Ash – Reflection: Sexuality

14196204508_b158d03706_zPhoto credit: every flag together is the peaceful warrior : rainbow country, san francisco (2014)torbakhopper | CC 2.0

An ex reached out to me recently and it caused me to spend a bit of time thinking about my sexuality. I have learned over the years that for me, at least, sexuality is this complicated, grey mess, which I might not ever fully disentangle, especially if romantic attachment is included, incorrectly, under sexuality. Part of the reason sexuality has been a complex topic for me is that during my formative sexual years, I had no access to books which featured anything besides a straight romance. Which caused me to think: is Ash an opening to a broader discussion on the great variation within sexuality?

While in my review, I was critical of the lack of clarity around what Ash was feeling, as I ponder asexuality, I wonder whether my criticism might have been in haste. To be clear, I am not myself asexual, but I fall on the spectrum and have identified as grey-ace for awhile, though the label demisexual is a clearer fit. It’s this grey area of asexuality that may have shown up in Ash, as quite often Ash doesn’t appear to be sexually attracted to the two potential mates, but in the case of the Huntress, there is a clear romantic sort of attraction. I initially chalked it up to the innocence of first love, but now I wonder if it was a bit more complicated than that.

But maybe a more important question is does it matter? In my reading of Ash, I felt the romantic storyline was unclear and vague and I was critical of that. But should I have been? Is there some simplicity in simply not driving a point strongly home and just letting whatever be, be? Quite possibly. Sometimes I feel I struggle with sexual identity simply because I put too much importance on certainty and labels. (Which is interesting consider the teenage version of me did a lot to shirk sexual labels for years.) In my attempt to read more diverse books, written by diverse authors, I have become a bit too focused on what specific diversity is showing up in a book. But how much does that truly add to my experience of reading?

This topic was brought up in my reflection of Wonder where I was critical of a person of privilege (able-bodied) writing about the experiences of a person that lacks that privilege (physical deformity). While I still strongly believe in the importance of #OwnVoices and have found I greatly prefer those stories, the discussion in the comments did cause me to hesitate on whether I was closing myself off into a too narrow box. When I first conceived of this site, I planned on discussing books written by white American women and non-American whites. But then I came across various sites on diversity and felt I was not doing justice to the voices that needed to be lifted up enough if I did not narrow my focus. While I think there was good intent here, and it lead to me reading some amazing stories like Juliet Takes a Breath and The Hour of Daydreams I would not otherwise have read, I think it has become too strong of a focus for me, to the point that I am now in a significant reading slump. For a while I have been slipping into the slump by ignoring the books I want to read based on my mood in favor of reading those that meet the strict criteria for this blog and I finally fell in a serious enough slump I haven’t finished a book in over a week and nothing much has interested me sense.

For me, it is time to take a critical reflection on how I am approaching book reviewing and what it is I am placing emphasis on. Ultimately, my critiques of Ash’s lack of clarity around sexuality did not drive down the rating of it, so I stand by the review; I just wonder whether taking a step back from my critical framework would reignite the spark I had when I started this blog and reinvigorate my reading again. I do think that ultimately, the tone of reviews and reflections are going to shift a bit. The focus in reflections already has and I am happy with this change. There may be more joy in accepting the grey than trying to define things. I think there was in Ash and it’s a rare gift to read a book where there is a vagueness that rings true of youth, innocence, and coming into one’s sexuality. It reminded me of that time in my youth and it’s why I ultimately enjoyed reading Ash, even if I didn’t fall in love with it the way I thought it would.

What parts of your identity are more grey, fuzzy, and hard to define? How comfortable are you with the greyness? How comfortable are you with greyness in books?

Advertisements

Ash – Review: Library

Ash coverAsh by Malinda Lo – 3.5/ 5 stars

I wanted to LOVE Ash by Malinda Lo. I wanted this to be my next favorite book. A lesbian retelling of Cinderella, probably the fairy tale I relate to the most, was destined to be a favorite. So, I looked, and I looked, and I looked for reasons to absolutely love this book, but ultimately, it ended up being a pretty average book.

What started off with a lot of potential, and a lot of initial goodwill on my part, ended up not amounting too much. I, mistakenly, assumed that the prince would instead be a princess, but that’s not the twist. Instead, the king’s hunter is a female huntress and she’s the one Cinderella (Ash) notices. Okay, so, not what I expected, but the unexpected can be good or even great, so this was not a major problem. Instead, there were several other serious problems with the book.

