I live in Australia and so their are only a few major online booksellers who have a decent selection of everything, excluding the more specialist sellers and amazon. I have not ordered anything for a couple of years from them but I place a small order last week about $120 in all. Like always their communication is awesome, they send it out and it arrives, no dramas whatsoever.

But I get a surprise inside when I open it, inside my brown cardboard parcel is a tiny tube of 'white glo' toothpaste, the tube is in tiny cardboard box of its own, its half open and toothpaste has spilled out - but not damaged any of my books, just soiled the inside of its on cardboard sheath. And each of my books had several discount wine coupons and Uber delivery coupons inserted in them as well, as is standard these days.

I am kind of miffed at this and wondered when the book seller suddenly cared so much about my dental health, does my purchase record indicate dental decline?? The wine and food coupons sure okay...but toothpaste??

Then I discover a book mark included too, bonus...no its an advertising mark made by the white glo toothpaste people telling me how amazing their products are on both sides. I chucked it in the bin along with the toothpaste.

The same week I happened to order a single second hand book (total value $11) from ebay from Book Express in New Zealand, never dealt with them before. It arrives the day after the toothpaste order. Its well packaged and inside its wrapped in pretty paper, tied with twine and inside a beautiful bookmark with native New Zealand bird on it and a handwritten note saying thank you for your business.

The toothpaste did not harm, apart my my books smelling minty fresh but it kind of irks they try to foist this stuff on us, after we spend money with them. Yet the smaller guy is the one who goes out of his way to provider superior customer experience.

I appreciate both occupy different places in the book seller mass market place and that I can vote with my wallet to somewhere else. I just find it amusing they think its worth risking getting toothpaste on lots of people's books for some kind of secondary commercial consideration from white glo!

Read this recently and was surprised just now to find virtually no discussion of it here. I thought it was very good. The prose perfectly went from thrift to flowery to suit the mood and was frequently breathtaking. I was captivated by Enda’s story and I enjoyed the chapter formatting where the one chapter wherein she tells her story is basically the entire novel.

I found the commentary into human lives and relationships incisive if a little sentimental- Enda and the priest seemed to fall for each other rather quickly. Overall though I enjoyed the exploration of Father Declan’s mind, especially since it’s not immediately obvious that his regrets are the focus of the story. Reminded me a bit of Ishiguro with the focus on the inner worlds and wearies of the characters.

Thoughts?

It took me a long time to finally read Brave New World but Im quite happy I didnt read it earlier in life. Im still trying to gather my thoughts on this book and Im very curious of how other people have interpreted it.

So first of all, let me start by saying that Huxley was way ahead of its time. The whole society he built - a society where every the individual doesn't matter and you are very much replaceable, where capitalism is what moves society, where people do everything to only feel the good parts of life - is something we see in 2026. The fact that he wrote this book just 20 years after Henry Ford created the assembly line is kind of insane tbh and I think the world building is clearly the biggest strenght of the book. Also, writing this openly about sex, including between children, religion, politics and State propaganda and drugs in 1920s was very brave, even though the UK was of course more open than other countries back then.

The second point I want to make is that the book is not an easy read at all. Not so much in terms of content, but in terms of language and pacing. Im not an English native, but usually read everything in English and this book had so many words I've never heard of before. And the pacing is my biggest beef with this book. I think its suppose to be on purpose tbh, just like an assembly line, everything happens fast, there's no time to focus too much time on an individual character. But it did make it harder to read and Im still not 100% sure I got everything correctly and there's some characters Im still confused about (Henry Foster, for example, I dont get this character at all).

Now, the part I want to ask about is people's thoughts on John's character. He's of course supposed to represent the exact opposite of the people who were conditioned since birth to be part of the new society. But he is the exact opposite, meaning that - in my opinion - he is his own kind of extremist. While the "civilized people" want 100% comfort and happiness, he seems to want 0%, to prove to God he is worthy. He allows himself zero satisfaction, he ignores Lenina's advances, he doesnt try somma, he prefers to isolate himself from society and torture himself. He's flawed on his own way, which I quite liked in the book: Huxley doesnt give us any character who is the beacon of morality, who we should want to be like. He gives us two-sides of the same coin, though I guess Bernard Marx and Helmholtz are somewhere in between the two.

Finally, Im curious to know whether anyone has seen the BBC adaptation. The book is paced so fast and with so many technical/old words that Im kind of confused about some parts and would love to see an adaptation of it, but only if there is one that is actually good.

