Nour
3.5 stars
While I think Shaw is a brilliant man, the work is basically over-milking the same point over and over again in abstract manners while lacking nuance. I enjoyed the handbook at the end more than the play itself.
I loved the first half but it just didn't hit the right spots it promised to hit. Severely disappointed.
The cut-off came at the perfect time. I was going towards 4.5 stars in the last 50 pages for a variety of reasons but if you really, and I mean REALLY, understood what Gogol was intending in this book, even if the cut-off was not intended, you would know why this is a perfect end.
I feel this is the end of an era. I absolutely left a part of my heart in this book.
(There is a re-imagined continuation with 60 pages written 5 years after Gogol's death in my copy. It is not available in other translations I have seen. I am not usually into these kind of things. I considered the Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy series to have ended with Douglas Adams life and I fear ruining the magic this book has on me right now by reading the continuation in someone else's pen, which I also feel would be irrelevant. I think it ended where it should have unless Gogol himself have imagined it differently. I might go back in a few years and read that final chapter. But for now, for me, Chichikov's story is satisfactory in how I understood the author to have intended the manuscript to come across).
This book has taken a duplex apartment in my head, rent free.
Wow. This one has me in a pickle. I sat for a long time wondering how I would rate this and I am still pretty confused.
You see, I was aware that exactly what I disliked about the book were things that were very intentional, which makes me feel I am living in a bookish inception. So it was hard to rate this book from a cerebral point of view vs. an emotional one. I was tittering on the edge of 3.5 stars for a while but that ending (and I mean the last 20% of the book) was so under stimulating, I actually started having a sensory overload from my bedsheets just trying to get through it (the autistic girlies know what I mean by that... also WASSSUPPP)... I struggled to read this (from the language, non smooth writing, it took literally 75% of the book to even get to the main premise of it which is fine but it was dragging on, there is no doubt about that at all) but I especially struggled in the last 20 pages from under stimulation that I banged my head repeatedly against my headboard (also autistic girlies should be familiar with this), but I understand what the author intended even if I struggled myself... which is a weird position to be in. I admit I've never been in a similar situation before.
From a cerebral point of view... this book is very clever. I annotated like crazy. I did not enjoy it. I think that was actually the point (Enjoyment of a piece of media is not an expectation for me. I absolutely prefer feeling uncomfortable. I absolutely admire the boldness that comes with writing something that is not intended to be enjoyed. I actually am satirically and humourously pleased with saying the words “I did not enjoy this work” because as I said, logical vs. emotional, and that is tickling my brain right now). The point was to make you feel uncomfortable, for you to hate the main character who is BTW a piece of sht but to also pity him? he is very pathetic in a lot of different ways. I don't think there was any way that exists under the sun for me to *actually enjoy it. The same way you wouldn't particularly like Albert Camus's The Stranger in that emotional way but can recognize the genius of the novel.
I have never been this conflicted by a book before. I do admire what it is trying to do but I thoroughly struggled to get through it and so I think a 3 stars rating is good enough. It is exactly how I feel : a grandiose meh, with a dash of I am happy this average rating makes me extremely uninvolved, removed, successfully avoiding having to make a decision, and a slight nod of the head to the cleverness with which this was delivered... all in all it is pretty diplomatic for me. And that should suffice, for now.
EDIT: it is the next day and while I am leaning towards 3.5 stars in my mind, I would like to keep my rating as diplomatic as possible at 3 stars.
I am glad I read this book. It was brilliant in its own way, one has to got to admit that. But I struggled to get through it.
I absolutely do recommend it but only to people who have been reading a variety of books and genres for years, it is definitely not for the new reader or the romance/fantasy/thriller/mystery reader. This book is like the summer British afternoon... long but you have a few interesting things in between, bite sized that make it tolerable.
I must add that since my own country is at war right now, too, a lot of things have hit home for me and made me realize how different things are for us right now.
Again, I recommend, but only if you have read a bunch of classics or Orwell before. Definitely not a starter novel.
This book is not for the faint of heart, or anyone with any heart at all.
I advise you to go into this with extreme open mindedness, to the point where you have no thoughts or opinions of your own.
