In near-future Iceland, passing the controversial Empathy Test allows people to “mark” themselves in a public register - a referendum on making the test compulsory for all approaches, and the issue is divisive…

While the story specifically revolves around the idea of “marking” oneself as a compassionate (thus “good”) citizen, the interesting ethical questions that it raises are applicable more broadly and relevant to society today. Without presenting answers, Ísberg explores who decides society’s rules, and, crucially, what happens to those not deemed “good”, both in terms of the stigma and prejudice they face, but also whether they should be “rehabilitated” and whether that should be the state’s responsibility. The entrenching of positions on the upcoming referendum and escalating vitriol and threats were all too believable.

But the overall story felt incomplete - I’d have liked to know what happened to each of the characters further down the track as we left some of them in what felt like the middle of their story arc.

We follow four main characters navigating the weeks leading up to the referendum, allowing for a richer exploration of varying viewpoints on the question. But, and this is probably mostly a reflection of my lack of sleep at the time of reading, I did struggle to keep the different POVs straight in my head.

A tense story of choosing the sort of society we want to live in and how much that should intrude on privacy and differences - raised interesting ethical questions but ultimately felt incomplete.