#ayrareads

My reading goals took an unexpected turn by the end of November. I used to snub the romantasy genre a lot, thinking it just (arguably) cheapens the fantasy genre as a whole. Lack of world building, too much focused on the romance part, this and that. The list goes on. But last month, I took a chance in reading about a handsome shadow wielding dragon riders and I’ve been hooked. And I haven’t stopped reading new books from the genre.

Yes Sarah J Maas will never be Brandon Sanderson level. Rebecca Yarros is a contemporary author and would never ever level with George R.R Martin or even Neil Gaiman. Holly Black will never be a Terry Pratchett. Fourth Wing will never win a Hugo award for best literary work. But you know what? I don’t care. I realized maybe the romantasy genre isn’t the problem but my personal prejudice to it. I’ve come to realize that maybe even if the literary romance tropes are used and abused in this genre, I DON”T CARE. They make me laugh and cry and root for the characters and they make me kick my feet up in the air. Something doesn’t have to be great in all aspects for me to enjoy what it has to offer.

I think it has more to do with how I think of myself especially recently when I entered my thirties. I finally got over what I think I SHOULD want vs what I actually want. That maybe I am that basic. That I don’t want or need to read complicated world buildings all the time but still want to escape into worlds where good looking high lord Faeries live, where morally gray men and shadow wielding dragon riders exists who will fall in love with you and burn the world for you. Where badass female lead characters are the center of the story and their relationship development with the people matters most and slaying the bad monsters is just a plus, and not the other way around. and maybe smut is good in normal dose! I’ve devoured more books than normal in less amount of time and with the year ending too! I’m spiraling into a Sarah J Maas multiverse that I don’t see myself stopping any time soon and I’m starting to collect physical books again because of my love for these characters after sticking with my kindle for YEARS.

"Poor, unhappy Erik! Shall we pity him? Shall we curse him? He asked only to be "some one," like everybody else. But he was too ugly! And he had to hide his genius OR USE IT TO PLAY TRICKS WITH, when, with an ordinary face, he would have been one of the most distinguished of mankind! He had a heart that could have held the empire of the world; and, in the end, he had to content himself with a cellar. Ah, yes, we must needs pity the Opera ghost.”

Most of us have probably heard Andrew Lloyd Webber's version than Gaston's. I am highly impressed with how this is written and how this novel is a well deserved classical masterpiece. The narration is like a combination of Bram Stoker's Dracula and Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, and I guess that's why it bred a new genre during its time. The writing is so good to the point I jumped into google if there was a hint of truth regarding the phantom's myth because Gaston Leroux presented the details with such accuracy, you'll have doubt if it's real or not.

A few things! ** that has to do with Andrew Lloyd Webber's version:

I would like to make a proper review since I thoroughly enjoyed this book as much as I enjoy reading Ender's Game the first time. Not to say I haven't enjoyed the other books in the series but that's beside the point.

This is a very good book and a good companion novel after Ender's Game if you still have a bit of a hangover with said novel. Since Speaker for the dead is waaay ahead on Ender’s timeline, Enders Shadow is good as it is not as a supplementary read but like a good dessert after a heavy steak meal.

Overall the book challenges the narrative of Ender by introducing Bean's narrative. I like how it connects some bits and pieces of the happenings on Enders Game but not actually making Enders Shadow something of a cheap spinoff. It's a novel in its own right. But I have to admit that there are some points where I feel that Bean’s narrative was being too forced on how it’s been originally told.

[a bit of a spoiler ahead]

There are a few points where I don’t like that Bean is a bit imposed and had a bit of an impact to Ender Wiggin's own success and timeline considering it was already laid down on Enders Game that Ender Wiggin is THE ONE, no contest, also considering we are not only looking at Ender's POV but also some glimpse on the conversations of the teachers like Graff and Anderson. Example of this was how it was actually Bean who made the roster list for the Dragon Army and Ender only had a vague idea of his involvement (or no idea at all). Or that Ender wasn't aware (or it wasn’t how it was told told in his own narrative) that Petra was setting him up when the Salamander army was trying to gang up on them. These few points were clashing in Ender's POV and personally I think it was vital that this wasn't too imposed under Bean's POV since it would be safe to say the important character after all of this is still Ender. It's downplaying Ender's brilliance a bit on the main narrative just to make room to emphasize that Bean is brilliant.

But apart from this, it was rather enjoyable to read how other students actually see Ender. It makes you feel like you're part of the battle school yourself. And I also love the transition of Bean's character from thinking that Ender was a rival, to finally someone he looks up to and asks for validation, then to being a friend and someone he actually cares about apart from himself. It's also noteworthy that this answers some of my personal questions of what actually happens to Earth now that Ender and Valentine left it. Peter was a very interesting character for me and although he was only mentioned in this novel, it was a good opener to the Shadow series as a whole.

Second issue I have is with the proposed antagonist which is Achilles. I feel like it was a bit of lazy writing in creating someone to oppose Bean. It was stated that Bean was a brilliant boy, an extraordinary child, one in a million, and how coincidental would it be that another brilliant boy from the streets, in literally his own turf, would be brought up in battle school. I wished that they made a rival for him that he actually met in battle school. I find it just a bit lazy andclichè that his rival should still stem from his experience from earth, the only enemy that he left on Earth. They could've just left him there and not bring him up to battle school. But of course, I may be wrong since this is just an introduction of him. I am expecting to read more about him on the following books.

Second, I have an issue with Bean being TOO brilliant. It diminishes some of the hard impacts I had on Enders Game, such as Bean learning too quickly that what they were playing was the actual battle. or that the teachers were too complacent with Bean snooping around and getting sensitive data. It was just too pushing to the point of being overboard in emphasizing that Bean is very smart.

I still love him, though.

“Our partners do not belong to us; they are only on loan, with an option to renew—or not. Knowing that we can lose them does not have to undermine commitment; rather, it mandates an active engagement that long-term couples often lose. The realization that our loved ones are forever elusive should jolt us out of complacency, in the most positive sense.”

“Because marriage was a political, economic, and mercenary event, many people believed that true, uncontaminated love could only exist without it.”

"Monogamy used to mean one person for life. Now monogamy means one person at a time."

"We live in a culture that continually lures us with the promise of something better, younger, perkier. Hence we no longer divorce because we’re unhappy; we divorce because we could be happier."

“Being cheated on makes people feel insignificant, but feeling insignificant for years on end may lead people to cheat.”

“In my study of desire, there is a question I have taken with me around the globe: “When do you feel most drawn to your partner?”

---

Definitely one of the most powerful books I've read this year along with Esther's first book, Mating in Captivity. Like how she speaks in public, Madam Perel has a way of captivating her readers with how she describes the topic of infidelity in such a way that it makes it enigmatic and mystifying. She sees things in all angles, merging psychology and philosophy in her explanations that make you want to do a double-take, write it down, read it again, and remember just in case you encounter someone having the same dilemma in their relationship. She doesn't give blatant advices on how to resolve infidelity. Rather, what she does is look at it and examine how we view cheating and why it's been condemned for so long but still has existed for centuries.