Medea begins with a displacement, and ends with a displacement.
Medea is perhaps one of the most ferocious female characters in all Greek tragedy, andMedea begins with a displacement, and ends with a displacement.
Medea is perhaps one of the most ferocious female characters in all Greek tragedy, and I’m fascinated by her. Medea is a masterful manipulator, conniver, convincer: her stychomythia with Creon and later Aegeus each remind me of Clytemnestra’s with Agamemnon in Aeschylus’ Oresteia. She makes herself a suppliant to Aegeus, falling at his feet in honor. She kills her children out of revenge. Well, actually, her killing of her children functions here as somewhat of an attempt to cut her final ties. I think it’s interesting that the original myth does not actually even make her kill her children. Euripides has a tendency towards putting his female characters (most notably with Electra, who actually kills Clytemnestra rather than sympathizing with Orestes) into roles with less moral goodness, but more agency.
Yet she is also sympathetic. Medea’s role as the ‘other’ is downplayed, and her identity as a murderer sympathized with. Medea’s only ask for an oath to King Aegeus is that she never seeks expulsion: she desires a safe harbor, after one expulsion after another.
Jason is desperate for power, but throughout, it is Medea who has saved him, who has helped him, who has become a murderer to save him. When he betrays her, she has nothing to go back to, and an identity forever corrupted by her past deeds. Medea and Jason accuse each other of selfishness, a lack of love for their children, and a desire for power; both exhibit all of these traits themselves, but it is Jason, the familiar, whom we criticize most. The gods, towards the end, are on her side. (Interestingly, this ending, too, would’ve been a plot twist to Euripides’ original audience. Plot twists in this era of tragedy are rare.)
This play allegedly took third place in 431 BCE drama competition into which Euripides entered it, but by the end of the century, Aristophanes was cheerfully mocking it, and it made the ‘select’ plays of Euripides, the ones passed along.
Notable Lines (Rachel Kitzinger translation): NURSE: The bonds of love are sick. (16) NURSE: Moderation sounds best on the tongue. (127) MEDEA: Oh, Father, oh, city, to my shame: I killed my brother and left you. (168) MEDEA: I’d rather three times over stand behind a shield than give birth once. (250) MEDEA: And we’re women: most helpless when it comes to noble deeds, most skillful at constructing every evil. (409) CHORUS: Had Phoebus, lord of singing, given us the gift, we would have sung in answer to men’s voices? (426) MEDEA: O Zeus, you gave a sure test for false god: why is there none for human baseness? (516-517) MEDEA: Let me be thought the opposite of these: harsh with my enemies, gentle with my friends. (805-806) JASON: O, children dearest— MEDEA: To their mother, yes. Not to you. (1396-1397)
Notable Lines (Paul Roche translation): JASON: It was Aphrodite and no one else in heaven and earth who saved me on my voyage. MEDEA: I would not touch anything of yours - how dare you offer it. MEDEA: My heart dissolves when I look in their bright blue irises. CHORUS: So ended this terrible thing.
This is my favorite ridiculous show and so I'm beginning this with a chart: pink: marriage blue: crush on green: flirts with [image]
So, yeah, This is my favorite ridiculous show and so I'm beginning this with a chart: pink: marriage blue: crush on green: flirts with [image]
So, yeah, this is a really really funny play, and a play with a lot of good puns, etc etc etc, and it is for that reason that it is entertaining. But this show is compelling for some deeper reasons. Here, I will insert several bits of my eight-page essay on gender and sexuality in Twelfth Night, an essay that got embarrassingly long.
Throughout Twelfth Night, Shakespeare plays with the idea of both gender and romance as roles we perform, and with love as something beyond gender or sexuality. Beginning with lead character Viola transforming herself into Cesario, the show delves into issues of gender as a performed role and romance as another performed role, a tool for status gain. Characters desire each other for outside appearance or for status, rather than for love. Viola’s transformation of gender allows her to take on a freer ‘role’ in the world, a role which at once suits her and forces her to hide. Yet Orsino wants her as both a maid and a man — in other words, he loves her for who she is. By consciously breaking gender roles, Shakespeare concludes that gender and love are primarily performance, yet gives his characters some intimacy anyway.
