Scan barcode
peeled_grape's reviews
143 reviews
What is Not Yours is Not Yours by Helen Oyeyemi
4.0
I couldn't get through this, and when I say "it's not you, it's me" I mean it with this book. The stories are lovely, really. Inexplicably hard to get through, though -- these are drenched in detail, spend a lot of time meandering, and spend a lot of time between characters/side experience. It's a combination of the length of these stories, the fact that it is a short story collection, and the fact that it builds with no real release that made this so hard to get through. I will finish it! But it's almost been a month and I need to move on.
These stories remind me of bedtime stories. They have the same winding and lightly magical qualities. Hard to follow for the distractible (so, me). I originally picked this up because Carmen Maria Machado cited Oyeyemi as an influence, but this reminds me more of Lindsey Drager's stuff (though that's still not a perfect match). Machado probably cites her for the detail. Of the ones I read, "presence" and "books and roses" were my favorites. "presence" started to go toward horror, but it felt too warm and light for that. Again, bedtime-story vibes. All perfectly lovely stories, but nothing insanely striking.
These stories remind me of bedtime stories. They have the same winding and lightly magical qualities. Hard to follow for the distractible (so, me). I originally picked this up because Carmen Maria Machado cited Oyeyemi as an influence, but this reminds me more of Lindsey Drager's stuff (though that's still not a perfect match). Machado probably cites her for the detail. Of the ones I read, "presence" and "books and roses" were my favorites. "presence" started to go toward horror, but it felt too warm and light for that. Again, bedtime-story vibes. All perfectly lovely stories, but nothing insanely striking.
In the Dream House by Carmen Maria Machado
5.0
Ohhhhhh my god. There is no writer whose work I admire more than Carmen Maria Machado's. This is nonfiction, so it's not quite the same as reading her fiction, but her style is all over this, which means I still highly recommend this for people who've read her other work. The form is incredible -- playing with the chapter/section headings in this was so smart. I feel like I should have a lot more to say about this, but the truth is that it is endearingly honest and captivating. It's a narrative that doesn't have all the answers, and is somehow more complete that way. Read this. It is so important.
This book begins: "If you need this book, it is for you." I am not quite the person Machado had in mind while writing this, but it is for me all the same. I simultaneously want this book nowhere near me and want it within arm's reach at all times. When I read, I often mark things I like with flag post-its (mostly to avoid highlighting the text or making pen notes in the margins), and I have never marked so many things in any book, ever. This is a narrative that validates so many others. In other words, I was deeply moved.
This book begins: "If you need this book, it is for you." I am not quite the person Machado had in mind while writing this, but it is for me all the same. I simultaneously want this book nowhere near me and want it within arm's reach at all times. When I read, I often mark things I like with flag post-its (mostly to avoid highlighting the text or making pen notes in the margins), and I have never marked so many things in any book, ever. This is a narrative that validates so many others. In other words, I was deeply moved.
Stephen Florida by Gabe Habash
5.0
This book had me from the first page. It is so bizarre. I deeply admire how bizarre it really is. Habash writes a heavily involved, first-person protagonist that somehow doesn't know things that we do. It is deeply psychological and unflinching and gritty. Stephen Florida is the kind of narrator that doesn't let you look away. If I have one criticism, it is that Habash has a loose grip on how to build up to something (and that goes for more than just the ending). For my own satisfaction, I cannot read the ending as purely literal. I have several ideas on how to read it that all make me feel like some wild conspiracy theorist with the red strings and questionable pieces of evidence (see: that one gif from It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia). I can dismiss this, though, because I didn't feel that this book needed to lead to anything. I was perfectly happy to meander in Stephen's thoughts and memories for the entirety of this book, and I selfishly wish it were longer.
Magic for Beginners by Kelly Link
5.0
Kelly Link isn't interested in stories that have "a point" or that tie up all the loose ends -- you will be left in the dark. That is the point. (Is this sometimes hard for me to accept as a reader? Maybe. I struggled a little with this. I understand how it could get frustrating. This is a me problem, though, not a problem with the writing.) There is a line in "Lull" that I think describes her style: "There shouldn't be a moral although we should be able to think back later and have some sort of revelation."
Magic is a good way to describe these stories. The magic in them lies in their complexity; there is just so much to think about, so many ways to read the same story, so much happening in each line. I have never read something more clever in my entire life, and I'm frustrated because I can't articulate why. "Lull," "Some Zombie Contingency Plans," and "Magic for Beginners" round out my top three. (Can we talk about "Lull" for a second? Holy shit, y'all.) I liked "The Cannon," though I really had no idea what that was about at all -- the ending was satisfying, and I couldn't even tell you why. (In case you haven't gotten it yet: Link is the smartest writer I have ever read from, and I really could not tell you why I know this; I just know it. I will figure it out, one day.)
