lenorayoder's reviews
138 reviews

First of all, regardless of its pitfalls I would absolutely recommend this novella. It's a quick read that's completely worth it. 

The good: The premise and plotting of this book is so compelling. For the entire book you're only told who one of the

Thing impersonators

is, and everyone else is up in the air. When the book sticks to the psychological thriller aspect of this scenario - that

anyone could be a Thing and there's no way of knowing who or how many

- the book is amazing. I love that the book sometimes lingers on the horror of

the Thing

, but mostly cuts away from

heavy action or dramatic

moments that other books would linger on. This often helps keep the tension up and the attention focused on how the men are reacting to these circumstances, which is I think what the book does best. The 30's sci-fi is really fun, I liked Campbell's ideas of how technology might advance to allow a group of people to live for months on end at the south pole, and what they might be doing there. Campbell also clearly did his research, and I appreciate that each character's motivations remain consistent and make sense, even

the Thing's

to the extent of what we know. 

The bad: At times the book is confusing to keep tension and momentum going and build atmosphere, but at time it feels unintentionally confusing. Despite frequently describing minute parts of the setting in language that felt out of place from the rest of the book, I was often confused about where people were. At some point I remember snow being mentioned when I hadn't even realized the characters were outside. I was also frequently confused about who was who since a lot of characters are introduced with little detail very quickly. I think the story loses something when you don't know how many people are crowded into how small of a room, who those people are, and if a scene is happening outside where it's extremely cold and easy to get lost. In some instances the confusing timeline added to the feel of the book, but in others I think it took away from emphasizing either how quickly a situation can devolve or how long the men have been living in a really tense situation. Lastly, while I appreciated Campbell's research in some respects, that man had trouble killing his darlings. There are several instances where characters explain or discuss something scientific or world-buildy. In a lot of these instances, dialogue would have felt more natural and tension/momentum higher if these things had remained unsaid, alluded to, or summarized.
 

Because I love the good so much and I think a lot of the bad can be chalked up to this being written in the 1930's, this gets 4 stars from me. I really liked it! If this had received a modern editing treatment, it would probably be 5 stars. 100% recommend, and it was fun to read during a snow storm as part of my winter challenge. Also, the screen treatment in this edition gets 1 star. Thank god studios went with Carpenter's vision instead.

This book mostly feels like wasted potential. There was a lot to love in the first half - Mary's relationship with her father is heart-wrenching, alternative perspectives of Lizzy, Jane, Charlotte, and Mr. Collins during the events of Pride & Prejudice add some interesting complexity to that story, and seeing Mrs. Bennet framed through a dramatic lens rather than a comedic one makes obvious what Austen only implied in her story. This book's strength lies in exploring these platonic and familial relationships - the hope Mary desperately places in her father (and to a smaller extent, Lizzy) is so compelling to read. 

Unfortunately, this book has a LOT of pitfalls. First, the characters. At some point those alternate perspectives of Charlotte and Mr. Collins start to feel very two-dimensional. Miss Bingley's character is absolutely assassinated, and becomes a weird amalgamation of her role and Lady Catherine's in P&P. Kitty is almost completely wiped from the book, it's kind of astonishing. Mary has two romantic interests, but one barely feels like a real person and the other feels more multi-faceted but

isn't endgame

so we don't get to see more. Mary herself starts to feel less like a real person and more like a pale imitation of other Austen heroines. 

And now, the plot... it barely exists. Very little happens with Mary in the first half of the book. Then, Mary

takes a whole ass trip to London, gets a new wardrobe, improves her conversation skills and

meets... two new people. The romantic plot feels lazy and it's the only thing the book has going on for the latter half. Every plot point feels like a pale imitation of something we've seen executed much better by Austen, sprinkled with less impactful paraphrases of Austen's iconic lines! It's rough. 

The more I think about this book the more holes I poke in it, but at the end of the day it still gets 3 stars from me because I really enjoyed that first half before I started thinking about it too hard. 

