jrayereads's reviews
429 reviews

 

You would think as a fellow dead-sibling-haver, that this would have grabbed me more, but it just didn’t hit. I really enjoyed the writing and characterization. Mars is a really well written, believable, and sympathetic protagonist that you want to succeed. The romance subplot was very well developed and a welcome element in the book that gave me SOMETHING to root for. Aside from Mars and Wyatt, I didn’t really care about any of the other characters, including his tragically passed sister, Caroline. I LOVE a summer camp setting, but I just don’t think there was enough tension throughout to keep me invested in the ongoing mystery throughout the middle section of the book. 

I swapped between the audiobook and the physical book and I would HIGHLY recommend the audiobook. There are different ambient sound effects sprinkled throughout that really enhance the experience. The narrator was great as well. He really captured the gay snarkiness of Mars’ internal monologue. 

This definitely wasn’t bad, it just wasn’t a standout. I could actually see this being a really cool movie or miniseries. There was some very unique creepy imagery with the bees towards the end that would translate well to film. Anyways, if you want summer camp antics with slightly spooky vibes, pretty good queer rep, and a just okay mystery, you’ll probably enjoy it! 

 

If you have any interest in reading this book I would encourage you to basically forget the source material and approach it as a completely original work. Do not expect a faithful retelling of the story or pretty much any of the characters of the original. 

I am genuinely shocked at how much I disliked this book. It was one of my most anticipated books of the year as a HUGE lover of the original play and Lady Macbeth as a character. I even re-read the play before picking this up so my memory would be refreshed (which, in hindsight, was a HORRIBLE mistake because all that did was highlight all the ways in which this book completely ruins the things that made Lady Macbeth an interesting character to me). 

Ava Reid is an undeniably talented writer. Her prose is excellent and she’s great at creating a sense of tension and atmosphere within her stories. That is partly why this is so disappointing - I know Reid is capable of delivering a really compelling story and that just didn’t happen here.

There is a lot to say about the overall plot and structure of the book, but ultimately where this book fails is its characterization. Lady Macbeth is the blueprint of gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss. She is the mastermind, the cunning planner, the one pulling the strings. She is an external force pushing Macbeth further down his path of ambition and madness, but she also has her own unique characterization and arc. The Lady Macbeth of this book is none of those things. She is a big-tittied 17 year old witch who is motivated out of fear of the men around her (lowkey fair) and nothing else. She is hyper aware of the precarious situation she is in as foreign bride, completely at the mercy of her new stranger husband, who has rumors of her being cursed surrounding her. Throughout the book things just happen to her. She is reactive, responding to the actions of the men who have more agency and influence on the narrative than Roscille ever does. 

Towards the beginning, we get this great scene where she basically orchestrates Macbeth’s attack on Cawdor and she is the one who adds this additional layer of justification for Macbeth by forging a letter incriminating Cawdor as treasonous to the king. This was actually very compelling and it made me excited that, from then on, Macbeth would see how intelligent she is and would view her as an equal, which is much closer to the dynamic the two of them have in the play. But that’s not the case. Macbeth, who is a completely flat and uncomplicated Big Evil Guy, gets his prophecy that he will be king and forces Roscille to do the deed so it can’t be traced back to him. She complies, not because she has any agency or any personal stake in Macbeth being king (she doesn’t seem to give a flip either way, as long as she’s safe and he’s happy), but because she is “just a dagger in [her] husband’s hand.” 

This book is presented as a feminist retelling, but it’s not feminist to create a narrative where the FMC has LESS agency, personality, and interesting characterization than she did in the source material. It isn’t feminist to take a relatively loving and respectful dynamic, that between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, and twist their story to feature abuse and sexual violence when none existed in the source material. It’s actually more interesting for women to have meaningful and loving relationships with the men in their lives and still explore the ways in which they are still harmed by the patriarchy. You don’t actually have to present all the men in the book (except Lisander) as giant, cartoonishly evil monsters with little nuance or individual personality in order to explore gender dynamics of this time frame.

There are lots of other small things that drove me insane that were sprinkled throughout this book - from the weird romance between Roscille and Lisander, the confusing and sometimes problematic nature of Roscille’s magic gaze, and the underdeveloped and pointless “backstory” given to the three witches, but you get the idea of the core reasons that I disliked this book. 2 stars for now but if I get even madder over time I might bump it down. 

 

I feel woefully underqualified to analyze and review poetry, but I will say I liked this short collection a lot. I want to dust off my Bible and do a re-read with the verses open alongside Austin’s poems. 

In general I feel like the longer poems were much stronger because there was more space to develop her ideas further and build upon the really beautiful imagery and themes present throughout. I would’ve loved more of those longer poems because I think they tended to be the strongest ones. The shorter poems that were the length of a verse or two didn’t really bother me because I think, oftentimes, Christians often boil things down to verses taken out of context and construct entire narratives based off one-liners so taking short verses and subverting them worked for me. I think the shorter verses also work really well when you just sit and read the whole collection in one sitting because you get the repetition of certain phrases and ideas where she’s altering the original verse but also building upon previous alterations within her own writing, specifically with the Matthew 25 poems. 

Standouts to me were Song of Shulamit, Words of Consecration, and Romans 1:26-27. I appreciated the humor and sweetness of this collection and I would recommend it to any ex-religious or queer folks. 

Y’all, I was so stoked when I was approved for the ARC of Emily Austin’s next book. I read Interesting Facts About Space and Everyone In This Room Will Someday Be Dead earlier in the year and gave both of them 5 stars. She has quickly become one of my favorite authors. As a fellow lesbian with anxiety and religious trauma, her books are my exact niche. I had extremely high hopes going into this new release and I am very happy to report that We Could Be Rats lived up to my expectations. In a lot of ways, this book has stuck with me much more than her other two novels. 

