did not finish book. Stopped at 54%.
Did not finish book. Stopped at 54%.
DNF'd at 50%, why not just finish it?
Oh, I did. I really, really did. I had high hopes for this book and it ended up falling flat on its face.
A lot of the other reviews here perfectly encapsulate this novel. It's just boring. Somehow, with such an intriguing idea and plot, it's so very boring. Every night I would sit down to read this and every night my mind would wander, thinking about everything except for what was on the page.
Where to begin. It seems as though the author tells when she should be showing (don't *tell* me Arthie is a hardened criminal, SHOW ME! you're trying to make me believe she's on par with Kaz Brekker and yet she's made her name in Ettenia by not being violent? What does she do, brood until people quiver?) and showing when she should be telling (the lack of description...I stg).
I failed to be immersed in any capacity into the world. Ettenia is clearly some sort of England, so I guess the author is just trusting that you can imagine a psuedo-London instead of describing the atmosphere and culture.
Why only include the POVs of 3 characters when there are 5 members involved in the heist, I do not know. Having POVs from just Arthie and Jin I could understand, but adding Flick into the mix just made me question the exclusion of Laith and Matteo:s perspectives. Additionally, I couldn't get a full grasp on the characters. The way they are portrayed in their POV didn't seem to match up to how they acted in the other characters' POVs which could actually be intriguing. It could've been purposely depicting how people are duplicitous and/or complex. Instead, it just muddled the characters and gave us incomplete portrayals.
My goal was to finish this book, but nothing about it made me want to turn another page or reach the heist. Yes. After over 50% of the book, I still did not reach any form of heist. The plotting and preparation takes up so much time and is so convoluted and dry. What I find magic about heist stories is what happens off the page. I don't want the semantics. I want action! I want to see how the meticulous planning of clever criminals and their niche skillsets unravel an excellently executed heist, even better when something goes awry and the characters have to think of their toes. Any forms of that in this novel were just so underwhelming.
TLDR: just (re)read Six of Crows
Oh, I did. I really, really did. I had high hopes for this book and it ended up falling flat on its face.
A lot of the other reviews here perfectly encapsulate this novel. It's just boring. Somehow, with such an intriguing idea and plot, it's so very boring. Every night I would sit down to read this and every night my mind would wander, thinking about everything except for what was on the page.
Where to begin. It seems as though the author tells when she should be showing (don't *tell* me Arthie is a hardened criminal, SHOW ME! you're trying to make me believe she's on par with Kaz Brekker and yet she's made her name in Ettenia by not being violent? What does she do, brood until people quiver?) and showing when she should be telling (the lack of description...I stg).
I failed to be immersed in any capacity into the world. Ettenia is clearly some sort of England, so I guess the author is just trusting that you can imagine a psuedo-London instead of describing the atmosphere and culture.
Why only include the POVs of 3 characters when there are 5 members involved in the heist, I do not know. Having POVs from just Arthie and Jin I could understand, but adding Flick into the mix just made me question the exclusion of Laith and Matteo:s perspectives. Additionally, I couldn't get a full grasp on the characters. The way they are portrayed in their POV didn't seem to match up to how they acted in the other characters' POVs which could actually be intriguing. It could've been purposely depicting how people are duplicitous and/or complex. Instead, it just muddled the characters and gave us incomplete portrayals.
My goal was to finish this book, but nothing about it made me want to turn another page or reach the heist. Yes. After over 50% of the book, I still did not reach any form of heist. The plotting and preparation takes up so much time and is so convoluted and dry. What I find magic about heist stories is what happens off the page. I don't want the semantics. I want action! I want to see how the meticulous planning of clever criminals and their niche skillsets unravel an excellently executed heist, even better when something goes awry and the characters have to think of their toes. Any forms of that in this novel were just so underwhelming.
TLDR: just (re)read Six of Crows
Bloodmarked by Tracy Deonn
I feel like I just read an entire series in one book. My mind is reeling omg.
I don't love all the plot decisions made in this series but hey, I'm having fun.
also...... we're totally getting an ot3 right???