Throughout Twelfth Night, characters break their gendered ‘roles’ in society, with women coming off as powerful and men coming off as incompetent. Despite Orsino’s claims about the “weak nature” (3.4.30) of women, it is not women who are weak within the play: Maria is bold and conniving, and Olivia consistently resists the romantic role she is placed into by Orsino. Orsino is perhaps one of the most passionate characters in the play in his love for Olivia — “O, then unfold the passion of my love / Surprise her with discourse of my dear faith” (1.4.26-27) — and he changes his mind quickly — “If music be the food of love, play on... Enough; no more” (1.1.1-6). Meanwhile, Viola/Cesario is the more logical and rational: “She bore a mind that envy could not but call fair” (2.1.28-29), Sebastian says of her. This contrast between the romantic, changeable Orsino, and the strong, confident-in-her-choices Viola is a direct inversion of societal sexism, a humanizing of women that is revolutionary in merit. Yet despite their personal breaks in role, each character is still playing a part, dictated by gender. Women in the play cannot always express their freedom; Olivia, for example, is looked at as a romantic object by Orsino, and Maria by Toby. Only one female character manages to fully escape this, and she takes somewhat extreme measures.
Like a role in a drama, Viola's gender identity is simply a matter of outer appearance. Yet over time, we notice that Cesario’s character is convincing enough to others that she is hardly criticized. Sebastian says of her, “it was said she much resembled me” (2.1.24-25), something Viola confirms with “my brother know / Yet living in my glass” (3.4.399-400); meanwhile, Maria describes her as “a fair young man, and / well attended” (1.5.101-102). It is here that the play’s tension appears: where does the character start, and Viola begin? Viola, as Cesario, is often described via metaphors and similes; no one can quite pin her down. Indeed, as the play continues, Viola seems to take on the role of both a maid and a man. In early stages of the show, she refers to herself thusly — “As I am man, / My state is desperate for my master’s love. / As I am woman (now, alas the day!)...” (2.2.36-38). But even upon the unveiling of her womanhood, the duality of her nature is clearly stated — “Nor are you therein, by my life, deceived: / You are betrothed both to a maid and man” (5.1.228-230). Within these lines, Shakespeare puts Viola in the liminal space between gender, allowing her a role in the world in which her personality supersedes her gender. Viola performs the role of a man, and thus she is a man. When Sebastian and Viola are finally reunited, the situation calls for Sebastian to refer to his sister in the past tense. Yet metaphorically, there is perhaps some truth to this past-tense gendering. “I had a sister / Whom the blind waves and surges have devoured” (5.1.239-240), Sebastian tells the audience. Maybe, indeed, Viola and Cesario have become one and the same.
Yet through her disguise, Viola is also put into a position where she cannot be loved for her true personhood, a position many other characters share. Within Twelfth Night, disguise and failed honesty both ruin and form relationships. Malvolio’s disguise, taken on to make Olivia fall in love with him, backfires entirely, leading him to be interred in the dungeons. Meanwhile, Sir Toby and Maria’s relationship is based around their role in humiliating another, with very little human connection; Maria, like Malvolio, simply desires her chosen lover to boost her status. Indeed, perhaps the biggest tragedy of the play, then, is that Olivia does, in fact, end up with someone she knows only from the outside. She has fallen for Cesario’s ‘outside,’ yes, but she has also fallen for her clever lines and flirtatiousness. And yet by chance, she has married the wrong person, someone of whom she knows nothing but outer character. Sebastian, in a similar fashion, has married someone he barely knows, and in so doing rejected another who clearly cares for him. In the face of Antonio’s sacrifices — “His life I gave him and did thereto add / My love, without retention or restraint, / All his in dedication. For his sake / Did I expose myself, pure for his love” (5.1.78-82) — the love of someone Sebastian has met only lines earlier pales. Honest love has not come about for Olivia, Sebastian, Malvolio, Antonio, or Maria: their disguises have stayed intact.
It is only in the relationship between Orsino and Viola that love occurs on a true basis of personal knowledge, transversing heteronormative romantic boundaries (note: this line inspired one of my teachers to ask how I learned the word heteronormative, which is deeply hilarious). Orsino begins the play in a role, that of a lovesick teenger for an unnatainable girl; it is only through the love of someone he actually knows that he breaks out of his role. The relationship between Orsino and Viola relationship is clearly romantic before Viola is shown to be a woman. The first scene we see of Cesario and Orsino begins with a brief speech from Valentine, in which he establishes their relationship has already become quite close: “He hath known you but three days, and already you are no stranger” (1.4.1-4). It is Orsino’s words themselves, however, that best indicate romantic tension towards Viola: “...Cesario, / Thou know’st no less but all. I have unclasped / To thee the book even of my secret soul” (1.4.13-15). Perhaps more importantly, it is clearly established he is attracted to her even in believing her to be a man — “Diana’s lip / Is not more smooth and rubious, thy small pipe / Is as the maiden’s organ, shrill and sound, / And all is semblative a womans part” (1.4.50-54), he says to her. (note: it also establishes that Viola definitely looks like a twink. you're welcome.)
