Scan barcode
A review by shmadsie
Lady Macbeth by Ava Reid
1.0
Just assume my first, like, five minutes of this review is primal screaming because MY GAWD. This was awful. Nope, beyond awful. I can't think of a word that captures how upsetting and infuriating this book is. It's bad in a way where I want them to stop making copies of it because no one should ever, ever read it. It's so.... insulting?? And I'm terrified someone out there will read this as their introduction to this character and that makes me want to bite people. I love how these "feminist reimaginings" are beyond shitty to women. This is like watching Jurassic Park in the '90s, shockingly feminist, and then Jurassic World in 2015, super misogynist. You expect it to go in the right direction just because time marches on and instead you end up with this shit.
First, why in the fuck would you take an amazing, middle-aged badass icon of a character like Lady Macbeth and make her seventeen? Just.... WHY? WHYYYYYYY. Who let you and whyyyyy???
Second, it didn't have anything to do with Macbeth aside from the names. The fantasy was too far out there with dragon Lisander, the vibes were off, the characters were SO DAMN BAD. Just why? Why did you make this Macbeth when allllll you would've had to is change the names so it wasn't. Literally that's all.
Honestly, honestly though? The thing that absolutely kills me is you could more readily call Shakespeare's play 'Lady Macbeth' than this monstrosity by that title. She's the driving force of that entire play, she's behind all the action, she's got plans on plans on plans. She's in her villain era and smashing it. This...... I don't even know what to call her because she's not a feeble imitation or even the little league to actual Lady Macbeth's major, she's........ sitting on a park bench eighteen miles away from the game. She's nothing. She's defined by everyone and everything around her, even the scenery sometimes chews her up, she's trying but what is that? That's nothing. That's not the character. The character is ICONIC for a reason. Lady Macbeth IS the play, she is the guiding hand behind Macbeth's actions, she is the catalyst for so much of what occurs. Now read this book and tell me if that's at all the impression you get here or if, instead, for some reason, this author was allowed to take this character and ruin her?
First, why in the fuck would you take an amazing, middle-aged badass icon of a character like Lady Macbeth and make her seventeen? Just.... WHY? WHYYYYYYY. Who let you and whyyyyy???
Second, it didn't have anything to do with Macbeth aside from the names. The fantasy was too far out there with dragon Lisander, the vibes were off, the characters were SO DAMN BAD. Just why? Why did you make this Macbeth when allllll you would've had to is change the names so it wasn't. Literally that's all.
Honestly, honestly though? The thing that absolutely kills me is you could more readily call Shakespeare's play 'Lady Macbeth' than this monstrosity by that title. She's the driving force of that entire play, she's behind all the action, she's got plans on plans on plans. She's in her villain era and smashing it. This...... I don't even know what to call her because she's not a feeble imitation or even the little league to actual Lady Macbeth's major, she's........ sitting on a park bench eighteen miles away from the game. She's nothing. She's defined by everyone and everything around her, even the scenery sometimes chews her up, she's trying but what is that? That's nothing. That's not the character. The character is ICONIC for a reason. Lady Macbeth IS the play, she is the guiding hand behind Macbeth's actions, she is the catalyst for so much of what occurs. Now read this book and tell me if that's at all the impression you get here or if, instead, for some reason, this author was allowed to take this character and ruin her?