Has anyone here read Till We Have Faces? If so, what is your opinion? I just finished it and I am unable to say anything positive about it. I was familiar with the Cupid and Psyche myth upon which it is a variation and I wondered what Lewis, with his talent for myth and fantasy would do with it. I considered putting it down and quitting often throughout my read but kept on hoping to arrive at some 'aha'. It never came. Reviewers (professional and Amazon) rate it highly. Based on that I'm considering re-reading it to see if a deeper understanding or 'aha' will come. I've never re-read a fiction tale I didn't like on first read hoping to see what I missed. So to other readers of Till We Have Faces, both pro and con, thoughts?

This is inspired by my recent reading of Patti Smith’s M Train. I’m not sure I’ve ever been so disappointed by a mostly beloved book. I found it pretentious and boring. I did not find it poetic or profound. I spent every page wishing and reading only to hasten the end. There was one particular line about her Rockaway bungalow surviving the first major storm of the 21st Century and I was irritated by her dismissal of Katrina. I think I am very alone in my opinion towards this book, but I couldn’t throw this one in a donation pile faster.

Please tell me your experiences with renowned works!

Hello readers and welcome! Every month this thread will be posted for you to discuss new and upcoming releases! Our only rules are:

1. The books being discussed must have been published within the last three months OR are being published this month.

2. No direct sales links.

3. And you are allowed to promote your own writing as long as you follow the first two rules.

That's it! Please discuss and have fun!

Welcome readers,

Have you ever wanted to ask something but you didn't feel like it deserved its own post but it isn't covered by one of our other scheduled posts? Allow us to introduce you to our new Simple Questions thread! Twice a week, every Tuesday and Saturday, a new Simple Questions thread will be posted for you to ask anything you'd like. And please look for other questions in this thread that you could also answer! A reminder that this is not the thread to ask for book recommendations. All book recommendations should be asked in /r/suggestmeabook or our Weekly Recommendation Thread.

Thank you and enjoy!

This is a favorite book of mine which I revisit every few years, and in light of reports about Trump considering selling off part of Yosemite to a private developer, not to mention the "Lake America" debacle, the short story "—And the Moon Be Still as Bright" felt especially relevant and emotional to read. In general, I've found Bradbury's works to be enduringly prescient, though often in regrettable ways.

"'They're all here. All the things which had uses. All the mountains which had names. And we'll never be able to use them without feeling uncomfortable. And somehow the mountains will never sound right to us; we'll give them new names, but the old names are there, somewhere in time, and the mountains were shaped and seen under those names.

The names we'll give to the canals and mountains and cities will fall like so much water on the back of a mallard. No matter how we touch Mars, we'll never touch it. And then we'll get mad at it, and you know what we'll do? We'll rip it up, rip the skin off, and change it to fit ourselves.'

'We won't ruin Mars,' said the captain. 'It's too big and too good.'

'You think not? We Earth Men have a talent for ruining big, beautiful things. The only reason we didn't set up hot-dog stands in the midst of the Egyptian temple of Karnak is because it was out of the way and served no large commercial purpose. And Egypt is a small part of Earth.

But here, this whole thing is ancient and different, and we have to set down somewhere and start fouling it up. We'll call the canal the Rockefeller Canal and the mountain King George Mountain and the sea the Dupont sea, and there'll be Roosevelt and Lincoln and Coolidge cities and it won't ever be right, when there are the proper names for these places.'"

Additionally, the penultimate story, and my personal favorite, "There Will Come Soft Rains" is set during a future post-apocalyptic August of 2026 (the book was published in 1950), so that was another stirring coincidence/parallel of sorts.

Just finished it and wow, I loved it. I am a big Christopher Moore fan, and I know he has his problems and some people don't like him, he's not for everyone. I LOVED this book.

I really appreciate the afterword where he explains the historic facts, how he used them, how he took poetic license, how he was inspired. I like how he explained after all of it, the book is really a story about Waly.

It's total fiction, yet I learned things about art, Klimt, Waly, Carl Jung, and Inuit mythology.

I really loved the dialogue, I could imagine the chaotic discussions between three and four people at once, he wrote them clearly enough yet didn't lose the sense of chaos. The interplay between Judith and Waly, or Judith and anyone, was sooooo good.

I enjoyed how he blended Frankenstein, Inuit Mythology, and 1900s Vienna and made it all seem "right" and plausible, like at no point did I think "this is just ridiculous and stupid," I was never taken out of the fantasy of the story.

Somehow he can write horrible things that aren't as triggering (for me) as when other people write about those things.

I just thought it was a fun, really interesting story, well written, never dull and never dragging.

