Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.01k reviews by:
ninetalevixen
I received a review copy from the author through #ReviewPit. This does not affect my rating or opinions.
3.5 stars.
Since Jill and her teammates are mostly in the NA age range, the youngest team member being her cousin Marco at almost 18, and the narrative gets dark at points, I would consider this New Adult rather than YA, which is nice since I'm in the NA range myself and always in search of characters in a comparable/similar life stage. I love that this isn't about a teenager learning how to use her powers and finding a team — nothing wrong with that, but it's a story that's been told many, many times — but rather a 20-year-old who already has an understanding of her powers and Super society (i.e., the authority umbrella), plus a team to rely on; there's both external and internal conflict as Jillian, aka the titular Battlecry, takes on a leadership role in direct defiance of the elders' teachings.
Each character is on their own journey in certain ways, but at its heart they're a found family, with all the love and bickering (and genuine fights) that you'd expect. They have each other's backs despite their disagreements, and there are quite a few heartwarming domestic scenes: superheroes off the clock, a la The Incredibles! To be completely honest I didn't feel like I connected very strongly with any of them, not even Jill, but I did appreciate their group dynamic and sympathize with their struggles.
Personally I also felt like some of the character development and romance was a bit too overt, not quite organic. But it didn't significantly hinder my enjoyment — on a plot level it's entertaining, and it tackles some interesting issues of ethics and personal values.
rep: biracial secondary character, vegan secondary character
cw:
3.5 stars.
Since Jill and her teammates are mostly in the NA age range, the youngest team member being her cousin Marco at almost 18, and the narrative gets dark at points, I would consider this New Adult rather than YA, which is nice since I'm in the NA range myself and always in search of characters in a comparable/similar life stage. I love that this isn't about a teenager learning how to use her powers and finding a team — nothing wrong with that, but it's a story that's been told many, many times — but rather a 20-year-old who already has an understanding of her powers and Super society (i.e., the authority umbrella), plus a team to rely on; there's both external and internal conflict as Jillian, aka the titular Battlecry, takes on a leadership role in direct defiance of the elders' teachings.
Each character is on their own journey in certain ways, but at its heart they're a found family, with all the love and bickering (and genuine fights) that you'd expect. They have each other's backs despite their disagreements, and there are quite a few heartwarming domestic scenes: superheroes off the clock, a la The Incredibles! To be completely honest I didn't feel like I connected very strongly with any of them, not even Jill, but I did appreciate their group dynamic and sympathize with their struggles.
Personally I also felt like some of the character development and romance was a bit too overt, not quite organic. But it didn't significantly hinder my enjoyment — on a plot level it's entertaining, and it tackles some interesting issues of ethics and personal values.
rep: biracial secondary character, vegan secondary character
cw:
Spoiler
blood, death, graphic violence, physical & verbal abuse, mentions of sexual harassment and attempted rape, systemic sexism/misogyny, brief suicidal ideation.jpg)
The idea of the 5 love languages seems to have entered collective/mainstream knowledge, so I honestly don't feel like I learned a ton from reading this book. That said, it was illustrative to see specific examples for each language, and I appreciated the checklists/suggestions for implementing these ideas in the reader's life. And beyond the behaviors, Chapman examines the underlying attitudes that define and shape the relationships, which I found interesting and helpful.
Admittedly, this is a pretty heteronormative book and the gender roles are more prominent than I would've preferred; the anecdotes don't add much except maybe to boost the author's ego — maybe credibility or inspiration was the intent, but they exemplify the points and work out too perfectly to be wholly believable at face value. (Also, to be honest, the dialogue had me rolling my eyes; but I didn't pick up this book for its storytelling potential.) Some of the passages are overly cheesy and/or preachy, but then that kind of comes with the territory.
Admittedly, this is a pretty heteronormative book and the gender roles are more prominent than I would've preferred; the anecdotes don't add much except maybe to boost the author's ego — maybe credibility or inspiration was the intent, but they exemplify the points and work out too perfectly to be wholly believable at face value. (Also, to be honest, the dialogue had me rolling my eyes; but I didn't pick up this book for its storytelling potential.) Some of the passages are overly cheesy and/or preachy, but then that kind of comes with the territory.
An enjoyable read overall: engaging plot with a mystery that neatly managed the balance between predictable and underdeveloped twists, and a reveal that made sense. Loved the acknowledgment that a girl can have both beauty and brains, love both pretty dresses and science, and neither has to detract from the other. Thomas was dreamy, the classic Victorian rake with a heart of gold, and the romance largely skipped over the YA angst that I find so tiresome.