My one criticism of Link's writing is that it makes some subjects "cute" that maybe should not be. Take "The Faery Handbag," for example -- I read this as a literalization of emotional baggage and trauma that's impossible to articulate. It was deeply clever, and the easiest for me to get a grip on, so my reading experience was far more pleasant with this than other stories. Still, it made the darker aspects of this just feel cute. Rhetorically, I'm not sure about that. The same goes for "Stone Animals": look at the bunnies! It just felt a little like skirting around the hard things.
Anyway, TL;DR: You're going to be confused, and you're going to like it.
Magic is a good way to describe these stories. The magic in them lies in their complexity; there is just so much to think about, so many ways to read the same story, so much happening in each line. I have never read something more clever in my entire life, and I'm frustrated because I can't articulate why. "Lull," "Some Zombie Contingency Plans," and "Magic for Beginners" round out my top three. (Can we talk about "Lull" for a second? Holy shit, y'all.) I liked "The Cannon," though I really had no idea what that was about at all -- the ending was satisfying, and I couldn't even tell you why. (In case you haven't gotten it yet: Link is the smartest writer I have ever read from, and I really could not tell you why I know this; I just know it. I will figure it out, one day.)
My one criticism of Link's writing is that it makes some subjects "cute" that maybe should not be. Take "The Faery Handbag," for example -- I read this as a literalization of emotional baggage and trauma that's impossible to articulate. It was deeply clever, and the easiest for me to get a grip on, so my reading experience was far more pleasant with this than other stories. Still, it made the darker aspects of this just feel cute. Rhetorically, I'm not sure about that. The same goes for "Stone Animals": look at the bunnies! It just felt a little like skirting around the hard things.
Anyway, TL;DR: You're going to be confused, and you're going to like it.
Lincoln in the Bardo by George Saunders
5.0
Do you ever finish a book and just think "ah, right, I really do love reading"? It's been awhile since I became so involved in a book that, when I put it down, was actually disoriented. Where am I, again?
So, that is to say: This is beautiful. The blurb on the back describes the book as "kaleidoscopic," which is spot-on. I love the pairing of blurring the lines between fiction-nonfiction and life-death. Every scene in this book that speculates what comes after death is fictional, while all exposition of the living is nonfictional -- I loved that. Big questions. No answers, which is great. It's an exploration of what it means to lose and grieve and let go. I love this form. I love the unfinished sentences (SO much) and all of Willie's sections and the perfect adaption to language. I love this weird mixing of real and fiction. Yeah, it's stunning.
Also: Willie's last section in the book?? Oh?? My god?? I'm not the kind of person who cries while reading/watching movies, but I had to set the book down and take a second. It is devastatingly beautiful. God. Wow. It is the contrast between the party happening (and probably tormenting him) during his death and then, later, him talking about all the things he gets to do at said party after he's dead. It got me and is still getting to me and I will be thinking about this section for a very long time. It's the letting go and the acceptance of the whole terrible thing -- I find it hard to do much more than open and close my mouth like some kind of awed fish. God. It makes me wish I had friends who read this stuff. You will want to talk about this with someone, I think.
So, that is to say: This is beautiful. The blurb on the back describes the book as "kaleidoscopic," which is spot-on. I love the pairing of blurring the lines between fiction-nonfiction and life-death. Every scene in this book that speculates what comes after death is fictional, while all exposition of the living is nonfictional -- I loved that. Big questions. No answers, which is great. It's an exploration of what it means to lose and grieve and let go. I love this form. I love the unfinished sentences (SO much) and all of Willie's sections and the perfect adaption to language. I love this weird mixing of real and fiction. Yeah, it's stunning.
Get in Trouble by Kelly Link
4.0
Kelly Link's writing reads like an impressionist painting. There's a lot of detail, and it's obviously very skillfully done, but you can't expect it to be clear. It's more about the impression it leaves. It is sometimes frustrating! Because it doesn't entirely make sense to me! But Link is very good. There is a great deal of confidence in her writing. She writes something weird/bizarre/magical, and while you stop to think about why it's there, it's like she hasn't even noticed that the weird/bizarre/magical isn't a part of reality. She isn't questioning any part of her style at all.
"Two Houses" is my favorite here, but "Light" is the best written. Link is at her best telling ghost stories. She is at her best when she's playing with the shape of her stories. "Valley of the Girls" was too much too fast for me. It needed more space; it felt crammed. The first story in the collection is "The Summer People," and it gets better the longer I think about it. (Maybe I should stop writing these reviews immediately after finishing the last story.) I really do like thinking of this stories as abstract with emotional truths. It's, like, the only way I can think about these without getting super frustrated, and then I actually enjoy and appreciate the writing. I just wish someone had told me that before I started reading Link's stuff.