I don't love all the plot decisions made in this series but hey, I'm having fun.
also...... we're totally getting an ot3 right???
Illuminae by Jay Kristoff, Amie Kaufman
Did not finish book. Stopped at 17%.
Did not finish book. Stopped at 17%.
I'm sure this book and series are really cool but I just couldn't get hooked. Too many names of ships and protocols and people that it was hard to get a grasp of. I could be discovering that I'm not a huge scifi reader.
Longbourn by Jo Baker
emotional
hopeful
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
4.5
This book was such a gem.
Jo Baker took such care in fleshing out the Longbourn servants, in giving them more than just names but hearts, wants, flaws, pasts and futures. It is evident how much Baker loves and respects Pride & Prejudice since this book is excellently crafted. Longbourn serves as a companion to A sten's 19th century novel that expands on the world. P&P is insular, whereas Longbourn explores the politics of the time. Race, sexuality, class (moreso than just upperclass), and more are explored.
Some readers may be disappointed by the portrayals of their beloved Bennet family but I believe them to be fair. Would you have zero criticism for the family whose underwear you clean and excrement you empty? The family who works you to the bone? The Bennet's, as any family with a staff would, do not care about the lives of their servants and Baker expertly examines these relationships.
I, for one, am sad to have to say goodbye to these characters.
Longbourn is a must read for any book-fan of Pride & Prejudice.
Jo Baker took such care in fleshing out the Longbourn servants, in giving them more than just names but hearts, wants, flaws, pasts and futures. It is evident how much Baker loves and respects Pride & Prejudice since this book is excellently crafted. Longbourn serves as a companion to A sten's 19th century novel that expands on the world. P&P is insular, whereas Longbourn explores the politics of the time. Race, sexuality, class (moreso than just upperclass), and more are explored.
Some readers may be disappointed by the portrayals of their beloved Bennet family but I believe them to be fair. Would you have zero criticism for the family whose underwear you clean and excrement you empty? The family who works you to the bone? The Bennet's, as any family with a staff would, do not care about the lives of their servants and Baker expertly examines these relationships.
I, for one, am sad to have to say goodbye to these characters.
Longbourn is a must read for any book-fan of Pride & Prejudice.
Most Ardently by Gabe Cole Novoa
Did not finish book. Stopped at 39%.
Did not finish book. Stopped at 39%.
When I first heard of a trans remix of Pride & Prejudice I was so excited. I couldn't get my hands on it fast enough, but then I started reading it and I couldn't DNF it fast enough...
I will say, if you're not too familiar with the original text, you'll probably find this an enjoyable book, so ignore me. However, if you're a big Austen fan like myself, I'd si this one out. I do want to know what happens to Oliver, but unfortunately can not get past how this adaptation does not do Austen's text any justice.
Many of the characterizations are completely wrong, almost offensive. Mrs. Bennet goes from being frantic, emotional comedic relief (original) to being downright evil (this version). Mr. Wickham is just immediately unlikeable which is ???? Maybe there were reasons for these choices but I couldn't make myself read more to find out.
Also, I found that the author forced his own opinions about 19th century life and society that his characters would not share, and yet they did. It was almost anochronistic but not for any valid artistic reason. I'm not asking for Austenian prose or complete historical accuracy, but you could at least still write a story that could make sense for the 19th century. For example, (I have multiple)Oliver thinks it's annoying and can't understand why his mother jumps to the conclusion that Bingley will propose to Jane after the first ball. Well, when a man shows interest in a woman and then proceeds to invite her for tea, it is likely that he is highly interested in her and higher 19th century folks didn't exactly date around.
Another example is when Miss Bingley and Oliver "take a turn" around the room and Mr. Darcy openly criticizes them for it. In Austen's works, this scene would be read as mocking the upper class in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way. This author just removes the humour completely in an attempt to half-ass banter/arguing from Oliver (as Elizabeth) and Darcy.
ANOTHER example is when Oliver is disgusted that Mr. Collins would take an interest in him because he is his cousin. While yes, it is obviously very weird to want your cousin, it wasn't in the 19th century! Mr. Collins is undesirable for a number of reasons.
