Nourez Rawji

What makes a good Gothic? A sense of presence in the location. The feeling that the characters’ inner selves are being made manifest by that location. A healthy dose of moral ambiguity. A sense of being trapped, of danger, whether it's supernatural or of the characters’ own making. And through it all, a sort of grotesque allure to it all.

All of these elements exist in the foundations of Hazelthorn, but the book is so tied up in its YA trappings that it never comes together into anything meaningful by the end. At its core, Hazelthorn is the story of Evander, a young man who's spent much of the last 7 years locked in a room at the titular manor due to fits of an unnamed illness, and Laurie, the boy who tried to bury him alive 7 years prior. One day, Evander wakes to find the room's door mysteriously unlocked, and the head of the household poisoned, and he sets out to solve the mystery with Laurie's help.

When the scope of the book is just the two leads, it tends to work well. They ebb and flow into each other’s lives, being drawn together slowly by something in between romantic attraction and infatuation. The botanical horror setting and the slow digging into their characters’ pasts make for the bones of what would be a solid novel, but that's about where the good elements end for me.

The novel quickly loses its momentum whenever it stops being a weird, ethereal, gory meditation on the nature of wanting vs loving. It introduces plot twist after plot twist, moustache-twirling villains, an inheritance scheme, and a hardline sense of morality that all contribute to a very YA feel to it. The romance throws away its nuance and everyone ends up falling into strictly defined good and bad guys, all wrapped in the most on-the-nose social commentary I've read in a while. It ends up feeling over-explained and underbaked, the gothic sense of place falling away to a much more generic feeling back half. And finally, I need to touch on the prose. It's straight up awful. Every single noun has an adjective attached, every single concept is described with a metaphor or simile, there's so much flowery language that it feels suffocating. I love good poetic writing, but this is amateurish at best and unreadable at worst. It really does feel like you could cut about 30% to 40% of the words out of this novel and still have the same overarching story. I normally don't skim when I read, but I found myself having to do so just to get through the writing here. I seriously think this will be my go-to example of purple prose for people who aren't familiar with the term. I don't know if the editor just let it slip or the author was insistent on it for artistic purposes, but it was the single factor that took the book from a 3-star (it was okay) to a 2-star (I disliked it) review for me. It's that overbearing.

Ultimately, Hazelthorn is a mixed bag of good and bad ideas all tied together with deeply irritating prose. If you're okay with ornate, flowery language in an ornate, flowery mansion, this may be for you. Otherwise, I can't recommend it. There are so many better gothics out there.

I've been re-reading (or listening, in this case) to the entire Harry Potter series leading up to new TV series, and The Chamber of Secrets is the one that I don't really have much in the way of stong memories towards. I recalled it being a bit of a retread of The Philosopher's Stone as a child, and I never really gave it fair shake beyond that as an adult.

I was pleasantly surprised by how much more than The Philosopher's Stone I enjoyed it ont his re-read. Though a lot of the narrative structure is similar in both stories, Chamber benefits tremendously from simply being able to dive the reader into the story without having to fully establish the world beforehand. Harry, Ron and Hermione attend Hogwarts for another year, find another dark secret within the school, and spend a large amount of time sneaking off to investigate it when they'd be better off simply telling an adult in the room.

Where the book really differentiates itself from The Philosopher's Stone is in the level of nuance given to the world and to the characters. The first book was framed from the perspective of a boy just learning that Wizards and Witches exist, the second is able to dive into the nooks and crannies and make the world feel alive. The first really felt scoped in on Hogwarts as a location, here we get little tidbits of information from outside, spending time at the Weasley family home, new locations in the magical parts of London, and getting a fair amount of expansion on the views and ideas of various types of Wizards outside the school. It's the book that marks the shift from The Wizarding School to The Wizarding World.

The characters are more fleshed out. Harry is able to grow into his newfound identity as a wizard, feeling more comfortable at school, allowing more of his personality to shine through, rather than simple confusion at every new thing he encounters. There's a bit of sass there, a confidence that this is where he belongs that leads to a great payoff in the ending. This allows Ron to be more involved as a character rather that an exposition device. Some of the banter between the two of them is endearingly hilarious. The villain is more deeply integrated into the school storyline, and it leads to palpable tension for everyone along with some genuinely creepy moments. However, if there is one flaw, it's that Hermione is absent for a suprisingly large amount of the novel. It does really let the Harry and Ron friendship blossom, but her absence is noticable.

All things considered, this is a review for a series that has been reviewed to death at this point. If you liked The Philosopher's Stone, then The Chamber of Secrets is a funnier, darker and more refined version of the same formula. It's the best kind of more of the same.