In strong contrast to Olivia’s love for Viola and Orsino’s love for Olivia, Orsino is someone Viola knows. The challenge here thus is not a lack of connection, but a lack of ability to be together as two men. “I, poor monster, / fond as much on him” (2.2.33-34), Viola says of herself, self-deprecating on her state of desire for Orsino; she knows her desire cannot be while she plays the role of a man. Their relationship does not lose sexual tension throughout the show, either. Orsino’s direction to Viola to “If ever thou shalt love, / In the sweet pangs of it remember me” (2.4.17-18) is easy to read into, and Viola’s subsequent discussion of her sister’s feelings for a man are hard to stage as anything but a sexually tense scene. A clever bit of wordplay a scene later uses servanthood as something sexually driven, sexualizing Viola’s relationship with Orsino: “You’re servant to the Count Orsino, youth.” “And he is yours, and his must needs be yours / Your servant’s servant is your servant, madam” (3.1.102-104). Here, Viola uses ‘servant’ to denote both her own servitude and Orsino’s love for Olivia, establishing the term as something of a romantic innuendo (as it was commonly used). Even when confronted by accusations about Cesario, Orsino calls him his own: “my gentleman Cesario?” (5.1.193).
There is a moment of change in the play, where Orsino discovers that Cesario is also Viola, and we, as the audience, have an expectation of how this will play out — in the 2005 reimagination She’s the Man, for example, Orsino is horrified by Viola’s identity as a woman and romantic tension with him, and must take a week to process her true self. In contrast, the play’s Orsino proposes to Cesario only minutes after discovering her identity. Their relationship is now, quite suddenly to Orsino, permitted, no longer taboo; thus, the play implies that the only obstacle to their romance has been societal judgement around Cesario’s outer presentation, rather than Orsino’s feelings towards her. Notably, Orsino, in proposing, does not attempt to put Viola into the box of womanhood. He calls Viola boy even in asking her to marry him — “Boy, thou hast said to me a thousand times / Thou never shouldst love woman like to me” (5.1.279-280), his declaration begins, also implying that their conversations have gotten… intimate, shall we say, previous to this revelation. He then proposes thusly: “And since you called me “master” for so long, / Here is my hand. You shall from this time be / Your master’s mistress” (5.1.339-340)... “—Cesario, come, / For so you shall be while you are a man. / But when in other habits you are seen, / Orsino’s mistress, and his fancy’s queen” (5.1.408-411). Even with Viola’s role exposed, he still sees her as inhabiting the liminal space between gender; he has not changed his recognition of her personhood. In other words, he loves her for who she is, beyond the performed roles of manhood or womanhood — it is simply that her new role as a woman allows their relationship to progress in public.
Shakespeare is not a playwright averse to situations of gender confusion — his plays As You Like It, The Merchant of Venice, and Two Gentlemen of Verona all play with crossdressing in some way. Yet this play specifically establishes love as something beyond gender, done for personality and not fitting into heteronormative ideals. In ending his show with Orsino and Viola marrying, Shakespeare comes the closest possible to allowing two men to form a relationship on stage. While few truly romantic couples actually end up together within the show, the subtext of the play is clear: good love is love that sees beyond the outside to the heart. Hope you enjoyed this sappy essay.
I don't remember enough about this, but it is weird as fuck, and Carson McCullers is a gay icon. Imagine wfreshman high school english: book three
I don't remember enough about this, but it is weird as fuck, and Carson McCullers is a gay icon. Imagine writing such fantastically obvious gay subtext in like, 1950. ...more
A Midsummer Night’s Dream is Shakespeare’s funniest comedy, honestly. When a couple tries to run
“Though she be but little, she is fierce!”
A Midsummer Night’s Dream is Shakespeare’s funniest comedy, honestly. When a couple tries to run away, they get followed by a man in love with them, and then by a woman in love with him. And a fairy fucking around makes it all go to shit. As you do!
This play is probably funniest because of its excellent set of characters, including: ✔Hermia – is 4’9” and could kick your ass. runs a feminist blog ✔Lysander – is so beautiful and so, so useless ✔Helena – was told she was too tall for a pair of heels once by a shoestore clerk and stared him directly in the face while purchasing them. your one friend who’s pining over some shitty man ✔Demetrius – the shitty man. okay, actually, he’s doing his best, he’s just like, really bad at everything
→adaptation thoughts← Okay, first of all, may I just say: I won’t rest until someone does a version that changes the genders of Lysander and Helena and makes it a play about an arranged marriage being forced apart because they both find gay love. you're all weak for not taking this obvious opportunity
But in case you wanted a serious answer: I have not actually seen this adaptation yet, but I am a huge fan of the casting of this production: [image] [image]
My review for this got deleted at some point so god knows what I said about this. I believe my general thoughts were that the novel as a whole leans tMy review for this got deleted at some point so god knows what I said about this. I believe my general thoughts were that the novel as a whole leans too hard into high school cliches; I read this right after another book about being bullied to suicide, one also from the perspective of the bully, and I'd enjoyed the solid character arc of that one. Five points of view is a lot for a 300-page book, and I think the coherency suffered here.