If you haven't read it, I would recommend it. If you HAVE read it, please tell me what you thought about it, if you didn't like it, I'd like to hear your reasons why.

​“Brother” by Ania Ahlborn was one hell of a read. I’ve been a massive fan of her work for years now, and many horror readers consider this her best novel. I can easily see why, because it was an impressive read.

Before I dive into my review, here are all the trigger warnings I found while reading…

- Parental abuse (mental and physical)
- Violence against animals
- Homophobic slurs
- Rape
- Cannibalism

If any of these trigger you, please do not read this novel. Moving along, Ahlborn’s writing style is incredible. ​She knows how to craft an engaging story, develop memorable characters, and deliver the horror. Reading this novel felt like an insider look at a family similar to the one in the legendary horror movie “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.”

Imagine getting a deep look at the minds of each member of a psychotic family like that, and that is how it felt here. It’s a modern twist on a sick and twisted family of killers with a whole lot of bloodshed.

There are many layers in this novel, especially in the dynamic between Michael and his brother, Reb. My goodness, Reb was quite the insane character. Demented and sadistic are the first words that come to mind when thinking about what he brought to the story.

Even though I enjoyed this story for the most part, especially all the atmospheric building, some parts dragged on. This was evident whenever the story shifted between past and present timelines. It was interesting to get backstories on several of the characters, but these chapters were too heavy on dialogue and not enough horror. At times, it disrupted the natural flow of reading, as I was more interested in the present than in the past.

The good news was that this wasn’t an ongoing issue from beginning to end. ​Once I hit the 75% mark, the suspense and climactic race to the end were brilliantly written. There was so much gore and bloodshed that it made my horror-loving heart very happy.

Please don’t worry, I’d never spoil anything for my fellow horror readers, but there were several insane reveals in this novel that blew my mind. I didn’t see them coming at all, and it just added even more awesomeness to this novel. It also made up for those parts that dragged on, and overall, it picked things up tremendously. These plot twists and reveals were surreal.

The ending was fantastic, and one I did not see coming. I was shocked, to say the least, but everything wrapped up nicely, and once again, Ahlborn delivered. I was delighted with how this bloodbath all ended.

I give “Brother” by Ania Ahlborn a 4/5 for being a terrific read, and one I will remember for a very long time. It’s more of a slasher novel, with a sociopathic killer family, that shows the dynamic layers of what that looks like through the lens of two brothers. If this novel didn’t have parts that dragged on due to that alternating timeline of the past and the present, this would have easily been a perfect 5-Star read. Either way, I love Ahlborn and look forward to reading more of her books, which I have several waiting for me on my TBR, and anything else she writes in the future.

What's your big secret? Maybe it's that you're part of a really embarrassing fandom or maybe it's your gender identity. Maybe your secret is a source of immense pleasure that the world at large just can't understand or maybe it's a source of great shame and acts as cross you must bear. Whatever it is, Sky Daddy by Kate Folk is a really fun book for the overly self-concious about how to manage these confusing and challenging parts of yourself.

Linda is, by all external markers, completely unremarkable. She's a young woman with a crummy apartment, who only has a single friend who works with her at the same dead-end job moderating online comment sections. The one thing of interest about her is her obsessive sexual and romantic attraction to planes, with her greatest wish in life being to die in an aircraft.

Linda believes that if people find out out her misplaced love of planes, she will be disqualified from participating in polite society and that's an all too familiar feeling for me and I'm sure many others. Your life becomes a shrine to this odd thing about you, your every action becomes about sereptitiously moving towards that desire or spending all your mental energy trying to keep it under wraps.

Almost every character in the book carries a secret like this, childhood traumas, affairs, loneliness, there's something everyone is burying beneath the surface. What made the book such a hypnotic read is seeing what happens in the aftermath of these secrets coming out.

Everyone was right to be worried, the truth being revealed ends friendships, derails careers, and sends people into the pits of despair. It hurts but you also see people walk so much more freely now that they aren't chained to the dark hidden parts of themselves.

My takeaway from the book is that the life you will live if you spend every day denying who you are is so much more painful than the initial discomfort of being honest with people who care about you. Coming out with the truth might be difficult and embarrassing, but you get to walk around with a much lighter heart if you do

Hello readers!

Every Monday, we will post a calendar with the date and topic of that week's threads and we will update it to include links as those threads go live. All times are Eastern US.