And, as a final note, I'm listening to the Audible Full-Cast versions of the audiobook, I need to give a shoutout to how incredible Kit Harrington is as Lockhart. Lockhart is one of my favourite characters in the series, and Harrington's performance stole every scene he was involved in. He has the perfect level of smug stupidity for the character, and makes the new audiobook worth listening to by himself.

I've seen this book described as what would happen if Cormac McCarthy wrote Dark Souls, and I have to say that's pretty much on point.

The Plague is raveging France, the Legions of Hell have begun to wage war on Heaven, with God nowhere to be found.

This is the initial setup for the novel which follows a brigand, a priest and a young girl who has prophetic visions on a journey to Avignon. It's worth noting that for a large portion of the novel, the above setup is more or less the only real story notes that are explicitly given, with the story instead taking on a far more episodic structure than I was expecting. Like the stories metioned above, Between Two Fires is perfectly content to feed the overarching narrative to you via contextual tidbits and through the worldbuilding itself. This initially threw me for a bit of a loop, as it did feel like the middle segment of the book meanders for a while with a bunch of loosly connected stories. However, once I started to piece together what was going on, the structue clicked for me pretty quickly. The end result is that the overall novel is fantastic, but I can also see myself simply going back to re-read individual chapters which work well as standalone stories.

And when it all comes together in the last act, I was absolutly hooked. The ending is incredibly strong, the perfect capstone to the characters journeys.

I also really enjoyed the writing style. The writing has fantastically grotesque imagery, it's incredibly bleak, but there's a suprising amount of levity in the dialogue. I found myself really enjoying the little moments where the main trio managed to get a little bit of time to simply talk to each other, it made the overall story so much better.

All things considered, this might be one of the few instances where a book that's been blowing up online may have exceeded my expectations. It's an easy 5 stars for me.

The Harry Potter series was integral to my childhood growing up, each new release feeling like an event in the way that I don't think I've ever had since. I recall lining up at midnight for the release of each of the books after Prisoner of Azkaban as they released, seeing each of the movies in theatres on release weekend and so on.

But I haven't re-read the series since the release of The Deathly Hallows films, give or take.

So I came into the start of thir re-read a little apprehensive about if the books would live up to my expectations and memories as as a teen and young adult now that I'm comfortably in my 30s.

I'm glad to say that The Philosopher's Stone abosolutely did. It's the perfect example of a childrens novel that's still just as magical and relatable as an adult as it is when you're 11. Rowling's worldbuilding is masterful, and the prose while not the focus infuses the story with a fairy-tale sense of whimsy and wonder that holds up to this day.

The only real complaint I have coming back to it over the years is that the short length does mean a lot of the charcter development and friendship between the core trio of characters happens off-screen, with chapters jumping months ahead into the future. We're told about half-way through that Harry and Ron became friends with Hermione, and it then jumps forward from Halloween to Christmas, where she's home for the holidays. In fact, we don't actually see the three of them doing much of anything before the final confrontation due to the lack of pages. As a child, I was okay with "then they were friends" as being enough, as an adult it felt like the book would have benefitted from just a little bit more content in the middle act. However, this is a minor complaint that has no bearing on my enjoyment at all.

I also listened to the Audible Full-Cast audiobook, which was also great. It's more of an audio-drama with music and sound effects than a straight audiobook, so I wouldn't recommend it for first time readers, but I thought for a re-read it added so much to the experience.

An ode to the introverts, told through the lens of a surprisingly sassy murderbot. It explores the false idea that many have that introverts are either too shy to speak up, haven't had enough interaction with others, or otherwise want to or can be made extroverts. This core idea is explored in an humorous manner by Muderbot's inner monologue contrasting with the external situation of being hired as a security consultant by a team of humans who are a bit too eager to be friendly with it. The novella format also works to the advantage of the plot it's telling, as the narration style and minimal, utilitarian story felt like they had just about outstayed their welcome by the end. It's a fun, single session read, just go in expecting a character piece, the story really is there to facilitate the interactions between Murderbot and the humans.

I try to keep my reviews spoiler-free, but I really do think it's impossible to talk about this book without diving into the specifics. It's a fun take on a relatively well-tread narrative structure of a time travel loop, with characters creating a mess as they travel back to change things. Specifically, it reminded me a fair amount of Steins;Gate, which also focusses on dual protagonists with a romantic undercurrent, to the point where I wouldn't be surprised if it was a direct influence. It has some structural issues, I like the first half which is more neo-noire than the second which hits the gas and goes full thriller and feels like it crams more than it can handle into the back third. But I enjoyed it, especially due to a solid audiobook performance. I just wish the second half had a bit more time to breathe.