I actually quite enjoyed this book as a kid, which is why it is so disappointing to know that the author, Richard Paul Evans, has been accused of sexuI actually quite enjoyed this book as a kid, which is why it is so disappointing to know that the author, Richard Paul Evans, has been accused of sexual harassment by several members of a Utah con in 2017. He has reacted to this accusation, as well as its rapid support by the kid lit community including authors Ally Condie and Shannon Hale, by informing the world of his feeling that the plight of white men in America is as bad as “Jews in Nazi Germany”. So yeah, getting a No from me....more
remember when this book, written by a proud meat-eater, accidentally made me a vegetarian?
Okay, but seriously, I'd recommend giving this a read. Give remember when this book, written by a proud meat-eater, accidentally made me a vegetarian?
Okay, but seriously, I'd recommend giving this a read. Give the teen version a read if you really can't take a 450-page nonfiction book. Either way, I think everyone needs to know exactly how the food industry works. And no, it's not advocating for you to become a vegetarian - it's simply showing truths. The lack of attempt to guilt readership is honestly what stands out about this book. By showing reality without pushing an opinion on what the proper solution is, Pollan manages to be especially convincing. I truly think this book is worth the read....more
This is one of the most psychologically terrifying books I've ever read, and I think that's because of its hyper-realism. I don't know if I'd class thThis is one of the most psychologically terrifying books I've ever read, and I think that's because of its hyper-realism. I don't know if I'd class this as dystopian. I think I'd class this as a survival tale. And a terrifying one at that.
It's a smooth progression from a completely normal situation to a freakish horror scenario. Miranda's world progresses so slowly, so smoothly, that it's hard to even realize how nightmarish her life has become.
Don't expect any jump scares, or explicitly scary scenes, yet the whole book is terrifying. The focus is all on showing and not on telling.
And Miranda's character arc? Stunning. She grows from a very naive and downright dreamy kid to an incredibly mature kid, and you barely notice. Again, the showing and not telling is the main strength of the book.
Honestly, I read this book too long ago to really get everything, but I think you can get anything you want from this review.
NOTE: This is a series review, so I'm talking about every book here. They're all on a fairly similar caliber to me, although book one is probably the NOTE: This is a series review, so I'm talking about every book here. They're all on a fairly similar caliber to me, although book one is probably the best one; it gleams with slightly wasted potential.
Delirium has some great elements, enough that it made a big mark on me in grade six, but also far too much romance for my taste.
This book focuses on a future society where love has been outlawed, and humans are cured of their ability to love at age sixteen. Lauren Oliver develops this concept into a terrifying yet realistic world; it's not hard to understand why the characters think of this world as a utopia. Sure, they have somewhat restricted freedom, but when their religion and all their elders believe so firmly in protecting them from love, how can they disagree?
This book exhibits some of Oliver's best writing, with prose that's flowing yet not too flowery. There are metaphors, yes, but they never overwhelm or kill the book.
"Love; the deadliest of all deadly things. It kills you both when you have it and when you don't."
Lena is a believable narrator, although not very entertaining. She's a bit... typical. To be fair, Lena improves and has a decent character arc as she realizes the toxicity of this world. I ended up really liking her. Lena's best friend Hana is an interesting, dimensional side character.
I have a complicated relationship with this series' romantic plots. Plots, you say? Yes, there are two. Love triangle pops up in the second book. To be fair, Oliver executes both these plotlines fairly well, and both Alex and Julian are good love interests. But there's just too much romance in these books. Oliver should've focused more on platonic love (Lena and Hana's friendship was RIGHT THERE) rather than entirely romantic love.
All that being said, this is a fantastic series beginner. It's just one of those beginners that's good for its potential, not for its actual content. Pandemonium and Requiem are, again, not bad. They're just not great.Pandemonium is a gritty and a fun ride, with a good character arc for Lena. I know many reviewers hate Requiem's ending, but I thought the open ending fit. I was also glad to finally get Hana's point of view, although I really wished her arc were resolved.
