I’m starting to get ‘the dread’ every time I think of picking this up, so will be putting it down for now. 

Maybe I’ll come back to it at another time, but right now I’m kinda sick of Elena and Lila’s dynamic, and was hoping for a bit more growth in them in this instalment. 

Ferrante really does write so well, but the realism is getting a bit much for me. The whole story just feels like broken and horrible people going through the same cycles ad nauseum, in only slightly different formats - which is exactly what life is, but is maybe a bit much to read. 

I don’t know what, if anything, I gained from reading 53% of this book. But I can unequivocally tell you that all this novel has to offer is a pretty dispassionate and removed description of various Native American massacres, with a boat load of racism from our main character that is never reckoned with. 

Ok, yes, a lot of people ‘back in the day’ had these views on Native Americans. But did Barry do a single thing to bring these views under the lens of modern day, or at least make it clear that he disagreed with them? Did he fuck. 

It’s just a barrage of outdated thinking, with no actual plot apart from ‘my boyfriend/husband/whatever is going to die at some point’, which surprise, surprise is written by a (as far as I can tell) straight man. Even weirder that it appears he was inspired by his gay son to write this. Not every queer story has to end in tragedy my guy, and it makes me wonder what you think of your son’s sexuality if he inspired you to write about this shite.  

The novel also assumes the reader has a working knowledge of this period in America’s history, which I don’t, so I had no context for a lot of the events, meaning they were even more meaningless than I thought possible.  

It’s essentially a vague textbook-esque description of a load of bullshit. Don’t waste your time. 

This book had two immediate red flags for me in the first chapter, then adding to that the fact that reviews that say this is a really bleak book, I just don’t want to read any further. 

The first red flag was that we’re not told when this is set. All I could tell is that there doesn’t seem to be a lot of modern technology, so it’s probably set pre-2000, but apart from that I have no fucking idea. Why do authors think we can just mindread dates?? One review I read said the date was mentioned first on page 225!!! That’s too fucking late. 

The second (and obviously much bigger) red flag was the huge amount of casual racism towards Chinese characters in the first 20 pages of the book. And it’s not the characters being racist, which wouldn’t be as big of a problem, it’s the narration itself (i.e. Dennis-Benn’s voice). 

This is obviously already awful, but in a book that’s centred so much on racism against black people, it’s wild to see racism against another ethnicity spoken so plainly and without any acknowledgement. 

Even if, as suggested by the research I did into some of the words used, these names are seen more as 'endearing' in Jamaica, rather than slurs, TELL US THAT?? Dennis-Brown is obviously trying to reach more than just Jamaican readers with this novel, so she really needs to explain why her seemingly stereotypical and degrading names for people aren't racist (if she even believes that’s the case). Just blind fucking hypocrisy. 

These three examples of what I’m talking about are all from a SINGLE page in the novel while describing the Chinese family who own a shop: 

 1. 

 2. 

3. They’re described as often seen 

Excuse me?? Not to mention that this family have lived in this same Jamaican village for at least four generations?? Surely after so long living in Jamaica they wouldn't be SO staunchly only eating stereotypically Asian foods?? 

 
If all of this nonsense was commented on, it would be a whole different story. If Dennis-Brown made it obvious that even though this behaviour towards other ethnicities is common, that doesn’t make it ok to do. Instead, the dismissive way the Chinese characters are described in this chapter alone made me really uncomfortable and like I couldn’t trust Dennis-Benn to have compassion for people not like her, so I won’t be continuing this read. 

Started this looking forward to it, but unfortunately, I’m wholly unconvinced by Mortimer’s narration style.  

It sounds like he’s reading a character profile/summing up something, rather than telling a story. It’s so choppy and doesn’t feel like anything flows. 

Essentially, it sounds like he’s just reading the story out loud, rather than actually being the character, which is especially jarring as its written in first person speaking directly to the reader. 

If I get a chance to read this physically in future, I’ll give it a go, but I knew I wouldn’t be able to stick with his narration. 

At 40% in, I’d hoped the flaws in the opening of this book would have been addressed, or at least other positives about the story would overshadow them. This did not happen. 

