It's a bizarre concept for a story: a psychic rabbit and a group of friends lollop across the countryside in search of a new home. And it's so charming, and so well-written, and so fascinating in its gentle description of the natural world that I'd give almost anything to be able to rate it 5 stars. But I can't, because it's so bloody inaccurate.

There's a sad little truism when it comes to fantasy: everything changes but the status of women. I never for a minute would have believed I'd end up applying that maxim to a book of anthropomorphic rabbits, but there it is. Adams is clear when writing that he's referencing non-fiction work on the life and habits of rabbits, and it's so convincing on every level that I was fully prepared to believe him. Imagine my shock, then, when I found that every detail is accurate apart from anything pertaining to gender. Rabbits in real life are matriarchal, and apparently it's the female rabbits that are the instigators in forming new colonies. Not here, and not because Adams doesn't know better - he does (he's looked it all up, remember). He's just decided to erase that little bit of reality, goodness only knows why though it's easy enough to speculate.

I'm a science communicator by training - got a PhD in it, even. And fiction is such a useful tool for teaching others about the natural world! Why, then, ruin it with what are essentially lies, and for no good purpose? Yes, it's just a story. Yes, I'm sure some of you will think I'm taking this too seriously. But my suspension of disbelief has just been shattered, sorry, and I'm aware of how ridiculous that sounds with regard to a story about psychic bunnies. Even so...