There's something about this book, I can't put my finger on it and plan to read some analysis on it to fill the gaps. It just blew me away. It's an amazing exploration of religions, how they start and end and how people twist faith into an excuse to do terrible things. It also avoids the pitfalls that criticism (or in this case satirisation) of religion is often plagued with. It doesn't tear religion to shreds or claim that faith is something stupid. 

It both argues the importance of faith to some people and the dangers of when a religion becomes more about the structure and positions of power and less about the god. 

Brutha is such a genuine character. He is wonderful and the ending with him leading Vorbis through the desert? immaculate. Also! the false prophet being killed by his god being dropped on his head?? hello????

These books can be hit or miss for me and this was a miss... the plot failed to hook me, the characters were generic and uninteresting and the trademark twist flopped. It just seems like she writes the first half of the book then goes "who would be the most shocking person to be the killer?" then instead of making it interesting or giving them motivation she just has it be a big shock and have them be an insane killer who somehow didn't show any signs for years. mehhhh.

I adored this book! definitely my favourite out of this series so far. Istvan and Clara are also contenders for favourite characters and their dynamic is just so fun. Two giant strong warriors who can't seem to stop pinning eachother against walls? sign me up. 

The plot of this book is also amazing, there's so many moving parts and they fit together beautifully. I was so invested in everything going on and the climax at the gladitor ring was so satisfying. And the emotional arcs pay off so well too. Action, emotions and romance all done perfectly. It builds off the smooth man arc from the first book perfectly and takes it to a whole other scale, Clara has her own motivation and place in the narrative and feels feels like an equal to Istvan in both the romance and action plots. 

This book was an epic and I cannot praise its plot, world building and characters enough. I want to play through it as a dnd campaign. The additions to the lore are wonderful: the overrun white rat temple contrasts the calm hold of the one in Archons Glory, the creator of the smooth men is a tragic character who will stick in my mind for a while and the werenuns?? simply too good to ignore. 

my only complaint is the ending is unclear where Clara and Istvan will go the other books in this series have epilogues and I would have liked one just to see how they manage their relationship between their other commitments and the distance between their peers. I'm sure we'll get hints to this in other books though. 

Sadly I didn't love this book like I have the others in this series! I'm disappointed but I think it just boils down to a couple simple issues.

Still love this world and its characters and will be getting the 4th book ASAP! The world building with the Gnoles was the highlight of this book for me, such an interesting fantasy race. Also the epilogue!! seeing the couples from the previous instalment's and then that cliff hanger, absolutely left me fiending for the rest of the series. 

The issue stems from this book being so short, much shorter than the last two in the series at only 250 pages there isn't much space to build a relationship. After the last book which was epic in scale and the first which was very slow burn at times this one doesn't have as much to work with. Piper and Galen have an instant attraction but there isn't much time left for pining. I didn't find their relationship believable, it very much could have done with more development and just more in universe time to let moments settle. The whole story happens over only a couple of days and downtime was very much needed I think. 

This is also evident in other things, the plot hook of a murder mystery is solved way too quickly and some time spent tracking the killer or even more time in his house before his nefarious intent becomes obvious would have greatly helped with the plot. Might have even worked better if one of their companions had been targeted- If Thomas had trapped Earstrip in the basement and his disappearance had tipped them off. More time with Thomas's captive would also have helped with her rescue later, she feels like a chekhov's gun that wasn't properly established before going off. 

After Paladins strength, which had an amazing plot alongside its romance, this felt like a step back. Like a short story rather than a stand alone novel. 

I have since learned that lots of the lore with the "ancients" is from other T. Kingfisher books (which have been added to my TBR) but only judging from my experience of this book the lore is a little basic and falls into the trope usually in video games. The long forgotten civilisation that left incomprehensible machines you now must fight behind. 

Really hope the next book picks up and Marguerite gets the epic love she deserves.

I've been meaning to pick up a Pat Barker myth retelling for a while, for some reason i was convinced i'd love them but now I'm not sure i'll be picking another one up.

Not that i hated this book, I enjoyed it and liked its approach to the myth but it did fail to meet my expectations which might have been unfairly high. 

