Summary Donna Tartt

What we enjoyed about the book:

  • very engaging, “pleasantly surprised”
  • hating all characters was the point?
  • Julian a mysterious figure: cult leader? enigma? shadow figure? dangerous? at fault for Henry’s fate?
  • “I loved this book”
  • tragic novel, made a person feel sick and sad
  • invites a reread
  • pretentious students fun
  • humour: “Francis is such an icon”
  • book haunts you after you finish reading
  • what did Henry whisper to Camilla???
  • detective story inverted, fascinating
  • homeric beginning: Bunny will die –> waiting for it do happen; whodunnit in reverse
  • tons of plottwists
  • writing style captivating, pleasant to read
  • narrative situation: Richard looking back, can we trust him? Nah
  • unreliable narrator
  • “I liked the friendship”
  • a secret kept them together, cult, are they really friends?
  • class difference very interesting, made Richard more human
  • very toxic relationships
  • Richard as the outsider
  • Can we trust Richard at all?
  • winter episode terrible but told us a lot about Richard
  • fairly small group, good for readers to remember who they were
  • Henry: we need to know more, idealised Julian to a fault
  • “morbid longing for the picturesque” – vibe
  • “they’re all damaged and they all think they’ve found solace”
  • money is not an obstacle for the group, only Richard is poor: yet he is the only one who manages to obtain a degree and find financial stability?
  • priviledge: dark academia, the arts, philosophy, philology –> far from the mundane
  • giving yourself over to pure thought clashes with Richard and his material needs
  • transition when reading: I want this, dream, nightmare, reality
  • rich people (in academia): “they can afford to be assholes about it”
  • making the decision to kill Bunny –> paint Bunny as the villain –> Bunny also violates the aesthetics of the group
  • various interpretations exist alongside each other: supernatural involvement? magic? drugs? All of it?
  • Fantasy reading of it: https://www.tor.com/2022/02/04/how-donna-tartts-the-secret-history-hides-fantasy-in-plain-sight/
  • Euripides: https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0092 –> great tragedy, chorus in plot, Dionysus –> frenzy
  • Nietzsche: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/51356/51356-h/51356-h.htm
  • Nietzsche –> Apollonian and Dionysian –> Apollo: rationality, order, art, msic, poetry, logic; Dionysus: wine, irrationality, chaos, passion, dance, no control
  • Richard not being part of the ritual makes him twice the outsider, by killing Bunny he finally joins the group for real
  • before / after structure good
  • fragmented narration of the murder –> suspense
  • puzzle narrative
  • Bunny murder not at the end, unexpected
  • 5 Act structure by Aristotle
  • “Goldfinch” by Tartt: character from “Secret History” shows up, nice!
  • fascination of The Occult: secret knowledged, limited access –> speaks to us –> bigger than us
  • several secret histories: the group has one, the ritual is a secret too
  • book about obsession

What we discussed:

  • chapters too long
  • everybody’s toxic
  • first part was great, second part just “what the hell”
  • incest part a big NO
  • all female characters are horrible?
  • dark academia = toxic masculinity? objectifying women?
  • “I was waiting for Charles to die”
  • Henry killing himself out of character?
  • Richard as narrator: do we truly know what happened?
  • “I liked that not everything lined up” –> question everything also frustrating
  • “book made me feel extremely stupid”
  • passion of the characters: extreme emotions not something we feel yet still feel jealous about?
  • layers: illusion of characters but also readers
  • checklist for everything gothic, sublime, romanticism
  • plottwists in the end not as grand as expected (like Greek classics, for instance)
  • genre limits the book a bit?
  • stylistically the book could’ve been more experimental
  • Richard not likeable: motivation does not always make sense — what is he not telling us? Richard an opportunist but not as obvious and disruptive as Bunny
  • dark academia: white, rich men?
  • no one sees Camilla as a person? Implicit criticism?

