Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.25
“This is the quiet of the dead, the kind of quiet coloured by the creaking of rope and the rush of water and wind, all the things that aren’t the quiet that makes the quiet so loud it hurts”
The setting of Andrew Joseph White’s ‘Hell Followed With Us’ is simply incredible. The story follows a trans boy, Benji, who has been turned by a far right Christian extremist group who brought upon ‘the flood’ on judgement day and committed the genocide of nine billion ‘heretics’ into a monster called the Seraph that’ll bring them religious salvation. The dystopian backdrop to the story was so captivating and the world White creates around his band of rebel queer teenagers who try to exist in this reality against the force of The Angels is so harrowing yet fantastically crafted. It is however very unsettling and White does not hold back with the gore and body horror. Be warned this book is full of mutilation, disease, creatures that are made up from decaying corpses and general violence, but it does add to the horrifying religious apocalypse that White creates.
The story is primarily told through the perspective of Benji as he battles with being accepted as a boy and the monster that is growing inside him, however there are occasional other perspectives that didn’t feel overly necessary. I would have been happy with a consistent story from Benji’s perspective. It also often shows only the aftermaths of violence and battles rather than the events themselves which I felt was a small loss. The story however was captivating and the dystopian worldbuilding some of the best I have ever read.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
“Give joy in return for joy, one common will for love, and hate with one strong heart; such union heals a thousand ills of man”
‘The Eumenides’ is Aeschylus’ depiction of the first murder trial documented within Greek myth, Orestes’ murder of his mother Clytemnestra in revenge for her murder of Agamemnon. Here Athena plays judge with Apollo serving as Orestes’ defence and The Furies as prosecution, the chorus being made up of Furies being absolutely the most interesting chorus of ‘The Oresteia’ trilogy. The depiction of the trial was interesting, especially given how little its format has changed since 436 BCE. I also appreciated the perspectives of The Furies and their attempt to avenge Clytemnestra however at the end of the day the play was frustrating due to the continued sexual double standard and godly plot armour received by Orestes where I just wanted to see the man devoured by the Furies. Ultimately as presented across the trilogy it is concluded, by no other than Athena, that the lives of men are more valuable than that of women…
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.75
“No man can go through life and reach the end unharmed”
‘The Libation Bearers’ follows the return of Orestes to the house of Atreus in his mission to avenge the murder of his father and therefore punish his mother Clytemnestra. The large majority of the play was a frustrating read, given more than half was Orestes and Electra saying they desire revenge and praying for their success, and then the sexual double standard and irony in their desire to avenge Agamemnon but not care remotely that Agamemnon was only murdered by Clytemnestra because he killed their sister and his daughter… In addition to this, the chorus of slave women who were taken in the destruction of Trot at the hands of Agamemnon all desired to see his murder avenged, which is quite some classical Stockholm Syndrome. This difference in standards was infuriating and there were a fair few unlikely conveniences in the play such as Electra seeing a hair somehow in the soil, and then immediately recognising it as her brothers. The scene where Clytemnestra faces Orestes however was so powerful and heart wrenching, it was brilliantly written and translated and can imagine how powerful and captivating it would be on stage.
Though my goodness I cannot wait for Orestes to be torn apart by Furies that little bitch.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
“The most arresting odes to slumber are spoken by those who can’t have it; the proximity of someones resting place can be a strange comfort when you can’t find any rest on your own”
M.L. Rio’s ‘Graveyard shift’ is a novella about 5 ragtag insomniacs who gather in an abandoned graveyard by night, one evening discovering a freshly dug hole and over the course of that night vowing to get to the bottom of its mysterious appearance. It was a gripping story with such an atmospheric and exciting setting. It was full of intertextual literary references that I always enjoy, and oddly many associations to Scooby Doo. It was a bit untidy at times but with a lack of resolution that really attests to the endless hours of wakefulness that don’t have the resolution of the days conclusion in slumber. I feel like for a novella the cast of characters was a little too large, there not being a chance to explore many of them to the extent I would’ve liked, but they are each unique and believable nonetheless.