There were a couple bits that really resonated with me: Briseis naming the men Achilles killed and then quoting their mothers speaking about them. It gave a voice to these men that were slaughtered and are usually only used as a number to show Achilles's rage at losing Patroclus and showed the loss of war. Mothers losing their sons, the babies they raised and loved, some dying as young as 15. And the bit right at the end where she says how when people retell the story they'll soften the massacres and rape and turn it into a love story. That perfectly sums up my issues with how some people discuss the Illiad and focus on Achilles and Patroclus as star crossed lovers when really it's about a horrific war full of loss and tragedy. (Surprise: I didn't like Song of Achilles) 

While I appreciate the core of this book and the aforementioned sections that acknowledge the horrors of war something about it just fell short. There were anachronisms throughout that ruined my emergence. Why are ancient greeks saying for God's sake? or singing modern drinking songs? or saying Nah? These just completely took me out and showed a lack of result on Barkers part. It also had pacing issues especially towards the end, the section between Patroclus dying and Achilles dying was so drawn out and repetitive.

Before this book was announced I was a big believer that we don't need prequel books about other victors games. I still believe that and plan to kind of pretend the canon of this book doesn't exist going forward. Despite that I was really excited when about this book which is why I think I'm so disappointed. I believed what Suzanne Collins said about only writing when she had something to say but I don't believe this book is that, or at least that it's just that. After BOSBAS I thought she could write a prequel without falling into the trappings that others do. But here we are. 

My biggest issues are: The continuous arrival of characters from the original series, the unnecessary explanation for things and the changes made to the canon regarding Haymitch and his games. 

The last one is the worst to me because the snippet we got in Catching Fire was so perfect for him and his character. He doesn't at all fall for the trappings of the capitol or the tricks they pull, immediately identifies the dangers of what seems like a paradise, refuses to engage with other tributes and just heads in one direction for seemingly no reason. Maybe to see where it goes or maybe to just avoid being part of the games at all. Eventually he partners with Maysilee but knows they can't keep it up and then avenges her when she dies, killing a career with a cheating trick (ON PURPOSE BECAUSE HE'S SMART) and being punished because that's not how you play the games and the capitol wants him to know that for the rest of his life. 

The most unnecessary thing in this is Beetee and the "break the arena" plot. It feels like Collins was trying to give an origin story for the group that did the CF plot but that isn't needed since we can assume they got together during other games where they were mentors and Plutarch was working as a mole for them. We already know Haymitch is smart and willing to do things against the capitol it doesn't need to be established how he got pulled into the rebellion. In fact I think it would be better if this came about when he was a mentor, had witnessed more games and had more trauma and was maybe instrumental in the creation of the group. Here he is more of a proto-Katniss. Given what to do without understanding it whereas the Haymitch we see later is a planner, not a doer. He's much better as a schemer with quiet intellect hidden behind his scrubby exterior. Which his CF games shows: he seems to just be grumpily storming off but when it comes down to it he uses the arena to win in a way no one expected. This version of Haymitch is just following instructions and isn't very interesting in his own right, his best moment is taken from him as his final kill is made into a happy accident. 

Also changing Haymitch from a perpetual loner to someone who allied with LITERALLY EVERYONE is such a choice. Yes adult Haymitch is a loner because he learnt from his games that having people close to you means having people to control but it's simply out of character to have him me such a team player. And to take care of basically every tribute that comes his way? The I bet on loosing dogs attitude is much more Katniss than Haymitch, behavior he'd tell her is useless because those tributes have no chance and only one of them can win. I do adore how similar Katniss and Haymitch are but they are still seperate characters and I feel like this book rolled back a lot of their biggest differences.

The constant cameos made me groan. I literally had to close the book and take a deep breath. I think having Burdock, Katniss's dad, was enough but also having her mother and Peeta's dad was overkill. Especially giving them names because them being nameless in the trilogy is so intentional and this throws that out the window for a little bit of fan satisfaction. Three past victor is too much. Beete's inclusion felt the least forced and seeing the phenomenon of victors children being reaped was interesting. Mags was the least needed, we know she was a caring mentor from Finnick and this didn't show anything new for her character. Finding out about Wiress's games was interesting, she didn't need to be present for that though. Haymitch could have recalled last years games himself. I do think Wiress could have been kept since showing a Mentor fresh from their games, barely managing with that trauma and now coaching kids, knowing that's what Haymitch will be forced to do next year would have been narratively good. She would be a mirror of his future self. The worst moment is making it so Haymitch is responsible for Wiress and Mags being disabled. Mags is implied to have had a stroke in the trilogy and yes that could have been a capitol lie but not everything needs to be torture or linked to a main character. Sending an old disabled woman into the games was evil enough. Effie can stay though we love Effie . 