Ratings:

  • 4/5 Henry deserved better
  • 3/5 Julian Daddy TM Issues
  • 4/5 Henry ghosts
  • 4/5 Bunnies
  • 5/5 Mystery pill bottles on my shelf
  • 3/5 It could’ve been shorter
  • 5/5 I’m toxic af and I’m proud of it
  • 4/5 everybody needs therapy please
  • 4/5 If we were villains was better
  • 5/5 Greek sacrifices

Summary Liu

What did you like about “The Three Body Problem”

  • fuse science / histoy –> “completely mindblown”
  • 2nd read: “I loved it even more”
  • China, Cultural Revolution, other cultures in video game –> fascinating
  • find out alongside characters –> interesting
  • gigantic scope: China, Earth, Universe
  • Well researched book
  • books made us question things, researching, reading up
  • unexpected twists and turns
  • rooted in history and then extrapolated extremely
  • alien civilisation and clashing political and existential questions
  • lots of effort, impressive
  • needs to be reread
  • China content more interesting for some than the scifi bits
  • reversed trope: Earth & humanity as a haven
  • freedom not guaranteed
  • writing style very precise
  • felt very realistic
  • we want to become badass STEM researchers now too
  • dark parts of science but also humanity
  • What is good? What is evil?
  • What do you do when faced with an unbeatable enemy?
  • quite dystopian: workers in dystopian system also on other planet
  • book 2&3 escalate even more –> unimaginable scope
  • the foe is not a nameless, lovecraftian horror but a society gone wrong
  • Religious faith in the aliens?
  • fighting for Earth?
  • Ecocriticism
  • Forbidden literature –> current issue
  • no limit of imagination
  • Cultural Revolution a new angle
  • within Chinese literature, the book is quite influential –> scifi
  • Charakters not only intellectuals but also normal people
  • Dehydrate! (Doctor Who vibes!)
  • not super action packed but still fascinating
  • main characters and time changesd all the time: jigsaw puzzle fascinating and annoying
  • Ken Liu great translator, needs a shoutout. But: order of story differs, German translation supposedly has more content, more info here: https://www.wired.com/2016/10/wired-book-club-ken-liu-interview/ + https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/ueqc7n/talked_with_a_mandarin_speaker_about_the_three/ –> English translation starts with Cultural Revolution, Chinese original has this in the middle but Liu wanted it to be different

What we discussed:

  • being a writer in China is hard, judging the author?: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/06/24/liu-cixins-war-of-the-worlds
  • too science-y for some, “I can’t look up everthing”
  • computer game very different from the rest
  • escalates too much maybe?
  • too many coincidences to be realistic
  • Beginning of book so very different from the ending, vibe changed entirely
  • Trisolarians a bit silly? Why not evacuate earlier?
  • No emotional connection to some characters
  • Villain origin story fun but also…weird?
  • Too many characters?
  • Scope a bit much if you are used to more contained scifi, if you come from “Foundation” or “Expanse” universes, you’re grand

Ratings:

  • 5/10 social score points: not interested in reading the sequels but a unique book
  • 5/5 Chaotic Eras: “2nd reread and I will reread them all again”
  • 4/5 Trisolarians: gonna read the sequels
  • 5/5 jawdropping plottwists: “I was like daaaamn”
  • 4/5 suns: interested in sequels, but could be a bit shorter
  • 4/5 Stars: good but too scifi for me, still entertaining
  • 4/5 too much info dump and science
  • 4/5 solar systems: will read sequels

More recommendations:

Summary Frankenstein

What we enjoyed about the book:

  • convoluted narrative situation, embedded stories, framing device
  • Waltons is a “massive Frankenstein stan”
  • unreliable narrators are great
  • “I liked it” despite it being a classic
  • super influential
  • timeless, so many retellings
  • different than imagined –> adaptations have a huge influence
  • very descriptive, good nature / emotion descriptions
  • transcends the idea of monster vs. good person
  • creature = monster? Victor = monster? creature = victim? –> blurred lines
  • change of how we like / perceive characters interesting
  • old book but writing style not too old fashioned
  • more layers / questions what we know
  • limits of science
  • creature / creator, hubris
  • exciting Gothic tale
  • transcends the limits of the genre
  • “such an iconic story”
  • Mother of Scifi just slays
  • subtexts: anticolonial, vegetarian, feminist
  • impressive
  • psychological dimension fascinating
  • 1930s movie not like the book at all
  • teenage angst novel
  • What if Frankenstein raised the creature properly? Daddy Issues TM
  • Do we create our own monsters?
  • theatre adaptation with Benedict Cumberbatch great
  • radical
  • man giving birth to a creature
  • queer reading so cool
  • scope fascinating: Cologne, the Rhine, Italy, Arctic circle
  • weird that he’s so shocked by the creature, Frankenstein made it???
  • movie adaptations messing with our head
  • Monster Theory!