My book club just finished this book and it is still haunting my thoughts. One quote from near the end of the book about Yossarian bearing responsibility for his friend's death really stood out to me, and neither my book club or the internet seems to have discussed it much:

"Yossarian thought he knew why Nately's whore held him responsible for Nately's death and wanted to kill him. Why the hell shouldn't she? It was a man's world, and she and everyone younger had every right to blame him and everyone older for every unatural tragedy that befell them, just as she, even in her grief, was to blame for every manmade misery that landed on her kid sister and on all other childeren behind her. Someone had to do something sometime. Every victim was a culprit, every culprit a victim, and somebody had to stand up sometime to try to break the lousy chain of inherited habit that was imperiling them all." Ch39 The eternal city

As a millenial, it immediately made me think of climate change inaction, and how by silently disagreeing or merely trying to survive, very little is done against the crushing inertia of the systems that have existed before we were born.

It wasnt until I was trying to find what the author intended for the reader to take from this passage, that I think it recalls back to Yossarian's debates with Clevinger, and shows Yossarian adding nuance to his previously extremely individualist, survival-at-all-costs view. In chapter 8, he acknowledges that the war must be fought and men would neccessarily die, but he is adamant that he would not be the victim. In the battle of Bologna, he is willing to allow the ground troops and other bombers to go into danger to keep himself out. After chapter 39, he refuses to take the deal for safety and is willing to risk his freedom for the kid sister.

This one passage is adding new life and complexity to the debate in the book that on first pass was pretty easy to agree with Yossarian wholecloth.

Quick disclaimer: I'm ESL , so there might be some mistakes. Thank you for your understanding.

Quick disclaimer 2: no AI used in this. This is just how I write. Also I'm unwell. Thank you

Recently I went through medical issues with my left wrist, which awarded me with 4 days off work and not much to do but read and ice the inflamed area. During that time I read 'Bunny', by Mona Awad; it stuck with me for many reasons, to the point when I anticipated my wrist to heal so I can sit and write the post you now see before you. It won't be unwarrented to say that I might have not earned the right to critique the book without finishing it. Fair. But my issues with this book are ongoing, and are the kind of stuff that presist and cannot be solved in the latter half of act 3.

This post includes my initial thoughts post dropping, points inspired by others takes on the book, and a few arguments I have yet to see anyone make; therefore, I hope this long read will be worth your time.

Miserable, bitter and disappointing as I am, I don't want to start on the wrong foot. Lets start with what worked.

The positives

I DNF quickly and without remorse, usually around the earlier parts of a book; here I stuck with it for around 80%, which wouldn't have happened if I thought the book was truly terrible. Perhaps that's just the thing - I see so much potential in Bunny, and the premise and weird-litness of it all are so up my alley - I wanted to love it. I did loved parts of it. Here they are:

1. The book flowed very easily, and, on the merit of writing alone, was enjoyable to read.
2. The visual descriptions, in particular, were a delight. During my read, I had such a clear vision in my head on how every character looked like, how they moved like. Awad paints this world pretty effortlessly and with detail, creating vivid image in the mind's eye.
3. There's one line that was absolutely terrifying to me. I won't include it here because spoilers, but I felt it was bone chilling.
4. It's impossible to deny that this book generates discussions, not just the 'wtf just happened' but beyond, in meaning and symbolism. I actually read around fans theories and dives into the themes. Book discussions such as these are always good, and having book generate such discussion is not a given. Personally I see themes of loneliness and how it connects to creativity, ones mental state, and what one is willing to do and how they are willing to behave in order to escape said loneliness. Hell, look at me, I didn't even like it and I'm writing a whole thinkpiece.
5. I love how people love this book. To be clear, I'm not dumping on any of you who enjoyed Bunny or even have it in your favorites. my opinions aside, I can see why many would love it and connect to it.
6. Jonah my lad (best character)

With that out of the way, It's time to address my many issues with this book and why I eventually dropped it. After thinking, I realized my hater attitude towards this book is multilevel, and in the following segments, I'll treat it as such.

Level 2: The breaking points

Or: the actual issues I pinpointed as the reasons I outright dropped the book. Of these there are two:

1. Max and the bullshit that follows him
   • Later in the book we get Max, a character very reminiscent to Samantha, the protagonist, except that they are far more proactive, very confident, have a strong sense of self and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, a hot man. The literal personification of what Samantha wishes she could do - but as a hot man! - that appears around 70 percent into the book and absolutely ruins every single plotline.
   • When we fist see Max, he's just some random dude at a bus station who MIGHT be a hybrid created by Samantha. Maybe. We don't know. I like that ambiguity. I hoped we never see him again. We do. And guess what? he is not only hot, he is HOT hot. At some point I threw my head in frustration and asked myself what low-tier trope-y romance novel did this guy jump out of, and how do we get him back in there and out of the story?
   • Max presence gives rise to the most juvenile plotlines. OMG! The evil girl click is going to be taken down because they'll fight over a man! Omg! Ava dating a hybrid Samantha created?? ro-oh!!! This is SUCH a disney channel plot, btw. Cant you imagine a Wizards of Waverly place episode where Alex turns a bunny into a boy and Harper starts dating him? The more we stuck with the Max shenanigans the more other immature plot choices rose to the surface; It highlights the worst, most cliche teen drama parts.
   • Why are we giving this dude so much power to move the plot? Why can't Samantha do ANYTHING? Why do we need a (hot. very hot!!!) man to progress the story and get shit done?
2. Repetitive Plotpoints that Draaaggggg
   • There is a limit to how many times I see them sit in the stupid workshop and watch everyone fake compliment the overtly-terrible work of the Bunnies. There's a limit to how much I can sit through the same jokes-middling satire- critic points of higher education/MFA/Ivy colleges. There's a limit to the 'hi bunny love you bunny omg bunny you look so good bunny'.
   • Samantha is the source of a lot of the repetitiveness. She kinda sucks in general which is usually up my alley but oh my god, she's a drag. She reiterates on the same topics over and over, and the details we get never feel like satisfactory reveal. Oh, you once again wonder what caused the rift between you and your thesis councilor? Care to give us any new details? No? Just wistful ruminating? Ok. Oh you are going to start the oh-woe-is-me while simultaneously shitting on your peers and ignoring the one other student that tries to connect? Are you going to explore those emotions and behaviors in any kind of way? No? Fine. Yes, Samantha, please tell us for the 4th time about the eyes and demoralizing slogans you write instead of progressing in any meaningful way. No, no, no need to change the way it's presented, discussed, or develops I LOVE reading the same thing over and over. Oh, we are doing this thing when you say one thing yet mean another to avoid conflict and fit in? are we doing this for the 20202040th time? Is either your actions or your thoughts convey anything NEW character or plot wise? No? OH COME ON SAMANTHA. The last part gets me the most. I now suspect it was a way to avoid conflict on the side of the AUTHOR, not the character. At some point I almost said allowed: WE NEED TO FURTHER THE PLOT, SAMANTHA. Yes, I understand this coping mechanism and what it means about fitting in and the struggle to not appear as 'different' or 'trouble maker' but, surely, on our act 3 or so, this behavior will start to change. Oh? This is what max, the hot man is for? I'm so so glad he's here.

So yeah, when I realized that 1 is a permanent and important addition to the story and 2 is not going to change, I had to drop the book. I simply had enough. Though I cannot say those were the only contributes to my DNF-O-METER. There were smaller, less obvious problems, issues that pricked and pinched me, and those accumulated, too.

Level 2: The slow and insidious killers

Or: Stuff I didn't like but powered through, to a point.

1. The weird way this book describes the dangers of the town.

• The town where the story takes place is a classic tale of the rich part of town, the poor part of town. The elite college, with it's rich students, hip resturants, and the luxurious houses around it; then the rest of the town- run down, dangerous, falling apart and just a horrible, no good place to live.
• How do we describe how much everything sucks? By describing people who do not fit the conventional style of beauty or that are mentally ill!
• One description stood out to me. It was an explicit explanation about how dangerous the town actually is. Samantha says that you might see an upstanding looking man walking down the street. But as we get closer, you might discover he is talking to himself- worse! Straight up having a shouting argument with himself! I had to stop awhile, just to take a deep breath and ask Samantha with my reader-to-character telepathy, 'hey girl. what?' Yes. Seeing a person having a yelling match with himself can be uncomfortable. But the man himself is not inherently criminal or malicious, just mentally unwell. FFS, I have seen people like that multiple times in the neigborhood I lived all my life in, which is very safe place. On rare occasion, I'd argue I've seen more extreme examples. Sometimes people are just hurt, and those with mental illness are much more of a danger to themselves than they are to others.
• This is done a few times in the story, and at some point it just feels like Awad wants to just highlight the undesirables and use them as a set piece to how just maddning and evil this place is. Ohhhhhhhh theres a guy that lives next to Samantha, and he is freakishly large. He's a pervert, because, well, he lives by Samantha and he is such a freak because, a, he is large. There's such a malicious tone that just permeates every part of the book that does not have to do with the main characters, almost all of which conventionally attractive, and not locals of the 'wrong kind' even Ava, the 'poor' character, was presented as a student at Warren. And her poverty is specifically stated as artsy and chic.

