Take a photo of a barcode or cover

ambershelf 's review for:
All I See is Violence
by Angie Elita Newell, Angie Elita Newell
Gifted by the publishers. 3.5/5
What I liked
- the historical setting of the 1876 Battle of Little Bighorn and the 1972 protests on the Pine Ridge Reservation
- 2/3 of the POVs are from the Indigenous women across 100 years and how similar/different their struggles are as Natives
- the emphasis on their connection to their ancestral homeland and nature
- I really appreciate that the author doesn’t hand hold the readers & give too much historical background—most readers will likely have to google to get a full picture of the historical backdrop (this can be a negative for some readers)
What didn’t work
- there’s one POV written from the white colonizer’s perspective that I think could’ve been excluded completely to make room for the other two more interesting & important narratives
- lack of distinction between the three POVs. In the beginning I had to guess which perspective it is. I’m not sure if the author meant it as a way to show how similar the hurt and trauma of land dispossession manifests even after 100 years. But I think having chapter titles of the narrators & time would’ve been helpful
- the writing is more telling at times, and I feel the narrative is somewhat distant. I would’ve liked to see more “rage” especially given the title & themes
What I liked
- the historical setting of the 1876 Battle of Little Bighorn and the 1972 protests on the Pine Ridge Reservation
- 2/3 of the POVs are from the Indigenous women across 100 years and how similar/different their struggles are as Natives
- the emphasis on their connection to their ancestral homeland and nature
- I really appreciate that the author doesn’t hand hold the readers & give too much historical background—most readers will likely have to google to get a full picture of the historical backdrop (this can be a negative for some readers)
What didn’t work
- there’s one POV written from the white colonizer’s perspective that I think could’ve been excluded completely to make room for the other two more interesting & important narratives
- lack of distinction between the three POVs. In the beginning I had to guess which perspective it is. I’m not sure if the author meant it as a way to show how similar the hurt and trauma of land dispossession manifests even after 100 years. But I think having chapter titles of the narrators & time would’ve been helpful
- the writing is more telling at times, and I feel the narrative is somewhat distant. I would’ve liked to see more “rage” especially given the title & themes