But as I always say, a single man in possession of a good fortune sometimes is actually not single. He's often a total liar.
A great parody underst
But as I always say, a single man in possession of a good fortune sometimes is actually not single. He's often a total liar.
A great parody understands the genre perfectly, and A Most Agreeable Murder understands both the regency romance and the whodunit so well. There's so much genuine care for the regency novel put into this parody! The characters feel like wonderful commentaries on Pride and Prejudice, giggling at its quirks not out of mockery but out of love.
Beatrice Steele is an unmarried lady of marriageable age. So it's too bad she seems so preoccupied with murder, rather than finding a husband. Her secret could probably stay secret, were it not for a fiasco at a ball: When Edmund Croaksworth, well, croaks.
Our intrepid cast consists of Beatrice Steele; sisters Mary and Louisa, and her Bennett-parent-parody parents; childhood best friend Daniel Ashbrook, his complicated sister Arabella, and their judgmental father; superstitious Miss Bolton; “orphaned” Caroline Wynn; and disreputable Francois Fan. And rounding them all out is Inspector Vivek Drake, ready to investigate the murder — but why ever was he here in the first place?
While I'm not sure I found it terribly surprising per se, the solution was very fun. Beatrice's character arc is compelling, and the relationship between her and Inspector Drake builds well. Overall, this will just be a very fun romp for anyone who loves the more humorous aspects of a good Jane Austen and a good Agatha Christie. Those with less familiarity with either probably won't get much from this, but that's what I like about it.
"If you think any of this is funny, you are sorely mistaken," Mr. Steele told Frank. "Of course I don't think it's funny!" Frank insisted. "Even worse! You have no sense of humor!"
T Kingfisher is a master of an uncanny horror mix that makes the spine tingle. I’ve always been a fan of shrooms horror, so I am so happy to have gottT Kingfisher is a master of an uncanny horror mix that makes the spine tingle. I’ve always been a fan of shrooms horror, so I am so happy to have gotten to read this retelling of Edgar Allen Poe's The House of Usher (interestingly, the only story by him I ever read for school).
Our leads are the following: Lieutenant Alex Easton, sworn soldier from the fictional Gallacia; Roderick and Madeline, the siblings of the house of Usher; Denton, an American doctor; Angus, protector to Easton; and Miss Potter, a local myconid collector. They're an enjoyable batch to follow (particularly Miss Potter.)
As the situation spirals, the descent into horror feels chillingly inevitable. The ultimate result is a great blend of body horror and horror through implication. My only critique of this was that the beginning – as T. Kingfisher builds both the house of Usher itself and the fictional European nation of Gallacia, where soldiers use a different pronoun system – is a fairly slow start for a novella. The result is fantastic, but it takes a while to build, and I wondered if that transition could've been ironed just a tad.
The Comedian, Edward Blake, is dead. Adrian Veidt/Ozymandius is pretentious. Daniel Dreiberg/Nite Owl II is retired. Jon Osterman/Doctor Manhattan is The Comedian, Edward Blake, is dead. Adrian Veidt/Ozymandius is pretentious. Daniel Dreiberg/Nite Owl II is retired. Jon Osterman/Doctor Manhattan is above all. Laurie Juspeczyk/Silk Spectre II is sleeping with him. And masked detective (view spoiler)[Walter Joseph Kovacs (hide spoiler)]/Rorschach plans to burn them all. Hey guys... Watchmen is really good. It's kind of underground I don't know if you would've heard of it : /
The present-day superheroes, in many ways, step over the graves of those before. Edward Blake is one of the last surviving members of the original Minutemen, founded in 1939 and disbanded in 1949. With his loss, they are survived only by Laurie’s mother Sally Jupiter/Silk Spectre I, who left the group in 1947; Mothman/Byron Lewis; and Hollis Mason/Nite Owl, whose autobiography dots the pages. The original Minutemen also included Hooded Justice; Captain Metropolis/Nelson Gardner; Dollar Bill, murdered in 1947; and The Sillhouette/Ursula Zandt, a lesbian murdered after exposure in 1946. They are each gone, disappeared after their usefulness ran out.
There's a strong focus on the ways superheroes have changed the world: Dr Manhattan's appearance in 1960 won the U.S. the Vietnam war.
Superhero gangs have fallen apart not just because of political pressures, but because of personal issues, and specifically abuse. (view spoiler)[Hooded Justice and Captain Metropolis/Nelson Gardner’s toxic relationship led Captain Metropolis to form the new crime group, the Crimebusters; meanwhile, Hooded Justice and Silk Spectre were each other's beards. (hide spoiler)] Perhaps more notably, (view spoiler)[The Comedian assaulted Silk Spectre. (hide spoiler)]
By the end, (view spoiler)[Comedian is revealed to have been killed after discovering the plot against Doctor Manhattan. Hollis is gone too. (hide spoiler)] The complex of the superheroes have cannibalized themselves. And it is brilliant to watch.
Siren Queen is a masterclass in using magical metaphors to explore queerness and racial identity in pre-code Hollywood.
Luli Wei wants to be a star, aSiren Queen is a masterclass in using magical metaphors to explore queerness and racial identity in pre-code Hollywood.
Luli Wei wants to be a star, and is willing to become a monster to become one. Through her relationships with the secretive Harry Long, the alluring Emmaline Sauvignon, the complex Greta/Caroline, and the all-herself Tara Lubowski, she leans towards and away from monstrosity — and towards, and away, from herself. It’s a magical realist or fabulist novel with complex takes on fame, and the prices we pay for it.
I will continue reading every one of Nghi Vo’s novels.
To be quite honest, I felt I got very little out of this book – despite a compelling lead character, and a compelling character in the inspector, I foTo be quite honest, I felt I got very little out of this book – despite a compelling lead character, and a compelling character in the inspector, I found the plot plodded along, rather than truly dragging me. At first, plot happens to the lead rather than her driving the plot; then, she acts in ways almost stupid. Fantastic writing, but I found this a bit forgettable and won’t be returning to it.
Maybe, I said deliberately, it’s because you like to fuck people who don’t belong to you.