1. I cannot get a good grip on your character, bunny
   • This book does such a good job in describing the characters visually and that extends to the bunnies, with clear vision for the aesthetic each one of them preforms. But as far as personality goes - the four often get muddled, perhaps with the exception of some trite surface level description or another. I had trouble telling which one of them spoke at times.
   • 'well, disco, that's the point! It's the loss of self for the favor of gaining the comforts of the group' Is it? So why each of them is given a name AND a unique nickname? Why the writing makes such a distinction between them at one point, and recedes at another? If you wanna go ego death or better yet, hive mind, GO THERE. This is a surreal horror story, why not go as far as you can? Perhaps the point was watching the bunnies teetering the line between the self and the group. Then again, there are plenty of examples of this done in other media that shows this battle-for-balance much better, and show the response of unique personalities to have to confirm to the book. The story needed the time, space and effort to nail that balance if intended. I was so disappointed to discover that there wasn't much behind the aesthetic, and not even in a way that felt as if it was the point.
   • Hey, so, were each of the Bunnies a personification of a woman oriented genre? Duchess was the self-help self-discovery girlboss of priv-lit, Creepy-Doll was clearly romantasy, Vignette the over complex prose of pseudo feminism and pretentious shlock capitalizing of 'women's rage', and cupcake the sugary sweet feel good romances? Was that an allegory intended or am I pulling the metaphorical bunny out of the bullshiting hat?
   • I heard the Bunnies being referred to as a critical take on toxic femininity, the pitfalls of over-positive feminism; I heard they are clear hostility against the hyper feminine (don't love that term btw) and traditionally 'girly' asthetic, either on the part of the character of Samantha or the narrative of the book; i heard they are a take on the usual MFA crowd, entitled and full of themselves; I mostly think they were underdeveloped and never acted like real human woman. Especially of that age. A lot of the cast is very HIGHSCHOOL, but with the Bunnies it was beyond that. And when repeated as much as it did, it was so boring!
   • The Bunnies characterization is a huge blow especially with how important they are to the narrative, plot, and Samantha emotional journey. I feel like the book doesn't know what it wants the Bunnies to be, and not in a 'Samantha is an unreliable narrator', it just feels rushed.
2. It's (bad) SATIRE!
   • I see this argument a lot when talking negatively about the book. Of course the Bunnies are infantlized! Of course they are stretched to extreme! Bunny, I often hear claimed, is a satirical book. The critic, among others, just doesn't get it's a satire. Look, I read the descriptions, I read the reviews. I know Bunny is satire, I just think it kinda sucks as one.
   • Bunny never commits to being fully satirical; the bunnies, as muddled as I find their personalities, can be recognized as satire. Rather malicious satire that feels kinda not-like-other-girl-y, but fine. But so many others are not satirical, they just ARE. Is Jonah satire? is the Lion? Ursula (who has three different names in this book) MIGHT be satire, or might just be a tounge-in-cheek critique of the type of teachers in programs such as described. The way the world itself is painted is very grounded and down to earth for the most part - I acutally kind of love it, feels like a real breathing place- but from a satirical perspective, I just didn't see any consistency in applying it. Bunny doesn't STRETCH the way satire stretch, and never evenly. They kinda get to it with the first Bunny creation ritual, but it felt kind of out of touch with the rest of the book.
3. Context, please!
   • Call me a pleb, but I never join nor am I planning to join a Masters program; and If I did, it wouldn't be in fine arts. I don't have the background to recognize this sort of environment. This facts, however, have never bothered me when I engaged in settings similar to the one described in the book. In fact, I read to engage with lives that are different than mine, to see life from entirely different perspectives and to explore and learn about expriences and people apart from myself. Sometimes I broaden my horizons, sometimes I find out a point of joint experiences I can emphsize with, and sometimes I am just engaged.
   • I don't have issues experiencing 'DARK ACADEMIA' (aka, this kind of shit would never happen in the engineering faculty), because those books know how to intreduce context important to the understanding of the story. Bunny lacks those. I don't want nor need an infodump, and in many of the book's weirder and wilder aspects I enjoyed the not knowing. But I need a context to frame the emotions and goals of the main characters. And there were a few times when I either had to make an educated guess or outright invent context, and others where I realized it when engaging in post reading discussions. I'm not talking about context to deepen my understanding or discover hidden meanings and metaphors and what not, I'm talking basic stuff. My two biggest one was first - WHY is going to this program is so important Samantha is willing to kill herself over it? (I kinda sorta assumed it will help her advance her writing, but there was never any talk about famous Warren alum or the outright benefits of even going there) - and b, - don't they have any other classes? (No, they probably don't, the workshop and private theisis work probably take longer time. I had to ask my friend doing her masters about it, and even then she had other courses so I just guess it was the case). The first is important to understand the circumstances of the hardship of the character, and the other is integral to understanding why Samantha is so isolated and why is she so desperate for the Bunnies - a group she clearly disrespect - to accept her.
4. Slurs

