3.5 -- this is one of the most intensely depressing books I've ever read; I've never EVER encountered a more toxic relationships rendered more toxicly3.5 -- this is one of the most intensely depressing books I've ever read; I've never EVER encountered a more toxic relationships rendered more toxicly. y i k e s. An extremely effective read with excellent prose and hazy vibes, but be warned it will make you ILL...more
Oh this was so good. Catalina is the exact kind of protagonist I love -- totally awful but unbelievably sympathetic -- and Villavicencio is a master oOh this was so good. Catalina is the exact kind of protagonist I love -- totally awful but unbelievably sympathetic -- and Villavicencio is a master of 'show don't tell', even with first-person narration. So so good....more
I've said before that Steve Erickson knows a secret truth about America, about the 20th century, about human nature.
What that secret is becomes glarinI've said before that Steve Erickson knows a secret truth about America, about the 20th century, about human nature.
What that secret is becomes glaringly, desperately apparent in these sociopolitical aphorisms masquerading as journal entries. It's not a secret most of us want to know, but it's a secret we need to face. It's not that Erickson predicted where America would be today, in February 2025, exactly -- but he did, and the truth he's identified is simply that we are our own mirrors.
This isn't hopeful in the sense that it will leave you inspired and believing democracy has a snowball's chance of making it through the next decade -- but I, at least, have never felt as seen as when I read Erickson, and this was no exception. Read it, to have some threads of Trump's first term untangled, and to understand the vitriol we need to feel right now.
Buck up, buttercups. It's gonna be a hell of a 21st century....more
2.5 -- as it says on the back, this is a clumsy attempt at capturing the breadth of Cloud Atlas and the emotional import of Station Eleven. It does ne2.5 -- as it says on the back, this is a clumsy attempt at capturing the breadth of Cloud Atlas and the emotional import of Station Eleven. It does neither, and instead reads like the same voice & story a dozen times over -- slightly sarcastic, extremely Xennial (not in a good way), and with a lot of parental issues. The characters are connected in the way the characters on Once Upon a Time were connected -- kinda incestuous, overly convenient, and ultimately pointless.
Even setting aside the wild bad-sci-fi falling-apart of the end (I continue to not love when sci-fi tropes are presented as original in non-genre pieces) -- though I didn't hate reading it and a few bits were half-decent, overall this fails as both an experiment and a story. That's particularly too bad because of how prescient it is -- as we head into a lot of the same sadnesses that the world of How High faces, over decades & centuries --- one of our most potent weapons of hope is narratives, stories. I was hoping for some of that, in this. Unfortunately, what hope there is is hollow, backgrounded, and ultimately superseded by the last omnipotent being who has a story to tell us. Not interested, Nagamatsu. Sorry....more
I'm actually physically angry about how boring and convoluted this was. I'm actually physically angry about how boring and convoluted this was. ...more
Nahhhh. You don't need to read this. You don't need to read 320 pages of name-dropping, personal anecdotes that obscure any actual information, poorlyNahhhh. You don't need to read this. You don't need to read 320 pages of name-dropping, personal anecdotes that obscure any actual information, poorly-logicked arguments (when you can find them; when they aren't mired down in a zillion irrelevant details), and algorithmic apologism ("one day AI will recommend all the perfect music you could ever desire!") -- all to hear a point basically made in 1978.
Yes -- we all bring something personal to our encounters with art. Yes -- that can have physical or even medicinal effects. There's so much more going on, and this book does nothing to uncover any of it. If you want to read about Levitin knowing what Joni Mitchell's living room looks like, or what graduate students he clearly had crushes on, or -- I'll be generous -- some vaguely-related social science studies -- for sure, read this. Otherwise, just know that music is deeply and productively important to our species, and we still don't totally understand why. That's okay. Just keep singing, playing, and listening -- and try Bridge of Waves if you want to explore it with more grace, intelligence, passion, and depth....more
Ummmm. I don't know if I've ever been so confused about how to rate a book before. So -- let's process it together, shall we.
(disclaimer: i am acting Ummmm. I don't know if I've ever been so confused about how to rate a book before. So -- let's process it together, shall we.
(disclaimer: i am acting as my own therapist below as i do not presently have an active therapist, carry on)
Therapist: What's your first impression?