Just a personal preference thing, but I found the writing itself excessively descriptive (I love imagining the scene as much as the next reader, but I seriously don’t need a metaphor elaborating on the exact shade of the curtains) and I wasn’t all that fond of Audrey Rose’s commentary on everyone else’s thoughts and feelings — I get that it’s literally part of her training to make observations and conclusions, but the way she waffled irregularly between certainty and speculation didn’t work for me.
Just a personal preference thing, but I found the writing itself excessively descriptive (I love imagining the scene as much as the next reader, but I seriously don’t need a metaphor elaborating on the exact shade of the curtains) and I wasn’t all that fond of Audrey Rose’s commentary on everyone else’s thoughts and feelings — I get that it’s literally part of her training to make observations and conclusions, but the way she waffled irregularly between certainty and speculation didn’t work for me.
2.5 stars.
Based on the title, I was mostly expecting to read about "mansplaining" (which, by the way, the author explains is not a term she came up with, even if she may have brought attention to the issue), but Solnit makes a really good point about the underlying power imbalance and the slippery slope into gender-based violence. You really can't talk about mansplaining as an isolated phenomenon, because it all goes back to patriarchal norms. It's a symptom rather than disease. That said, I did find myself zoning out a little after the first few essays.
And unfortunately, these essays are limited to a Western (white) cisheteronormative perspective, to say nothing of socioeconomic privilege. Burkas and niqabs are dissected as tools of oppression, beyond a passing mention that some people don't think so. There is barely any mention of the impacts of race or sexuality — apart from how the fight for same-sex marriage is really "for all of us" because gays and lesbians challenge gender roles by ... being in relationships? I wasn't entirely sure what her point was. (What I do know is that transgender individuals weren't mentioned in the discussions on gender, and bisexuals weren't mentioned at all in these essays. And there are problems inherent to queer relationships, some of them related to gender ... but I digress.)
I'm not an expert, but I recall reading that women of color and queer women face even more violence, and I can attest to the addition of racism to everyday sexism as a person of color (and biphobia, but that's another discussion). I do get that not every topic can be covered in a limited essay, or even collection of essays, but the most inclusive that this gets is a discussion on how changing societal views toward gay people [Solnit specifically talks about homophobia] should make us hopeful that we'll eradicate misogyny too.
Solnit talks a lot about the progress we've made "because feminists fought for us". However, feminism isn't a uniform movement, and feminists aren't a monolith. As this essay collection demonstrates, not all feminists (think to) fight for all women. [To say nothing of nonbinary people, or trans men, or anyone else.]
Based on the title, I was mostly expecting to read about "mansplaining" (which, by the way, the author explains is not a term she came up with, even if she may have brought attention to the issue), but Solnit makes a really good point about the underlying power imbalance and the slippery slope into gender-based violence. You really can't talk about mansplaining as an isolated phenomenon, because it all goes back to patriarchal norms. It's a symptom rather than disease. That said, I did find myself zoning out a little after the first few essays.
And unfortunately, these essays are limited to a Western (white) cisheteronormative perspective, to say nothing of socioeconomic privilege. Burkas and niqabs are dissected as tools of oppression, beyond a passing mention that some people don't think so. There is barely any mention of the impacts of race or sexuality — apart from how the fight for same-sex marriage is really "for all of us" because gays and lesbians challenge gender roles by ... being in relationships? I wasn't entirely sure what her point was. (What I do know is that transgender individuals weren't mentioned in the discussions on gender, and bisexuals weren't mentioned at all in these essays. And there are problems inherent to queer relationships, some of them related to gender ... but I digress.)
I'm not an expert, but I recall reading that women of color and queer women face even more violence, and I can attest to the addition of racism to everyday sexism as a person of color (and biphobia, but that's another discussion). I do get that not every topic can be covered in a limited essay, or even collection of essays, but the most inclusive that this gets is a discussion on how changing societal views toward gay people [Solnit specifically talks about homophobia] should make us hopeful that we'll eradicate misogyny too.
Solnit talks a lot about the progress we've made "because feminists fought for us". However, feminism isn't a uniform movement, and feminists aren't a monolith. As this essay collection demonstrates, not all feminists (think to) fight for all women. [To say nothing of nonbinary people, or trans men, or anyone else.]