The highlight of ‘Graveyard Shift’ was absolutely M.L. Rio’s authors note and essay that concluded the book discussing her own sufferings with insomnia and its relationship with academia. This made me feel so seen (along with its representation within the novella) as an aspiring academic who also suffers with such. Ironically, reading another experience with a lack of sleep and the loneliness that comes in the early hours are the hours I am never seen, stuck with my thoughts and loneliness until the sun rises again. For this reason ‘Graveyard Shift’ was so comforting in a way, and made me feel a little less alone concluding the book as the time creeps beyond midnight.
“The wrath that forced my thoughts on this fierce law the doom of treason and the flaming death is past”
‘Idylls of the King’ is a collection of 12 of Tennyson’s narrative poems recounting Arthurian legend. It looks at the rise and fall of the Round Table, sparked by the events of the quest for the Holy Grail. I had limited knowledge on Arthurian myth prior to reading this and therefore struggled with it, it didn’t make much sense in many places and was difficult to keep track of the narrative. Honestly the knights followed themselves aren’t particularly chivalrous and flawed in many perspectives, yet so often heralded.
There is often discussion about a lack of an English Mythology, and whilst Arthurian myth should fill this gap the stories, at least the ones as presented and retold by Tennyson, support this lack of a mythology as they didn’t seem to have the same resonance or memorability as the likes of Greek Mythology. I do however believe ‘Beowulf’ has its place as a English myth, and Tolkien’s stories in time have potential to join this mythology, especially due to their inspirations from Arthurian myth that should found our mythology. On their own however, something seems missing.
My greatest struggle with ‘Idylls of the King’ is the similarities I could draw between such and Spenser’s ‘The Faerie Queene’, especially in the tradition for knights to attack one another unprovoked. If there was less of this and a lot more communication a lot of fatalities would easily be avoided.
“For the last long stretch, for the home stretch, the stretch that we know is blind to end sometime in the rattle of the door latch, in the sudden firelight and the sight of familiar things greeting us as long absent travellers from far overseas”
Grahame’s classic children’s tale ‘The Wind in the Willows’ is the story of four unlikely friends, a rat, mole, badger and toad, who live in a world alongside humans and interact with such. The dynamic of this is a little confusing as it seems some animals are human in quality, and others are just animals and treated that way by the protagonists, even to the extent that they will still happily eat chicken for example.
The primary story of ‘The Wind in the Willows’ follows Toad in his careless passion for motor cars and the trouble this obsession alongside his huge ego leads him to. From the readers perspective, he is ver much redeemed by the quirk that he is a toad who likes driving cars otherwise he is a character of extremely dislikable qualities, though I am not sure wether he is supposed to come across this way. He is selfish, arrogant and whiny and the greatest negative of this is how much it takes away from the characters around him, for the other three lose much of their charm as they are solely used as support anchors for toad, repeatedly forgiving him and sacrificing all they have and their narrative roles for Mr Toad.
That being said, this is a children’s book about the misadventures of four animals and hence I don’t think I should be too heavily diving in to the development or lack there of of each of their personalities. I didn’t actively dislike the book, but as oppose to other children’s classics I have recently read it just didn’t really stand out nor have any sort of charm to it.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.75
“I thought once that gods were the opposite of death, but I see now they are more dead than anything, for they are unchanging, and can hold nothing in their hands”
‘Circe’ is Miller’s reimagining of the story of the exiled titan witch, building her story and motives beyond the days Odysseus spent on her island in ‘The Odyssey’. Unlike ‘The song of Achilles’, which I will look back to a lot when considering ‘Circe’, Miller didn’t have nearly as much source material to retell hence to build a narrative a lot of creative freedom is used of which gives Circe realistic motives, a humanising backstory and fills an absence in her conclusion, however in patching the holes of the life of an immortal titaness Miller is forced to tell a story over hundreds of years, leaving many episodes seem fragmented as years of exile pass between them and characters come and go, their mortal lives outlived. As a consequence of such ‘Circe’ felt very fractured at times and the only characters aside from the eponymous heroine to have a complete character arc is Odysseus, of whom’s appearance and the shifting perception of his character very much elevated the book as the many chapters of build-up to the events of ‘The Odyssey’ I did find myself struggling through. Circe’s relationship with Odysseus and then Penelope and Telemachus absolutely redeemed the book for me from a first half that I found generally underwhelming.
This may be fault of the expectations I had after ‘The Song of Achilles’, for Miller’s prose didn’t feel alike to the narration I had previously enjoyed. ‘Circe’ was much less poetic, perhaps due to the fact that a love story was not the focus of the book, however nonetheless the beauty of Miller’s language seemed absent. Miller succeeds in giving Circe a story, but the very undertaking of such resulted in drawbacks.
“Once you finish this book you become a different person. You don’t feel the same. You don’t think the same. It changes everything. And it will always be true”
I am obsessed with Orwell’s story of 1984 and its themes, that’s a given, however in the past I have struggled with retellings or reimagining of it as I often feel they are just missing something, always not quite playing on the same tune of Orwell’s intentions and message. Macmillan and Icke’s stage adaptation of the story absolutely did not feel this way. It was a very metaphysical staging of the story, where time is unclear, both literally in the absence of history in Orwell’s ‘1984’ but also in the intermingling of multiple timelines across the play, entering and exiting Winston’s memory, playing with the concept of his existence and breaking the fourth wall to blame and involve the audience for a complicity to the dystopia occurring before them. It was so fast paced and cleverly done and completely hit the bleak and confusing style of ‘1984’ yet simultaneously left the idea of hope, an adaptation to Orwell’s grim telling that I felt was a clever inclusion and I was by no means opposed to, especially as it was so unclear.
Reading this play and imagining the darkness, staging and uneasy effect it would have on audiences only affirmed to me the reasons why I love this story so much and got me so so excited to hopefully work on its coming together in some means (I swear I better get some sort of involvement !!)
“It’s very easy to hide away in a wine bottle but very hard to get out again”
Blackman’s ‘Noughts and Crosses’ tells of the forbidden love between Callum, a white boy and Sephy, a black girl, in a dystopian society where Blackman inverts the racial prejudice and hierarchy that plagues the world. It is a political analysis where the treatment of those white echoes racist societies, with many mirrors to the civil rights movement and the divide between peaceful and violent protest.
Blackman also touches on issues beyond race such as sexuality, broken families and addiction. ‘Noughts and Crosses’ was full of shocks and the ending was especially impactful, however to reach such ending it was a frustrating journey. The story is told in alternating chapters narrated by both Callum and Sephy, however in places I felt this format was so forced and the book would’ve flowed better if not regimented into this strict chapter structure. There were so many switches with the chapters being somewhat short and some were only a few sentences which it felt like only existed to continue the story from one of the characters perspectives but try not to break the chapter structure. Additionally, I really did not like Sephy’s perspective. She was the privileged perspective hence was supposed to be a little out of touch, but Blackman tried to present her as understanding the issues of racism and being the ‘white saviour’ figure (or black saviour to place it literally) and I did just find her extremely insufferable and whiny. I struggled with the story through Sephy’s perspective and Callum was a really interesting character so it just feels like I lost half a book from his point of view.
While I feel like I missed out on the intricacies of Callum’s struggles and the fascinating cast of characters that make up his family due to Sephy’s perspective. The romantic focus of the book also wasn't handled the best and was so much weaker than the political elements, I feel the story could've been so much more powerful without the focus on the problematic relationship between Callum and Sephy. The sequels will likely look a bit more into the wider cast of Callum's family and extend political world-building but I do also really struggle to see how this universe and plot line can be extended into another book, let alone a subsequent five.
“Better to die on your feet than live on your knees”
‘Agamemnon’ doesn’t place much emphasis on the warlord king himself, but on his victims. Following the events in the House of Atreus occurring with Agamemnon’s return home from victory at Troy, it establishes a huge double standard between the treatment of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra for actions of equal magnitude but ultimately the eponymous hero plays little role in ‘Agamemnon’. The most emphasis is placed on the chorus and the fate of Cassandra, deemed to be Troy’s last ember and a fascinating character. In Aeschylus’ rendition she is dehumanised yet also so at the forefront and able to regain her agency from her captors and her curse in death. The play surprisingly didn’t actually cover many events, in typical Greek Tragedy all action occurred off stage but it is clear that ‘Agamemnon’ is more focused on setting up for the return of Orestes and his desire for revenge, as oppose to the initial revenge of Clytemnestra.