Jill: This is just...it's just Fifty Shades of Grey, right?! Like I'm not crazy, right??? It's fan fiction of Fifty Shades of Grey but with a self-insert. Right????
Therapist: I don't know, is it?
Jill: It is. Like it absolutely is. You've got a young everywoman writer who, incomprehensibly, attracts the obsessive and devoted adoration of a rich, handsome, cultural, well-connected man who sweeps her up and away into a BDSM relationship. I don't buy anything they have going on -- I was waiting for the other shoe to drop the entire time, but it didn't, so...it's all Mary Sue energy. It's Fifty Shades.
Therapist: Why were you expecting the other shoe to drop?
Jill: I mean, wouldn't you? There's no real conflict, except the day-to-day stuff that we all experience in real life -- and yes, I know you're going to quote my Our Tragic Universe review at me so I'll save you the trouble -- sure, there's value to a plotless plot, but in a romance novel you'd expect..something to go awry.
Therapist: I don't know if many of the other reviews classify this as a romance novel.
Jill: Well the Toronto library classified it as "erotic fiction." But yeah, I see your point. It's got more going on than your standard romance novel -- not that there's anything at all wrong with a romance novel, but it's not even attempting to be escapist, is it?
Therapist stares silently.
Jill: No. And really, Songsiridej hangs a bit of a lantern on that in the end anyway, doesn't she, with the short story Rabbit publishes and the realization she has about it by the end? The whole thing is a twist -- you think that Rabbit is being controlled by the choreographer, because that's what appearances would suggest -- but really, it's been someone else all along.
Therapist: Go on.
Jill: It's a book about friendship and growing into your thirties, more than it's about romance or love. Like -- all love stories are convenient, from the outside. Sometimes from the inside. When you think you've found your fate, everything loops around it as if it was always going to lead that direction. But the people around you who aren't part of it -- of course it makes sense that they wouldn't understand, and would project their own images onto what they're seeing you do. Just like Annie does.
Therapist: And Annie feels left behind, too.
Jill: Yeah. And I get that. I've felt that. Many times.
Therapist: So there's more going on here, perhaps.
Jill: Begrudgingly, I would say yes. There are a lot of questions about control -- the Rabbit metaphor is key, I think, because rabbits are wild, like the choreographer says (which I loved, incidentally), but they also are notorious for getting trapped. And I think this book is asking a few questions about that -- what it means to be trapped. Why we might let ourselves become trapped, willingly and happily. Why being trapped is sometimes safe and sometimes limiting, and why what we think from the outside might be limiting is actually safe, and why what we think is safe is actually limiting. And, of course, how we can keep our own personal power through it all.
Therapist: Heavy.
Jill: It's totally heavy. But the part that's heavy is the friendship scenes -- the pressure of labels and community that we hold to and find in our 20s. Annie's desperation to keep Rabbit contained in her queer label, instead of allowing her to follow her own life and path -- I mean, the story is really about Annie and Rabbit, in the end, isn't it?
Therapist: Well. I mean. Do we need to go into the older guy/younger girl thing here for you Jill or uh --
Jill: NO I THINK WE'RE GOOD THIS IS PUBLIC INTERNET, MAN, ITS FINE, DONT WORRY ABOUT IT
Therapist coughs.
Jill: Okay well fine, I have my own personal stuff around this particular narrative and trope that I bring every time I read a book like this -- I'm looking for specific things and constantly comparing, and I always want more. But the truth is -- what I like about that dynamic is captured here. Perfectly. It's a conversation about power, about love, and about individuality and strength. It's just approached from a variety of angles.
Therapist: So?
Jill: So.
So.
...this book is actually pretty great. Yeah, it's Fifty Shades reduxed. But fanfiction, I'd be first to say, is sometimes the best way to explore a new facet of something old, complex, and wrought. We all wrestle with what controls us, we all want to surrender, and we all change. The story is the same and always so different. Process as you will....more
As I just said -- reduxing the Persephone myth is a tall order, and this novel unfortunately doesn't succeed in doing it. The ways this book fUghhhhh.