In The Chosen and the Beautiful, there is a section where
Maybe, I said deliberately, it’s because you like to fuck people who don’t belong to you.
In The Chosen and the Beautiful, there is a section wherein Daisy and Jordan make a paper model of Daisy, to substitute for her while the real Daisy is drunk. This paper daisy is younger, bouncier, fewer cares. This paper daisy, like childhood, like an authentic self, does not survive.
The Great Gatsby is a classic, and thus one doubly difficult to adapt - when you know a classic, how do you pivot? The shifts made here preserve character dynamics but add to them; Jordan is a queer Vietnamese woman, and perhaps more notably, the narrator. The story is not from Nick, a more innocent, but Jordan, cynical to the last.
In considering recent Great Gatsby adaptations, I’m struck by a desire often to add queerness to the story with an aim of ‘if only they were gay, everything would be fine’. The Chosen and the Beautiful dodges this. Here, they are all in love, or might be, and everything is worse. The lack of love is not what kills them; it is the inability to love for what you and the other person already are.
Nghi Vo's writing truly kills me. Also, this entire section is a CRAZY line to put in your Great Gatsby retelling: (view spoiler)[
“I’m not in love with you, you can’t treat me like this.” She looked at me stunned. “Of course you are,” she said, and the thread between us snapped.(hide spoiler)] Genuinely incredible. Will continue hanging on Nghi Vo's every word.
I read this in January 2021 and did not mark it as read or review it for six months, because I did not even know what to say to encapsulate this readiI read this in January 2021 and did not mark it as read or review it for six months, because I did not even know what to say to encapsulate this reading experience.
Court of Miracles is a Les-Miserables retelling following Nina (Eponine), a thief known as the Black Cat at a court in 1850s France. Under the gaze of Tomasis of the Guild of Thieves, she fights to protect first her sister Amelda and later her adopted sister Ettie (Cosette) from Thenardier, her father, and the Tiger, an evil lord.
Overall, I think this book is really pulling out the epic highs and lows of YA fantasy. There’s a lot going on here that I really liked. The vibes perhaps surpass almost anything else; when leaning into atmosphere, Court of Miracles gets it right. At its finer moments, I was reminded of The Gilded Wolves. The bond between Nina and Ettie is sweet and easy to get invested in. I enjoyed the writing of Tomasis, who’s often hard to pin down in a compelling way. Primarily, though, the appeal of this book is in Nina. Nina’s schemes are often really strong and well thought out, and her inner monologue is compelling enough that it’s hard not to root for her. She is genuinely so much fun, the ideal girlboss, and I loved watching her schemes come together. SPOILER: (view spoiler)[Some of my highlights are: (A) when she controls when Lamarque dies, makes it trigger for a revolt, and kills during it; (B) when she calls in favor with Le Maire (Jean Valjean) who she saved to hide Ettie for 2 years ugh iconic; and (C) pretending the tiger is Jean Valjean to trick the Inspector, this one is also sort of cool adaptationally. But I mostly just ADORED the ending of this novel. When Nina picks her sister over the closest figure she has to a father, Tomasis, and tricks Thenardier into shooting Tomasis… I almost four starred right there. Excellent ending, no complaints, 10/10. (hide spoiler)]
However, some elements left a lot to be desired. The politics of this novel are fairly overcomplicated as compared to what matters and some of them end up being super irrelevant. Here is what I remember from this book which I read a year ago and also my fairly confused notes: SPOILER: (view spoiler)[There are nine guilds and lords; the sisters guild was betrayed at some point by The Tiger. The main court is the Miracle Court. Tomasis leads The Cats (thieves); Orso or the Dead Lord leads the Ghosts (asssassins), of whom Gavroche is a member; the Tiger leads the Flesh guild. There are also the Bats (poisoners), of whom Montparnasse is a member; the Rats (smugglers); and the courts of Dreamers and Letters. (hide spoiler)] …I’m not even going to lie, I was just not invested enough in any of this to really understand it. That’s because the first half of this book is all buildup, with the actual focus of the novel—the main plot goal—coming into play only during part four, at around 45%. While these first three sections are not awful, they completely lack aim, while the fourth and final section has a clear and fulfilling goal. Had this entire book been the same quality as the last fourth, I think I would be genuinely obsessed with this series. I wondered almost whether the last 1-3 parts could be better purposed as an extended flashback, woven in throughout the book. I also wondered if they might be better cut down.
Oh, and The Dauphine and St Juste, aka Enjorlas, both love Nina. And for what? They don’t even know about her girlbossery. I'm not even that much of a love triangle hater, but what is the point of this? It's not interesting and it does nothing for Nina's development.
Let’s discuss the adaptational bent of this novel. I have not actually read Les Mis, first of all, but as a problematic theater kid, I do know the plot. The adaptational take of this novel is a reimagining of Les Mis (A) from Eponine’s perspective and (B) in which Eponine is a girlboss who hates her father and it's also a fantasy world. On a fundamental level, I do think this is a fun take. Other characters also appear, of course; St Juste is sort of a weird combination of Marius and Enjorlas, except it sort of seems like he got the Enjorlas personality and then Marius just got cut which is hilarious. Grantaire is also there. The long and short of it is this is not an exact retelling and you should not read it expecting such.
Adaptationally, however, there is one element of this book that haunts me. And not in a good way. First of all, I want to know who asked for Jean Valjean and Javert genderswap m/f. Who has ever looked at Les Miserables and said you know what I wish? I wish Javert were a woman so that she could kiss Jean Valjean. Who’s asking for them to kiss at all? And if the author is brave and bold enough to raise her hand and admit she, yes, she was asking for them to kiss, why not just leave them as men? I don’t mean this in a why are we putting women in this book way—why are we adding straight people to this book? Weren’t there enough? Didn’t we hit the quota? I don’t know how to explain how little I could take this seriously. I can’t believe I'm expected to take this seriously.
So… overall. Court of Miracles is certainly a book of all time. I will remember it primarily for Nina’s compelling, interesting schemes, and for the sheer secondhand embarrassment I experienced while reading a Jean Valjean/Javert m/f genderswap au. If this sounds like something you’ll find compelling… go for it. If it does not... do not.
