A review by ed_moore
Babel: An Arcane History by R.F. Kuang

adventurous dark informative tense fast-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? Plot
• Strong character development? Yes
• Loveable characters? Yes
• Diverse cast of characters? Yes
• Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

4.5

“Language was just difference. A thousand different ways of seeing, of moving through the world. A thousand different worlds, and translation, however futile an endeavour, to move between them” 

R.F. Kuang’s ‘Babel’ is by technicality a fantasy but the magic system was so subtle and comprehendible, in addition to being set in 1800s Oxford, that it didn’t feel much like its genre. As not a huge fan of fantasy I really appreciated this as Kuang left the main focus not on magic systems and fantasy, but instead incorporating them into a wider commentary on the British Empire and colonialism. The way this was handled was really poignant, following Robin Swift, taken from Canton as a boy to study translation in Oxford and contribute to empire, and his discovery in what his involvement means and therefore revolution against colonialism from the inside. This complicated dynamic led to questions on who on the surface level was the antagonist, and this was frequently unclear and really left a lot of suspense which was fun. The best element by far was ‘Babel’s’ entrenched focus on etymology and love of literature within the book. It was full of intertextuality and respect of different languages and cultures and I even learnt a thing or two about words which I adored and didn’t suspect in picking up a fantasy/dark academia. 

I did however feel in places that characters were often fleeting or their roles unclear, much was left unresolved on individual character levels though the larger plot ending was satisfying. I also did find myself in utter visible shock in places which is highly commendable. Kuang’s use of footnotes was a point of contention for me however. They were included in the audiobook and often came in quote jarringly, and their purpose was varied and unclear. Sometimes It academically footnoted a quoted text, sometimes a Chinese pronunciation (which I can’t understand why such wasn’t just accurately pronounced in the main prose and instead had pronunciation reaffirmed in a footnote, and other times providing details that were fictional about the characters and really should’ve just been included in the main text. If they had a more defined purpose that was less scattered they might’ve been slightly less jarring, and in places can see and respect why they were used, but I felt they took me out of the reading experience a little by their randomness. That is however the most principle of my criticisms and in the scheme of things such aren’t that much. 

I read ‘Babel’ so quickly despite its length which is a testament to how well it flows and how engaging it is, I will note that I much preferred the first half to the second that had a focus on the simpler Oxford university life, but am mostly satisfied across the board.