As I just said -- reduxing the Persephone myth is a tall order, and this novel unfortunately doesn't succeed in doing it. The ways this book fails, though, are frustrating on so many levels, partially because there are so many issues with it -- but I shall pick my top 3 and give you a fun annoyed listicle to end the year, hip hip hooray
1. The writing.
2. The writing.
3. The writing.
lol
Okay but seriously...
1. The writing, re: narrative, is incoherent. We spend way too much time getting to the point, with lengthy descriptions of boring moments, and then the actual action and beats of interest barely get a few pages. Everything is told, not shown, which is extremely grating to read, and that's compounded by the very basic, "I did this followed by this" style of first-person narration. That doesn't HAVE to be true (first-person narration can be extremely effective!) -- but in this case, this all combines to create a book that tells you what to think instead of letting you engage with it -- and does so with extremely weird pacing, zero suspense (and therefore any given event has very little narrative import), little to no reasoning behind actions and decisions (more on that in #2), and actual writing that's easily skimmable and forgettable. I don't understand why anything mattered more than anything else, and that flattening of the narrative made it impossible to really care about anything -- or anyone -- in it. Which leads me to...
2. The writing, re: character development, is a mess. The best example of this is Persephone "falling in love" with Hades -- excuse me, what and where?! You can't argue those snap character changes are just the purview of Greek mythology and Lynn is mimicking it, because the same chapters fiercely underline Peresephone's slow character change into a ruling queen -- excuse me, what and WHERE?!!! She's the same bratty annoying character she's always been, except she sort of tells people what to do and says to Hades that she doesn't hate him. How is this growth? How is this love? It's neither, and it's because the writing is so shallow and inexpertly-executed -- there are no footholds to take you on the journey with her. She just says she loves him and calls it a day. Set aside Demeter and Hades, both of whom are equally one-note and absolutely defined by their obsession with Persephone -- there's just nothing interesting in this book, at all, that breathes new life into everything this incredible myth has to offer. As usual (well, as Lore Olympus-usual lol) -- Demeter is a whiny mom, Hades is a lovesick puppy, and Peresephone is a selfish brat. Hooray! We knew that going in! Who cares!
3. The writing, re: reduxing the myth, is confounding. Initially, I thought this was going to be kind of a cool retelling in modern language, but with no real edits, to the Persephone myth. 'Fine,' I says to myself I says, 'kinda boring, but maybe there will be some interesting interpretations to hang my hat on.' But then halfway through, Persephone falls inexplicably in love with a random mortal woman and....the myth is just totally rewritten to be sapphic. Persephone then DOES fall in love with Hades (with absolutely no exploration of their relationship except Hades being a simp and crying about her not liking him, and then she inexplicably decides to like him), but the weird Ione thing hangs over the entire story and adds absolutely nothing to it. Except, I suppose you could argue, that Persephone ~decided for herself~ who she liked, which I guess could be empowering -- but getting there is so convoluted through all the bad first-person writing and non-existent plot/character development (and the fact that the relationship with Ione is boring as hell, too) that I just don't really agree with that. What you get, here, is a simultaneously super chaotic and super dull story about a bunch of brats. Which...I mean I guess is Greek mythology, so who knows maybe I'm the problem
So like -- if you like the Persephone myth, this isn't torture to read and will likely divert you. But, for me personally, it had absolutely no emotional or intellectual impact -- so just be aware that you may not be in for an experience of much, ah, depth. If you don't care and just want to pass the time, have at; otherwise.........still waiting for Madeline Miller to get her Persephone version out.........come on girlie...more
Reduxing the Persephone myth is a tall, almost impossible, order (though there is a 2002 sci-fi miniseries that really hits the mark BUT ANYWAY ---). Reduxing the Persephone myth is a tall, almost impossible, order (though there is a 2002 sci-fi miniseries that really hits the mark BUT ANYWAY ---). There's a lot to it, despite/because of it being so simple, and however you retell it is going to be profoundly lensed through your own biases. Typically, I prefer a retelling that empowers Persephone, humanizes Hades, and -- sorry -- ignores Demeter. That, this book is not.