Hana in general is a very complex character. Hana's story takes us through the tale of her friendship with Lena, her jealousy and want for love. Hana's character in general is fascinating and I LOVED getting this insight into her motivations. I really wish Delirium had focused on Lena and Hana as the two leads, rather than just bringing Hana in for the final book. This short story also brings up issues of class between Lena and Hana. It just really fascinated me. And the last line is!!
Probably not recommended, because YA can do better. In fact, Lauren Oliver can do better (Before I Fall, anyone?). But if you're interested, go for it....more
3.5 stars. Please just consider this a review for all the books except book three. I don't accept Allegiant as canon. Bye.
Okay, look, I know that in 3.5 stars. Please just consider this a review for all the books except book three. I don't accept Allegiant as canon. Bye.
Okay, look, I know that in the book community, Divergent is occasionally considered an overhyped hunger games remake. Maybe just stop reading this review if that's how you feel about it. Because I absolutely LOVE this book.
WHY THIS BOOK STANDS OUT: AN ESSAY BY ME
Whenever I hear people joke about Tris being similar to Katniss, I immediately assume they haven't read both books. Because Tris is nothing like Katniss. Katniss can be very cold and dispassionate: she's driven by her need to protect her sister. Tris is not at all cold. She's driven by passionate, self-righteous anger. She's extremely reckless and These things are written as character flaws. Tris is called out for being reckless in the face of danger multiple times throughout the series. (view spoiler)[I mean, she fucking dies because of her own recklessness. I may hate Allegiant, but I'm still allowed to use it to prove my point. (hide spoiler)] She's flawed in a realistic way and she'll always remain one of my favorite fictional characters.
While the worldbuilding of this book is admittedly a little odd, this book does a wonderful job exploring fear. (view spoiler)[Tris has a seemingly random fear of being trapped in a box slowly filling with water. As the book goes along, she realizes that fear is related to her fear of losing control. Tobias has two separate fears that stem from his abusive childhood. (hide spoiler)] There's such a deep examination of fear and its roots, which I've never seen in another book.
This book does a damn good job with moral conflicts. (view spoiler)[There's a moment close to the end where Tris is forced to shoot a close friend to survive. While the drama of it all is arguably dragged out too long in Insurgent, this is a really interesting conflict to have in a book. It's brilliant writing. (hide spoiler)]
OTHER GOOD THINGS
Tobias and Tris are my favorite damn couple. Their dynamic just... works. I love how they narratively parallel each other and reflect each other's flaws. I love how they fight but there's no dramatic breakup. (Oh, there's another bonus! No love triangle.) And that scene between them in the fear landscape remains one of my top ten scenes ever. The lack of jerkass guy x sweet innocent girl romance is also a plus. (Side note: I still think the movie Tobias was way too hot for the role. Maybe I should've known I was gay sooner??)
And the side characters!! I love the side characters. I love the Uriah and Lynn and Marlene dream team. I love Christina and Will. And Tris' family relationships make me feel All The Emotions.
SLIGHTLY LESS GOOD THINGS, AND WHY I IGNORED THEM AND LOVED THIS BOOK
The book isn't a very sensical dystopia. In some ways, I guess the faction thing is no less sensical than the Hogwarts worldbuilding. Actually, I think the alignments based on top values make more sense than HP houses. So I'm not really bothered by that.
All the worldbuilding is technically explained in Allegiant, but I hate Allegiant SO MUCH that I'm just going to acknowledge how weird the divergent tests are.
THE BIG BIG CON AND REASON I CAN NEVER ACTUALLY RECOMMEND THIS BOOK
Because the last book fucking sucked. Sorry. Here's my ranty, spoiler-filled review about that. This book totally would've made my all-time favorites list if not for my anger over Allegiant.
Divergent is solidly the best book Insurgent is kind of a "meh" second book. It's not terrible, just not amazing. At least it's not as bad as book three.
Allegiant is... a fucking mess. I wrote a separate review because I was just that pissed off. Fuck you, Allegiant.
Four is a typical story collection, but it's one I liked a decent amount. I always did like Four's character....more
4.5 stars to this amazing series. You'll notice that this box set only contains the first three, which is ridiculously convenient - I didn't read book4.5 stars to this amazing series. You'll notice that this box set only contains the first three, which is ridiculously convenient - I didn't read book four or the novella until 2016 and still loved both, which just goes to show that this series truly is amazing.
Unwind is about a world where society’s distrust for teenagers has been taken to a further extent. Instead of aborting unborn children, governments allow parents to unwind their kids at ages 13-18. Your organs will be given to people who need them – cancer patients, car-accident victims, sick, mangled or disease ridden people. This concept could’ve been terrible in any other author’s hands, but Shusterman executes it perfectly. He writes about how teens are seen as property, existing as aspects of their parents or not at all.