My hot take is that "Magic for Beginners" is the better collection. I know, I know.
I feel like most of this review was negative. Link is very talented! And very good! Most of the flaws I am coming up with here are in my reading skills and not her writing.
"Two Houses" is my favorite here, but "Light" is the best written. Link is at her best telling ghost stories. She is at her best when she's playing with the shape of her stories. "Valley of the Girls" was too much too fast for me. It needed more space; it felt crammed. The first story in the collection is "The Summer People," and it gets better the longer I think about it. (Maybe I should stop writing these reviews immediately after finishing the last story.) I really do like thinking of this stories as abstract with emotional truths. It's, like, the only way I can think about these without getting super frustrated, and then I actually enjoy and appreciate the writing. I just wish someone had told me that before I started reading Link's stuff.
My hot take is that "Magic for Beginners" is the better collection. I know, I know.
I feel like most of this review was negative. Link is very talented! And very good! Most of the flaws I am coming up with here are in my reading skills and not her writing.
Swamplandia! by Karen Russell
3.0
Hmm. Hmmm...
I've never read a book more rooted in history and place. It's a blend of historical fiction/horror with a shit ton of geographic detail. Sometimes this was lazy. Sometimes I felt like Kiwi only existed as an excuse to pack in historical detail(and to rescue Ossie, at the end) , and that felt kind of lazy. Karen Russell is very good at descriptions. She is incredible at accurately describing a feeling, a noise, a motion, etc. in a handful of words.
The beginning and middle of this book are very long -- I wouldn't say dragged out, but long. Then so much happens in the last 50 pages. Every sentence introduces some big leap. This didn't feel purposeful enough to me.
As far as the ending goes: This book loses its magic quickly. That's not saying it gets bad quickly, but it just loses every supernatural, absurd or otherwise unreal element to it. It feels like being dragged to the surface all at once, an "oh haha, that was all silly" feeling. You know when you leave the movie theater and it's bright in the hallway and it sinks in, again, that there's a real world out there? Like that. It was abrupt. I like books that let you feel the gravity of this situation, and this did that! But the last 100 pages did NOT match the first 300. (Think: Kelly Link for 300 pages, George Saunders for the last 100.) This reminded me of "Stephen Florida" in terms of bizarre, technically-realistic-but-so-weird-it's-not details, but I hoped it would do the same kind of unanswerable ending, where you don't know what happens, really, and there's a lot to speculate on. I wasn't satisfied with the ending.
Also, this was a very small portion of the book but it is something that gets me incredibly angry when it is done wrong: Do! Not! Write! About! Journalists! If! You! Clearly! Know! Nothing! About! Journalism! I think these parts were supposed to be exaggerated, but really, what happened is that Russell bloated the stereotype of a journalist, and it was lazy. It's not funny. It's not cute. It's not creative. Just move on.
I've never read a book more rooted in history and place. It's a blend of historical fiction/horror with a shit ton of geographic detail. Sometimes this was lazy. Sometimes I felt like Kiwi only existed as an excuse to pack in historical detail
The beginning and middle of this book are very long -- I wouldn't say dragged out, but long. Then so much happens in the last 50 pages. Every sentence introduces some big leap. This didn't feel purposeful enough to me.
As far as the ending goes:
Also, this was a very small portion of the book but it is something that gets me incredibly angry when it is done wrong: Do! Not! Write! About! Journalists! If! You! Clearly! Know! Nothing! About! Journalism! I think these parts were supposed to be exaggerated, but really, what happened is that Russell bloated the stereotype of a journalist, and it was lazy. It's not funny. It's not cute. It's not creative. Just move on.
Homesick for Another World by Ottessa Moshfegh
2.0
All of the stories here were good without being great. They're all very alive, but very forgettable. I found that "A Better Place" was the only one I found moving in some way -- the rest just kind of exist, and that's okay, but not mind-blowing. Every person in these stories is very disturbed, for one reason or another. It's a collection about bad people knowingly doing crappy things to other people, who are sometimes also crappy/weird/disturbing/disgusting. Moshfegh's voice is electric, but there was something about these stories that was bored with itself, and it got kind of repetitive. TL;DR: I found this really easy to read, and the stories are all good, but nothing caught my attention in particular.
Stop Kiss by Diana Son
2.0
A very fast read. It was okay, I guess. It feels cliché. It's a romance story. There are two people. They fall in love. Something happens that gets in the way of their love.