One issue is that Collins falls into the age-old problem of characters writing absolutely unrealistic diary entries. No single diary entry ever written on Earth has transcribed such long conversations so exactly. There is no way Sophia (or anyone without a memory disorder) would be able to remember pages of exact dialogue, especially James's tedious scientific diatribes, yet apparently, she can. Authors really need to stop putting long stretches of dialogue in diary entries, it makes no fucking sense and completely breaks the immersion of the story. 

Also, all of the men are misogynistic arseholes who wouldn't even know how to pick up a child, let alone deign to look after one themselves. And God forbid they think of a woman as a real person. And all the British women are brainwashed idiots with no ambitions other than being the perfect wife. Yes, that was more the norm at the time, but not everybody was the exact same cookie cutter person. Where's the nuance?!
 
Henry is fucking annoying. His relationship with Edward is so fucking weird. 

And I didn’t even make it to where I assume Sophia and Hira form a romantic/sexual relationship, but the build-up is really weird because Sophia is basically a child in a woman’s body. 

Also, the cover, though beautiful, doesn’t make sense any sense?? The silk stops people from hearing, not people from speaking. So why are their mouths ripped away? And if instead it’s meant to be pointing out that people don’t have a voice, why the fuck include a man?? All of the men Collins cares about in this book (i.e. anyone with money) have their voices heard loud and clear. 

A disappointing book I don’t have the time for. Next! 

I can’t say for sure, but I think a lot of the issues I had with this read were due to reading it on audio, rather than with my eyes like I did the first book. 

Even 50% in, I hadn’t managed to piece together who some of the characters were, and what they did in the first book. Not being able to reference the map may have affected this, but I also felt than Parker-Chan didn’t give enough of a reminder of who the characters were. In most cases we got their name and a brief sentence that alluded to the fact they were in the previous book. Nothing else. It also doesn’t help that character lists don’t exist for this series, so despite a thorough search on the web, I couldn’t find anything to help prompt me about who some of the characters were. 

Because I didn’t have that context, I really struggled to understand their motivations, relationships with other characters, and the impact of their actions. 

I realised I was just listening to this to listen to it, rather than really enjoying and engaging with the story. It just wasn’t compelling enough without the context of character histories. All I got out of it was: 

Oh, a war, oh, a war, oh a war, oh some sex scenes where Baoxiang keeps saying how young the guy he’s fucking is, oh a war, oh a war, oh Zhu and Ouyang bonding over being horrible people who just happen to be gender non-conforming, oh look another war. 

Maybe I’ll give it another go if I get my hands on a print or digital copy, but seeing as I didn’t love the first book, it definitely won’t be a priority any time soon. 

Graham Jones is obviously a great writer, just the opening of the novel proved that to me. 

However, that means when he writes a fucked-up character, he can really write a fucked-up character. I felt like I was losing my goddamn mind reading this, especially in the essay sections – as if I’d lost the ability to comprehend the written word. Jade will throw out random pieces of information with no context, jumping from idea to idea with no apparent rhyme or reason. I had idea what she was on about 50% of the time. 

Then add to that my lack of interest/knowledge of slasher films, and I just couldn’t stay in Jade’s head any longer. I truly felt like I was going mad, and my brain is already too fucked-up to continue with the book. 

I moderately enjoyed the start of this novel. O’Farrell’s writing is lovely to read, and I was interested in the two storylines. However, as I read further, I was turned off more and more. 

Around 30% in I noticed that the modern timeline was getting more and more baby focussed, and way less interesting. I don’t need any more encouragement not to have kids, thanks. And from reding other reviews, the book’s biggest strength seems to be the themes of motherhood it explores, which I couldn’t care less about. 

I also thought all of the memory loss shite was lazy and unrealistic. How are these people still alive?? 

But the nail in the coffin was the ‘romance’ between Lexie and Innes. To me, this relationship entirely consisted of Innes taking advantage of a young woman, and the age/experience gap between them really started to bother me. She’s 21 and he’s 34. I’m 27 right now, and I can barely stand even being around 21-year-olds, let alone date one of them. 

