Engaging and not shying away from complexity, whilst still written in simple and easy to read language. Personally I didn't think there was anything groundbreaking in the content - whilst a lot of the things he was talking about were dreadful, unfortunately none of them was particularly surprising to me. What it did well though was bringing together a lot of the problems and absurdities of different facets of British politics and illustrating them through one person's experience. Made more compelling by the emotional journey from naïve optimism through shock, disbelief and disillusionment to despair after exhausting every possible avenue and being thwarted at every turn.
This was a bit creepier than books I would normally read - reading it late at night was definitely a bad call! But that means it was pretty darn effective at doing what it intended. The whole creepy-island-claustrophobia thing is possibly a bit cliché but it's a cliché because it works - same goes for sinister creature preying on beautiful girls. Mostly I felt like it was pretty well written, possibly with the exception of the clunky insertions of basic, bland, feminist points. In contrast, the ace rep was much better done - openly discussed but not overly so and with some nuance.
I felt slightly misled by all the people saying this was a fun book, because at least the first 150 pages were basically non stop trauma. But it was gripping and i did come to appreciate the kind of dark humour in the second half of the book. Quite a satisfying ending and I liked the more general point with the cooking show about how you can make serious impacts and get serious points across with something that's not necessarily where you would expect to find those things.
Not the most novel-like of novels. More that the author was using fiction as a vehicle to explain how Putin came to be where and what he is today (as da Empoli sees it at least!). For those of us who are fairly ignorant about recent Russian political history it was an interesting and engaging read - although it wasn't the most compelling plot it didn't feel clumsy or overly dense. However, I'm fairly sure more knowledgeable readers would find it a bit dull and/or frustratingly oversimplified. The only real gripe I had was with that random ranty chapter about technology stuck in at the end. Added nothing of value whatsoever, didn't fit with the rest of the book, and there was no real attempt even to disguise it as anything but a pretentious essay.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
A very sweet and gently enjoyable book. I thought Moira in particular was an excellent character - still deeply affected by a complicated past from decades previous, shallowness of friendships harshly exposed by the pandemic, open to learning new things about the world and herself. Of course, it was also great to have her as an older asexual character when a lot of the existing representation is teenagers/young adults. It was also a good demonstration of the importance of access to resources/information/community.
Nessa and Meg felt like quite accurate representation of well-meaning but hasty and occasionally callous teenagers. When Poppy was introduced though, it felt like Nessa was super quick to judge her and for a while I was expecting there to be some kind of lesson there about not being so hasty to write people off? But then it turned into Poppy actually being completely horrible. I thought her suddenly being expelled for drug dealing was kind of bizarre though - it slightly got my back up in a vaguely 'drugs are immoral' kind of way.
The writing was a bit clunky and overly preachy in places. But for the most part it was very readable.
I really enjoyed this! Got me all enthusiastic about moss and lichen and ferns. Always liked the rain anyway but now I'm super excited about how rainy it is in West Wales. Basically it succeeded in converting me to temperate rainforest nerdiness and I have two new mortal enemies: sheep and rhododendron ponticum. Tbf sheep were already in my bad books.
Ah this really hit the spot. Read it in one day and it just solidly delivered what I was hoping for. Easy to read YA, rom-com still covering serious things but with a light touch, well-written characters that aren't one-dimensional, Camelot vibes plus everyone is gay. Iconic. Honestly I was a bit confused by the world-building but that may be on me for having read it so quickly. Anyway, would solidly recommend, especially for anyone wanting an easy pick-me-up or getting back into reading.
Very interesting and thought-provoking! The plot felt quite holey in places but the concept was cool and gave a different lens to to think about female bodily autonomy - regardless of your position on abortion you'd think if ever there was a case for it, alien implantation would be it. I was quite entertained by the way it attempted to duck and weave around the idea that mass rape might be the most likely explanation for all the women suddenly being pregnant after being sedated for a day - "mathematically unfeasible" so of course alien implantation is a much more likely cause... Lots of interesting ethical and legal dilemmas, a nice little twist I didn't see coming, and an ending I definitely did see coming.
Excellent. Particularly good at eviscerating crappy studies, patiently pulling them apart and explaining why their conclusions are a load of rubbish. The title was quite clever - the core argument of the book being that there's no real evidence for hardwired, innate biological differences between male and female brains, but what IS demonstrated over and over is that brain plasticity means brains are "gendered" by the highly gendered world in which they develop and exist. i.e. whatever differences that can be found between male and female brains are often far better explained by gender-differentiated factors in upbringing etc., e.g. playing tetris or similar spatial problem-solving games. Rippon dug into a lot of the complexity around the way that attitudes and expectations influence abilities. Very young children have well-developed social perception are highly attuned to parental disaproval in particular, e.g. little boys will pick up on their dad's discomfort with them wearing a princess dress even if the dad doesn't say anything negative (and if asked would say he's fine with it). I think Rippon referred to children as "expert gender detectives" or something similar. I found the discussion around women in STEM particularly interesting and useful because it articulated and backed up a lot of the things that I had long thought/suspected but not been able to express as clearly or succinctly; the complex layering of factors from the types of toys young children play with, the association of maths and science with "genius", early beliefs about boys' vs girls' likelihood of being geniuses, and teachers' biases all feeding into maths anxiety in girls, then coupled with visibility of clear existing gender imbalance and blatantly hostile work/study environments... It's a hell of a lot more complicated than just needing to encourage more girls to do science.