All of these examples go to show that the author didn't take care in translating the original source material to his new plot. There is a disconnect between Oliver's storyline and its relation to Pride & Prejudice.
Just very disappointing. While I did want to know how the story ends, I can't bring myself to read another page of cringey dialogue, mischaracterizations, and a bastardization of Austen's genius. Very intriguing concept of introducing queer narratives into a well-known story and period of time but poor execution.
I will say, if you're not too familiar with the original text, you'll probably find this an enjoyable book, so ignore me. However, if you're a big Austen fan like myself, I'd si this one out. I do want to know what happens to Oliver, but unfortunately can not get past how this adaptation does not do Austen's text any justice.
Many of the characterizations are completely wrong, almost offensive. Mrs. Bennet goes from being frantic, emotional comedic relief (original) to being downright evil (this version). Mr. Wickham is just immediately unlikeable which is ???? Maybe there were reasons for these choices but I couldn't make myself read more to find out.
Also, I found that the author forced his own opinions about 19th century life and society that his characters would not share, and yet they did. It was almost anochronistic but not for any valid artistic reason. I'm not asking for Austenian prose or complete historical accuracy, but you could at least still write a story that could make sense for the 19th century. For example, (I have multiple)
Another example is when Miss Bingley and Oliver "take a turn" around the room and Mr. Darcy openly criticizes them for it. In Austen's works, this scene would be read as mocking the upper class in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way. This author just removes the humour completely in an attempt to half-ass banter/arguing from Oliver (as Elizabeth) and Darcy.
ANOTHER example is when Oliver is disgusted that Mr. Collins would take an interest in him because he is his cousin. While yes, it is obviously very weird to want your cousin, it wasn't in the 19th century! Mr. Collins is undesirable for a number of reasons.
All of these examples go to show that the author didn't take care in translating the original source material to his new plot. There is a disconnect between Oliver's storyline and its relation to Pride & Prejudice.
Just very disappointing. While I did want to know how the story ends, I can't bring myself to read another page of cringey dialogue, mischaracterizations, and a bastardization of Austen's genius. Very intriguing concept of introducing queer narratives into a well-known story and period of time but poor execution.
Masters of Death by Olivie Blake
5.0
I took a chance with this book, not really knowing if I'd like it or not. Suffice it to say, I LOVED it.
Olivie Blake's nonlinear storytelling in this novel may not be for everyone, but I for one love this style of storytelling. I love piecing things together as the novel progresses.
I think the story succeeded in giving us well-rounded characters despite it following so many. Blake knows how to write banter and I found myself cackling throughout the novel. I've seen criticism for the various ways of displaying dialogue, but to me it added to the books charm. It is a very charming book.
Another piece of criticism I've seen, and can understand, is that readers are confused. I don't think that was unintentional. For most of the narrative, "the game" is elusive and the reader is not meant to understand it at first. We know as much about it as Fox (and Vi and Tom) does. Therefore, it makes sense to me to be left confused until the climax. A second read of this book would be really rewarding too. I can't wait to reread it one day.
I've comp'd this book to Good Omens in its wit, commentary on morality, and the satirizarion of supernatural creatures and characters that we're all familiar with.
Overall, fun, humourous, and touching!
Olivie Blake's nonlinear storytelling in this novel may not be for everyone, but I for one love this style of storytelling. I love piecing things together as the novel progresses.
I think the story succeeded in giving us well-rounded characters despite it following so many. Blake knows how to write banter and I found myself cackling throughout the novel. I've seen criticism for the various ways of displaying dialogue, but to me it added to the books charm. It is a very charming book.
Another piece of criticism I've seen, and can understand, is that readers are confused. I don't think that was unintentional. For most of the narrative, "the game" is elusive and the reader is not meant to understand it at first. We know as much about it as Fox (and Vi and Tom) does. Therefore, it makes sense to me to be left confused until the climax. A second read of this book would be really rewarding too. I can't wait to reread it one day.
I've comp'd this book to Good Omens in its wit, commentary on morality, and the satirizarion of supernatural creatures and characters that we're all familiar with.
Overall, fun, humourous, and touching!