Shusterman has extremely well-written main characters. Connor's character development is complex and interesting. He’s sarcastic and willing to do what it takes. Also, nice socks. Lev isn’t the most interesting towards the beginning of this book, but he has incredible character development, going through a slight villain arc and learning who he is slowly but surely. Risa is emotionally cold, but also badass and lovable.
He doesn’t stop there; this series is also packed with interesting, developed side characters. Una has broken my heart so many times, Hayden has broken my heart so many times. I've only read one or two other series where the character arcs are so consistently interesting, especially with such a large cast.
There’s not too much romance, but what romance exists is amazing. The romance between Connor and Risa is developed extremely slowly, no instalove, with them gradually becoming a team. They’re one of my favorite couples.
While this series is fairly diverse in terms of race and gender, I do have a few quibbles. Throughout the series, we have so many interesting girl characters… but none of the major girls are leaders. All the leaders here are guys, and it's not the greatest. Also, there is not a single lgbt character in this entire series. That’d be fine with a small cast, but there are around 20 major characters in this series. There’s a short novella where Hayden is implied to be bi (which he totally is), but a one-line reference to bringing either a boy or a girl to a party is not enough. I need more.
There is also too much backstory for villains I didn't care about. This aspect is really awesome for the first two books, but it gets old after a while. Not every villain can be symapthetic.
All that being said, I recommend this series wholeheartedly, to everyone....more
3 stars for the series as a whole. This series has a really great concept and some good aspects, but it lacks quite enough emotional depth and ends up3 stars for the series as a whole. This series has a really great concept and some good aspects, but it lacks quite enough emotional depth and ends up being somewhat superficial as a result.
Uglies is about a world in which everyone is considered by default ugly and has to become pretty. The book certainly benefits from this smart concept; this is a world where beauty rules. Unfortunately, the interesting connections to our world aren't explored enough in this series. Pretties are stupid, Uglies have their brains. It's nothing new.
Tally and Shay are each interesting characters with believable inner conflict. They're flawed and their friendship is flawed, but they parallel each other in interesting ways. I almost wish we could've gotten both their points of view. Unfortunately, this series goes all over the place in terms of plot and character growth. There's no solid arc for Tally and Shay; they have emotions, then go back to being terrible because of an operation, then they develop again. Tally has three different character arcs because she keeps having her brain remodeled. I have to admit, it was quite disappointing. It gets old after the second time her character regresses.
Tally's ending as a character (after four books) is pretty good; she's changed a lot and lost many of her emotions, but she's not a robot. Her morally ambiguous character during books three and four was a lot of fun. While I didn't like Specials as much at the time, in hindsight it might be my favorite for Tally's slightly psychotic yet way more interesting character. Despite the fact that the twist at the end of book two was AWESOME.
However, I question the need for her in-between reset to become a Pretty. All that happens in book two is a romance. What was the need? If I were to rewrite the series, I would've skipped Pretties and instead left Tally as an Ugly.
Another issue with this series is the badly-written romance. The love triangle especially is just a fail. David is the love interest for this book, and he's a decent guy and decent character, but it's hard to ignore that he's supposedly dating Shay at the time he kisses Tally. Zayn, in the second book, is flat-out annoying. He's reckless and tiresome, and their entire relationship is based off his hotness. There's no need for the love triangle here, and frankly, both plots could've been executed better. The conclusion for Tally and Zayn is especially messy.
This isn't so much a review as a compilation of thoughts. God knows what my views would be today. Just see how you feel after reading the review, I guess....more
OH GOOD, LET ME DO A SERIES REVIEW. I don't care about reviewing all six books because I don't remember which ones I liked best - I read the whole thiOH GOOD, LET ME DO A SERIES REVIEW. I don't care about reviewing all six books because I don't remember which ones I liked best - I read the whole thing in a week, and then read Light a month later when I released. But this series is fabulous. The Gone series is basically Lord of the Flies with much better characters. This series is seriously weird and yet SO much fun and SO emotional.
This series is the gold standard of dramatic tension. Grant's plotting is brilliantly crafted, full of twists and turning. The events are often viscerally terrifying. Michael Grant's writing draws you in, making you feel as if the events are actually happening.
In terms of which book is my fave... who fucking knows. So I don't remember much about Hunger but it changed me as a person? I'm pretty sure mostly because I fucking love Diana. I think Lies was my least favorite and I honestly remember nothing about it. Plague is definitely the scariest; I don't remember the last time I was so terrified by a book. Fear and Light are both good, although not quite as great. The best part of Light is the fantastic conclusion. I am so, so okay with who lived and who died. Seriously, there are one or two characters I was sure were going to die and they didn't!! I'm so blessed!!