What if we handled bees together in the 1800s… and we were both girls? The Care and Feeding of Waspish Widows is a sweet romance between Agatha, a LonWhat if we handled bees together in the 1800s… and we were both girls? The Care and Feeding of Waspish Widows is a sweet romance between Agatha, a London book publisher, widower, and mother to a radical, and Penelope, a country beekeeper married to a gay man off at sea.
Olivia Waite has a style of writing romance that must just really work for me. She builds the relationships between these characters slowly but surely, making the audience hard-pressed not to root for them at every turn. Even when the banter is slow-building, I just never fail to invest in her characters.
Additionally, Waspish Widows touches pretty heavily on themes of class. I liked that Sydney and Eliza, Agatha’s son and apprentice respectively, got their own storyline building into themes of the novel. I also adore how she interacts with actual historical events and topics; the public trial Queen Caroline (of Brunswick) of Great Britain places the date at 1806.
I didn’t love this quite as much as I adored Celestial Mechanics, as I just didn’t feel quite as strongly about the characters, but overall this was a worthy sequel, and I’m excited to read book three. If you like Waite's novels you should give this a try, and if you've never read anything by her, you should try A Lady's Guide to Celestial Mechanics. (And then this one, if you like it!)
When Caitlin from my local bookstore recommended Code Name Verity to me (in the category of ‘historical fiction + kinda gay), she told me that 1) I woWhen Caitlin from my local bookstore recommended Code Name Verity to me (in the category of ‘historical fiction + kinda gay), she told me that 1) I would be obsessed, and 2) I would want to reread this book as soon as I finished it. She was right about both.
I read this book in the range from 1:00am to 4:00am, first of all. I don’t even remember the last time I needed to finish a book so bad. I needed to find out what happened!! How was it all going to go down? I had guesses, sure, but I didn’t know! I needed to see them escape.
That is because there is so much excellent foreshadowing in this book.
LONG SPOILER RANT ABOUT SAID FORESHADOWING: (view spoiler)[thinking about the fear foreshadowing and the fact that Maddie’s person was actually the mercy killer all along like HELLO??? hello??? very very proud of myself for figuring out the underlines at Lima, page 100, that was kinda hot. kinda wasnt expecting Anna Engel to be sympathetic even though I did have the genuine thought to myself that she was going to need to be for the underlining plan to work. the RADIO HOST like oh I think I registered that conversation as a lil weird but I totally did not register WHY and I loved that. dropping Verity in the conversation? i NOTICED that but i didn’t really get it… so much to think about. I fucking knew that Maddie wasn’t dead. I’m about to sound like a nerd so bear with me but it’s because of the placement of her death reveal—were she actually dead that would’ve been a huge reveal to drop at a key moment, in an interrogation, but we more see Julie’s grief, and it’s not A Moment™️ in the same way. I guessed that the codes were fake but the how SLAPS. I liked that I couldn’t at first tell who was who. For a while I was expecting Maddie to actually be the lead because I noticed the preoccupation with names and pseudonyms, but that ends up just being paid off with Julie’s identity as a torturer. and a liar in general. the fact that Julie is telling a fictionalized account the whole time… incredible. (hide spoiler)]
Anyway. It is not just the setup and payoff that I loved about this book. I had so many feelings about this character. I love that Queenie’s narrative voice is so distinct; that she’s so lighthearted at times, and it takes longer to see her further sides. She's a really dynamic character. Maddie is also really interesting, and I loved getting invested in her. More importantly, the relationship between the two of them is really wonderful and hit me hard. Physically I’m here but emotionally I’m typing a long essay about how much they love each other.
LONG ESSAY HERE: “finding your best friend is a bit like falling in love” really got dropped as an actual line in this book. sure! yeah absolutely! or maybe you just like girls (as Julie apparently does! canonically!) o for it to be the 1950s and i have a best friend who makes me feel like im falling in love. (view spoiler)[THINKING ABOUT KISS ME HARDY. thinking a LOT about kiss me hardy. also thinking about Julie just writing the name 'Maddie' because she can't even process anything else, and then Maddie doing the same later....... sigh. on a side note Maddie ending up with Jamie is genuinely Hilarious. she says that Jamie reminds her of Julie Multiple Times. this is not Brideshead Revisited. (hide spoiler)]
The final note: I was so so upset by the ending of this book I kept expecting a miracle to have happened. I loved it. It made me cry. It will probably make you cry too. I don't know. Read it and let me know.
A commentary on tragic love in a society desperate to condense it—in Communist Russia, and in Lavender Scare-era DC—with an utterly stunning ending thA commentary on tragic love in a society desperate to condense it—in Communist Russia, and in Lavender Scare-era DC—with an utterly stunning ending that still has me tearing up.
The Secrets We Kept follows three characters. There's Irina Drosdova, a Russian-American government worker turned spy. There's Sally Forrester, the Swallow and established spy. And in Russia, Olga Ivinskaya, the long-term lover of Boris Pasternak and inspiration for his hero, Lara. They are connected by Pasternak's book, Doctor Zhivago – and by the forbidden love at its center.
In framing itself as a response to Doctor Zhivago, I think The Secrets We Kept has a lot to say about the parallels between Soviet-era censorship of love and the 1950s American Lavender Scare, where it is estimated between 5,000 to 10,000 Americans lost jobs in the federal service due to fears that their status as gay men or lesbians could make them susceptible to blackmail.
Overall, a well-written and enjoyable historical thriller/love story.
The Calculating Stars is alt-history book about a world in which a meteor hit the earth in the 1950s. Following Elma, a Jewish computer aspiring to beThe Calculating Stars is alt-history book about a world in which a meteor hit the earth in the 1950s. Following Elma, a Jewish computer aspiring to be on the moon, we see the mundane parts of an apocalypse, the scientific parts of an apocalypse. Other characters include Nathaniel, Elma’s husband, who is really cool; Nicole, one of Elma’s best friends; Ida, a black member of the 99 club and aspiring astronaut; Imogene, also a member of the 99 club and an aspiring astronaut; Helen, a Chinese aspiring astronaut; Betty, white reporter for Life; and Parker, an arrogant bastard.