• There is an individual use of two slurs in this (2019) book. The first, the R word for the mentally disabled - pretty sure related to Jonah, if I remember correctly, and if memory serves it was used naturally and not as part as criticizing behavior, aka we could really used ANY other word. The secound the G word for the Romani people -to describe a random woman AVA presumably locked eyes with in Paris that is never brought up again, literally a 'make AVA look cool story'. I'm not out to cancel Mona Awad for THAT, but seriously, wtf
• A review revealed to me that the word used repeatedly to describe a cleft lip is in fact, offensive. Oh but you see, it includes the word 'hare' in it, and therefore is so funny and clever in a book with bunny motifs. HARES ARE NOT EVEN THE SAME AS BUNNIES. and even if they were it was no reason to use this word. I am, as mentioned, ESL. So idk how common knowledge this is, and it might have been an honest mistake on Awad's part. I'm glad I caught up to the review though before I started using this word like a dumbass. Also, in writing this, I understand that using a very real medical condition as proof of 'imperfection' and 'flawed vision' fucking sucks

It's just... Like floatis at the upper corner of your eye. They are THERE, and maybe you'll be ok if you don't look to close, but then again the book invites us too and I want to, I think it deserves a deeper and intentional read. So I focus, and now the floaties are in the middle of my view. And maybe floaties are fine but every once in a while you just get a flash of light that disorients you for a second, and yeah its gone in a blink but here you are, still blinking.

Level 3: The other stuff

Or: stuff I'll still rumble about, but less.

1. 1. What is up with using pop culture reference as descriptors?
   • I don't mind cultural refrence, pop or otherwise. I think they can help set a space and time for the work, and are also can be used to hint toward character personality, foreshadowing or even themes. However, Bunny uses pop culture references not as an additive, but rather as a central peice. to the sentence. What is, exactly, 'Game of Thrones hair'? Most of it was wigs, and that is if you know she is refering to the show and not the first book in the ASOIAF series. What is ' Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind smile'? I haven't seen the movie. I don't know. Please, if you ever write a sentence like that, please define what you mean by that pop culture namedrop you just put in, and then WRITE THAT INSTEAD. As it is, those incidents cheapen the writing as a whole, and dates the work rather than places it. And I know Awad can do better, I know that because of other descriptors in the book
2. Weird phrasing
   • Just instances of weird phrasing, like 'I can almost laugh. My head is thrown back and uncontrollable laughter comes out of my mouth.' So can you laugh or can you *almost* laugh? I blame the editor(s) for small mistakes like that. I rarely see one mistakes of this kind in a book and this one had several. The writing deserved more!
3. Ladies, there are youtuber discount codes for this
   • The Bunnies great ritual secret is making 'hybrids', which is the pretentious way to say they are just making attractive boys , which btw, WEIRD word to use for grown women referring for partners to fuck! I thought it was part of some larger point but it's just bad phrasing. Anywho, this alone is embarrassing enough, but one major issue they had with the works, as it were, is the lack of penises. This is an issue because now, alas alas, the bunnies cannot be used for the bedsheets ballad.
   • Ok. you guys are grown women (supposedly) of considerable wealth who live alone. GET AN INTIMATE TOY. Idk why i'm so pissed off about this point. It's just that it feels like a really obvious solution for their stupid male centered issue they are having.
4. Lovin the Craft
   • Lots of Lovecraft references. Presumably for the ookie spookie going mad town vibez. Lovecraft sucks as a person and though his enviorment might explain parts of his behaviour, he still had deep rooted issues and was a major Bigot for most of his life. The use of Cathulu for the cosmic horror stuff, in particular, is overwrought and boring. Why not invent a horror author that haunts the town, who's life/work mirrors aspects of the story?
   • Also, if we go with the made up author, we are free to set the story out of New England, therefore avoiding setting and plotpoints that might further the idea that this book is trying to reheat some other books Tartes.
5. Jonah my lad (best character)
   • No but why am I more interested in this supporting character that is there as a reminder of what Samantha could choose - for company, and for her view on life- than the main cast?
   • I legit would LOVE a book about a depressed drug addict from Alaska writing poems and talking with bears and then recovering and moving to a hoity toity school and still keeping an optimistic look on life with a kind and honest heart. If you got a book like that let me know.

