Scan barcode
root's reviews
46 reviews
Our Wives Under The Sea by Julia Armfield
emotional
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
Decently enjoyable! Unfortunately quite a lot of words for something that could be much shorter and still deliver the same impact and message. I'll be curious to see how the author evolves from here, it is a good start.
Yellowface by R.F. Kuang
dark
informative
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Yellowface is an artfully written novel that reminds me why I enjoy reading in the first place. It is delicious and repulsive at once.
There are layers to the author's messages within that make this work a joy to dissect. There are the overarching themes of what stories should be told and by who, and, for lack of a better term, the pathology of white women and victimhood. Beyond that, it is a critique of western individualism and its effects on the self and others, concise commentary on issues within publishing and literature as a whole, on assimilation and the struggle of cultural disconnect amongst diaspora, on labor, on class, on performative justice in online circles and broader: how social media affects our behaviors, and surprisingly manages to touch on historical aspects without leaving the plot itself. And Kuang does all of this without patronizing and without condescending: it is plaintext, expected for the audience to excavate its meaning themselves without spoon-feeding.
It is a wonderfully crafted story: every word has a purpose, every detail strategically placed just so. It is a story about who should tell stories and why the "who" is important from the narrative of the villain herself, as we watch her twist and change her own story. The ending could not have been any other ending--it is a foregone conclusion, but only retrospectively. The narrative itself and how it was crafted in a way that relies on and trusts the reader to understand makes me indefinitely curious how white women would perceive this story. Does it sound normal to them? Is the horror removed? Or is the horror in recognizing the similarities? Are they willing to recognize themselves, their friends, their family? Is there a point where they shift from believing things are okay to drawing the line--and what point is that? I wonder if that was part of Kuang's thought process; I wouldn't be surprised!
I haven't actively wanted to write a book review in a very long time. I mostly do it in order to keep track of my own thoughts in the future when I am looking back at what I've read. This one I wanted to write.
My one and only critique of this book is not even specific to this book or to its author but to recent literature in general: I worry that modern literature's references to current technology--specifically company and brand names rather than technology type--will make it difficult at best to understand years from now. This book was released this year and Twitter has already been renamed to X, for example. But this only matters to the book's ability to be timeless, and certainly doesn't affect its relevance in the here and now where it is clearly intended to be perceived.
There are layers to the author's messages within that make this work a joy to dissect. There are the overarching themes of what stories should be told and by who, and, for lack of a better term, the pathology of white women and victimhood. Beyond that, it is a critique of western individualism and its effects on the self and others, concise commentary on issues within publishing and literature as a whole, on assimilation and the struggle of cultural disconnect amongst diaspora, on labor, on class, on performative justice in online circles and broader: how social media affects our behaviors, and surprisingly manages to touch on historical aspects without leaving the plot itself. And Kuang does all of this without patronizing and without condescending: it is plaintext, expected for the audience to excavate its meaning themselves without spoon-feeding.
It is a wonderfully crafted story: every word has a purpose, every detail strategically placed just so. It is a story about who should tell stories and why the "who" is important from the narrative of the villain herself, as we watch her twist and change her own story. The ending could not have been any other ending--it is a foregone conclusion, but only retrospectively. The narrative itself and how it was crafted in a way that relies on and trusts the reader to understand makes me indefinitely curious how white women would perceive this story. Does it sound normal to them? Is the horror removed? Or is the horror in recognizing the similarities? Are they willing to recognize themselves, their friends, their family? Is there a point where they shift from believing things are okay to drawing the line--and what point is that? I wonder if that was part of Kuang's thought process; I wouldn't be surprised!
I haven't actively wanted to write a book review in a very long time. I mostly do it in order to keep track of my own thoughts in the future when I am looking back at what I've read. This one I wanted to write.
My one and only critique of this book is not even specific to this book or to its author but to recent literature in general: I worry that modern literature's references to current technology--specifically company and brand names rather than technology type--will make it difficult at best to understand years from now. This book was released this year and Twitter has already been renamed to X, for example. But this only matters to the book's ability to be timeless, and certainly doesn't affect its relevance in the here and now where it is clearly intended to be perceived.
The Stolen Hours by Allen Eskens
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
1.0
Reading this was akin to watching Law & Order or Criminal Minds in the sense of it being a bit cheesy and predictable, with a lot of jargon and a fixation on very clever and methodical criminals.
The author does very little showing, it is entirely telling. You are told that this character went to xyz university and told that they are feeling xyz emotion, rather than any sort of acquisition of character details. There are occasional, sudden flashbacks to the past to explain characters' current behaviors. The characters themselves are very flat and two-dimensional. As an example, the main character's entire personality is that she is a lawyer with trauma--the most personal thing you learn about her that has nothing to do with her trauma or her job in 300+ pages is that she likes king crabs in her dinner.
The author does very little showing, it is entirely telling. You are told that this character went to xyz university and told that they are feeling xyz emotion, rather than any sort of acquisition of character details. There are occasional, sudden flashbacks to the past to explain characters' current behaviors. The characters themselves are very flat and two-dimensional. As an example, the main character's entire personality is that she is a lawyer with trauma--the most personal thing you learn about her that has nothing to do with her trauma or her job in 300+ pages is that she likes king crabs in her dinner.
The Huntress by Kate Quinn
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
I woke up at three in the morning itching to write this review. So it can be said without a doubt that I thoroughly enjoyed myself. Like most books I love, though, I want to tear it apart.
First, the positive: The characters are so complex and real, so fully fleshed out that you could reach out pinch them. I appreciate that the story is steeped in grey morality--the characters talk about what is right and what is wrong but ultimately their actions are simply their actions. They are allowed the chance to want things, to do things, that are just a different path to go down. The horrors of war are not flinched from but neither are they gratuitous and voyeuristic in showcasing pain. The depiction of PTSD is really good here too, the different flavors and presentations between characters. I love this book, I love the characters, I will more than likely read it again.
Now for me to tear into it. I will disclaimer this by saying I generally avoid historical fiction surrounding the Holocaust, because it is often just military/government propaganda alongside a healthy dose of trauma and genocide as shock value. So my criticisms of this are primarily political and it is more of a widespread issue that I was just disappointed to see in this book. This book is effectively, whether accidentally or not, feeding into American propaganda and the red scare.
First, and most glaringly, the biggest crime that American society in this commits is the crime of trusting refugees. There's a little talk in the book about how you shouldn't suspect every refugee for simply being where they're from, but the message sort of falls flatwhen every American refugee you encounter is an evil Nazi in disguise. I also don't believe that Ian Graham would overlook things like the US government refusing to get involved in the world war until it threatened them, the US government turning away Jewish refugees and sending them back to Germany to their deaths, the US government knowingly sponsoring Nazi scientists, etc. I think he would have raised hell and talked about it for a great portion of the book. The only other negative thing that American society is criticized for is that they want to forget the war happened, which is not really a criticism of America if it's shown in the book that every other country is also doing this.
There is also that it is simply so American that it is a little humorous. You get a very thorough rundown of everything wrong with the Russian government, a lengthy explanation of how things work in Russia but exactly nothing on the US government because of course you know. This prevailing notion that the Americans are these good ol' boys, that they fought the war to fight evil, that they are largely sympathetic to Jewish people, that Americans thought at all kindly of refugees. This very All American Girl who is so soft and sweet that even after finding out what the huntress did, she is still sympathetic to her. This All American Boy whose biggest issue is following what his parents set for him.
A little deeper here, but Nina is sympathized with because she's not a communist.The women in her regiment, her sisters, are depicted as either not entirely buying into their government and willing to go against it, or as sheep who believe in the vision but not aware of the atrocities. You are expected to dislike Nina's old roommate for being a hardcore communist. Nina getting attacked is bad because they assumed she was a communist because she's Russian--would it still have been bad if she was a commie? Would her sestras be good people if they believed in communism? Then Nina declaring capitalism as her government preference over communism because of burgers and the lack of queues. I think it's forgotten that the US has its black vans too, lest we forget the open access documents for biowarfare unleashed on American citizens, assassinations of journalists and politicians, so on. I think that in denouncing gulags it is forgotten that American prisoners work for cents and that prisons have a contract with the government on how many prisoners per year they are entitled to. The human rights violations occurring in them. It just strikes me as very red scare heavy to have no commentary on American issues but a detailed rundown of everything bad about Russia. It seems antithetical to the commentary in the book that Americans are more worried about communism than Nazis. That, and I think sometimes faith and loyalty, belief in a government system that wants to hurt you, is a lot more terrifying than being against it from the start. I think Nina believing in Stalin's vision would have made for something more heartbreaking, to realize that your government doesn't care about you and sees you as fodder, to realize innocence doesn't matter, to cope with abandoning your country that you believed in, etc. It's odd for a grey morality book to draw its line at sympathizing with fictional communists.