I have a hard time trying to summarize this book because I think it’s best to go into it knowing nothing and just being along for the ride. The themes of this book deal with grief, loneliness, anxiety, nostalgia, and growing up. The structure of the book is so interesting and the payoff for it was masterfully done. About halfway through I was concerned that the unique structure was going to overstay its welcome - but that was not the case at all. Just trust me, keep reading.

Emily Austin is a very funny writer who is a master at witty dialogue and creating moments of painful second-hand embarrassment that you can’t help but cringe and laugh at. There is humor sprinkled throughout this book, but the tone of this one is more serious than her other two books. There was just something about the narration that made my heart ache throughout the entire story. There were so many things that our main characters were feeling that I have also experienced firsthand, and that made the reading experience almost too real in some places. I felt like she was plucking thoughts straight out of my head. But, like in all of Austin’s books, there is still an emotional catharsis and underlying hope that persists despite how dark things sometimes feel. Sigrid is extremely creative and imaginative, but somehow this book ends up feeling like Austin’s most grounded work. 

If you like Austin’s previous works or queer literary fiction in general, this one is an absolute must-read. She gives depth and originality to the “women vs the void” or “sad girl” genres that are really popular right now. She is able to not take things too seriously while simultaneously adding a levity and hope that makes each of her books so healing to read. 

Thank you SO much to Netgalley for an e-ARC of this book in exchange for an honest review.

 

 

I spent quite a bit of time reading through the Goodreads reviews on this book to see how other people reacted to it. I think for this book you either just get it or you don’t. People who have not had a similar experience to Kadlec will probably not like this book. I remember how difficult it was for me to hear stories like this when I was deep in evangelicalism/fundamentalism because it created cognitive dissonance in me. If you grew up having been deeply harmed by modern American Christianity, if you are queer, if you are a woman, if you grew up under purity culture’s strict rules and expectations, you might really resonate with this book and feel seen, heard, and understood. I definitely fell into the latter category. 

Loses a star for me because I agree with some of the criticisms that it, at times, has weird pacing or the memoir bits are broken up by political/social commentary in ways that interrupted the flow of the book for me. It didn’t bother me too much but I think with some additional editing, parts of the book could’ve been structured better. I also would’ve loved more about the early stages of her deconstruction. I think that could’ve fleshed things out and made the narrative more cohesive.

I left this book thinking about how important it is that stories like this are told, even when they are “inflammatory” (as many other reviews have said) or uncomfortable. Books like this can be a safe place for Christians to engage with ideas that challenge them. You can feel frustrated and confused and angry without hurting someone. If you, as an Evangelical, are struggling to engage with a book like this in good faith and an honest desire to learn and understand about other peoples’ hurt, I am concerned about your ability to engage with real-life queer people who have experienced trauma from the church and are sharing their experiences with you.

Also, shoutout to exvangelical queer kids who heal through D&D!!!!!

 

 

I agree with the rhetorical goals of this book and I think a lot of the information was very interesting, but I’m not sure who the intended audience is. 

As much as I understand and relate to the frustration that seems to be underlying every element of this book, I think the tone that occasionally borders on condescending and angry does it a disservice. If this book was intended FOR rural whites, who are already sensitive to feeling condescended to, I think it will just make them upset and unwilling to listen to any of the very valid points the book presents (which might be a stretch that they would do so anyways). I am a leftist who lives in the U.S. South, so I interact with the demographic of this book everyday. I found parts of this book that refused to coddle and excuse the beliefs and actions of rural whites refreshing - but I think those elements will be alienating to rural whites as an audience. It feels like instead the intended audience of this book is for irritated liberals who need catharsis for how frustrating it is to try and engage with people so politically inconsistent and out of touch with reality. I guess that’s fine enough as a goal. I think it’s pretty well-structured and the consolidation of many different studies and polls which reflect the perspectives of rural whites was interesting. 

I guess I feel conflicted. The information is good, but the people who need to hear this the most will probably be put off by the overall tone. I feel like a book that covers a different but semi-related topic very well is Jesus and John Wayne. Obviously that addresses religion more than politics, but I feel like that book struck a good balance between honesty and still being approachable for people who are ideologically aligned with the subject the book is criticizing. I have also seen people recommend Dying of Whiteness, so I will check that one out as well. 

 

 This book proves Plath to be an undeniably talented writer. Her prose is honest and haunting and very addicting to read. She is obviously patient 0 for writing these indulgent, unhinged, unlikable women. I can see why people say this is a book for women in their 20s to read. There’s something so painfully relatable about Esther trying to figure out what she’s going to do with school and writing and the rest of her life. I appreciated the book for what it was as a classic and an important book in the “sad bitches against the void” genre that’s so popular now. 

But unfortunately, Plath was also extremely racist and homophobic and both of those elements popped up throughout the book, seemingly for no reason. If I was rating solely based on quality of the writing/story, it’d probably give it a 4 or 4.5, but based on my subjective enjoyment, I can’t give it anything higher than a 3 due to the pervasive problematic elements. 

 

Not vibing with the audiobook, may try again with my eyeballs. 

 

The premise of this one was really interesting and I think Alexis Henderson’s writing is excellent and very bingeable, but I just didn’t feel connected to the characters. The beginning dragged a lot for me and it took quite a long time for me to feel invested in any action. It wasn’t bad, just kind of forgettable. Also, it’s listed as horror but I didn’t find it very scary. I didn’t even necessarily think it had very strong tension built until close to the end. It felt more like a historical fantasy with a splash of a gothic vibe to me. 

A couple spoiler-y thoughts below: