I love Young Adult novels. Not all of them are good, but that can be said for any novel at any age level. What I like about YA novels though, is that the good ones often present a view of the universe that is very nuanced and help expose young adults (and all other readers) to ideas about what is, what should be, economic systems, social issues, etc., within a safe world. Readers are free to explore these topics without having to "worry" about whether the vast majority of their friends will agree with whatever political view the book takes, because it's just a book. I'm not saying this doesn't happen for adult books, but oftentimes adults take adult books too seriously and can get offended if they see someone reading a book they think contains ideas that are "wrong." Young Adult books don't necessarily carry this stigma (though you always have to be careful for those people worried about whether it is "appropriate" based on cursing, sexual activities, etc.). The point is! Young Adult novels are a great way for people to gain basic understanding of complex ideas without worrying that someone is going to slap a book out of their hands or dismiss its ideas because it's written by a "radical."
The Red Rising trilogy (which is the opening salvo of a larger series) is an example of a YA series where there's a lot that can be unpacked if you want. Or there's the option of just enjoying the story. Overall it help tells a message about the dangers of white-supremacy (or any sort of supremacy but in our current world it's white-supremacy), capitalism, technology, and societal norms. It does not go the way of Dune and the Butlerian Jihad (i.e., robots/AI taking control of everything and humans fighting back), but in some ways is much more insidious. It's biological science technology involving genetics, the reproductive system, and micro-chipping. Things that seem hugely science fiction right now, but which aren't actually that far away. The basic premise of of the series is that humanity has been separated into different colors, each color holding a place in the hierarchy of society. Reds at the bottom, Golds at the top. Through genetic engineering Golds are superior in size, strength, and supposedly everything else. Reds and other colors (Grays, Obsidians, Pinks, Violets, Blues, Oranges, etc.) are useful but inferior. Society has rules, Golds enforce those rules, and everyone is happy. Except, obviously to the reader, they aren't. Darrow, a Red hell-diver, is called upon by the Sons of Ares to infiltrate the Golds and help bring about the revolution. He is remade as a Gold and pushed into what amounts to a military academy. And let me tell you, it's way worse than the Hunger Games. The series is violent, disturbing, and heart-rending. I've cried and yelled and almost thrown the book (yes, I stopped myself in time but did end up slamming it against my table). It is not a story that has a happy ending, though I suppose Pierce Brown may pull something out of his hat in this last book, but it is a very important story to read. Even if you don't read it as a commentary on capitalism, white-supremacy, social norms, technology, and/or the human condition it is a series worth reading. Because as much as I love happy endings, it's important to be reminded that sometimes things don't turn out well. There are wars, traumas, and horrors in our world, but that doesn't mean we give up. That is, in my opinion, the most important message of this series (though there are a whole lot more if you read deeply). So read those happy books like I do, but maybe pick these up too. Because it never hurts to be reminded that we can always get back up again and there is always something worth rising for. Happy Reading!
0 Comments
It doesn't always happen but sometimes when I review a book on Goodreads.com I give it less than three stars. I don't like to do this. I know how much work goes into writing/publishing/marketing/selling a book, and I'm still on the writing portion of mine. But sometimes I need to rate a book just "ok", which is a two-star rating on Goodreads. And the thing is, this book, and others in the series, have storylines which are worth a three-star rating at least. I'm on the third book in the Parasol Protectorate series now. I started reading the series last week. Obviously I like these books right? And I do. I just do not like the writing style.