<Spoiler>As an aside I think there was a missed opportunity to discuss what the actual difference is in your fellow country men raping you for daring to be a woman pilot vs getting captured and raped by the opposing side. A lot of the gender politics in this were kind of flat, just men who hate women inexplicably (no duty to family or women being less physically capable or any other of those excuses) and women going "look see I can be in the military too." Nothing really deeper to it...so much of Nina's dialogue is "haha I bet you thought I couldn't do it cause I'm a girl" and people either responding "no no I am not a misogynist" or "yes I am a raging misogynist" repeatedly. Compared to the rest of the complex issues discussed in the book it just is...flat.
First, the positive: The characters are so complex and real, so fully fleshed out that you could reach out pinch them. I appreciate that the story is steeped in grey morality--the characters talk about what is right and what is wrong but ultimately their actions are simply their actions. They are allowed the chance to want things, to do things, that are just a different path to go down. The horrors of war are not flinched from but neither are they gratuitous and voyeuristic in showcasing pain. The depiction of PTSD is really good here too, the different flavors and presentations between characters. I love this book, I love the characters, I will more than likely read it again.
Now for me to tear into it. I will disclaimer this by saying I generally avoid historical fiction surrounding the Holocaust, because it is often just military/government propaganda alongside a healthy dose of trauma and genocide as shock value. So my criticisms of this are primarily political and it is more of a widespread issue that I was just disappointed to see in this book. This book is effectively, whether accidentally or not, feeding into American propaganda and the red scare.
First, and most glaringly, the biggest crime that American society in this commits is the crime of trusting refugees. There's a little talk in the book about how you shouldn't suspect every refugee for simply being where they're from, but the message sort of falls flat
There is also that it is simply so American that it is a little humorous. You get a very thorough rundown of everything wrong with the Russian government, a lengthy explanation of how things work in Russia but exactly nothing on the US government because of course you know. This prevailing notion that the Americans are these good ol' boys, that they fought the war to fight evil, that they are largely sympathetic to Jewish people, that Americans thought at all kindly of refugees. This very All American Girl who is so soft and sweet that even after finding out what the huntress did, she is still sympathetic to her. This All American Boy whose biggest issue is following what his parents set for him.
A little deeper here, but Nina is sympathized with because she's not a communist.
<Spoiler>As an aside I think there was a missed opportunity to discuss what the actual difference is in your fellow country men raping you for daring to be a woman pilot vs getting captured and raped by the opposing side. A lot of the gender politics in this were kind of flat, just men who hate women inexplicably (no duty to family or women being less physically capable or any other of those excuses) and women going "look see I can be in the military too." Nothing really deeper to it...so much of Nina's dialogue is "haha I bet you thought I couldn't do it cause I'm a girl" and people either responding "no no I am not a misogynist" or "yes I am a raging misogynist" repeatedly. Compared to the rest of the complex issues discussed in the book it just is...flat.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child abuse and Sexual harassment
Dark Matter by Blake Crouch
Did not finish book. Stopped at 37%.
Did not finish book. Stopped at 37%.
This was awful. Singlehandedly got me to stop reading for a couple months and is also the first book I've DNF'd in years. I contemplated powering through it, but it had me dreading reading so much that I decided to finally put it down.
The pacing, the narration, the dialogue, the very weird racial comments...just truly bad. There are some sections of it that read like the author describing the wikiHow article for things like IV injections or reading about how HIPAA works but without ever having actually checked how hospitals talk about HIPAA to patients. I read a few excerpts out loud to a friend recently as a joke.
It also doesn't make any sense if you know anything about how research works, how science is generally conducted, how doctors work, etc...definitely not for anyone with laboratory experience, has been to the doctor for anything more serious than a cold at least once, ridden a taxi before, or any other life experiences that will just jar you right out of the story.
The pacing, the narration, the dialogue, the very weird racial comments...just truly bad. There are some sections of it that read like the author describing the wikiHow article for things like IV injections or reading about how HIPAA works but without ever having actually checked how hospitals talk about HIPAA to patients. I read a few excerpts out loud to a friend recently as a joke.
It also doesn't make any sense if you know anything about how research works, how science is generally conducted, how doctors work, etc...definitely not for anyone with laboratory experience, has been to the doctor for anything more serious than a cold at least once, ridden a taxi before, or any other life experiences that will just jar you right out of the story.