And that is it. As far as my issues go. And now, conclusion

That's all, folks

Clearly I was affected by Bunny. But now I'm free, at least until the comments; and please leave them, love em or hate em I'd love to hear your opinions

It's late and I'm unhinged and I wanted to love this book, I wanted to love it so so much, and maybe I should locate a mosquito or something and metamorph it into the book I wanted to be, or maybe I should just go to sleep.
Thank you for reading, very very much.

“Why I Love Horror: Essays on Horror Literature” by Becky Spratford is a fantastic collection for horror lovers who want to delve into the minds of some of the best horror authors and explore why they are so passionate about this genre. I had a blast reading this and enjoyed the unique perspectives and upbringings that led to the horror seed that eventually grew into a horror tree for these talented authors.

Before I dive into my review, here are the trigger warnings I found while reading…

- Abuse (physical and mental)
- School shootings
- Kidnapping
- Cancer
- Racism
- Bullying
- Miscarriages
- COVID-19

​If any of these trigger you, please do not read this book. Moving along, this collection of essays felt like a love letter to horror. Many of the authors even shared personal stories and recounted what drew them to horror, often relating it to the real-life horrors in the world, which I totally connected with.

I’d never spoil anything for anyone, but I enjoyed every essay, especially by many of my favorite horror authors. This featured Brian Keene, Tananarive Due, Josh Malerman, Paul Tremblay, Grady Hendrix, Clay McLeod Chapman, Stephen Graham Jones, and more. I not only discovered new authors, but I also enjoyed how Spratford recommended their best and most popular book before their essay. I added a few new books to my TBR thanks to this, as that was a nice touch.

Speaking of Spratford, I had never heard of her until I read this book, and I learned a great deal about her impact in the wonderful genre of horror I love so much. All the work she’s done to help bridge the gap between librarians and horror readers is phenomenal. I remember growing up in the 2000s, and whenever I visited my local library to ask about horror, the librarians would either make a face or not know enough to recommend anything beyond whatever Stephen King had written.

​Now? They will suggest a wide range of recommendations, from horror classics to the year's must-read horror books. It’s night and day different. The fact that she is helping educate and encourage librarians to embrace the horror genre is a testament to her awesomeness. Much respect to her for everything she’s done and will continue to do in horror, as it continues to be such a beloved and popular reading genre.

This collection of 18 essays truly made me love horror even more. One essay even had some hand-drawn illustrations to help tell its story, which was pretty immersive. Once I finished reading, I took a moment to reflect on why I love horror.

I’ve been reading horror for over 30 years now, and it’s simple in the grand scheme of things. Horror is my happy place. Whenever I was going through crap in life, horror was always there for me. I could read a horror book, watch a horror movie, or listen to a horror podcast, and I’d be transported to my happy place when facing issues with school, work, friendships, breakups, and any obstacles life threw my way.

Finally, the overall horror community is such a fun, friendly, and inclusive one. It doesn’t matter if you love 80s slashers, read splatterpunk, or are addicted to The Losers’ Club Podcast. You are always welcome. I can’t tell you how many amazing people I’ve met in the horror community with whom I instantly bonded over our shared love of horror. It’s special. It’s just like all the horror books, movies, soundtracks, and podcasts we enjoy. It’s all extraordinary and feels right for all of us horror lovers.

I give “Why I Love Horror: Essays on Horror Literature” by Becky Spratford a perfect 5/5 and would consider it a must-read for horror readers everywhere. These essays will give you a unique insight into the minds of some of the biggest and best horror authors ever. It’ll not only make you appreciate horror even more, but more than likely give you a few new books and authors to get into after you read their thoughts. It’s books like these that have made me cherish all things horror even more, because for most of my life, it has always been a part of me.

It will forever be a part of me.

I don't usually go for dual-timeline stuff but this one got me. The present-day farm scenes felt small in a good way, and then she'd drop you back into the theater summer and it suddenly wasn't small at all.

Lara telling her daughters the story in pieces is what I keep turning over. Not the plot, the fact that she gets to decide what they hear.

Anyone else finish this and feel weirdly protective of the ending? I almost don't want to look up interviews.

Hello readers and welcome to our Weekly FAQ thread! Our topic this week is: How can I better understand what I'm reading? Whether it's allusions to other works or callbacks to earlier events in the novel how do you read these and interpret them?

You can view previous FAQ threads here in our wiki.

Thank you and enjoy!