One last thing about the plot: I think it would have worked as a story with one change: Have Haymitch be a mentor and not the tribute. This is something I wanted from a Haymitch prequel before this book was announced. We know his games but seeing his early years as a mentor would have been something entirely new. And then there's a fresh games to do whatever you want with it without changing an already narratively sound bit of character work. This would also allow for him to interact with past victors without it being forced and we can get his back story stuff through him reliving his games trauma and lamenting his losses. Also Haymitch would have reason to be involved in a plot because he'd have nothing left to lose. 

A hunger games book about how media changes perceptions would be perfect and details like the arena being an eye hammer home that Collins still has the ability to do complete unsubtle and narratively satisfying symbolism. Fire is back as a metaphor for rebellion and I love that. Haymitch and Lenore Dove are amazing, his family too. His district 12 life is well done and fills the gap between BOSBAS and the trilogy perfectly without giving too many details. I wish the book had spent more time with them and less at the games. The characterisation of the other 12 tributes is great, they all feel like real people. The other tributes not so much. I did love Panache but think some of this moments should have gone to the girl Haymitch stands off with at the end because she wasn't really a character until that point so the end was unsatisfying. I did like how Haymitch ended his games intent on leaving the capitol victorless much like Katniss was determined to give them two knowing they couldn't go without one. 

I forgot about the egregious inclusion of Lucy Gray and having Haymitch realise that the Snow was in love with her. That was abundantly unnecessary. Having Lenore Dove know but not tell was enough, a ghost of Lucy Gray to haunt the narrative. 

I know that the point of this book is to show Haymitch before the trauma and evilness from the capital changed him into a grumpy, loner alcoholic but the character in this book doesn't feel like Haymitch at all in the narrative voice and in his actions it just feels like a completely different character. I could've believed that at some point he was hopeful but not to this extent. Collins had a need to make this games more epic in scale since she was dedicating a book to something we've already seen. The solution would've been to focus on Haymitch's life before and after the games rather than to change well written and established. In BOSBAS this is done well the games are important but don't take up much of the narrative. I also just think it's a disservice to fans to years later completely rewrite the story and then to make the version of events we know actually a capitol trick. I hope this is the last we see of the hunger games, at least for a while.

 The TD:DR: Great world-building and interesting concepts but a show don't tell issue that makes all the characters and relationships call flat for me. Still enjoyed!

Admittedly, I only picked this up because I watched Mickey 17 and loved it, but I tried to go into this unbiased. I will say it's different enough to be enjoyed after watching the movie. I was worried I'd get bored since I started immediately after watching. It has a unique vibe and so much got changed that I felt like I was along for the ride.

The biggest difference is Mickey's (7/17) personality, in the movie he's a lovable idiot but in this, he's kinda just a scrub. Rather than being tricked into ruining his life he makes a hilariously bad decision and has to bail himself out. He's mean, a bit of a shithead but is undeniably intelligent. Something I liked was his interest in history, an obsolete career since so much is documented in the space age. It allows for some great world-building since you find stuff out about failed expeditions but from Mickey researching them as he contemplates the chance of success of their own mission.

The world was the best part of this book for me. The concept of an expendable and what it would mean to die and be reprinted, would that be immortality or a series of people only living days or weeks of short unhappy life? The ship of Theseus comparison is perfect for this. It all unravels immediately when there are two of them, is that the same person living twice? clearly not since they form independent thoughts and actually disagree with each other. This point is something I feel is handled worse in the movie since the two Mickeys are so different that it softens the idea that this is the same person. Mickey 18 is a completely different person so the grey area that allows for speculation and interesting argument is gone. Seven and Eight are the same guy and that makes raises so many ethical dilemmas.

The other characters in this book are interesting but feel a little weak. I can't name any good character moments from any of them especially since a lot of this novel is Mickey recounting things to the reader rather than things happening and us experiencing them with Mickey. Bit of a show don't tell issue. It would have been better to see Nasha cradle Mickey through dying than have him recount it after the fact with all the intense emotions gone. Same with Berto, it would have been better to have the tense scene of Mickey blaming him for his debt and the tension between them be current rather than having Mickey explain it to us when we already know they resolved it and remain friends. Honestly, a lot of the actual events of this book without flashbacks and exposition is Mickey being hungry and wondering how to split his Kcals with Eight. I think the pacing and plot could have been handled a lot better. It just leaves the other characters feeling flat and the reader uninvested in them or their relationships with Mickey. I know Mickey loves Nasha because he tells me he loves her and she loves him but I don't feel like their relationship matters.