This is gruesome, horrifying, the biggest mind fck I've read in my entire life but I absolutely loved it. The writing is gorgeous. It is very reminiscent to me of Mein Teil by Rammstein which I think is why I loved it so much as Mein Teil absolutely has my heart. Mein Teil follows the cannibalism case of Armin Meiwes, and the two also met in a chatroom in the 2000s. This parallelism is what made me absolutely love it even more. I am still shaken. I hallucinated about it in my dreams last night. My heart feels like it came out of my chest. But I do not recommend it to anyone who cannot understand the dimensions at play here. It is heavy. It will knock you out. I am so horrified, in a good way, I feel if I spoke no sound will come out. And the idea is so unique and good. Chefs kiss*
Kill it with fire.
The only redeemable quality is the smoothness of the writing (albeit slightly repetitive) and the world building (the world he built seemed to be solid, and stable). However, there were too many characters, it was hard to keep up with them all. I was still unable to remember a character by name the last 20 pages of the book. Some chapters ended on semi cliff hangers and we didn't reunite with the character in question for another 70-80 pages which is about 20% of the book so it is very unreasonable. Also, there were a lot of side stories for some very unimportant characters that I don't think were relevant at all to spend so much time on. Very little character development from start to finish, if at all, and too many sex scenes that SHOULD have been spent on character development instead. Each character seems to have one trait that carried it through from start to finish because of so little space to develop it with an abundance of sex scenes in between that the author seemed to be... sex obsessed? I understand how for an Arab, writing such raunchy and detailed sex scenes can seem like the ultimate defiance in writing, especially since it is published in Arabic, in an Arab country, but not only was it tacky, it was bordering on being vulgar since at least 70% was irrelevant to the story and the characters ended up appearing juvenile because of how mono-dimensional they were in sacrifice for the trivial sex scenes.
Also, it was weird how some people were only described by their race in relation to menial jobs they occupied when no other feature about them was described at all (not even what they are wearing, or their attitude, or the face expression)... it was just odd... and robbed me the wrong way. This is not a work of literature (far from being one in Arabic at all as the language is way too simple, expressions and descriptions repetitive, and storyline non memorable or revolutionary) for the connection between low wage job (receptionist and drivers were always black for example and no other feature about them mentioned) and race be of any critical importance to the work as a whole, and it shouldn't be, as the story primarily follows a bunch of Egyptians in relation to their society back home, the estrangement and cultural shock in America and their relationship with the Egyptian dictatorship.
Also, the story had no clear direction, nor did any of the mini stories of the people within, the ending feels cut off, there is no clear resolution at the end, the story felt incredibly stagnant for around 300 pages, and it was very hard to go through it despite the smooth writing because it was so static and I could not see any direction for it to go in.
1.5 stars
This book didn't end fast enough for me.
Where should I start? First of all, I am aro-ace and this book went in under 20 pages from “ok, that is a valid feeling” to this is downright offensive, bordering on lgbtq-phobia.. and this book is 400 pages.
The main character's internal monologue was offensive, annoying, and frankly, didn't make sense for someone who was pretty knowledgeable about the LGBTQ community and how things operated. She was also extremely bitchy and uncommunicative to people who cared about her, especially Rooney. She on more than one occasion gave back handed remarks that were bordering on slut shaming to Rooney. She made it feel like people owed her their help because she has never been kissed. And of course, the elephant in the room, taking advantage of someone's feelings of her to try kissing someone when she can do it with any rando in the club.
Not to mention, every single page calling herself “not normal” , an “error in programming” while she could have just communicated her feelings and her very sex positive friends, who are LGBTQ, who always encouraged her to do what is comfortable for her (while the internal monologue was like omg i will be made fun of for not having sex and aside from 2 randos in high school, she actually had a more sex positive experience than the rest of us and the rest of us always knew there is not a problem with waiting till you are comfortable), might have helped her. Instead, she shut down, and was resentful of the lives her friends led. Also, it was offensive as an aroace to read this fictional experience where the obsession of the main character with being kissed and having a relationship despite acknowledging that she feels disgust towards them is on. EVERY. SINGLE. PAGE. WITHOUT ANY BREAK. Without her actually being involved in the life happening around her. And frankly? she was spineless af. So tired of the stereotype of the dorky ace chick with oversized granny clothes who sits in the corner and only talks when it is necessary, who is weak and can't defend herself and needs her more confident friends to stand up for her. So tired. It is overdone. I am so angry at this book.