I received a review copy from Random House Reader's Circle through a Goodreads giveaway; all opinions are my own and honest.
2.5 stars
Overall: the research and reasoning are pretty solid, but the writing style doesn't really work for me. Still got me thinking, though, which I appreciate.
3 stars for the first half
I've never read the Bible, let alone looked into its historical or cultural context, so it was interesting to learn about its dubious origins alongside its literary merits. Dawkins presents pretty solid evidence against it as a book of faith, though some passages cross the line into mockery and contempt — while understandable given his personal background, it doesn't make me want to keep reading.
2 stars for the second half
As someone who's been interested in science for as long as I can remember (and lucky enough to get a quality education), I thought that the explanations of evolution, enzymes, etc. slide from accessible to borderline patronizing pretty quickly. Of course, it doesn't help that Dawkins name-drops his own other books as well as other [I assume] major names in science.
2.5 stars
Overall: the research and reasoning are pretty solid, but the writing style doesn't really work for me. Still got me thinking, though, which I appreciate.
3 stars for the first half
I've never read the Bible, let alone looked into its historical or cultural context, so it was interesting to learn about its dubious origins alongside its literary merits. Dawkins presents pretty solid evidence against it as a book of faith, though some passages cross the line into mockery and contempt — while understandable given his personal background, it doesn't make me want to keep reading.
2 stars for the second half
As someone who's been interested in science for as long as I can remember (and lucky enough to get a quality education), I thought that the explanations of evolution, enzymes, etc. slide from accessible to borderline patronizing pretty quickly. Of course, it doesn't help that Dawkins name-drops his own other books as well as other [I assume] major names in science.
It’s always hard for me to rate anthologies and collections, since I feel differently about each piece — particularly when each was written by a different author, as is the case here. Naturally some essays were more compelling and/or relatable than others, though to be fair none of them represented my personal experience with mental illness, nor did I expect them to; I was surprised to recognize myself in symptoms and trains of thought attributed to other diagnoses than the ones I received, but overall I felt seen. And that’s the point of sharing such personal experiences, as several authors said explicitly — so that public stigma decreases and individuals realize that they’re not alone.
As always with anthologies, some of the stories were more compelling (and/or better written) than others. The variety - some happy endings, some not; some LGBTQIA couples, some not; etc. - was definitely fascinating, great representation of how unique an experience "falling/being in love" can be. Plus, some of my favorite authors demonstrate their storytelling skill in this collection!
Meet Cute: Some People Are Destined to Meet
Meredith Russo, Dhonielle Clayton, Julie Murphy, Nicola Yoon, Ibi Zoboi, Katie Cotugno, Jocelyn Davies, Kass Morgan, Katharine McGee, Jennifer L. Armentrout, Nina LaCour, Emery Lord, Sara Shepard
As always, some stories were better than others, ranging from 2 to 4 stars.
Siege Etiquette: 2.5 stars. Pretty typical YA romance, like a novel condensed.
Print Shop: 4 stars. Soft wlw, a sense of community, digital/analog and subtle generational divide.
Hourglass: 2 stars. Props for POC plus-size protagonist, but really tropey; “I’m not like other girls.”
Click: 3.5 stars. The tragic backstory is a bit much, though that might be the opening infodump; the romance itself is cute.
The Intern: 3 stars. Also pretty typical YA fluffy instaromance.
Somewhere That’s Green: 3 stars. Huge props for transgender wlw and religiously-raised lesbian, but pretty tropey. Theater aspect felt more like backdrop than plot.
The Way We Love Here: 4 stars. Love the premise of soulmates and how to find them; love the sense of possibility.
Oomph: 3.5 stars. Love their shared geeky sense of humor, backstory a little overmuch, but cute wlw potential-friends-maybe-more.
The Dictionary of You and Me: 4 stars. Love these vocabulary nerds; the twist was meant to be obvious and in a short story it works.
The Unlikely Likelihood of Falling in Love: 4 stars. I really enjoyed AP Stats, and it’s an interesting way to approach a meet-cute. Extra props for managing to describe Sam’s morning routines in detail without making it boring or repetitive.
259 Million Miles: 3.5 stars. Cute characters, plot made me feel lots of emotions. Fascinating futuristic setting.
Something Real: 3.5 stars. Not a huge fan of the writing style, but the premise was fun and the ending satisfying.