It's not that this book is extremely bad, or that I feel like you HAVE to follow the myth to the letter -- I don't care about 1-1 comparisons and think they often prevent a good story from being told. There are parts of this novel that are just exceptional -- the pharmaceutical billionaire Hades, the food-security NGO Demeter, and the writing itself was beautiful. But -- this is the story of Demeter and Persephone, not Persephone and Hades (my preference), and not Persephone, either. It's a story about a mother who loves her daughter, and a rebellious daughter who, it turns out, can only be saved by her mother -- which I found a weird, unpleasant, and restrictive note to end on. Persephone (Cory, get it, Kore!) is the adults' plaything, which makes the whole story kinda gross, because she never gets or maintains her own power. She just kinda floats around, drugged out on "Fruit of the Dead" cocktail/painkiller mixes (get it, pomegranate seeds!), and gets taken advantage of again and again, while her mom freaks out about finding her and eventually does. There's no growth, no conflict, just a reunion of a mom and daughter after summer, and Cory looking semi-longingly back at her rapist for literally no reason and wondering if she should return sometime soon, hee hee (get it, seasons!)!
Rachel Lyon is a talented stylist, and I'll give her another chance, but she's also very much A Mother, and that suffuses the entirety of this book. It's an exploration not of Persephone's coming-of-age, but Demeter's maternal panic -- and the truth is, I just find that boring, personally, so I got very little out of it. All the worse because the potential is so rife -- the modern setup works well, there's a lot that could have been very interesting, even this exploration of the myth could have worked well (like, Hades and Persephone don't HAVE to love each other, I just like when they do but I'm an adult ok I can handle it when they don't). But what you get is what's on the tin: Demeter is angry that Hades kidnapped her daughter, and goes to get her. Nothing else to see here.
So, if you're a mother who wants to read about other mothers being mothers, go off queen; otherwise, you can probably let this one go. Go watch that sci-fi miniseries instead :D...more
Longtime Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ friends of mine may remember that I'm inclined to deeply love Shakespeare fanfiction -- parOh this book was just an absolute mess.
Longtime Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ friends of mine may remember that I'm inclined to deeply love Shakespeare fanfiction -- particularly when it's a favourite play, which Macbeth certainly is. And I'm game, okay, you can mess with things a little, it's fun and fresh, I dig it.
However, when the story is absolutely unrecognizable aside from character names, pretentiously-quoted lines from the play, and very general plot points ----
That's a problem. And this book does it in spades. It also just isn't very good -- it's incoherently written and characterized, the emotional beats are bloodless, the motivations are invisible, and the writing is bland. However, the cardinal sin of it is that THEY DONE DID LADY MACBETH DIRTY, and I don't understand why it's so FREAKIN HARD to take one of Shakespeare's absolute best characters and give her a compelling backstory that isn't "She seduced the boys!!!!!!!!!!" Like is it so fucking hard to believe she could have a source of power that wasn't her sexuality? Come on, man. Show some respect. Lady Macbeth is an absolute goddamn powerhouse; in a book supposedly based on her, I recognized none of the character I love. Instead, this irritating, scattered, pale waif skipped around the castle asking her husband for shit that would start wars and getting hot for Duncan's son. It also veers SUPER weirdly into monsterfucker territory; no kinkshaming in this haus, but that ain't my thing, and it was both narratively unnecessary and jarringly out of character.
The only thing that remotely reminded me of Lady M was that, at times, Roscilla was smart. But even if you don't appreciate/see the love in Macbeth & Lady Macbeth's relationship in the play, you at LEAST have to admit they're in it together. They're awful people, yeah, but it's not like Macbeth is awful TO Lady Macbeth -- there's a companionship and a joint goal. In this book, Roscilla is taken advantage of every few pages. And sure, maybe that's realistic for the time period, but I don't care and also she fucked a dragon so..I don't know how much realism was part of the point, here.
But again, the book is so convoluted that maybe it was. Reid opens with this diatribe on language and borders at the time. She clearly thinks she's Doing Something with that, but the only way it matters narratively is you have to keep track of a bunch of names for the same thing, and people have different customs. A very profound point.
Okay I will stop my rambling sarcasm ------ if you love Lady Macbeth's strength, passion, brilliance -- or have any attachment to this play -- don't read this book. However, if you actually want to read about a random medieval seductress-witch who gets married off and whines for 300 pages, fill yer boots....more
Loading...
