Kam
Okay so. I’ve had this on my TBR for a VERY long time now, but I got around to it now because it was the book my friends’ book club selected for November, and while there was plenty about it that I liked, there were also some aspects that didn’t sit quite so well with me.
The first thing that didn’t sit well with me were the moments of rather heavy-handed thematic exposition - not development, EXPOSITION. This was most obvious in the conversations between Jenks and Lovey, but they happen between all the characters at different points throughout the novel. While there’s generally nothing wrong with such bald-faced, explicit exposition and expounding on themes, especially given the very minimal or total absence of literacy a certain subset of readers bring to the metaphorical table, I did find it a bit boring and lacking in artistry. There are many ways to expand upon the themes tackled in this book; straightforward explanation via character conversations is ONE of those ways, but it’s not the kind I personally enjoy.
This leads me to another issue I have with this book: the very minimal friction, not just between the characters, but between the characters and the universe they inhabit. In the crew of the Wayfarer, the only point of conflict amongst the characters is Corbin, whose general misanthropy is an interesting point of contention when he deals with the crew, but the story doesn’t really tackle it much except where the plot needs to in order to move forward. Similarly, when the crew encounters trouble in the universe (for example: giant carnivorous bugs trapping them on a homestead in an underdeveloped moon), the story glosses that entire trouble over, implying that the characters remained safe and sound all throughout their stay in the face of the swarm. As with my previous comment on the lack of subtlety in developing themes, the minimal friction is something that some readers find appealing, but which I, personally, don’t enjoy.
What this means is that the narrative tends towards episodic moments, which is something I CAN enjoy in certain narratives, but in this case, I didn’t particularly like. Sadly, I think it’s the only narrative structure that would have been able to sustain the low-stakes, low-friction tone of the overall story, since any complications can be either resolved quickly or are hand-waved away, thus precluding the need for any kind of sustained arc.
That being said, I did really like the characters - yes, even (or maybe especially) Corbin. They were a fun bunch to read about, and while I might not have liked some of their interactions, I did like the way they dealt with each other and other people, for the most part. They are the sort of characters I might like as people, and not just as characters.
Overall, this wasn’t that bad a read, but I did have some issues with it, with the bald-faced exposition of themes and minimal narrative friction being the most notable ones. I understand that the explicit discussion of themes and the low-stakes plot are a draw for some readers, and that it’s a big-enough audience to warrant the creation of an entire subgenre of SFF (i.e. cozy SFF), but I really don’t think it’s for me. At least the characters were interesting.
Originally posted at kamreadsandrecs.tumblr.com.
Okay so. I’ve had this on my TBR for a VERY long time now, but I got around to it now because it was the book my friends’ book club selected for November, and while there was plenty about it that I liked, there were also some aspects that didn’t sit quite so well with me.
The first thing that didn’t sit well with me were the moments of rather heavy-handed thematic exposition - not development, EXPOSITION. This was most obvious in the conversations between Jenks and Lovey, but they happen between all the characters at different points throughout the novel. While there’s generally nothing wrong with such bald-faced, explicit exposition and expounding on themes, especially given the very minimal or total absence of literacy a certain subset of readers bring to the metaphorical table, I did find it a bit boring and lacking in artistry. There are many ways to expand upon the themes tackled in this book; straightforward explanation via character conversations is ONE of those ways, but it’s not the kind I personally enjoy.
This leads me to another issue I have with this book: the very minimal friction, not just between the characters, but between the characters and the universe they inhabit. In the crew of the Wayfarer, the only point of conflict amongst the characters is Corbin, whose general misanthropy is an interesting point of contention when he deals with the crew, but the story doesn’t really tackle it much except where the plot needs to in order to move forward. Similarly, when the crew encounters trouble in the universe (for example: giant carnivorous bugs trapping them on a homestead in an underdeveloped moon), the story glosses that entire trouble over, implying that the characters remained safe and sound all throughout their stay in the face of the swarm. As with my previous comment on the lack of subtlety in developing themes, the minimal friction is something that some readers find appealing, but which I, personally, don’t enjoy.
What this means is that the narrative tends towards episodic moments, which is something I CAN enjoy in certain narratives, but in this case, I didn’t particularly like. Sadly, I think it’s the only narrative structure that would have been able to sustain the low-stakes, low-friction tone of the overall story, since any complications can be either resolved quickly or are hand-waved away, thus precluding the need for any kind of sustained arc.
That being said, I did really like the characters - yes, even (or maybe especially) Corbin. They were a fun bunch to read about, and while I might not have liked some of their interactions, I did like the way they dealt with each other and other people, for the most part. They are the sort of characters I might like as people, and not just as characters.
Overall, this wasn’t that bad a read, but I did have some issues with it, with the bald-faced exposition of themes and minimal narrative friction being the most notable ones. I understand that the explicit discussion of themes and the low-stakes plot are a draw for some readers, and that it’s a big-enough audience to warrant the creation of an entire subgenre of SFF (i.e. cozy SFF), but I really don’t think it’s for me. At least the characters were interesting.
Originally posted at kamreadsandrecs.tumblr.com.