The followings are actual quotes from the book: All of these are in order of how they appeared in the book “It wasn't just that I'd hurt Jason. It wasn't even having to accept that I was some kind of sexual orientation that barely anyone had heard of” this is after knowing TWO PEOPLE IN REAL LIFE, WHO WERE HER FRIENDS, THAT ARE ACE AS WELL.
“I didn't want to be at a party where Jason hated me and Rooney and Pip were living what I would never have.” yes, Rooney and Pip, her best friends who have done so much for her and like each other...
“Because I am aromantic and asexual. But it sounded clunky. They still felt like fake words in my brain, secret words, whispered words that didn't belong in the real word” this is after reading tens of blog posts from real people online (+ the 2 irl friends)
“My animalistic instinct was this is stupid. This is fake. This is a made-up internet thing that is stupid and fake and absolutely not me.” Person talking to main character “I don't know when I started to realize that I hated it. For a long time, I was just dating and having sex because that's what people did. And I wanted to feel like those people. I wanted the fun, exciting beauty of romance and sex. But there was always this underlying feeling of wrongness. Almost disgust. It just felt wrong on a fundamental level.” I felt a wave of relief that I had never let myself go that far. Maybe I was a little strong than I thought.
Imagine your own cousin sharing with you the traumas of feeling forced to have sex and this is what you are thinking all the time.
This book is a waste of paper.
Spoilers, kinda, ahead, even though you kind of deduce this from the beginning.
I can go on and on about the plot holes (that thing that came up about Alex in the end felt like an afterthought and does not fit at all anywhere with the plot and how the characters dealt about it in the beginning), lack of nuance about feminism when it is a feminist book, lack of character consistency and development (which is embarrassing in such a character heavy book), lack of depth, the unlikability of the main character and the severe lack of understanding of how someone who has been manipulated and gaslit for 26 years would feel about sharing things with her abuser (which added to the unlikability of the character and made her sound well... dumb. At least in the scenes where basic survival instinct should have kicked in, like confronting the abuser of the crimes he committed, including attempting to murder someone, while being alone with them in the house? like telling him a secret she vowed to keep 20+ years before in relation to someone being raped (not her) and knowing because of earlier comments he made that at the very least, doesn't care about the topic at all). It felt like reading female characters written by a man who calls himself a feminist on twitter.
The writing style also felt forced? Like someone who is writing what they think their professor at university wants to read. The descriptions were very awkwardly put in the flow of the story and sometimes were irrelevant and made me frustrated and the inner monologue of Joni was annoying because it didn't even make sense at times. It felt patronizing a bit to read it as someone who did survive abuse very similar to Paul's, which is a type of abuse that is very common sadly. And the ending fell flat as literally everything was predictable but Joni's actions were not calculated, reckless, impulsive and dumb.
4.5 stars
This was so cute. So entertaining. So fun. The writing was consistent (which I can't say for the last few books I read, even though they were more acclaimed than this one) and adorable. The plot carried through smoothly (also an experience I DIDN'T have in the last few books, that have a higher average rating on here), and progressed nicely. There was no annoying back and forth even when some time passed, the missing info was smoothly integrated into the narration. I am so glad I read it.
1.75 stars
I don't understand the hype around this book. The writing tone is inconsistent, sometimes juvenile and not in a good way. The characters, especially Sadie were extremely unlikeable, not even in a morally gray way, but in a malicious she-wanted-to-be-chased way, often with admittance that she knew all along the opposite of what she is accusing people of. She also engaged in vile actions as well. The writing was cheesy and redundant, often illogical. For ex., excessive comparisons of real life things to being a game designer, including some aspects of motherhood and how Sadie dehumanized her own child to be able to make sense that this child is their own person by comparing her to a game character. The dialogue was clunky. The ending, after 500 pages was extremely unsatisfying and dull. The writing dragged on. It was unnecessarily long.
One thing in particular I hated was the author deliberately letting 2 years pass in the narration, moving to a different set of events after those two years, not even grand events, and then filling in the gaps of those 2 years in retrospect . It was fine the first few times, but it became super annoying very fast. The ending made it feel that all that reading was severely pointless.
If I could give this book less than 1 stars, I would.