What we discussed / disliked:

  • Romantic English bit annoying
  • very stupid Gothic idea: monster finds books in forest? Seriously?
  • undefined Middle Eastern problematic, half Christian so good? Wild.
  • backstory of French revolution weak
  • travel log format annoying to some
  • nobody writes letters like this, honestly
  • Frankenstein & Walton: gay?
  • scientification visible but details wonky
  • did Viktor give the creature genitals? Envy?
  • cottage philosophers romanticised af
  • Viktor is just clueless and runs away from his problems
  • very buff creature (OH ROCKY)
  • super rich people problems in parts
  • Daddy Issues TM
  • monster just needed a pet and a hug to be ok-ish?

Ratings (in weird categories):

  • 5/5 creepy teachers of ancient knowledge for a classic
  • 3/5 classics hidden in a random tree: not easy to read, too many layers?
  • 4/5 moving to a different country to outrun your problems: “if it had been a 5 star three years aago, I would’ve remembered more”; important book
  • 4/5 brutally but unsurprisingly murdered family members: “as a classic it was really good and easy to enjoy”
  • 4/5 brides for his harem: Open questions, who made the monster the way he was? Frankenstein too much, just trying tro justify his bullshit
  • 4.5/5 body parts: influence on scifi and Gothic so cool, approachable for a classic, fascinating narrative situation, Mary Shelley just slays
  • 4/5 major daddy issues: writing style & Viktor annoying, skipped paragraphs
  • STILL A BETER LOVE STORY THAN TWILIGHT
  • 4/5 warm hugs for the creature: radical themes, ahead of its time, still relevant today, pacing off

Other books we talked about:

  • Children Series by Tchaikovsky was recommended
  • China Mieville: Looking for Jack
  • Endgame by Beckett
  • Audiobook of “In the Life of Puppets” by Klune
  • “Equal Rites” by Terry Pratchett
  • “Island of Doctor Moreau” by H.G. Wells + “Daughtrer of Doctor Moreau”
  • November new Baldree cosy fantasy book coming ❤

Addison Summary

What we enjoyed about the “The Goblin Emperor”:

  • Very limited place-wise, condensed
  • Political intrigue the focus and not major fights à strongest point of the book#
  • Main character, Maia, is the best, very likeable, thrown into a very hostile environment
  • Maia just draws you in
  • So much potential: young character who lacks knowledge, nobody expected him to become the emperor (smart to introduce the world to readers!)
  • Smart book
  • Protagonist who faces racism and adversity
  • Philosophical stance of the character is convincing
  • Quiet, timid, pondering protagonist à important for a leader
  • Could relate to the character a lot
  • World building huge focus on language: status, gender à elaborate, “unlike anything I’ve ever read before”
  • Readers expected something big to happen but it didn’t
  • Navigating a new role and expectations while under intense scrutiny and facing racism
  • Witness for the Dead great
  • Questioning people very relatable
  • Racism in a fantasy setting very smartly set up
  • Goblin tradition: heritage, memory, ancestry, religion
  • Industrialisation, feminism touched upon too à smartly done
  • Felt organic in terms of world-building and character plots
  • Society felt very real, patriarchal setting contested but not extremely or unrealistically so
  • Female bodyguard one of the best characters
  • “It just calmed me down”, nice
  • Friendship wonderfully depicted
  • Bureaucracy / politics fascinating

What we discussed:

  • Too many names (list at the beginning of the book helpful) à makes sense though (protagonist and reader confused)
  • Audiobook hard to follow because of the names, audiobook not recommendable
  • Magic system and religious system could’ve needed more detail (we want to know more!)
  • Not enough fantasy almost à not enough magic
  • The beginning was a bit meh
  • Sad it’s a standalone novel
  • Ending felt a bit rushed
  • Ending too smooth? Too much summary?
  • Pacing in the ending off à too easy? (Maia grows into his new role of course, but it felt very easy)

Ratings:

  • Not finished yet: 3.5-4/5 ghost detectives “because I like the focus on language and that it’s limited to the city and not the whole world, but the amount of characters confused me”
  • 4/5 stars: “so much in there that I really enjoyed but so difficult to get into at first”
  • 5/5: “I’m not usually a high fantasy person […] but I really enjoyed reading it”, “I also want to finish it because I want to know how it ends”
  • 5/5

Other books we talked about:

  • “The Hanging Artist” Jon Steinhagen: Franz Kafka is a detective and has to solve a crime (“actually better than I thought it would be”), German title: “Kafka und der Tote am Seil”
  • “Dune” by Frank Herbert: full cast audiobook very good; rereading it for the second time fascinating
  • “Daisy Jones and the Six” audiobook + TV series really good