CHARACTERS AND STUFF
All the characters are SO GOOD. Seriously, this series has such great characters. There are so many side characters and somehow you get attached to all of them. Even the antagonists get your sympathy, and sometimes even your genuine love. There's one particular villain-to-hero growth arc that touches my heart more than any other.
[minor spoiler alert] I'm talking about Diana Ladris. She's seriously such a developed, heartfelt character. Diana's crisis over that one thing she did in Hunger made me fall in love with her. And then her arc?? Murdered me. We're so #blessed by her character growth. My original review of Light was “In this cruel world of YA lit, all I have left is Diana's character arc.” And I want to talk about this character arc a little. Diana is a self-confessed “bad girl.” She's not the greatest person; within this series, she does some fucked-up things and manipulates situations to her advantage. But she still gets a character arc and a happy ending. Bad characters in YA lit hardly ever get happy endings, and the fact that she did is amazing.
Some of my other faves are pretty surprising too. I can't believe I like Caine as a character? Fight me Michael Grant.
There's not much romance, but the existing romance is great. Sam and Astrid have a touch of instalove, but they get really developed throughout the book series. And the other romantic plots are even better, maybe just because they have less focus and way less instalove. Diana and Caine have an incredibly unhealthy dynamic on both sides, yet their characters are each so developed that you get invested anyway.
This series has great diversity too, with major lgbt characters and non-white characters. Yes, the two physically strongest characters are both guys, but this series does have a ton of high-powered girl characters, like Dekka and Brianna and Taylor. And there are of course other interesting, multifaceted girl characters, like Lana, Astrid, and Diana, who is my personal favorite character of anything ever. Sorry, I'll shut up about Diana's character arc someday....more
Maybe I should rate this higher just because I enjoyed it?? I don't exactly recommend this book, but I have to admit, I found it weirdly compelling whMaybe I should rate this higher just because I enjoyed it?? I don't exactly recommend this book, but I have to admit, I found it weirdly compelling when I read it in sixth grade. I found it trashy even then, but I wasn't bored and I never wanted to stop reading. Why? I'm really not sure. It's just one of those questions that will never be answered.
WOW THIS SERIES IS REALLY FUCKING LONG??
IT'S TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED SIXTY FUCKING PAGES NOT EVEN INCLUDING THE DAMN NOVELLAS.
anyway I'm calling these books 1) the mediocre one 2) the angsty one 3) the abusive love triangle one 4) the really hella entertaining but also probably the shittiest one.
Book one is just mediocre and underdeveloped. It's super entertaining and short though.
Book two is maybe the one that was the least bad, looking back?? Yes, the romance plot becomes a love triangle between a vampire and a wolf. But the new guy, Jacob, is actually really nice in here. And actually, some bits of this aren't terrible. Rosalie's backstory shows up here, and it's one of the coolest things I've ever read. More on Edward's family later.
Book three is actually the worst one. 1) Jacob's actually-kind-of-nice character got destroyed. Of course. 2) Edward went from slightly creepy to literally abusive. 3) And it was all just really, really boring. Did anyone notice that nothing happened until like page 500?
Book four... oh man. Book four deserves five stars just because I somehow found it entertaining enough to finish and rush through, despite being SEVEN HUNDRED FUCKING PAGES LONG. even though the conclusion is bullshit and that stuff with the blood-drinking was creepy.
Anyway, let's stop talking about the series and just get to my general opinions.
NOW LET ME DISCOURSE A LITTLE BIT
Twilight gets a really bad rap, and I'm honestly not sure it's deserved. I have read way worse romance in YA lit. Bella and Edward's relationship isn't perfect, by any means. He's a bit overly controlling and they've got a severe case of instalove. But y'all have romanticized far worse. Twilight is somewhat addictive trash with a romance that is actually less terrible than some of the ones I've seen in ya lit. Remember Article 5?? You know, actual physical abuse?? A lot of it?? This entire romantic arc is stereotypical, but Edward isn't a terrible guy - a bit overprotective, but he doesn't treat Bella completely terribly.
I do have to say that the next two books are a little worse in terms of feminism. New Moon romanticizes wanting to die without your boyfriend (to be fair, he wants to die without her too, but that's ALSO terrible!!) Eclipse romanticizes being overprotective and enforces toxic masculinity. And Breaking Dawn has some terrible shit to say about abortion, as well as some shitty connotations with those BRUISES. And don't even get me started on Leah's menopause thing.
LET'S YELL!! A LITTLE BIT!!
Uhhhhhh what are my opinions. Do I even have opinions.