This is a YA book, so it easily could have been a coming out/ coming of age YA book. I would have been fine with that. Except, that’s not exactly what this is. Instead, for a long time, Ash does not question what she is feeling and then when she does, it’s more about the love triangle than it is about her sexuality. For me, it was not clear whether Ash is a lesbian or bi/pansexual, though I suspect it is the latter. This is one of the things I struggled with in the book. I wanted Ash to either embrace her sexuality or grapple with it, but she didn’t do either and instead, seemed to just let the moment decide for her. Now, there is nothing wrong with a character shirking labels; I myself did that for much of my sexual identity. But that’s not what is going on here. Instead, it is almost as if Ash is too young to understand or have sexual thoughts. She comes across more curious about her love interests than attracted to them, which felt more like asexuality than anything else. Again, I would have no problem with an asexual Ash, but I gather that’s not what she is supposed to be. It’s as if Lo was not sure how to portray Ash’s sexuality and thus we end up with this unclear sense of it.

In addition to the sexuality piece being written in an unclear manner, there is an unclear love triangle which is partly murking the waters on Ash’s sexuality. In this retelling, Ash does not have a fairy godmother; instead, her fairy is a dark and dangerous male fairy. He is the other love interest, but it is not quite clear whether she is attracted to him sexually or simply pulled in by this supernatural power he exudes. Maybe it is clearer than I imagine and I simply could not come to terms with the idea that her fairy “savior” is abusing his power to get her to run off with him. It was disturbing, especially since Ash sometimes seems to think that she is attracted to him. It was a close portrayal of how abuse victims end up thinking that they are the one at fault. But, it is all too vague to state emphatically that this is what Lo intended, so it may just be a poorly fleshed out love triangle. Regardless, I was not a fan of the triangle nor of the idea of Ash falling for her fairy godfather.

But, for me, the biggest problem with Ash is that the love interest is an incredibly slow burn. It is often so slow, one is simply reading tedious plot that does not go anywhere or develop anything. In fact, I would have been happy with more character development or more clearly fleshed out plot lines. But instead, there are irrelevant scenes of Ash waiting for something to happen. I grew so bored, this was nearly a DNF. Eventually, it gets better and more things happen, but still they do not happen between Ash and the huntress, who spend long sections of the book having no contact with each other. By the end, I do not understand why either of them are interested in each other. To be fair, I strongly prefer slowly built relationships, but this one was so sparse, it barely made sense.

There was so much potential in this story that I want to rewrite it myself and flesh out a deeper, more beautiful story. The premise is solid and there is much to work with, but it did not end up satisfying me in the end. But, there were parts I enjoyed and I am glad I read it. I am not certain I will read more by Lo, though I want to do so. I worry that these concerns will linger in her other books based on snippets of reviews I’ve seen, leaving her lower on the list of authors I hope to revisit someday. Which is a shame as I think there was real potential for me to fall in love with Lo’s body of work.

Wonder – Reflection: Ableism and #OwnVoices

16951605420_4ecb7ff1cb_kPhoto credit: Writer’s Block | Isabelle Gallino | CC 2.0

Before I became disabled, ableism was not something I thought much about nor was I truly aware of the extent it is embedded in our society and in our internal voices. Ableism is defined as discrimination in favor of able-bodied people, but such a definition calls to mind things like discrimination in hiring or access to a building. Yes, these are aspects of ableism, but ableism goes beyond these things. It is pervasive in our society in an insidious way where most of us, even those of us who are victims of it, do not quite recognize it for what it is.

I had considered ranting about ableism and how books like Wonder feed into this mindset that there is some perfection we should all be trying to achieve. There are people who advocate euthanasia for children on the autism spectrum. This is equivalent to forced sterilizations of “imblices” and other degenerates which occurred in our history and it sickens me to think that there are such similar conversations going on today.

But honestly, such a rant wouldn’t be entirely genuine as I am not disabled with a visible or obvious disability. Instead, I have an invisible illness and while ableism is rampant towards people with invisible illness, it isn’t exactly or always the same as the ableism faced by those with visible illness or difference. In my case, I would prefer a world in which I could be fixed, so I could go back to my old self, but I also strongly believe there is nothing about me that needs to be fixed in the way society seems to think I need to be. After all, in America, we are most often judged on our productivity and a person on disability is deemed unworthy since they do not contribute. I do not think I need fixing in this sense and recognize that I have value regardless of productivity.

I already discussed this some when I reflected on the book, The Little Queen. So that’s not the direction I want this post to go in. I don’t know exactly the direction I want this post to go in. I feel the need to share something to atone for reviewing a book that falls within the parameters of this blog (author of color), but yet falls into the same problems of books by white authors writing outside their experience about marginalized groups. It’s made me stop to consider more carefully what specifically is the aim of reading books by authors of traditionally marginalized groups if those books do not fall within the realm of #OwnVoices. I don’t have an answer for that yet. In fact, I did not realize I needed an answer for that until I sat down to write this post. But it does partly help explain why I’ve struggled to write reviews for a few books I read awhile ago. When a book is outside of the #OwnVoices story, yet tries to write of such experiences, something does not sit well with me. It turns out, that the book I am currently reading falls into that category and there are moments I consider bailing; not because the story isn’t good or it’s not well written, but because I cannot imagine how the author can be true to his main character which has lived an experience so vastly different from his own.

Does it matter who writes the diversity as long as there is diversity? Is it possible for a writer from a privileged group to write a true account of character from a marginalized group? How do we know what is an #OwnVoices story and what isn’t? Do we demand authors tell us their history and background to then determine whether it is an #OwnVoices story? How responsible are we for what we read?

Wonder – Review: Library

Wonder coverWonder by R.J. Palacio – 3/ 5 stars

Wonder, oh Wonder. I had avoided reading this book because I rarely find that hyped books live up to the hype. I am a critic. I nitpick. It is part of my personality and also part of my academic training. I can thoroughly enjoy a book while I’m reading it and then point out all its flaws while I’m reviewing it. I strongly suspected a book written by an author who saw a boy with a deformed face and decided she had the right to tell his story would be one I would suffer through. I was mostly right.

To start, it’s important we are all on the same page about what ableism is, since it’s central to the critique of this book. Ableism broadly is discrimination in favor of able-bodied people. More subtlely, it’s treating non able-bodied people as if there is something wrong with them that needs to be fixed. If you read Wonder, you might have cringed after reading that statement, because you probably remember how nearly every character in the book felt that there was something wrong with Auggie that needed to be fixed. That in fact, his parents spent a lot of time, money, and energy trying to fix him. Or that nearly everyone around Auggie was ableist in some way towards him at some point in the book.

In America, I constantly see quotes that go something like this, “Love is seeing his flaws and loving him in spite of them.” This is pretty much how every character approaches Auggie – they love or like him in spite of his deformed face. But really, true love is loving someone because of their flaws. Ideally, we love each other as they are, not as we want them to be. No one is perfect; everyone of has some sort of deformity. Auggie’s deformity was visible, but for most of us, our deformities are on the inside. Maybe we are too judgemental, maybe we are too harsh with other people, maybe we don’t help out when others have needs, maybe we are quick to anger. These are not things to hate in another person, but instead to embrace in them because it is part of who they are. If we as a society would embrace that we are all flawed humans, with great variation, and there is no such thing as normal, the world would be a safer, happier place.

Maybe the point of having all the characters treat Auggie like he was broken and needed to be fixed was Palacio’s way of showing how flawed that view is. But if that was the message, it was lost on me, partly because of how the school only accepted him once they heard about how Auggie was bullied. Aw, poor deformed Auggie, his life is really hard, but it would be so much better if he was normal because then he wouldn’t be bullied. We should be his friend even though we didn’t like him at all when he was just the deformed kid. That kind of patronizing, ableist attitude makes my stomach turn and I was frustrated to no end that this book is held up as the standard for books about deformed or disabled kids.

Outside of ableism, the book was fine. It was kind of nice to get other viewpoints, but it also felt forced in a lot of cases. I didn’t have as big of a deal with Justin getting his own chapter as other people did, but I don’t think it added a whole lot of value. But I didn’t really think a lot of the individual chapters added a lot of value. They all sounded a bit too similar to me.

Wonder was a bit too happily ever after for me, with everything nicely wrapped up in a neat little bow. I expect that some for a book at this age level, but children are resilient enough for there to be challenging situations that don’t wrap up perfectly well. I would have liked to see more grey than the black and white, good or bad, one size fits all story lines.

In the end, this wasn’t a book about Auggie, but instead a book about how other kids dealt with Auggie’s presence, and that was bothersome to me. This should be a book about Auggie and how he feels about a world which treats him as broken and disabled even when he is neither. Auggie says that he’s a normal kid, but he does not act as though he sees himself that way. In fact, there are several times where it seems like Auggie enjoys being treated differently, for example by having his mom prioritize his feelings over his sister’s. There was a lack of consistency in how Auggie talked about himself and how he behaved. What did he truly think and feel and how representative is his story of children in similar situations? I suspect it is not representative, but I cannot be certain. This is why it can be problematic for a person privileged on a topic to write a main character who is not privileged on that topic. It can be hard to step that far out of one’s comfort zone or to find a way to truly understand an experience one does not experience themselves. While I am disabled, I would not presume to know how to write a character like Auggie as my disability is invisible. Also, I became disabled as an adult. I do not have the same experiences as Auggie to be able to write from his perspective and I would not even call my experiences similar enough to feel comfortable writing his story. This is why I am not exactly critiquing the way Auggie’s character was written, though I am critiquing the lack of consistency. While I suspect the depiction of his inner thoughts and feelings are inaccurate based on accounts I’ve read in the anti-ableism movement, I cannot possibly say for certain. That is for someone who is more similar to Auggie to say and I hope one day such a person writes a better story than Wonder about their childhood experiences.

If you want to read a book that will make you feel warm and fuzzy and don’t plan on thinking too critically about how accurate it is, then this is a solid book choice. From that point of view, this was a 3 star read for me. It is definitely over the top and a happily ever after story that will leave you feeling that the world is a good place. But, if you are looking for an accurate depiction of a deformed child, I suggest doing your homework on this book first and then making a decision for yourself whether it fits your needs. From this point of view, this is a 1 star read for me.

Add to your Goodreads TBR! Wonder

Considering reading it? Check out a free Kindle preview! Ready to buy? Purchase on Amazon or Book Depository. Please note that Diversifying Perspective is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program and Book Depository Affiliates Program, affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to free Kindle previews through Amazon.com and purchase pages at Amazon.com and BookDepository.com. This does not impact the selection of books nor the content of reviews.

The Golden House – Review: ARC

The Golden House coverThe Golden Houseby Salman Rushdie – DNF (no star rating)

The Golden House is the type of book I tend to love: high literary fiction which is satire and political commentary. However, even I have my breaking point with such novels and The Golden House has hit it. At almost 30% (chapter 13), this is a DNF for me and I suspect I won’t be picking it back up.

While I do not think literary fiction needs to reference other fiction or the like in order to be literary fiction, I don’t mind it in stories and I do find, when well done, it contributes greatly to the story line. However, in The Golden House, the name dropping is incessant and unnecessary. Very quickly it feels like Rushdie is simply doing it to prove that not only has he been well versed in the classics, like Greek mythology, but he is also completely up to date on news stories and happenings throughout the world. The references are all over the place and quite often add nothing to the story but frustration. The references are often obscure, almost on purpose, and many other times, are things only a few well read people would have come across. The reader is left feeling throughout the book that s/he must be missing something crucial by not understanding all these references. This will be a major impediment to this book finding an audience.

I personally have no problem reading a book that regularly refers to a few pieces of literature, even if I do not know them that well or even have never heard of them. I will stop reading the book to spend time going over the literary reference. Referring to other literature can be an effective literary device and I was interested in the Greek mythology references tied to the characters names in The Golden House. Readers of my blog will note that I highly recommended The Judgement of Richard Ritcher, which continuously throughout the book references a story I had not heard of going into the book. It was an effective literary device. I strongly suspect that had I finished The Golden House, the references to Greek mythology would have been highly effective literary devices. I am not critical of those references. I am critical of nearly every other reference, including to “famous” people and other very specific Manhattan snobbish, high-minded references.

Underneath the layers of random, unnecessary, obnoxious references is a typical literary fiction story, in which the first part spends significant time on character development. If one can ignore feeling in the dark because of the references, there is rich enough character development that I do not think it is entirely necessary to understand the random references (of course, the Greek ones are vital to the story). At about 15%, I decided to not slow down for the references I was unaware of and simply pushed through them. In doing so, I saw the beauty of Rushdie’s character development. It is an unusual style that is a bit challenging to get into, random references aside, but then at some point, it becomes crystal clear who the character is, was, and will be. The reader feels s/he is fumbling along through long sentences that do not seem to be going anywhere, until all of a sudden, one arrives at the destination. I fully grasp why people praise Rushdie’s writing. There is much beauty in it.