Solid romance read, and I'm an absolute sucker for time travel. The way

Mae and Andrew both get so emotionally intense so fast

was a bit much for me (

the way Mae responded to their fight by drawing a picture of them old and married and giving a speech about loving Andrew forever felt legitimately unhinged and obsessive

), but overall I liked the romance and I was happy

Mae and Theo

weren't endgame. A nice read to end the year with. 

Gave me something to think about and imparted some really valuable pieces of wisdom. I love that this book is realistic without being cynical. I highly recommend.

My main problem with the book is that it talks a lot about meeting people where they are and how organizers and activists have brought people into movements, but a lot of the book is written at a high reading level and uses terms unfamiliar to the average person without clearly defining them. I think that several entries in the glossary were more confusing than helpful, and that the book would have really benefited from a more extensive one. This probably isn't much of a problem for people who are already involved with the movements the authors organize around. However, the book frequently seems to also be speaking to new activists or people considering becoming activists, so I wish the book's language was a little more friendly to that audience.

disorganized, confusing, poorly edited, very amateur. gave me a vague idea of a few things to research further and that’s it. would not recommend. 

so problematic… unfortunately i am intrigued 😫

This was my first time reading Ursula K. Le Guin. No wonder she's so well regarded, if this is representative of her work. Such a cool novella. The initial concept is interesting on its own, and then on top of that LG created such an interesting, atypical main character with supporting characters that are almost as good.

I love the aura of mystery that pervades the story and how much goes unsaid - my favorite example of this is George's eyes. Other characters always take the time to describe his eyes, and their feelings/impressions about George make this subtle shift after they've looked at his eyes long enough to describe them. It's so eerie and implies that there's more to whatever sets George apart than his dreams, but nothing is explained or explicitly said.

I also really liked the Heather/George dynamic, and how they reacted to each other. It's hard to put into my own words why I like their interactions so much - maybe that they're so different and yet LG has created such undeniable chemistry between them anyway that they immediately begin to gravitate towards one another anyway.

Something about the book didn't quite manage to grip me until close to the end. It's hard to pin down, but I think part of it is that sometimes things were over-described in a way that didn't mesh with how the rest of the book expects the reader to roll with new realities the way the characters do. So much of this book is so good, but it feels like something's missing, or coming up a little short because of how good most of it is. Still, George, his philosophy, the implications of the very existence of the

aliens

... I'll be thinking about it this one for a while. I'm excited to read move of Le Guin's work. A couple of my favorite quotes:

"What will the creature made all of seadrift do on the dry sand of daylight; what will the mind do, each morning, waking?" I liked this when I first read it, but it's so much better after finishing the book. I went back just to read the opening paragraphs of the book once I finished it, and it's amazing how LG

managed to foreshadow George's core character and the events of the book

in a way that primes you for the philosophy of the story but doesn't really come together until you're mostly through the book. This line is especially good at the above while also just being beautiful.

"An irrelevant and poignant sensation of pleasure rose in him, like a tree that grew up and flowered all in one moment with its roots in his loins and its flowers in his mind."

George having a terrible time and then this being his immediate reaction to hearing Heather's voice on the phone... I was giddy.

Liked some of the art and the general plot. However, details of the plot were over simplified, rushed, and/or unsatisfying, and I hated the way most of the faces were drawn. 

I liked this, but a lot of aspects felt a little underdeveloped. I think the narrative framing of the story does it a disservice. I wanted to see more of Jessica’s five classmates and feel more tension about where the revenge plot was going. The pacing also felt a little off, especially during the last third of the book. Overall a good plot, and I find Jessica, Charlie, and Jay to all be interesting characters, but I wanted more from it. 

Very interesting, definitely worth the read. Tokarczuk develops a fascinating main character who makes for a narrator that keeps you guessing. Even though we don't know much about them, other characters also feel real and leave you wanting more. I am still so curious about Oddball and his dynamic with the main character. 

I really liked this, but it just felt like it was missing something that I can't pinpoint. Maybe something got lost in translation.