I hate that it's set "Now." Son doesn't set a year, it's just set as "Now." First of all: Why? If you're not straight, then it just makes it feel like stuff like what happened to Sara will never not happen because it will always take place now and will never change. Is this for straight people, then, to get them to Do Something to stop hate crimes/homophobia/etc.? I hate that most literature I've seen around the LGBTQ+ community is centered on homophobia, or that most of its message is directed at straight people. Oh, look, more gay people getting beat up. How edgy. How original. What I would like is happy homosexual couples, or, at least, ones that exist without being a big deal to the other characters -- the kind of relationship that just exists, and it's normal, and that's it, the normalcy given to heterosexual relationships. Yeah, homophobia is real, and this stuff happens, but this exists in so many stories that I literally never want to see it again. (It's also worth noting that every time I've seen this shit, it comes from straight writers. Can y'all stop.) I know this was written in 2000, but if you want this to take place in the perpetual Now, then it gets my criticism of Now.
I hate that it's set "Now." Son doesn't set a year, it's just set as "Now." First of all: Why? If you're not straight, then it just makes it feel like stuff like what happened to Sara will never not happen because it will always take place now and will never change. Is this for straight people, then, to get them to Do Something to stop hate crimes/homophobia/etc.? I hate that most literature I've seen around the LGBTQ+ community is centered on homophobia, or that most of its message is directed at straight people. Oh, look, more gay people getting beat up. How edgy. How original. What I would like is happy homosexual couples, or, at least, ones that exist without being a big deal to the other characters -- the kind of relationship that just exists, and it's normal, and that's it, the normalcy given to heterosexual relationships. Yeah, homophobia is real, and this stuff happens, but this exists in so many stories that I literally never want to see it again. (It's also worth noting that every time I've seen this shit, it comes from straight writers. Can y'all stop.) I know this was written in 2000, but if you want this to take place in the perpetual Now, then it gets my criticism of Now.
The Kingdom of This World by Alejo Carpentier
1.0
I know I'm not a very focused person, and I have the attention span of a goldfish, but sometimes I just didn't really know what was happening. There were a lot of passive sentences so I couldn't really tell who was doing what, the way actions were described weren't super clear, and there are a ton of jumps between people and time (with third person narration, which always trips me up). I spent a lot of time confused. (I wonder how much of it was translation?)
That being said: this is very well done. It's centered around the Haitian Revolution and leaves out the actual revolution, which, first of all, is a power move. It actually leaves out most big historical figures, which places the emphasis on voudou/voodoo and the characters that Carpentier thought were more intriguing. The form lends itself to the definition of the "marvelous real" very well. If you're into magical realism, read the intro -- I thought it was interesting.
An update, 09/12/20: I originally wrote the review above three days ago and rated it three stars, but the longer I sit on this, the less I like it. There are things that Carpentier did that I really hate. The protagonist is canonically a rapist, but this is treated so casually. Was I supposed to empathize with him? Was I supposed to gloss over that fact like the narrative did? Because, if so, that's disgusting. He sees victory, and to mark that victory, he has to rape someone because "men can't control their appetites" or "it's been too long" or whatever. This is a fictional character! Carpentier really did not have to make this happen, or to make it happen so casually! The only prominent female character in the entire book is depicted in the stereotypical "man writing a woman" nonsense. Her body is the only one described (especially in this much detail!), and of course, it's focusing on the parts men can derive pleasure from. She's one of those "temptress" characters. God. I know that this book is supposed to be the origins of magical realism, and I know that it's one of the few fictional works on the Haitian Revolution, but the blatant sexism in this and the way it's been ignored is infuriating. TL;DR: Women only exist in this novel as sex objects, and this narrative disgusts me more the more time I sit with it.
That being said: this is very well done. It's centered around the Haitian Revolution and leaves out the actual revolution, which, first of all, is a power move. It actually leaves out most big historical figures, which places the emphasis on voudou/voodoo and the characters that Carpentier thought were more intriguing. The form lends itself to the definition of the "marvelous real" very well. If you're into magical realism, read the intro -- I thought it was interesting.
An update, 09/12/20: I originally wrote the review above three days ago and rated it three stars, but the longer I sit on this, the less I like it. There are things that Carpentier did that I really hate. The protagonist is canonically a rapist, but this is treated so casually. Was I supposed to empathize with him? Was I supposed to gloss over that fact like the narrative did? Because, if so, that's disgusting. He sees victory, and to mark that victory, he has to rape someone because "men can't control their appetites" or "it's been too long" or whatever. This is a fictional character! Carpentier really did not have to make this happen, or to make it happen so casually! The only prominent female character in the entire book is depicted in the stereotypical "man writing a woman" nonsense. Her body is the only one described (especially in this much detail!), and of course, it's focusing on the parts men can derive pleasure from. She's one of those "temptress" characters. God. I know that this book is supposed to be the origins of magical realism, and I know that it's one of the few fictional works on the Haitian Revolution, but the blatant sexism in this and the way it's been ignored is infuriating. TL;DR: Women only exist in this novel as sex objects, and this narrative disgusts me more the more time I sit with it.