More honest and open than I expected. Except for what I read as a pretty antiquated, puritanical view of sex work. No one would do it unless they had to, etc. Otherwise, an intersectional look at a number of really difficult topics. Childhood sexual assault, transitioning as a black woman in a family that was not very accepting, nor a school with tools or willingness to protect her. Basically having to do everything herself without any support structure while dealing with quite a few unique challenges with her identity.

It’s edifying and opinionated, which I like in my memoirs. Good narration by the author.

Two familiar, but closer to strangers, share a conversation where one divulges the trajectory of his life being radically altered after saving a drowning man and subsequently becoming consumed with the idea of knowing who and what he is responsible for after the act. In the doing, disingenuously inserting himself into the man’s life.

I have always been somewhat terrified of the notion that you don’t know who you really are until opportunity presents itself. People believe they’d do the right thing and that what they feel aligns with their notion of their values. Untested, however, they have no clear definitions of boundaries or morales. And with more agency comes the ability to reshape the story you tell yourself of who you are. In this case, voiced to all but a stranger—who always do seem like the easiest people to share yourself with. Even if what you share is just that: a story mired in fiction.

This short, punchy, and deceptively simple novel was a fun ride. By the end there is plenty to chew on. The prose work is clean and uncomplicated, unfurling a plot that clips along until the final thought provoking beat.

This definitely exceeded my expectations. I thought it would be solid commercial fiction, but I think it’s a lot more complex than expected, particularly in the nuance of characterization and symbolism, themes that work really well. The dialogue and prose are accessible and straight forward, but mostly is a higher degree of specificity with imagery that’s effective and evocative. I can see why this was such a hit, and is considered a modern classic by many.

I see it was written in the 70s, so the racism and prejudice make sense, especially coupled with the single-minded stupidity of hate. However, when the narrative focuses on the only black character, in his own mind or thinking, it really didn’t make sense to me, how he saw himself and referred to himself as an n-word sometimes. It felt like it was conflating other peoples’ views with his own in some moments. And it was just pretty saturated with that kind of content, oddly.

Otherwise, though, other than some uneven dialogue and prose every now and then, it was absolutely excellent and good writing. Might give the sequel a shot sometime. I don’t think it was enough to convert me into a King fan, but if a particularly book has a premise or conceit I really like, I’d probably pick it up on the future. I did this entire on audio, so that might have helped as well. It’s hard to get hung up on some craft when it’s narrated.

Absolutely improves upon the first book in every single way. Multiple badass women juxtapose the previous novel where there wasn’t any standout one; multiple new places/lands are revealed; a new, interesting culture; time is a lot more malleable and really effective at breaking up various physical conflicts.

It’s actually sweeping, the technology and the magic is different and cool. The prose work is the same as previous. It doesn’t blow me away but neither does it feel like bog standard commercial fiction. It is 880 pages and so quite the commitment. It is worth it, I think. But also: the next book is 1000+? As much as I liked this and the marked improvement was great to see, the next two books are around 1000 pages. And they’re part of an ongoigg be series. I think I’m much more tempted to pick up a serious maximalist book than long genre fiction. But we’ll see.

4.5 rounded up.

Weirdly compelling. I didn’t think I’d be as interested in the subject as I was. Intersectional with mental health, the Justice system, ecofacism, colonial narratives around nature and it’s perception, this book around the theft of feathers from a museum taps into something esoteric yet, somehow, universal.

Great narration and well written. Doesn’t overstay it’s welcome. I don’t think it will blow anyone away, but also manages to be much better than it seemingly should be, by rights.

Little better than prose found in textbooks at school. Even as I was consuming it I knew I would retain nothing. There’s some good examples sometimes, even still. I tested myself at the end of the second chapter and I didn’t retain much. Obviously, this isn’t a fault of the book, I just do not learn like this. If I’m not actively stimulated and find it interesting it just doesn’t matter to me and I won’t remember or want to continue.

Also: The things I did consume, even stopping at around 15% ish percent in, around 3 hours worth of content, displayed a few studies that are… questionable. Looking into deeper dives of the book by others shows there’s a bunch of content like that and the book doesn’t preface it with the veracity of the actual studies… yet people say it’s also kind of still the best book on the subject.

Really, a set of vignettes set in different time periods which cascade into the overall story. Neatly tied up, filled with superfluous material as well though, I think. The presentation of the structure make it go very quickly. Lots of transitions and white space. Quite accessible and clear, especially when you’re there at the turn, so to speak, and find out what kind of story this is—why very clear is fairly exemplary for the fiction you’ll find this to be.

But I do think that it could have been much tighter; dwelling on some moments so overlong it drifts from what it’s “about”. And I’m at odds about that. It was surely a 4 star read at some points. Especially because this drift from the core story does partially mirror a certain protagonists decisions—though I’m not sure that’s intentional, and not merely a stretch or byproduct. Regardless, I think the bare bones nature of this text prompts you to see how elegant it could have been and chose not to. That’s a stylistic choice. And one that made it short of exceeding the expectations it sets, because the chosen beginning, to some extent, are extraneous content; perhaps look for a fun “gotcha” moment. It’s not too much to ask for better character work truncated than what we get though, so no dice.

Also: Be warned. If you’ve not read The Glass Hotel, and have the intention to do so, don’t read this book! It fairly spoils the white space is leaves for some characters. A fun calling card, if you know, you know!

This was a fun murder mystery that has a pretty cool setting that wasn’t super fleshed out. I got pulled out of the story trying to figure out how some things worked, which isn’t central to the story, but coupled with somewhat lacklustre character work, I kept wanting to know more about stuff not central to the core conceit. If you don’t care about that stuff and solely want the … semi locked room Murder mystery component? I think, is what it would be, I think those readers would really love this.

Narrated by the author (very well), the authorial voice is deceptively simple and clean, articulating complex feelings and intricacies in a matter-of-fact way. It’s ethereal at times, despite feeling like nonfiction or autofiction. There is being present in the past, as well as active reflection outside of time, yet within a vignette, which make up the structure of the novel.

While I was initially a bit put off by the simple prose I came around when it’s clear it’s about memory and mourning, and time becomes malleable. I thought this was often fascinating and moving. It doesn’t overstay it’s welcome and it can be uneven, but I think it’s more than successful; the structural decisions are very smart, in my opinion.

What if Tyler Durden was born so long ago he joined the war and when he was shot at ran off with someone, then just kinda messed around for a while, aiming vitriol at pretty much every social construct and type of human relationship. It’s very good at inciting emotion and has decent prose work, so it’s not a one star book, but it’s reads very juvenile and like they prayed to a moral relativism text all day before writing, or something.

I can see why it resonated with some people, especially the catch-22 crowd, a book I thought similarly was geared towards budding, lost boys growing into men that feel like everything’s a joke and they’re so hard done by. Essentially, it’s satire that’s ironic because it doesn’t know, or care, how solipsistic it is. Great for confirming motivated thinking of the same, and getting the blood up, but truly well and vapid when actually dissected. Holden Caulfield in an old man but meant to be liked and even revered, apparently, if reviews are to be believed.

It’s not self aware enough to realize the real joke is on this actual work as a whole. Most people grow up and are aware of privilege and occupy the same world, but not this one. As with many satires I’m finding the authors tend to show their whole ass and think they’re very, very clever while doing so. All I see is an ass. Sorry.