I've never really been a big short story reader, but this collection might be the one that really gets me into it. The stories here are all excellent. The type of great sci fi that puts a mirror in front of humanity and makes it reflect on itself. Looking forward to reading more from Ted Chiang.

I'm very much not the target demographic for this novel, but I found it entertaining enough, even if its flaws were pretty obvious. The parts that worked made up for it enough for me to keep at it though, but I don't think I'd have been missing out on much if I dropped it either. The good: it's a relatively well paced adventure novel, with mostly likeable characters. It makes use of Victorian era Central America quite well as well. If anything, it's fun. The comparisons to the 1999 version of The Mummy are apt, if you enjoyed that film you'll probably enjoy this book. The bad: the characters are incredibly flat. They basically tell you exactly who they are at the start and don't change even an inch over the course of the 16 odd hours the audiobook was. This is especially prevalent in Bates, who while heavily influenced by O'Connell in The Mummy, has quite literally no flaws. He exists only to immediately align with Elie's goals and do the right thing at every single opportunity. I'm not arguing that every character should be morally ambiguous by any means, it's just bland having to read a guy who starts and end the story in the exact same place. Even O'Connell was along for the adventure at first simply as a way to escape prison and hunt down some treasure. Bates is written to literally be that for Elie without an ounce of his own agency or motivation. The story plays with the idea of him having a level of toxic masculinity but more or less ignores it after the first chapter he's in, and even with that in mind viewed through the lens of a late 1800s male protagonist he's pretty much a human golden retriever. He suffers from what seems to me as a case of women writing men. As a guy, I just couldn't find his POV chapters all that believably written. They're not bad or unreadable. Just noticeably a little bit off. Similar criticisms can be applied to Ellie, she starts out strong with her convictions to not play into the societal role laid out for her. She's dedicated to being seen of her own merit, and blossoming into an archeologist. It's a great setup, but even in the face of tons of danger and challenge along the way, we never really see her have any doubts or challenges to her convictions. And boy does she love to talk about her convictions. I want to preface this by saying the critique here isn't about her views, which I share, but rather the poor execution of them. Ellie is initially introduced as a feminist and suffragette. It immediately makes her a compelling character in the opening scenes. She has a strong opposition to the treasure hunting and colonial mindset of archaeologists of the time. She then proceeds to bring these ideals up in conversation over and over again. She's constantly telling Bates about her opposition to the institution of marriage, her background in organizing protests, over and over. She constantly is pointing out archeological quirks even when she's literally being shot at. Again, it's not the ideas that I have issue with, it's that it begins to feel a bit like overbearing telling rather than showing. There is a segment right near the end where her suffragette background is explored a little bit in a choice (quite possibly the only choice any character in the book actually makes). It's like the author didn't trust that the reader would be able to remember her chaining herself up at parliament in protest in the opening scenes, so constantly had her tell characters her views to keep things at the forefront of their mind for the climax. It's the Netflix era TV writing issue, the author almost assumes the reader isn't paying attention the first time something is brought up, so it's repeated multiple times just in case you miss it. I would have liked to see more organic explorations of her ideals, rather than it being exposition dumped on us. But that would be difficult in a story where at no point does an opportunity come up for characters to be active in making choices that examine their morals. Finally, the romance between the two leads is just sort of there. It's not bad, it's not great. It felt like checking a box to have it listed on the back cover. It's not nearly as charming as the rest of the book is, but if you're into it it's there. It almost felt at odds with the prior characterization, and it would've presented Bates an actual arc if he had to come to terms with the two of them just being friends. I realize that the negatives seem to be a lot more than positives in this case. They're not, I actually did enjoy the book enough that I'll be reading the second one soon. It's just that the execution doesn't feel up to par with what it could have been. It's worth a read if you can look over some of the clunkiness.

Pleasantly charming. The plot structure is relatively simplistic (a group of adventurers go on a quest to kill a prince), what makes it work is the writing style and characters. It's heavily influenced by Hans Christian Andersen and The Brothers Grimm, reading like a modern take on a classic fairy. The characters are memorable and likeable, even if a little bit cliched. I was surprised that this was barely 300 pages long. It feels like a lot happens in the short page count, but that's a testament to the efficiency of the writing.

