Divergent by Veronica Roth

28/06/2011

5

Divergent by Veronica Roth was wonderful, brilliant, astounding and any and all those synonymous adjectives. I adored it; as I expected to.

It’s a dystopian novel and the society is divided into 5 factions that each seek to combat war and suffering by adopting a particular ethic and thinking according to that ethic: sticking to that above any personal morals or relations. In the books own words: Faction before blood. That means family, but I sort of think it means before yourself too: kill yourself instead of betray your faction. The protagonist is called Divergent because she- Tris- cannot adopt one way of thinking: she could fit in with many of the groups. Obviously, this causes her a load of trouble as well as a unique way to solve it.

I thought Roth wrote brilliantly almost consistently: only occasionally did I find myself being bored by some of what was going on. I think, because this is book one in a trilogy, the setting the scene and giving her and everyone else a background was a focus. Unlike some, I actually like this sort of thing because I am an information junkie; some people just thought it was pointless.

The first 104 pages were available online and before even considering buying the book, I read these pages. Now, this has never happened before. Not once have I been able to access a book in this format (free!) and it was odd. But I read it, and liked it. By allowing me to read this, I was persuaded to buy the book because I expected I would like the entire thing. I now believe every writer should do this: it means, as a reader, we can find out whether we will like the narrative and the writer themselves should we buy it. It was win-win as far as I was concerned. And even when I got the book, I read those pages again.

The book was marvellous and I shan’t rave about it for pages on end but you need to know above all else that I loved it like a cat loves a mouse, a dog loves a ball and a reader loves a good book.

The book wasn’t unbelievable though. I think that this society (the beginning Utopia) has something that could work if possible, but it isn’t. That’s of course the problem with a Utopia: that they are impossible. The reason this one was so much so was because human individuality would have to be controlled and that cannot be feasibly done. I’m not a utopian and I don’t want this is occur in this universe, but accepting the merits of this society gave me an insight to how the characters might think and react.

Veronica Roth was, lets face it, brilliant and faultless. If she’s a nice person in real life too, I think I’m in love.

Declaring Spinsterhood by Jamie Lynn Braziel

3

Declaring Spinsterhood by Jamie Lynn Braziel is a chick-lit book- which is not a genre I frequent: rather one I sometimes stumble upon. I got this book in a giveaway, and it was also the ARC copy, though I noticed no prominent mistakes. On the whole, it was enjoyable to read, but predictable.

Our main character, Emma Bailey, has a relatively entertaining way of reciting the story, though she repeated herself more than I liked. Her family life is quite terrible, and I literally couldn’t understand why she put up with it or- moreover- why her family were such an unfeeling load of renal mass without a shred of empathy. I liked the Dad, and her brother, but no-one else really. I mean, you’d think they’d just lay off with the jokes about her being single: especially since they’ve been doing it for years. Braziel tried rectify this by giving her a gun license, making her ‘bad-ass’ but I don’t get it. She doesn’t seem to do anything different to her usual self. I sort of felt that the gun merely acted as a plot device.

The mother was the worst because she was completely deaf to everything her daughter said to her, inviting Emma’s ex-boyfriends to Sunday lunch, and arranging a myriad of blind dates, despite them epically failing in the past. I actually didn’t really understand why Emma’s father married her since he is so much nicer and more cheerful, while she just some kind of cold, reputation-obsessed matchmaker. I’d have liked to see a point when she wasn’t so unapproachable.

Her friends were much more interesting: Kathy’s amiability was really evident to me, and I liked her almost straight away (though I don’t understand her covering for Emma so much). Brian was nice, but I knew where the story was going: that he’d get a girl, Emma would have an epiphany and one way or another things would work out. Even with this in mind, I wish it wasn’t so smooth. We knew something was wrong with all of Emma’s romantic interests because she didn’t trust Steve to be faithful…or that other guy at all. I don’t even remember his name, and he was passively important.

The novel’s name comes from Emma’s declaration that she is going to give up on men and live alone for the rest of her life, but I never really felt this was the case. She was pining after someone else at the time, and she never made any big change towards this aim. I sort of didn’t understand the declaration anyway it seemed either (A) a spontaneous, unconsidered choice or (B) a bad reaction to a bad date. The guys she dated were jerks, granted, but I don’t think we got enough history to back this up. Perhaps I’m being harsh though, since it was obvious that Steve really messed her up and, romantically, things weren’t looking too bright.

I think I’ve torn into this book a little, but I don’t think it’s that bad. I don’t read books in this genre, and I’m a bit particular about romance in books, so I could conclude that this just wasn’t my kind of reading material. It’s short though, so I’d never say I wasted time.