aimiller's Reviews (689)

This was super interesting and a really rich world! It felt kind of slow at the beginning, and the ending felt kind of rushed, but I was definitely deeply invested in the story by then and given that this is the first in a duology it can maybe be forgiven for the rushed sense (though it is LONG), as it makes sense to end where it did and leaving you wanting more. I felt a little tossed into the deep end at the beginning, but things gradually started to make more and more sense. If you're interested in fantasy that has a rich and original feel to it, definitely check this out! 

This was way more fun than I expected--I'll admit, I started it as a lark based on the author, but I found the characters to be super interesting and compelling; watching Mycroft's development was fascinating, the tone just FELT very Holmesian to me, and the plot really lent itself to exploring this rich history and the sheer diversity present in the British empire that is maybe not on everyone's mind when they think about the world of Holmes (or at least, not in a way that isn't like super racist.) I'm definitely interested in checking out the sequel, and overall like this book quite a bit!

A really solid introduction to why police don't do the work we think they do, and how their interactions with a number of different ways people are criminalized. Vitale also breaks through point by point of reforms that have been proposed and attempted to show how ineffective any reform that pours more money into the police really is. I don't know that the book was interested in pointing to a future without police altogether, despite the title, but I do think it's a good primer for people to start to understand how police don't solve the issues people think they do. 

There are like three books in this one book; one is a fun dramatic court romp that rivals the melodrama of any soap opera, one is a meditation on the meaning of human life, and one is an extended screed against political and war historians which, while amusing, went on too long. The first of these I found delightful, like cotton candy; the second was fine, especially as it appeared mostly after I was already invested in these characters, which were really the strong point for me in this book (once you get used to the shifting names and the sheer number of Annas with last names you do NOT remember.) The characters were rich and flawed and did very stupid things and matured over the course of the story in ways that felt deeply human. 

The meditations on history and the workings of war were vaguely interesting--funny, even, at first, and I delighted in the number of shots Tolstoy took at political historians who focus on individual people (mostly men) as genius--but over time it just got... boring? I was like "yes Leo that's great, thanks, can we get back to the other stuff please? I wanna know what's up with Pierre and how he's doing." It was just the least interesting part of this book to me, and it appeared more and more the deeper I got into it. 

Regarding the translation: I have nothing to compare it to, as this is the only version of this book that I have read, but I thought this translation was good; very accessible without losing a sense of the historical setting/world being portrayed in the book. But I'm no translation expert, it just worked out pretty well for me here. 

Basically if someone were to do an abridged version of this book that cut down on the portions about history I would be very happy to read it, but it didn't work for me alongside the other stuff here, which I enjoyed more. 

This is a powerful collection of stories; I think I have to revisit them at some point, because I read this book over a long period of time and so that broke up some of the longer pieces--particularly "Especially Heinous," which I think is an inventive and intricate story but which would maybe benefit from being read in a single sitting, and which I did not do. I would say the stories all have a similar feeling/aura to the stories, though they are different enough in feeling to be distinguishable. "Difficult at Parties" is probably the one that hit the hardest for me, but a number of them were very good and moving and eerie all at the same time. 

This was fine? Sort of fun (the discussion of the meal at the Beavers made me hungry, Brian Jacques eat your heart out,) but I don't know that this aged very well--or rather, I think I outgrew this and so returning to it, I didn't find it especially compelling or interesting. It wasn't a bad book, just not as interesting as I remember it being. This might be another situation where screen versions have replaced parts of the book in my head, or the audiobook didn't hold my attention as much, but I just wasn't as drawn in to this as I thought I would be. But I can definitely see that a much younger person would like it, and since it's meant for them, I'd recommend it on that basis!