To quote the book directly (and please note all quotes here are from the same scene): 

Innes says this to Lexie as if being young was a mistake for his stupid decisions. So why the fuck is he enticing her to make the same type of stupid decisions?? 

Two pages later when discussing their relationship he says: 

?!?!?!?!?!??! And this is AFTER we've seen them fucking in a flash forward, and right before they fuck for the first time. 

Then next page he’s talking to ‘himself’ (but out loud with her in the room): 

What an absolute goddamn creep. Yes, he’s meant to be saying it in a playful, teasing way. But HOLY CHRIST it takes two brain cells to see how fucked up this is. 

Adding on to the shit heap is the fact that Lexie never fucking talks. Their whole relationship is just Innes talking at Lexie and telling her how to live her life. That isn’t a romantic relationship, and almost gives parent talking to a child vibes, which is even creepier.  

If this was all being commented on by O’Farrell, and the message was intended as ‘don’t do this, this is bad’, it would be a different matter, but as far as I can tell the book portrays this as a love story I’m meant to find sexy and romantic, instead of a creep and a girl with Stockholm syndrome. 

I’m not that man I’m afraid. 

I picked up this book specifically because I want to read more stories with trans characters. I love that the core of the story addresses the (so often ignored) question of what happens to anyone outside the gender binary when an event/illness etc. only affects one gender in media. 

Unfortunately, however, I realised 40% in that the trans rep was pretty much the only thing I was enjoying. One of my main issues was the writing style. It is so incredibly unrefined, bordering on amateurish, in exactly the ways I hate. There are SO MANY long, rambling sentences where the meaning/subject of the sentence is muddled or lost, and so often I found myself losing focus during a single sentence. There are also so many unnecessary words used, for example in places where the reader could easily have implied the meaning without the extra words, or where Felker-Martin is describing something and uses two words that have the same exact meaning right after one another.  

I also thought the worldbuilding in general was pretty lacking. Yes, 50%-ish of the planet dying/turning feral would be a lot to cope with, but I would have thought they’d be a bit more 'back to normal' by now? There was mention of a working nuclear power plant, sometimes there’s electricity, but all of the shops/takeaways are closed/empty etc. Why wouldn’t some of them be open? There also seem to be abundant supplies of some things, with no indication of where they came from. Are factories still producing things, or has that all ground to a halt? Are women incapable of running anything themselves that isn’t a TERF militia? 

There was also basically no discussion about the start of the ‘event’, at least as far as I read to. ‘T-Day’ makes it sound like it hit everyone in one foul swoop, but other small bits of information also suggest that wasn’t the case because people had time to plan etc. This made it difficult for me to get the full picture of what was the most monumental event in every single character’s life. 

I also found it odd that none of the transwomen ever mentioned castration as an option for reducing their testosterone levels. Whether that was Beth/Fran discussing why they couldn’t/didn’t want to do it, or why it wouldn’t work, or the TERFs considering it as an alternative to killing everyone. 

I was also starting to find the constant descriptions of Indi's weight too much. I didn’t mind it in her POV sections, as that’s a character choice, and if she hates her body that much, (like many trans people) it would make sense for her to be thinking about it all the time. My problem came when every single character brought up her weight every time they thought about her. Just seemed hugely unnecessary. 

So, even though I was enjoying the trans rep in here, the story isn’t doing anything for me. As a seasoned dystopia/sci-fi reader, I feel like I’ve seen this all before, and the trans/hormone stuff is just a new layer sprinkled on top of pre-existing stories. And unfortunately, it’s a layer that isn’t strong enough for me to want to continue reading. 

This book INFURAITED me. I don’t think I’ve ever seen as many continuity errors in a single book, let alone such a well-lauded one. Then add to that weird ‘translation’ stuff and creeping on adolescent boys, and you get this piece of overrated nonsense. 