This... was interesting, first of all. It is certainly an interesting premise, and I think the focus on perceived normalcy—how we adapt to the daily grind as if it’s always been—is interesting. This book focuses not just on the race to save the world, the race to find a new home, but also on the gender and racial politics of the time, and the barriers that Elma and others must break down.
That’s all interesting. The problem is I didn’t feel like much happened in this book. There are long swaths where things are happening, but little that has long-lasting consequences within the narrative. Actually, very little has long-lasting consequences, period. Kowal often bows out from playing up the consequences of plotlines, such as (view spoiler)[the anxiety medication, the conflict with members of the 99 club, and even the conflict with Parker (hide spoiler)]. I also think I could’ve gotten more into this were I more invested in the characters. Elma is cool but I just wasn’t that invested in her as a specific character. This all came together with a much more personal aversion: I personally don’t tend to gel with science-heavy novels even when they’re down to earth. I think if you liked The Martian, you might absolutely love this.
I understand why this won a Hugo as it’s a very creative premise and interesting story; however, it was not really my thing.
I do not plan on extensively reviewing this book because I cannot completely undo my dignity and review a Cassandra Clare book that I read of my own vI do not plan on extensively reviewing this book because I cannot completely undo my dignity and review a Cassandra Clare book that I read of my own volition in 2022, but here is my take.
I think these books are fun. I think Cassandra Clare is a much better writer than she was in 2005 in terms of like… not making the most annoying people you’ve ever seen in your life. Are they high quality fantasy literature? No. Do I care? No<3 They’re fantasy romance I'm just vibing<3 Also I think it’s funny that Cassandra Clare has decided the way to put gay people in the 1800s is Lavender Marriage Drama<3 Also, unfortunately I contracted The Infernal Devices brainrot four years ago and it is both chronic and incurable, so I’m going to continue making that everyone else’s problem for the time being. As such, here is my brief summary of my thoughts on this book:
It’s fine. It has too many characters and sometimes the side characters are more compelling than the protagonists. There's also one love triangle I think is stupid and ridiculous; most of the love triangles are actually just Lavender Marriage Drama and thus are in my opinion funny. The genuine worst thing about Cassandra Clare’s writing right now might be that she writes in characters with compelling backstory, but does not give you the backstory in the actual series—only in spinoff books. That is ridiculous and should not be happening.
But I had a lot of fun, and I will keep reading this series.
The cast is kind of um… huge. The second generation is as follows (with their parents in parentheses: ➽James and Lucie Herondale (Will and Tessa) ➽Cordelia and Alastair Carstairs (some people named Elias and Sana, I don’t understand or care how related to Jem these people are) ➽Charles and Matthew Fairchild (Charlotte and Henry) ➽Barbara, Eugenia, and Thomas Lightwood (Gideon and Sophie), of whom only Thomas is relevant ➽Anna, Alexander, and Christopher Lightwood (Gabriel and Cecily) ➽Grace and Jesse Blackthorn (some woman named Tatiana) ➽Ariadne Bridgestock (the inquisitor I fucking guess)
Here is the drama that is going on, or what you missed on Glee so to speak, containing spoilers because this is for the appeal only of me and anyone who thinks I’m funny:
THE MAIN CHARACTERS ➽the premise of this book is that it’s 1903 and when people see problems the most normal response is to say ‘clearly fake marriage is the solution’ ➽James and Matthew are parabatai and Cordelia and Lucie are future parabatai. Both of these dynamics are really sweet and lovely. The four of them are like, a squad with Thomas and Christopher, of whom so far only Thomas is particularly relevant, and also occasionally gatecrash Anna’s place when the author remembers things need to be interesting ➽James keeps getting dragged into the shadow realm which is just like, a place where demons are. Also, demons keep telling him his grandfather is a demon because of Tessa’s whole hellspawn thing, which can really get a guy down ➽James is also in love with Grace, except he cannot remember when or why this happened and knows nothing about her personally. I wonder if this could have any kind of cause? Probably not a problem<3 ➽Cordelia is in love with James, who is also definitely in love with her, but mostly is just trying to get her father safe from Magic Jail and also make new friends, which is actually very sweet ➽Cordelia and James are boring for most of this book and then their book ending made me start eating glass whole ➽Cordelia is Persian and I think this is actually inoffensive ➽Lucie, who likes writing, is trying to bring back Grace’s dead sibling, Jesse, who is a ghost. she can also control ghosts, good for her ➽Matthew is an alcoholic and hates himself because he accidentally killed a man, which I only know from that other spinoff book you apparently had to read before this ➽which I did in fact read, because there’s something wrong with me ➽Matthew also having feelings for Cordelia is stupid and I hate it. who benefits from this love triangle. who is compelled by it. who is asking for it. I honestly can’t even begin to tell you how little I care about this
THE LAVENDER MARRIAGES ➽Anna and Ariadne are in love but Ariadne is “dating” Charles which sucks for both of them. both of these facts I also only know from that spinoff book, which is actually deeply annoying because without that knowledge this plotline would be a lot less compelling ➽Alastair is gay and getting kicked to the curb so Charles can lavender-marry Ariadne, except then Grace homewrecks their lavender marriage ➽homewrecking Ariadne and Charles's lavender marriage was funny of Grace and if you think about it is lesbian allyship ➽Charles like, sucks ➽again, a genuinely surprising amount of this book revolves around lavender marriage drama ➽Thomas and Alastair also maybe have feelings for each other, I think this is potentially compelling as a dynamic I’ll be honest but I’ll let you know more soon ➽Anna, who is gnc af, is on-page implied to have fucked Virginia Wolff, a detail I’m unironically obsessed with ➽if I see a single piece of legitimate discourse about whether Anna from the Cassandra Clare books is good representation I will hit my limit right here and now ➽Cassandra Clare I don’t know if you read these what else do you have to do but I will pay you at least $45 to make Anna the main character of this book
EVERYTHING ELSE ➽while all these people are being insane Will is busy being a malewife, a fate I personally love for him. also the audiobook like actually did his Welsh accent which is so sweet. ➽they fucking like. fridge one of Gideon and Sophie’s kids like she just straight up dies and everyone forgets about it ➽I am a Grace apologist. I think she did nothing wrong. Manipulating James into being in love with her with a magical bracelet and then manipulating Matthew also was a little over the top no it wasn’t<3 ➽okay no but to be serious Grace is a tool in this and has very little choice. she is a victim too. and I could fix her<3