This book feels like it should have been so much better than it was. Flat, completely generic and paper-thin characters in a plot that goes nowhere and doesn't resolve anything. Twist after twist after twist doing nothing but hiding the sloppy and generic bones the story is structured around. It's got cool world building, I'll give it that much. Islington clearly spent a lot of time writing out the history and lore of the world, but the characters who inhabit it and the story they're a part of do a disservice to the world they inhabit. The writing is cliched, and more often than not it feels like characters come up with solutions to problems using new powers that aren't really hinted at or built up towards at all, feeling unsatisfying and cheap. Finally, for a book that's marketed as high fantasy, it has a strong YA flair running through the entirety of it. There isn't anything intrinsically wrong with YA, but when I read high fantasy I prefer characters with a bit more maturity, and a little less chosen one type of tropes. Ultimately, it wears its Sanderson influence on its sleeves, but without the nuance and internal logic of a series like Mistborn. I do hear the rest of the trilogy is a big step up, but this first book was enough of a slog that I may drop the series at this point.

I'm not normally one to read memoirs, but this one stuck with me. Maya Angelou has an amazing ability to transport you to a time and place and let you occupy her shoes as a young woman coming of age in a world that is rapidly changing around her. It is unflinching in its depictions of racism, misogyny and hatred. It makes you feel uncomfortable. It should. To make comfortable this history of prejudice in America is to deny its existence. But in equal measure, it's unwavering in its depictions of love, kindness, curiosity and human connection as the answer. It tells us that cannot be defined by the external forces and actions. Goodness is an instinct. When you get the opportunity, you just do it.

It feels like reading a Victorian Gothic Horror version of James Gunn's Guardians of the Galaxy film, for better or worse. The Devils follows a group of less than savoury people tasked with escorting a princess across Europe while members of the opposition faction hunt them down. The plot isn't as deep as Abercrombie's other work, instead functioning more as a vehicle for its characters to interact. This is where the novel truly shines. Each member of The Devils is incredibly well realized and stands out. They're a bit cliche, but written so well it doesn't really matter. The little interactions between them as they overcome some truly bizarre obstacles along the way was quite endearing. The Guardians comparison is pretty apt here as so much of what made this work for me was being invested in the familial bond that starts to grow between them along the way. The dialogue can feel Marvel-ish as well, in it being very quippy. Abercrombie's always been a dry and witty writer, but this feels more overtly comedic in tone. I found it entertaining, but I can see people turned off. The one major issue that kept it as a “liked” rather than “loved” was the pacing. The book drags in the middle sections, with one segment where the group is split up going on for what felt like a good 100 pages too long. Some action sequences also feel similarly long, I think the book would've benefitted from being a bit leaner and more tightly edited. And finally, I need to point out just how incredibly good the audiobook is. It's probably my favourite single narrator performance in years. Each character is given a unique voice and accent, and the narrator has fantastic chemistry with himself. It makes the book truly come to life, and I highly recommend it it.

A day in the life of the owner of a nail salon. I normally love character pieces and stream-of-consciousness writing, along with explorations of characters who are on the flanks of society. This book seemed to have everything I normally would love in a novel, but it sort of felt a bit hollow to me. The writing is often intentionally abrasive, the narrator, a former boxer, maintains her emotional guard with the same tenacity that she did with her boxing guard in the ring. We follow her thoughts as she handles a string of clients through a single workday, along with her interactions and quips with her employees (always in their language, which the clients don't understand). The result is a character who can often come off as cruel, often mocking her customers behind their backs, while also constantly burying her deeper emotions which bubble up during those interactions. You get the sense that it stems from her own deep-set insecurities, but her guard only slips a few times and her stream of consciousness gives us a few small glimpses of what lies beneath. It all seems to be a great character study in theory, however, in practice I found it exhausting to get through by the end. There are some great moments, and I appreciate the novel makes you work to piece together the core of the character, but for the back half of the book it felt like it was just an endless loop of the narrator and her employees making fun of clients for pages and pages with little bits of characterization to help explain why. In that sense, it's the mark of a good character piece that even if I didn't particularly like the main character, I did understand enough of her to shift my perspective. It's just the time and effort it took me to get there felt like it could've been better structured. In the end, I liked the idea more than the execution. I couldn't help finishing up feeling that this could've been a great short story instead of a just okay novel.

My first time reading Kafka, and I wasn't disappointed. It's impressive how modern this feels, how it captures that feeling of putting up with a job you don't find satisfying to satisfy those who cannot be satisfied, and the absurdity of the situation. It has a fantastic whisky that I wasn't quite expecting, I found elements of it to be darkly humorous too. At its core though, it is simply a great exploration of how modern demands slowly can turn unconditional love conditional. Well worth the hour or two it'll take to read.

I didn't know what to expect going into this one but I ended up loving pretty much every second of it. It's political hard fantasy with a strong focus on logistics and economics, how the systems and bureaucracy are as important as the treaties and maneuvering. It reminded me in a lot of ways of Dune, A Song of Ice and Fire and The Handmaid's Tale, which is a high level of praise for any fantasy/sci-fi book, but it really did click with me. It all builds to an ending that is controversial but incredibly satisfying. This is less an in depth review and more of a post read impressions, but I highly recommend going in blind and just trusting the writing. It really is great.

I came into The Buffalo Hunter Hunter with high expectations having enjoyed The Only Good Indians. Those expectations were surpassed and then some. This book is nothing short of a masterpiece. At its core, it's the story of a Native American vampire giving his confession to a Lutheran pastor in the early 1900s, told via the framing device of a modern descendent of the pastor reading his journals 100 years later. What plays out is a slow, dense and brutal tale of revenge that grows more appealing as the layers are peeled back on the protagonists, leading to a climax that will stick with me for years. It's worth noting that the book takes its time telling its story. The appeal will come down to how much you're able to appreciate the subtleties of the character work with the expectation that it all builds to something worth sticking around for. The book can also be tough to read, SGJ weaves in Blackfeet terminology and ideas without spoon-feeding the definitions to you. There's enough context for you to figure it out, but it requires an engaged reading style. There's content itself is violent and often hard to read. It will make you uncomfortable. The westward expansion was brutal to the native inhabitants of North America, and the novel refuses to shy away from it. All that put together makes for what is likely my favourite novel since Klara and the Sun, if not Lincoln in the Bardo. It isn't an easy read, but it's worth every minute.

Wuthering Heights has been sort of re-remembered as an epic romance in the modern era. It isn't. It's a a story about horrible people being horrible to each other, an exploration of how obsessive codependency can result in cycles of abuse that span generations. It's an incredibly uncomfortable read. The characters aren't supposed to be rooted for, aspired towards or even particularly likeable. But they are beautifully written, flawed and human, and they carry the story forward. Go in with the expectation that the book is a tough, chaotic and stress inducing read, and it's hard to not love it. Just don't make the mistake of falling into the perception of what the average person who hasn't read it thinks it is. It's so much better than that.

I finished this book a few weeks back, and I still can't stop thinking about it. It's one of the most accurate depictions of agoraphobia I've ever read, all told by a protagonist who takes it to another level.

Short simple and to the point. Not as elegantly written as some of his other books, but rather a deeper, focused and scholarly exploration of the Middle Way.

A cosmic horror inspired adaptation of The Fall of the House of Usher. Fantastic imagery and an unsettling atmosphere, but a bit too quippy for my taste at times. Wasn't particularly invested in Easton as a main character, and a fair amount of time is spent world building a setting that doesn't have any direct impact on the story, and the ending is abrupt and slightly unsatisfying. Regardless, a fun, quick read. Worth at least giving it a try.

Takes the best parts of The Martian (the science and problem solving) and applies them to a far more engaging story. The dynamic between Grace and Rocky is amazing, I could have read an entire book of them just solving any random mundane issue. It also hits the perfect balance of being funny without it taking away from the seriousness of their situation. And the audiobook is especially good.

I have very mixed feelings about this one. It feels like it's two different books competing to occupy the same pages. It initially positions itself as a Victorian style bildungsroman in a world that happens to have dragons. No magic otherwise, it's relatively grounded and initially the focus is on the main character's journey to become a dragon researcher. I enjoyed the slice of life adventure feel. Then almost out of nowhere it takes a hard turn towards what I can only describe as a Scooby-Doo style fake haunting mystery, complete with meddling kids, a chase, moustache twirling villains, and a evil scheme that is monumentally unsatisfying. In isolation, I did enjoy that part for what it was, but honestly I enjoyed the memoir format the book started with enough that I don't think it was a necessary change. Also, the main character LOVES to constantly remind the reader how much she loves dragons. Her actions are enough to make that clear, the reader doesn't need to be constantly reminded. All that aside, I still thought it was a decent read. I just wish it was more upfront with what it actually is.

More interesting than purely good or bad. It's likeable almost entirely due to how unlikeable the protagonist is.

Fantastic mix of dark, contemporary family comedy and classical gothic horror. It's a mix that feels like the cast of Succession takes a vacation to Hill House. The tonal mismatch shouldn't work, but it had me hooked.

My first time reading Jane Austen, and I was surprised by how well the humour holds up 200 years later. The wit and sarcasm shine through, and are contrasted by some brilliant and character work. I was fully invested in the romantic lives of the two sisters well before the end and that was handled exceptionally well. Austen finds a way to mix a level of authenticity into the humour and the heartbreak, it never feels too grim or too frivolous. It's that balance and earnestness that I find many modern rom-coms tend to lack. The only real negative for me was the middle segment dragged on a little bit too long.