Ultimately, the random, incessant references were not why I gave up on this book. I was willing to look past them. By this point in the book, I am mostly invested in the characters and am interested in seeing how this plays out. The reason I gave up reading this book was personal. It is not something easily put into words, in part because of its intimacy and vulnerability, but mostly because it is simply a feeling I get from this book. It would be challenging to write a book about the Trumps, err Goldens, and not leave a bad taste in the reader’s mouth. There is something seedy, dirty, misogynistic, and unsettling about this book, but it is just a hint of a feeling, but a feeling strong enough it was becoming increasingly more challenging to read this book. As some one particularly sensitive to such threads in a book, I trust that this book will only become more challenging to read as it progresses and I am currently not in the head space to cope with those challenges. If my dog weren’t dying, maybe I would be, but right now, I am not in a space to read a book that goes down the rabbit hole of the Trumps, err Goldens. I do hope to get back to this book, but I won’t try to read it again until I am able to read reviews by people other than those whom excitedly requested the ARC or snatched up early copies. Only then will I get a true sense of what I am in for if I finish this book and without that sense, I do not see me picking this book back up anytime soon.

I received this book from Netgalley and Random House in exchange for an honest review.

Add to your Goodreads TBR! The Golden House


Considering reading it? Check out a free Kindle preview! Ready to buy? Purchase on Amazon or Book Depository. Please note that Diversifying Perspective is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program and Book Depository Affiliates Program, affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to free Kindle previews through Amazon.com and purchase pages at Amazon.com and BookDepository.com. This does not impact the selection of books nor the content of reviews.

Girls Made of Snow and Glass – Review: ARC

GIrls Made of Snow and Glass coverGirls Made of Snow and Glass by Melissa Bashardoust – 3.5/ 5 star

Girls Made of Snow and Glass started strong and had a wonderful dual timeline, but then the two timelines met and the book became more and more unbelieveable. Initially, the book has dual timelines, with Lynet (Snow White) in the present and Mina (The Evil Queen) in the past. I greatly enjoyed the backstory of Mina as it was relatable and gave her so much dimension. If the book had continued on this trend, then it would have been hands down 4 stars, if not 4.5.

However, at some point, both Mina and Lynet are in the present and the storyline becomes more and more unbelievable as it progresses to the overly optimistic ending. This book is touted as a feminist retelling of Snow White; yet this book seems to fail to understand that feminism does not preclude two female characters at odds with each other. Feminism requires strong, well-developed female characters who are three-dimensional and have their own agency. Mina and Lynet have these things and they were on the path set out for them in the original story. This was a good thing and in some ways, I have no problem with them veering off that path; it was just that it was hard to believe that these particular characters had enough compassion in them to overcome the incredible odds pushing them towards the original path.

Another problem I had with the book was with how many sections of the book dragged. The romance between Nicholas and Mina was discussed in much more detail than was useful, especially when it would have been preferable to develop other characters instead like Mina’s father, Gregory. If the courtship had led to useful information about Nicholas and why he treated Lynet like she was made of glass, then it would have been interesting. There should have been a stronger edit, ensuring that the book focused on the most important aspects of the story and developed all the characters who had a significant role to play.

Ultimately, whether you will enjoy this book will likely come down to whether you will like the ending. The ending was rushed and many significant plot points were barely given a page to explain. Add that to the ending being unbelieveable and not in line with who the characters are, and for me, I ended up with a book that start strong, dragged a bit in the middle, and then fell into some world in which the characters so well developed in the beginning were all of a sudden entirely different people making choices that the laid out characters would have likely not made.

If one goes into this book without strong expectations of how the story should go and is looking for a light YA read, then that reader may greatly enjoy the book. However, if like me, you went in expecting this to be a retelling and the kind of book where well-developed characters then make decisions which make sense based on who they are, then this might not be the book for you. I love fairy tale retellings. I love them even more when there is a lesbian twist to them. It is by far my favorite genre. But because I love them so much, I expect them to be well thought out, well written, and if they chose to retell the story within the context of the original story, to stick to the major points, or at the very least, don’t combine Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and the Snow Queen all into one. Pick one fairy tale, retell it, and be done – well done.