THE ENDING OR WHATEVER ➽Cordelia’s silly little girlbossery moment where she just lies and says that James could not have committed a crime because they were in bed together all night is genuinely a cultural reset. like the drama of it all. ➽even more obsessed with the fact that his reaction to this is just being like ‘well I guess we have to get married’. these people are fucking insane ➽by ‘these people are fucking insane’, what I mean is I’m SO compelled, this beginning of a fake dating au made me absolutely crazy, and James and Cordelia will I think make me chew glass a bit next book. ➽UPDATE: just found out that in the next book [there are spoilers here] they “practice kissing”, with James tied up and Cordelia on top of him, and I genuinely can’t explain how compelled I am rn ➽Alistair’s anti Charles girlboss moment my beloved<3
THE IMPORTANT THINGS ➽I am fundamentally not the same as all of you still having ship wars about the characters of the infernal devices in the comments and/or saying that series sucks because of the love triangle or complaining that it's "weird" that Tessa and Will spend extensive time on their wedding night thinking about how much they miss Jem. you don’t get it. you don’t understand it like I do. you haven’t read the 200k bed sharing fic where all three of them get together. we’re simply not the same. you’re probably normal and you know what? good for you
Okay that’s it sorry to both those of you who love Cassandra Clare and those of you who hate Cassandra Clare, my stance is that my reading these is camp<3
The second dream is more difficult to convey. Nothing happened. He scarcely saw a face, scarcely heard a voice say, “That is your friend,” and then
The second dream is more difficult to convey. Nothing happened. He scarcely saw a face, scarcely heard a voice say, “That is your friend,” and then it was over, having filled him with beauty and taught him tenderness. He could die for such a friend, he would allow such a friend to die for him; they would make any sacrifice for each other, and count the world nothing, neither death nor distance nor crossness could part them, because “this is my friend.”
Maurice follows the story of Maurice, a gay man in the early 1900s, as he falls in love, gets his heart broken, and gets his heart repaired. This book hit me… really hard.
There are two love stories here, one between Maurice and his school partner, and one between him and a garden worker. In one of these, his class colleague asks for their relationship to never go beyond kissing; he is always at arms’ length, until he is discarded altogether. In one of these, he is free to love as he is, freed from the bounds of false intellectualism and performance.
It’s not clear from the summary how sectioned this book is, but it is decidedly split: the first half deals with Clive and the eventual breakdown of that relationship, while the second half deals with Maurice’s attempts to ‘cure’ himself and then eventually, with Alec. I found the first half of this novel interesting. The second half made me cry of happiness. It’s infused with so much more hope.
The final scene focuses point of view on Clive, framed in the light, while Maurice is a voice in the dark; that, though, is his happy ending. Maurice ends the novel in love in the dark, while Clive ends the novel thinking that his lack of love in the light is superior. (It is we, as the audience, who must make our own decisions on that matter.) I enjoyed the movie, which I saw before reading the book, a lot. Though it’s easy to quibble with certain changes made from the book to the movie, there’s one bit I particularly like: the final shot, in which Clive looks out at the greens, wondering what he could have had, had he not been afraid.
In so doing, Forster creates an idea of love in the dark as a positive thing. This reminded me of that quote from Black Sails: “In the dark, there is discovery, there is possibility, there is freedom in the dark once someone has illuminated it.” I love how Jami @JamiShelves put it in her review: “Forster invokes the concept of the Greenwood as a metaphor for relationships existing outside the socially accepted framework for romance. The Greenwood exists as an unrestrained space, drawing connotations of 'the wilderness'. The country acts as a locus for desire, its existence outside the restraints of society and allowing desire to flourish unrestrained.”
There’s something profound about giving a happy ending to two men falling in love in a time where they were few and far between. In the outro, E.M. Forster says this:
“A happy ending was imperative. I shouldn't have bothered to write otherwise. I was determined that in fiction anyway two men should fall in love and remain in it for the ever and ever that fiction allows, and in this sense, Maurice and Alec still roam the greenwood.”
When this book was written, in 1913 and 1914, this seemed almost ridiculous, that two men could fall in love, and not marry, and be happy. Forster wrote this novel almost to challenge that idea. This book could not even published until after his death, in 1971, and was then incredibly controversial. This book made me feel like I believe in love again.
Also, and this is only a minor spoiler, but I think about this scene a lot:
“You do care a little for me, I know... but nothing to speak of, and you don't love me. I was yours once till death if you'd cared to keep me, but I'm someone else's now... and he's mine in a way that shocks you, but why don't you stop being shocked, and attend to your own happiness.”
(view spoiler)[to my ex: i fucked your gamekeeper. in your house. and in a hotel. and in your boathouse. bye lmao see you never -Maurice at the end of this book (hide spoiler)]
TW: conversion attempts & suicidal ideation.
(view spoiler)[what if it was 1910 and i crawled through your window and gave you a kiss and then you realized you were in love with me after giving my last name to your schoolteacher... and we were both boys (hide spoiler)]
The thing I like most about this book is the very concept: that it follows two men, one of whom has a perhaps more complicated gender identity, as theThe thing I like most about this book is the very concept: that it follows two men, one of whom has a perhaps more complicated gender identity, as they adopt a daughter together during the Great Plains First Nations Wars. The thing I enjoy less about this book is… that is all I have to enjoy.
The whole point of this book is to recount the very upsetting events with a dry tongue, which makes for a narrative that takes time and effort to find the light spots beneath. It is a book that does not give up its emotions easily. Indeed, protagonist Thomas McNulty, a little-educated Irish immigrant,
I would be interested to see reviews written on this book by people more familiar with this history and specifically by Native American people. While the book clearly has no love for anti-Native rhetoric, it also has very little to actually say on the topic. Winona stuck out in my mind as a character I rooted for easily, but in writing this review it struck me that I know very little about her as a person.
With some caveats, I think the book in general functions best as a historical account than anything else. We know Thomas McNulty and John Cole are in love, and we root for them as our protagonists, but we barely get to know anything about them as people. I doubt I could give you a suitable description of the characterization of either one. Characterization doesn’t have to be the end all be all of a book, but I definitely craved more.
The thing I like most about this book is the very concept: that it follows two men, one of whom has a perhaps more complicated gender identity, as they adopt a daughter together. I like queer historical fiction because I am gay and I really enjoy the idea that even in the past, when there was almost no space for it, people like me existed and thrived. I don’t know enough about the topic to judge whether this is an accurate historical account, but I am aware the author did a huge amount of research.
If a fairly play-by-play historical account of the Indian Wars and The Civil War that utilizes a backdrop of gender and sexuality sounds like your thing, I think this will hit you very hard. I wish I had more thoughts of depth about this.
Without further ado I present to you: The King of Crows Power Ranking
27. Jericho and Evie specifically when they interact with each other Picture thisWithout further ado I present to you: The King of Crows Power Ranking
27. Jericho and Evie specifically when they interact with each other Picture this: you are New York Times bestselling author Libba Bray. In your recent book series, you wrote in a love triangle. Unfortunately, the first prong was boring, lacked any chemistry with the lead, and also was the love interest to your lead’s best friend, so your entire audience was invested in the second prong. In book three, you make the incredibly lazy and in poor taste writing decision to end this love triangle by having prong one try to sexually assault the lead while under the influence of drugs. Now, it’s time to write book four. Do you (A) move on from any possibility of romance between these characters and just deal with the effects of the assault, or (B) write more angst between them?
If you guessed B, you’re right. And I truly, truly wish you weren’t.
25. The plot point where everyone is separated for forever and then randomly reunite in Kansas in like five pages This plot point has the geographic sense of the last season of Game of Thrones. and I say this with every ounce of hate in my heart.
24. Performative Activism With the exception of the Mississippi River chapters, in comparison to books two and three, King of Crows is I think significantly less willing to deeply engage with the character of racism and bigotry. In a series which I’d found previously very willing to engage with queerness (Lair of Dreams) and the impacts of American eugenics (Before the Devil Breaks You), the lack of political drive in any plot line besides Memphis’s felt like a glaring hole.
22. The concept of Nebraska The amount of times that characters reminded me we were going to Nebraska to see Sarah Beth, before immediately reminding me that they hate Nebraska. Could someone use their kindle version to command F “Nebraska”?
21. Sarah Beth herself no comment but who honestly gives a fuck
20. Jake Marlowe I didn’t feel I particularly needed what we got of explanation for Jake Marlowe. He’s a man torn apart by the evils of capitalism. I felt I either wanted the book to lean into his horror, lean harder on his dismissiveness and destruction of Diviners—a character they know, perhaps—or leave him more ambiguous, a figurehead for American exceptionalism beyond an actual villain.
19. The term ‘baby vamp’ Nicknames can be sparing. I promise I remember that Theta calls Evie ‘Evil’, Sam calls Evie ‘Baby Vamp’, and everyone calls Isaiah ‘Little Man’. I promise I know those are nicknames they use. The audiobook narrator deserved a bonus.
18. Every single adult with one exception Sister Walker and William Fitzgerald, how does it feel to be slightly boring as characters?
17. Evie ONeill :/ sorry Evie but what if you literally need to get smart. On a serious note, the lack of significant character arc given to Evie here beyond her grief is notable. I craved knowing more—I craved a breakthrough, a moment of character break where she recognized her own selfishness and truly changed. The catharsis never came.
16. Jericho Jones I almost forgot Jericho existed between books. In the book’s defense, it has been three years since I read book three. Less in defense, he was the only character I’d forgotten. The issue is that I think Libba Bray does the same. Jericho at his best is a character genuinely worried he is Frankenstein’s monster, worried he lacks humanity, desperate to find it again. Jericho at his worst is just some white boy. Jericho, in this book, was both or neither depending on the chapter.
15. The King of Crows Creepy? Oh, yes. Some of the best horror in the series comes in his town scene. You know the one. (Or do you?) But I really felt like his political positioning in the novel—his metaphorical stance as villain, destroyer of the Diviners, or metaphorical expression of their anger—switched too fast to make the impact it should have.
14. The legacy of Before the Devil Breaks You While the use of Jericho and Evie’s past in King of Crows feels primarily odd and in bad taste, the impact of Mabel feels well-drawn and heartfelt. A countrywide hatred for someone you once loved—a hatred for you by their very association—carries a kind of pain this novel explores quite well. I only wanted more.
13. Vera the random woman who killed her mother in law and also accuses someone of fucking a priest right before being murdered by the ghost of said mother in law This is maybe my favorite creepy Diviners chapter of all time because I just think this woman is so funny as a character. I want to have cocktails with her. She’s like those TikTok povs of ‘your friend who always thinks she’s in the right’.
12. Gay people Did we win? That’s a really good question. Henry and his offscreen lover’s single conversation got me good and manages t be one of the most heartwrenching moments of the book.
By contrast, Alma and Ling felt like an afterthought. We end the book without any second conversation. (I honestly thought I must’ve fallen asleep during the audiobook, because this left me so confused.)
11. Isaiah Cambell Isaiah loss: Most of this book, his biggest one yet, contains shockingly low levels of character arc. Isaiah win: His ending is absolutely fantastic. Isaiah my best friend Isaiah.
10. Random family from the South, circus people, and random train porter King of Crows does, for all its faults, have some truly fantastic one and done side characters.
9. Sarah Cambell While Memphis and Isaiah’s mom is not a main character in these novels, she has perhaps one of the single most tragic stories of the entire series, and I genuinely loved her chapters. For so little pagetime, her impact on the story is amazing.
8. Malewife/girlbosses couples The real reason Jericho lost the love triangle is that Sam is more of a malewife than he is. Jericho could never be a damsel in distress and have Evie rescue him from harm. Sam proves his damsel in distress aptitude fantastically within this book by being one.
While the Theta and Memphis content here was fairly lacking due to their long separation, their status as ‘one of my favorite book couples when I was young and impressionable’ has stayed with me, and I cannot help but be invested.
7. Sam Lloyd Speaking of damsels in distress. I honestly wanted slightly more out of Sam in this book; I hoped for more character development for him, a bigger moment of character breaking after the trauma of the kidnapping. It felt almost unbelievable to lack that. But… okay, I also just find Sam endearing. He’s funny to me.
6. Bill Johnson I genuinely forgot that Bill existed before this book, which is crazy, because he’s maybe one of my favorite Diviners characters. I think Bill is both genuinely hilarious and one of the more complex and sympathetic of the adults. He’s done bad, just as much as any of the others, but seems unwilling to sweep it under the rug. I enjoy him.
5. Henry Dubois Henry has little to do here besides being a white ally—sort of not kidding when I say this is his only role in half the book—but that’s okay, because Henry is one of the characters who I think has developed the most in previous books. He’s just a little guy to me.
4. Woody the Reporter Who would’ve thought that this random side character would be one of the main reasons the Diviners succeed? Certainly not me. A surprising amount of love poured into this character whose original concept was ‘reporter desperate for a scoop because of his gambling addiction’; I appreciated it.
3. Theta Knight Theta was almost bumped down in the ranking for receiving an incredibly wasted plotline around stalker ghosts, but then failed to be bumped down because your honor, I love her. Theta’s fear and simultaneous desire to be free could’ve been shown and not told to a greater degree, but still lead to a fantastic ending.
2. Ling Chan Ling my best friend Ling. In full disclosure, Ling is my actual favorite Diviners character, and she could have been in two chapters of this and would still be in my top five. I find her genuinely hilarious. I love a girl with autism swag and no ability to read social cues at all. My only complaint here was her underdeveloped plotline with Alma; a resolution, please. Otherwise, I continue to stand by my view that she is just like me in high school.
1. Memphis Cambell It is a truth universally acknowledged that Memphis, among every Diviners character, won King of Crows. His arc here is the most consistent and most well-conveyed. He’s always been my no 1 Diviners man, but this time, he’s earned it doubly. Congratulations, Poet.
IN CONCLUSION: Was this book amazing? No. Did it ruin the series? No. Is this series about to be my poster child for Middle Book Syndrome Is Actually Made Up And Middle Books Are Often The Best Ones? Yes. Hope this helps!
The Steep and Thorny Way is a Hamlet retelling set in 1923 starring a biracial Black woman, Hanalee, as she attempts to investigate the death of her fThe Steep and Thorny Way is a Hamlet retelling set in 1923 starring a biracial Black woman, Hanalee, as she attempts to investigate the death of her father in a possibly racially motivated hit-and-run, just as the accused killer, Joe, returns to town.
Overall, if I had to summarize my thoughts on this book, I would give it a solid mixed bag. There are some aspects of this that I adored, and a few that I found fairly forgettable. Cat Winters is a good writer; the pacing is at times a bit odd in the first hundred pages, but quickly picks up.
One of the strongest choices of this book is that the main relationship building isn’t a romance: It’s Hanalee and Joe’s enemies to unlikely besties plotline. Though their arc forms that of a romance, their roles to each other are those of best friends, and I genuinely adored that. The reader is more invested in their friendship by the end than we ever would be in any love story.
If I had to question elements of this book, I think certain elements struck me as slightly defanged. Some of this is probably generic—I’m a bit older in 2021 than when I was really into YA, and 2016 was a very different time for YA as a genre—but Hanalee and Joe are, for example, WAY too shocked by the existence of eugenics. (view spoiler)[They are a black woman and a gay man in 1920s Oregon. I think they’d know. (hide spoiler)] This defanging dilutes the punch that aspects of this novel should carry.
I will also say, as someone with numerous Hamlet opinions, it’s a fairly loose Hamlet retelling. I like that the Claudius—Uncle Clyde—is sympathetic, as he is in the play. Joe ending up becoming the Horatio character is an excellent choice. On other matters, I was slightly less convinced. The selection of Hanalee’s best friend, Fluer, as the Ophelia character, works fine, though I’m absolutely going to choose to read them as a couple given that she’s the Ophelia character. Her brother Laurence as Laertes also works fine, though his character is quite far from the original Laertes. Her mother makes for a deeply forgettable Gertrude. There’s another character, Mildred, who’s genuinely difficult to pinpoint as a Hamlet character. Tonewise, this novel is just not very near to Hamlet. If you’re looking for a Hamlet-style tragedy I would probably shy away.
SPOILER: (view spoiler)[I will also say that though it’s not a very Hamlet ending, I did enjoy the final twists. It’s not Hamlet, but it did compel me. (hide spoiler)]
In another way, though, I think this a perfect Hamlet retelling. To me, Hamlet is a play about the horror that comes from not being believed—from being perceived as insane, even as you are the only one who can see the truth. Incorporating forces of systematic racism and homophobia to the horrific, claustrophobic lack-of-belief that defines Hamlet is a fascinating take; so much of discrimination is in the fact that you cannot express what has happened to you, because no one will listen. Winters’s pinpointing of that is consistently the strongest and most compelling element of this novel, and what I know will stick with me about The Steep and Thorny Way: both as a Hamlet retelling, and as a novel.
“Are you going to give me the fornication without the intention of procreation is of the devil and a crime lecture? I believe I could recite i
“Are you going to give me the fornication without the intention of procreation is of the devil and a crime lecture? I believe I could recite it from memory by now.” “Monty-” “Perhaps I am trying to procreate with all these lads and I’m just very misinformed about the whole process. If only Eton hadn’t thrown me out.”
Wow, so I expected cute and amusing, but I did not expect to find both the funniest thing I've ever read, and also one of the most unfortunately-personally-relevant-to-me things I have ever read. This book means the world to me.
[Also, THIS MADE ME SO HAPPY. I literally do not remember the last time I enjoyed reading a book so much. Even my reading slump couldn't conquer this book. After I got off my slump-creating kindle and on to the hardcover copy I read at the bookstore, I read this in less than 24 hours. YES.]