Before we get into the politics, let us break down the structure of the book itself. The book is presented as an essay while failing to meet the basic requirements of an essay. Bold statements were presented without evidence or examples and no counterargument was provided to act as further justification for his statements, and while not even acknowledging the opposing faction, which makes the work prejudiced by default. The work sounds more like a series of tweets, composed with the purpose of baiting the reader, and then eventually at the end of each chapter, doubling down quickly and ending the chapters abruptly. This work doesn't even meet the requirement of a high school class.
What is more laughable is the many instances, and this comes back to how the book felt like a series of tweets, of him abruptly saying “I have done my research thoroughly on this topic so I know...” then providing none of that research or acknowledging that a topic is more nuanced than he is writing it out to be, but simultaneously saying that is why he needs to be a reductionist. Sir... it is your own book, you can write whatever you want, however long you want it to be. And even if you didn't have the space... so many useless things could have easily been struck out in favor of making a solid point.
I was thoroughly disappointed in a man I wholeheartedly respected and whose works I grew up with. I come as a generation that read Baldassar's Odyssey, Leo Africanus, the Rock of Tanios, Samarcande, etc.. when I was only 14-15, passed down to me from my parents who thoroughly respect him, too. To be astounded, not only with the poorly disguised bigotry, but by his inability to present a respectable work of writing albeit lacking in political awareness... that is unforgivable solely from a literary point of view.
Let us talk about the liberalism and the flagrant islamophobia and disdain of the global south, paired with lazy doubling down at the end of each chapter.
In the face of the current political climate, and him Amin Maalouf being someone who lived through the civil war, reducing the problems of the middle east as problems of underdeveloped sense of identity and self actualization vis à vis religion and then it inevitably trickling down into religious fanaticism... offensive would be a compliment here. A man who saw the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, to reduce that into a conflict of Muslim vs. Jewish is downright treason.
Not to mention justifying European colonialism and simultaneously criticizing any rise against said colonialism because “no more blood need to be spilled”, downright saying the global south is jealous of the west for what it could accomplish, accusing the African American population of not properly wanting to assimilate into American culture, etc...
Really, the whole book was a series of horrible takes, meant to kiss up to Europeans, imperialism and globalism while reducing the actual issues of the global south either to jealousy, inability to be self aware, or religious fanaticism.
It was also extremely inconsistent. It was sometimes very hard to keep up with an idea he is making, and it wasn't just me, my mom as well, and several other people I saw who reviewed this book.
And the good takes? 80% of them I had when I was 15, sir, you are not that special.
Everyone joins a band in life. 3.75 stars .
For the first ~150 pages it was a 4.5 stars for me. The plot was so perfectly laid out and interwoven. It was clear that the author did not write a single word until the outline of his story was complete and no guess work was done. The only issue I had was the cheesy narration which is fine, I can easily get over.
But this book was long and the more it dragged out, the more flimsy the plotline was and the more it relied on weird coincidences and random people doing things for the main character who basically floated through life.
The romantic trope was yuck in a lot of places, too.
2.75 stars “Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the over-compensations for misery”
Wow. I still don't know what to feel about this book. So many complex emotions but one thing for sure: it could have been better. It was just too erratic and feels too unplanned in some places. So many parts could have been better and that ending was so underwhelming. Objectively, the first half was better than the other half.
Also the “debate” with the controller was so obviously one sided. There was no actual argument. The debate felt built on emotions and they weren't actually making opposing points. Each person was talking a totally different thing.
The characters were ALL unlikable. There were no grey areas, just caricatures of people you know would never exist. The dystopia was actually very appealing anyway because there was no solid argument made against it and carried through till the end. Pointing out the lack of something is not argument in favour of its existence.
My two stars are for the first 100 pages, the writing style and in general, how the story progressed.
Not to mention the unnecessary racism. The time it was written in is not an excuse. The book was progressive in many other issues, but calling darker skinned people “dog-skinned” outside of narration, outside of character dialogue or thoughts... so unnecessary.
That racism actually was part of the lower rating, not only on principles, but it literally created a plot hole. It was no longer this world in my head of these principles, but something that invaded the construction of this world and weakened it because it didn't make sense.
By telling you anything at all, I'm at least believing in you, I believe you're there, I believe you into being. Because I'm telling this story, I will your existence. I tell, therefore you are.
Usually, when I rate a book 1 star, it is because it is a shame to call the incompetent who wrote it an author to begin with but this isn't the case here. Margaret can write, there is no doubt about that. She has earned the title of a writer. That is not my qualm with this book.