The story itself takes place in a steampunk rendition of Victorian England. The aether (a common entity in steampunk literature) sort of takes the place of electric and magnetic advances. In addition to this classical steampunk trope, supernatural creatures, vampires and werewolves, join the cast, and the main character herself, a Miss Alexia Tarabotti, is a preternatural. Preturnaturals aren't a common paranormal creature. In this world, vampires and werewolves are created out of mortals that had extra "soul." Similar to scientific understanding in our current world, the book's world doesn't really have a good explanation of what the "soul" is. But they know that mortals who have an excess survive the change to vampires or werewolves. In contrast, a preternatural has no "soul." They live, they have consciences, they reproduce exactly the same as humans would. But they have no souls, and their touch renders supernatural creatures mortal again. So, in essence, they're the opposite of a supernatural. Hence the term preternatural. I won't get into the actual plot of the book, but just reading that short description of the type of world the book contains is amazing. It's exactly my type of book. But the characters, who I mostly like, and the intricacies of the world itself weren't able to make up for the writing style. It was written in third person, which as an author I like because it gives me some freedom to switch perspectives without having to indicate in a chapter or section heading which characters is speaking. It can, however, be difficult for a reader if viewpoint changes too often without an indication or pattern (as often happens in the Parasol Protectorate series). In this series' case, I think the possible issues with third-person are compounded because the author doesn't always refer to the same characters in the same way. For example, sometimes she'll call the protagonist Alexia but other times she'll call the protagonist Miss Tarabotti. And there isn't a pattern I've been able to detect that indicates why she's using a different moniker. This was jarring for me in the first book, and has been in the second book as well. I'm not far enough into the third book to make a judgement on that yet. Long story short (though it isn't if you consider the length of this post), I've given the first two books of the Parasol Protectorate series two-star ratings because the writing style is so jarring, but they are at least three-star worthy in terms of characters and storyline keeping me interested. If you like steampunk and paranormal reads (yes there is romance thrown in too) feel free to read the book(s) and give me your opinion on them. Maybe you'll catch a pattern I missed and I can go back and up my rating. Or we can just gab about the book itself. Happy Reading! Last year and this year I've been trying to increase my non-fiction reading repertoire (though I cheat a little bit and count memoirs as non-fiction, which is a debatable classification that I take full advantage of) because I prefer fiction to non-fiction. Part of this is because reading is at least a partial escape for me, and I don't really want to read about the real horrible things happening in the world. This is also why I prefer romances and fantasy with at least a mostly happy ending. Part of it is that non-fiction reads differently than fiction, and often the writing style in non-fiction books is one that often leaves me with glazed over eyes even when the topic is interesting. However, I do want to be well-informed and I don't want to push myself into a corner with my reading, so in 2018 and 2019 I've given myself the goal of reading at least one non-fiction (memoirs included) book per month. And for April 2019 I read The Monopolists: Obsession, Fury, and the Scandal Behind the World's Favorite Board Game. Somewhat surprisingly (though I don't know why it would be a surprise as I like board games) the history of Monopoly is fascinating.
You see, the game itself was originally an argument against monopolies and, to some extent, capitalism. I won't go into the whole history but the game of origin was called The Landlord's Game and was invented by Lizzie Magie in 1904. It had two ways to play, monopoly style and non-monopoly style. As the game spread and people put their own spin on the game, including making homemade boards, it became known as the monopoly game, as the monopoly style was the one most used. But I'll let you read the book to get the whole story. ;) While it wasn't my favorite book ever to read, at this point I'm unsure whether a non-fiction book will ever receive that distinction for me, it was very interesting because it went about telling the history of Monopoly through the lens of a game developed in the 1970s (I believe the official date is 1977), Anti-Monopoly. The cool thing is, while I hadn't really noticed such a game before, I actually saw one today at the Labyrinth board game store in Washington D.C. I don't know if it's just because I read this book and so I noticed the game for the first time, or if the game had just never been sold in any of the stores I've purchased games from before, but it was really cool to see the Anti-Monopoly game, especially because this book made the topic so interesting. The Monopolists is written by a journalist, and therefore has a journalistic tone. That is, it tries very hard to be objective even though no human being can be completely objective. That being said, overall I think the book did a fairly good job of not overtly telling us that big corporations are jerks and shouldn't be trusted. It was surely implied, at least it was in my mind, but it wasn't an in-your-face statement. The book also increased my interest in trademark/copyright law (which is something I'll need to deal with at some point as an aspiring author anyway) and how since cases like the Anti-Monopoly case went through laws have changed to better protect the big corporations from their iconic products entering into the public domain. Mickey Mouse anyone? Overall, I enjoyed The Monopolists. I think it was well written, well researched, and the topic was quite interesting. I suggest it for anyone who is interested in the history of games, underdogs winning court cases, commentaries on current economic systems, and enthusiasts of the Monopoly game itself. If you end up reading it, or have a non-fiction book suggestion for me, let me know in the comments! Happy reading! |
AuthorThe author is a librarian who reads "too much" (is there such a thing?) and talks just as much. As an aspiring author she gets bogged down by grammar rules when she just wants to forget them to make a sentence flow, but never seems to be able to. She appreciates thoughtful comments and constructive criticism, but internet trolls beware, she's read enough fantasy novels to know how to defeat the monsters. Archives
October 2020
Categories
All
|