Just to be clear: I love pretty much everything about this book. It's fantastically paced, especially for such a long book - I mean, it broke my reading slump. It's hilarious - I laughed out loud multiple times. The romance is adorable and has some of the best development I've read in YA. Monty's character development was 10/10. The holy trinity at the center of the book is a ton of fun. Maybe I'll even talk more about this later and add something to this review. But you know what? You can find a thousand reviews about how cool everything in this book is. I want to talk about why this book was worth reading for me.
There are two things - no, three things - about this book that I think are really special. First of all, Gentleman's Guide to Vice and Virtue is hilarious, but not so light as to be flimsy. Not to shade every other book ever but this is 1) my niche category of favorite book and 2) a balance I think most books fail at; either we get books that are nothing but fluff, or books that are nothing but tragedy. This book is neither. It's dark, but it's also hopeful. When a book feels too light, it's escapist; when it feels too dark, it's depressing. This book made me feel like the universe doesn't suck too much. Just because people are survivors of abuse or trauma doesn't mean we always need to be in a world of angst.
Secondly - I feel like such a pretentious asshole - I love the themes here about not needing to be cured to be an important person. You have no idea how rare it is for chronically ill / disabled / neuroatypical people to be treated as whole, to be treated as real. This book really explores the fact that Percy doesn't want to be cured; he just wants to be treated like a full person. I have never read a book that even mentioned this feeling. It was... perfect. God, I can't put every emotion I felt about this into a full sentence. Just... if you're looking for this theme, please pick this book up.
Third, and maybe most important; this is historical fiction about people who don't get historical fiction. People love to declaim about how the historical fiction genre doesn't need diversity because, apparently, the only people who existed back then were white, straight, and abled. Which is serious bullshit. People like us have always existed; we just don't get books, especially historical fiction. Seeing representation like this in historical fiction is seriously new and it means the fucking WORLD to me.
The great tragic love story of Percy and me is neither great nor truly a love story, and is tragic only for its single-sidedness. It is also not an epic monolith that has plagued me since boyhood, as might be expected. Rather, it is simply the tale of how two people can be important to each other their whole lives, and then, one morning, quite without meaning to, one of them wakes to find that importance has been magnified into a sudden and intense desire to put his tongue in the other’s mouth.
And yet simultaneously it's so sweet. Like, someone tell me why this book invented romance and being in love.
This is a cute historical romcom focusing on people who don't get historical fiction because the world used to hate us. It's adorable and hilarious and important and I had so much fun reading it.
And this part from the author's note made me cry:
— Which begs the question - would a long term relationship between two English men during the eighteenth century have been a real possibility? I don't know. They likely would not have been able to be open about it. But the optimist in me likes to believe that the twenty-first century is not the first time in history that queer people have been able to live full romantic and sexual lives with the people they love. And if that makes me anachronistic, so be it.
This is fully the book I have owned without reading for the longest in my entire life – I apparently owned this for seven years – so I just want everyThis is fully the book I have owned without reading for the longest in my entire life – I apparently owned this for seven years – so I just want everyone to clap that it is actually quite good.
I’m interested by this as a Romeo and Juliet retelling, as it sort of frames the love between Romeo and Juliet as somewhat false, albeit genuinely believed by them both. While the “Romeo and Juliet is about stupid kids” take reins supreme in many circles, I think there is a lot of value to the idea that the two lovers, while perhaps young and naive, would have lived happily ever after were it not for the enmity between their houses. Prince of Shadows takes on a slightly interesting dimension by essentially arguing that the intensity of the love between Romeo and Juliet is – SPOILERS – (view spoiler)[part of a curse, one that demonstrates love as poison. (hide spoiler)] While this isn’t necessarily my interpretation of the text, the execution is actually quite good.
Because Prince of Shadows is really just quite exciting. Rachel Caine’s writing is effortlessly addictive, and her plot structure and usage of foreshadowing feels pitch-perfect. Even when a detour feels slightly odd in the moment, it always seems to come back to relevance later in the book.
And while I craved significantly more from Rosaline, the characters of Mercutio, Rosaline, and Benvolio all drew me in. Mercutio’s characterization is interesting – I think the novel does a great job of making him a character who does villainous things without making him a villain. Character-wise, though, I do think this may have worked better as a dual point of view. Single point of view romance is just difficult to make compelling. It’s a credit to this author’s talent that Rosaline and Benvolio work as well as they do.
Additionally, this novel went to the Bridgerton season 2 school of “surprisingly sexy given there’s no sex”.
Overall really happy with this one. Sorry for neglecting her for seven years; I’m really sorry and I’ll read one of Rachel Caine’s suspense novels in apology.
“Lines are funny things. They make us feel safe—at least for a while—knowing where we end and someone else begins. But they can also make us want, can“Lines are funny things. They make us feel safe—at least for a while—knowing where we end and someone else begins. But they can also make us want, can make us bitter, wanting what lies on the other side of the line.”
2 stars. This is a half-decent historical fiction novel, but altogether isn't anything special.
THE GOOD
This book's one pro is that it addresses a little-covered topic: the Pakistan-India partition. This issue is handled with care and sympathy towards both sides of the issue.
THE BAD
The characters aren't at all memorable. They are all used exclusively as plot devices. The romance is, likewise, a plot device. There's instalove AND a love triangle, neither of which is well-executed. I don't even know what more to say.
It's clear that Bradbury wasn't trying very hard with the character work here, and unfortunately, the otherwise poignant moments of this novel left me completely cold.
THE UGLY
A major white character is used as a bit of a white savior. She's an earl's daughter who is shown to really care about the savage Indian people. And her father, the rezoner, cares a lot too and knows better than every Pakistani resident. Bradbury clearly wanted to have a sympathetic white character, but she didn't execute the character and her narrative at all.
The narrative of this book also punishes the major Muslim character for his ambition, forcing him to (view spoiler)[leave behind all his family for a life of poverty alone (hide spoiler)], while the major white character ends her life in India with no consequences for her bad actions. There's nothing explicitly bad about this, maybe, but the author seems to imply that the character deserved his fate. It comes off badly.
Loading...
