Quite honestly I was expecting the finale to be something along the lines of Shirley Jackson's The Lottery or something, and it really looks like everyone sitting in one confessional.
Church people are shitty. There's not much more going on in it. Not a gripping read but it wasn't awful.
Quite honestly I was expecting the finale to be something along the lines of Shirley Jackson's The Lottery or something, and it really looks like everyone sitting in one confessional.
Church people are shitty. There's not much more going on in it. Not a gripping read but it wasn't awful.
I didn't go with 5 stars for this one even though I really liked it. I normally give 5 stars to books that hit me harder than this one did, but I still really liked it.
100% understand why some readers would not like this one. This is very much a literary work, even a philosophical work. I think familiarity with the Le Guin short story helps as well. The narrative is more about the themes explored - though I would say it's not fully giving up character for that. It does basically give up plot for it, though.
Themes of community, difference (and how humans handle it), the need to categorize and the discomfort with ambiguity and the unknown. Throughout the story different people get confessional with Pew because Pew is mostly silent and blank. Pew is more responsive to the people they can see are not out to …
I didn't go with 5 stars for this one even though I really liked it. I normally give 5 stars to books that hit me harder than this one did, but I still really liked it.
100% understand why some readers would not like this one. This is very much a literary work, even a philosophical work. I think familiarity with the Le Guin short story helps as well. The narrative is more about the themes explored - though I would say it's not fully giving up character for that. It does basically give up plot for it, though.
Themes of community, difference (and how humans handle it), the need to categorize and the discomfort with ambiguity and the unknown. Throughout the story different people get confessional with Pew because Pew is mostly silent and blank. Pew is more responsive to the people they can see are not out to "save" them. I think it'd be easy to read this book and wonder things like, why on earth am I reading about peacocks?? But I put on my English major hat and could see the thematic connections running through the whole book. In the peacock example, Lacey explores this instinct to attack the things that are different from us.
The style is minimalist in terms of emotional communication to the reader. You aren't generally told how people feel nor is it made clear to you how to feel about what's happening. The book trusts you to react without prompting. There were some details of body language that I felt communicated a lot of what wasn't said. Eye contact or lack of it with Pew is regularly described, revealing different characters' discomfort with Pew.
I thought Lacey skillfully, quietly (and with subtlety) explored some big themes. Exposed some self-deception and some of our worst tribalist tendencies.