Sometimes, we put too much weight on books being award winning that we, unconsciously, accept from them what we wouldn't accept from any other book or any form of entertainment for that matter. It is inexcusable that the premise of the book was first introduced at 55% of the book. Driving confusion for more than half of the book is inexcusable and none of us would let it pass for any other book, or movie, or video. That is without talking about all the back and forth even at the end of the book, even in the middle of active scenes involving other people.
SPOILERS AHEAD AS WELL AS A HUGE TRIGGER WARNING
I am not entitled to want a perfect victim or a perfect character. Most of us who have been reading for years are well aware and well comfortable with morally gray characters.
This character was not morally gray. Even before sh*t went down, she was passive. She was critical of her best friend and her mother for caring about women's rights. She had a relation with a married man. She was passive and later complicit. What is worse, is her being inconsistent. Picking and choosing what to be involved in.
But it doesn't stop there, she puts insane expectations on other people to free her while doing nothing to help those around her. Just read this excerpt of her conversation with her best friend after the new order was established.
I don't want her to be like me. Give in, go along, save her skin. That is what it comes down to. I want gallantry from her, swashbuckling, heroism, single-handed combat.
The god damned ENTITLEMENT.
Listen, it is fine to protect oneself. But expect someone else to sacrifice themselves for you to have a better life is just rude. What is worse, is her rationalizing rape so she can convince herself she isn't raped.
The rape scene, even though it came out of nowhere, was not the problem, I've read the premise of the book anyway. It is her thoughts about it that are super triggering.
“What he is fucking is the lower part of my body. I do not say making love, because this is not what he's doing. Copulating too would be inaccurate, because it would imply two people and only one is involved. Nor does rape cover it: nothing is going on here that I haven't signed up for. There wasn't a lot of choice but there was some, and this is what I chose. Therefore, I lie still and picture the unseen canopy over my head [...] I wish he would hurry up. Maybe I'm crazy and this is some new kind of therapy.”
Later:
- What does he want? kinky sex?
It would be hard to explain to her what he does want, because I still have no name for it (They were playing scrabble, that is it). How can I describe what really goes on between us? she would laugh, for one thing. It's easier for me to say “in a way”. That at least has the dignity of coercion .
That is inexcusable. I am convinced this was done for shock effect, without actual thought into what it actually means.
What really irks me is that two pages after the rape scene, the handmaid she walks with tells her about a resistance group and she gets excited. Just barely afterwards. And she wants to talk about it and know more but doesn't actually eventually do anything, just hears these words. At the end, when they are executing that guy convicted of rape (which she KNEW was not a true accusation since it is a government built on rape), she is suddenly active, suddenly full of rage after 300 pages of apathy and wants to attack the guy. Morally gray is an understatement.
She even stops caring about the resistance she claimed to be excited about when she starts having sex with a guy. She doesn't want to hear about it and she says she doesn't care. She also says she is relieved her walking buddy stops talking about it 2 weeks after starting to have sex with that guy. It wasn't even a relationship. TWO WEEKS.
And at the end, that is what happens, someone else saves her ass while she does nothing.
Apathy does not encompass her. Apathy is consistent. This is a disaster of a character with no planning.
The only criticism I have of the style of writing is that some metaphors did not make sense.
“verbal semaphore” just say CODE, that makes NO SENSE.
“his voice is metal-colored, horn-shaped”
“the three bodies hang there, even with the white sacks over their heads looking curiously stretched, like chickens strung up by the necks in a meatshop window; like birds with their wings clipped, like flightless birds, wrecked angels.” That is just redundant and unnecessary. Not everything should be compared.
that is a salad of words, loves.
Anyway, what do you all think?
3.25
It is well written but I struggle to see how people in 1988 - when this book was originally published - when there was no internet and no surge in interest in astrophics after The Big Bang Theory show, would find this in any way easy to keep up with. Some questions he proposed were ambiguous, some ideas were hard to keep up with, and it was hard to fall into a flow in this book, but as I said, it is well written and well put together regardless, hence the rating.
Dragged a bit on the end but everyone should read this book, especially those who struggle with mathematics and basically anyone who is eligible to vote to put statistics into context. My only problem with it is that the tone of the writer seemed to be very condescending towards the lifestyle section of the newspaper that is often catered to women and entertainment of women.