I received this book from Netgalley and publisher Flatiron Books in exchange for an honest review.

Add to your Goodreads TBR! Girls Made of Snow and Glass
Considering reading it? Check out a free Kindle preview! Ready to buy? Purchase on Amazon or Book Depository. Please note that Diversifying Perspective is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program and Book Depository Affiliates Program, affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to free Kindle previews through Amazon.com and purchase pages at Amazon.com and BookDepository.com. This does not impact the selection of books nor the content of reviews.

The Hate U Give – Review: Library

the hate u give coverThe Hate U Give by Angie Thomas – 5/ 5 stars

This book, The Hate U Give, has forever changed me. It is an incredibly powerful story, yet it is written in straightforward language, making it accessible to anyone. I read this book faster than nearly any other book I’ve read, partly because of this straightforward language and partly because I could not stop reading it. Every time I stopped to do something else, I found my mind coming back to this storyline, trying to process and cope with what had just happened while also trying to figure out what happens next.

It’s description is accurate and lays out the general progression of what will happen next, but it did not capture the intensity of this book. I went into this book knowing that Khalil was going to die and yet, when he was killed early in the book, I found myself crying. It was not the last time I cried either. Starr lives a life no child should be asked to live, balancing race, navigating gang politics, learning now to stay safe, and recovering from tragedy and trauma. Yet, she takes much of it in stride and still lives and enjoys life. She is an amazing narrator and captures the essence of the world around her in a way that transports the reader. She is an objective narrator while also feeling the effects of the world around her. She is raw and poignant and brave. She is the perfect young adult narrator.

The description also does not capture the breadth of this book. The Hate U Give covers many issues around race and racism, but often in a subtle way, which is integrated into the story. It covers cultural differences between white and black people, but in a way in which it does not overly highlight them or shut the reader down. The Hate U Give discusses all of these in a disarming way, allowing the reader to see their own mistakes, self-reflect, and decide if and how they want to make a change. In addition, the book does not over explain concepts, sometimes not explaining them at all and allowing the context to speak for itself. Other times, Starr explains the concepts in a way in which it seems natural conversation. Thomas’s amazing writing style gives the reader the chance to learn and grow without feeling ignorant or racist, which is a true gift.

I need to point out that I am not a typical fan of YA. While I have enjoyed a few YA books, for the most part, there are two things about them that I routinely dislike: love triangles and simplistic, non-descriptive writing. This book lacked both. Yes, there is a romance, but there is no triangle, at least not for Starr. And yes, the writing is straightforward, but it is not dumbed down and even though it is told in the first person, a style I typically do not like, the narrator captures so many details, emotions, connections, understandings, well, just everything. I lived this book, and now it is my proof that both YA books and first person narratives can to better than they typically do when it comes to providing depth.

I loved that Starr’s boyfriend was the role model of healthy relationships, even though the books starts with a moment where he was not the ideal boyfriend. Yet, he is not perfect. He grows and develops and is willing to learn. He makes mistakes, but works through them, and by the end is a great example of not only what a great boyfriend is, but also a great human being. We need more characters like this in books, especially YA books.

I do not know how to do this book justice, even though I so very much want to do it justice. Some reviewers find it more challenging to review a book they do not like, but I struggle with reviewing a book I love. I do not know how to capture the essence of the book, how it conveyed to me its secrets, how it moved me to a whole different place on my journey, how it will stick with me like a memory I actually experienced, or how much I want everyone else to read it. Some books speak to the soul, but that is a deeply intimate conversation which is hard to relay to others, or at least it is for me. This book not only spoke to my soul; it changed it. I can never look at the world the same way again and I am better for it. The hype for this book is not overrated and this is definitely a must read book. It will likely be in my top five reads of the year and has already made my favorite list. I likely will read this again, something I very rarely do, and I will devour everything else Angie Thomas writes. This is an incredible novel on its own, but to then realize that it is a debut speaks volumes to the quality of Thomas’s writing. Read this book; you will not regret it.

Add to Goodreads! The Hate U Give

Considering reading it? Check out a free Kindle preview! Ready to buy? Purchase on Amazon or Book Depository. Please note that Diversifying Perspective is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program and Book Depository Affiliates Program, affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to free Kindle previews through Amazon.com and BookDepository.com. This does not impact the selection of books nor the content of reviews.