Say Everything: 4 stars. This could easily have been a longer story; I want to know more about everything that happened.
The Department of Dead Love: 3 stars. Premise and scifi elements are vibrant, plot is disappointingly predictable.
Siege Etiquette: 2.5 stars. Pretty typical YA romance, like a novel condensed.
Print Shop: 4 stars. Soft wlw, a sense of community, digital/analog and subtle generational divide.
Hourglass: 2 stars. Props for POC plus-size protagonist, but really tropey; “I’m not like other girls.”
Click: 3.5 stars. The tragic backstory is a bit much, though that might be the opening infodump; the romance itself is cute.
The Intern: 3 stars. Also pretty typical YA fluffy instaromance.
Somewhere That’s Green: 3 stars. Huge props for transgender wlw and religiously-raised lesbian, but pretty tropey. Theater aspect felt more like backdrop than plot.
The Way We Love Here: 4 stars. Love the premise of soulmates and how to find them; love the sense of possibility.
Oomph: 3.5 stars. Love their shared geeky sense of humor, backstory a little overmuch, but cute wlw potential-friends-maybe-more.
The Dictionary of You and Me: 4 stars. Love these vocabulary nerds; the twist was meant to be obvious and in a short story it works.
The Unlikely Likelihood of Falling in Love: 4 stars. I really enjoyed AP Stats, and it’s an interesting way to approach a meet-cute. Extra props for managing to describe Sam’s morning routines in detail without making it boring or repetitive.
259 Million Miles: 3.5 stars. Cute characters, plot made me feel lots of emotions. Fascinating futuristic setting.
Something Real: 3.5 stars. Not a huge fan of the writing style, but the premise was fun and the ending satisfying.
Say Everything: 4 stars. This could easily have been a longer story; I want to know more about everything that happened.
The Department of Dead Love: 3 stars. Premise and scifi elements are vibrant, plot is disappointingly predictable.
Four stars for some parts and just two for others — I really enjoyed Watney's first-person narration; the passages in omniscient third, not so much — so I'm averaging it out to three.
Macgyver meets Survivor meets [some space colonization short story I vaguely remember reading in English class but can no longer recall the name of]. Murphy's Law in full effect. Man vs. (unfamiliar) nature. I'm 100% here for the premise.
While I've forgotten basically everything relevant that I ever learned about astronomy and/or engineering, the science seemed mostly viable in that I had no idea what anyone was talking about for the most part so I kind of skimmed the explanations and focused on the general plot.
As I mentioned before, Watney's a great storyteller — funny, dramatic, relatable — but the third-person POV bridges, while appreciated on a plot level, paled in comparison: awkward phrasings and some technical errors, and a certain lackluster quality that I can't seem to pin down. Points for casual ethnic diversity, but it'd be even better if the general narrative wasn't so rife with microaggressions.
In terms of tone, I personally didn't feel any significant will he make it suspense; this was probably in part because Watney himself was so focused on just solving the next problem to stay alive until he could be rescued, and that relentless single-mindedness came across clearly. That said, I had a harder time empathizing with the audience back on Earth, civilians waiting with bated breath and NASA employees frantically working to bring him home.
To sum up, I greatly enjoyed like 70% of this book but the rest was a little disappointing.
Macgyver meets Survivor meets [some space colonization short story I vaguely remember reading in English class but can no longer recall the name of]. Murphy's Law in full effect. Man vs. (unfamiliar) nature. I'm 100% here for the premise.
While I've forgotten basically everything relevant that I ever learned about astronomy and/or engineering, the science seemed mostly viable in that I had no idea what anyone was talking about for the most part so I kind of skimmed the explanations and focused on the general plot.
As I mentioned before, Watney's a great storyteller — funny, dramatic, relatable — but the third-person POV bridges, while appreciated on a plot level, paled in comparison: awkward phrasings and some technical errors, and a certain lackluster quality that I can't seem to pin down. Points for casual ethnic diversity, but it'd be even better if the general narrative wasn't so rife with microaggressions.
In terms of tone, I personally didn't feel any significant will he make it suspense; this was probably in part because Watney himself was so focused on just solving the next problem to stay alive until he could be rescued, and that relentless single-mindedness came across clearly. That said, I had a harder time empathizing with the audience back on Earth, civilians waiting with bated breath and NASA employees frantically working to bring him home.
To sum up, I greatly enjoyed like 70% of this book but the rest was a little disappointing.