Oh yes, Edward and Bella's relationship. Sigh. It wasn't actually that bad in book one from what I remember; he's weird, but he's somewhat less creepy. He's actually not particularly creepy here either, it's just that this book perpetrates some really crappy ideas. This series is actually way less antifeminist than people act like it is; I have read far, far worse in terms of feminism. But being willing to die just to hallucinate your ex-boyfriend is not okay. Given that both Edward AND Bella feel this way, I don't even class this as a sexism issue; this book portrays a flat-out unhealthy, toxic relationship for both of them.
Anyway, I love Edward's family kind of a lot?? Rosalie's backstory is one of the coolest things I've ever read. I liked that Bella showed sympathy for her and didn't just hate her for being pretty. There's also more backstory for Carlisle and the rest of the vampire family, which is really interesting and entertaining. Why did this book have to be about Bella and Edward??
I don't remember much about this one; it's fairly tropey and not much beyond that. I have to admit, it's a terrifying dystopia. On the other hand, theI don't remember much about this one; it's fairly tropey and not much beyond that. I have to admit, it's a terrifying dystopia. On the other hand, the characters are some of the flattest I've ever come across.
The romance in particular was a fault here. Peter is a sixteen-year-old boy in a higher position of societal power than the fourteen-year-old Anna. Predictably, Anna is naive and Peter is more mature. It was honestly just kind of skeevy even to me as a fourteen-year-old? Yeahhhhh....more
Perfect is about eating disorders and teenage pain, and it's absolutely brilliant. This story is incredibly short and incredibly powerful.
I don't knoPerfect is about eating disorders and teenage pain, and it's absolutely brilliant. This story is incredibly short and incredibly powerful.
I don't know exactly why this book stands out. Maybe it's the emotional touch. Isabelle and Ashley both come off as incredibly real characters, despite the short length. The story is so raw and real, far more than many books about eating disorders.
Maybe it's the reasonable, understated tone. This story is well-written and well-executed.
It's ridiculously short, but it's definitely worth a read....more
I know I read this series at the tender age of eight, when I was very impressionable and very eager to get obsessed with anything. But I think these aI know I read this series at the tender age of eight, when I was very impressionable and very eager to get obsessed with anything. But I think these are better than we give them credit for.
Not to show up and act like J.R.R. Tolkein was some misunderstood genius. But it’s fascinating to me that this book was foundational to modern high fantasy, a genre which I think plays a lot with cruelty: the brutal world, the betrayal of friends. Tolkein’s novels do not revolve around complex moral codes; they do not question whether there is good and evil, or who is who. The fundamental hero of this story is love.
It's no accident that the hero of this series is the most underestimated of all people: a Hobbit. There are the godly elves, but this series focuses on men's capacity to fail and triumph. The outsiders save the world.
I think, all the time, about the fact that were it not for one moment of pity Frodo takes, on someone who he knows will try to hurt him, this entire story would have been different—would have ended on a far, far darker note.
(On weekends, I also take time to think very deeply about Sam’s role in the series, and the fact that his love and loyalty saves Frodo and, by extent, the world. Within this narrative love saves the world.)
The biggest flaw is that Tolkein could not edit to save his life. I will not elaborate on that beyond to say he would dedicate at least five pages to explaining the concept. I’m going to keep it very, very real: my love for this comes partially from just how much I adore the movie adaptations. This is genuinely the #1 series in the world where I think the movie adaptation is superior in quality to the books. I’ve watched them so many times. I think every time I watch them I end up adding a few sentences to this review because I’m full of Thoughts and Tenderness. The movies are my favorite and always worth a watch.
These books are written terribly but they've actually got pretty developed characters and they basically made me fall in love with reading in third grThese books are written terribly but they've actually got pretty developed characters and they basically made me fall in love with reading in third grade or whatever? so. four stars.
I actually want to talk about why these stupid books made me fall in love with reading, because they truly influenced me so much. I think the best thing about this series is the developed character work. This is a series that has defined characters who you can root for or dislike, which is awesome. I actually think the characters improve throughout the series. In series one, Fireclaw is kind of a typical boring do-gooder. Brambleclaw, Leafpool, and Squirrelflight, the main characters in series two, are far more interesting and defined, with clear motivations beyond "do the right thing." This trend continues in series three and four. I also really appreciate the occasional morally grey or morally black characters. Yes, many characters are a bit "I do good things and I'm amazing!!" but characters like Ivypool, in the fourth series, were so influential to my childhood.
Yeah, the plot is a little weird and far-fetched, and the writing is pretty terrible now that I've grown up enough to see it, but this series is definitely good for anyone who likes middle grade fiction. Especially kids. This is definitely a series I'd give to all elementary schoolers....more
Loading...