Starting with the most blatant of the continuity errors: 

1. On page 3 Patroclus describes a memory of being on a beach with his mother, and says 

And then goes on to describe SO MANY more memories of his mother???? For example, on page 31 -

?? From the sketchy narrative context (more on this later) he is telling us about all these memories from a single fixed point in the future, so obviously that first memory is not his "only” one? 

2. How the fuck did Patroclus not know what a centaur was – not even the concept?? I could have been fine with it if he’d heard about them and thought they were myths/ancient creatures etc., not around in present day, but to have no idea AT ALL? Achilles clearly knew they existed, so how had it never come up between them, especially when he know he was due to go and study with one? 

3. When they’re up in the mountains with Chiron, Patroclus says 

They used to live A DAY’S TRAVEL from these same fucking mountains, where it clearly snows every winter, so how had they never ONCE seen snow??? 

4. Before the pair got to Chiron’s cave, Patroclus was absolutely fawning over/crushing on Achilles, and couldn’t stop talking about it. Yet when they get to the cave all of those feelings magically vanish, right at peak puberty time?? He mentions it once before the ‘training montage’ begins, then not again for the next two years? As. Fucking. If. 

 

Another issue with the book is the nonexistent sense of the passage of time. This made it especially difficult for me to grasp the boys' ages at times, which I’d say is a pretty important fact to get straight in this kind of story. I read the first seven chapters of the book in one sitting, yet was constantly forgetting their ages. The way Miller wrote about the boys in the first 25% of the book made them sound 16/17 at the youngest, so whenever their age was stated as being 11/12/13 I was shocked every time. 

This age ambiguity was caused in some cases by, in my opinion, the over-sexualisation of the boys in question, namely Achilles. There are a myriad of ways to show two kids being in 'love', but a 11/12-year-old constantly going on about a 13/14-year-olds glistening muscles or the “soles of his feet” is not one of them. Let alone the following quote, which, let me remind you again, is a 11/12-year-old talking about a 13/14-year-old: 

I felt like an absolute creep just reading that. I know we’re seeing it from Patroclus’ perspective, but was such specific detail necessary? Wait until they’re a bit older before describing their pubes in a sexual way, surely?? And the vagueness of their ages at the time of this scene just compounded the issue even further. 

There was also WAY too much casual mention of women being raped as if it was a totally accepted fact of life. I assume it was a common theme in the original works, but 1. This is a retelling, by a female author no less, so Miller didn’t have to include it at all. 2. It would have been nice to see at least one male character who was against it?? 

Then come my issues with the mechanics of how the story was being told. This became really obvious to me when Patroclus started translating some of the words used in the story, e.g. 

Patroclus obviously lived his life speaking ancient Greek, but these specific word translations suggest that he’s translating the story into modern English to tell it. The only thing this can suggest is that he has lived all this time, which is clearly not how the story goes. And if he’s not telling the story to us in the modern day specifically, and its just a story being told in his native language, why is there a need for these translations?? All very odd and completely broke my immersion in the story.
 
Finally, to discuss the ‘romance’ itself. A ‘romance’ which in fact, from both my own reading and many reviews, is actually just Patroclus being pathetically obsessed with Achilles, and not an actual relationship as I was led to believe. It’s pure hero worship, nothing more, nothing less. And apart from not being a complete and utter arsehole when they were kids, what the fuck else does Patroclus actually see in Achilles apart from ‘ooo, so pretty’ and the perfumed soles of his feet?? Achilles is just an arsehole. A fact that was made very clear when he left to study with Chiron and just expected Patroclus to follow him without being invited, breaking all the rules set out to him – 

- how about actually discussing it with him, rather than make Patroclus follow Achilles around like a love-sick puppy, giving him nothing in return? And Patroclus, in his hero-worship daze, was supposed to just accept that Achilles didn’t invite him to study with him and was ridiculously selfish to assume he’d just follow? Such a great basis for a ’relationship’.
 
And lawdy, reading some other reviews about later developments I’m glad I stopped when I did... Every single issue I have so far with the book only seems to get worse as it progresses. I was really hoping to like this one, but once again, straight (as far as I can tell) women writing a gay male love story ends up being a load of gay trauma shoved into a pile of shite. 

Farewell.