Awful, Sexist, Trite, Incredibly Boring Taradiddle

Ugh, man… It really disappoints me when it’s a female author writes about women so badly and with so much internalized sexism. The entire story is SO boring and SO predictable because it relies on these age-old archetypes that are recycled over and over again to continue to oppress women. Old sexist Chestnuts and not much else. « Love » as written by someone who seems to have learned about it from cheap harlequin books… From a literary perspective this has the merit of any old cheap Harlequin book with a topless cowboy or steamy magician on the cover - it’s THAT formulaic and shallow. I am having difficulty believing that this was written by the same author as Mexican Ghothic.

Mexican Gothic was fun and original - a juicy and fun sort of guilty pleasure read… This is just awful and it’s hard to understand how the writer can’t see what she is doing to women and their stories.

It relies on chiches as old as time, the woman sold off into marriage by her family and effectively condemned to a life of exclusive prostitution makes a convenient villain and her oppression earns her not so much as a breath of sympathy from the author. As far as the archetype goes she’s got it all, she’s gosh darn MEAN, she’s frigid (bad woman, don’t you know women should be PaSsIOnAtE?) she’s vain and greedy and scheming and cruel (we know this because the author is constantly telling us she is). She wasn’t always like that but she was made tainted (Ie sold off) which immediately made her soiled and evil. Got it? If the ridiculous cartoon of a person doesn’t drive that point home the god awful performance sure will. It sounds like the reader is reading a villainess for a children’s book or people who don’t understand words only tone.

By contrast the pure, wealthy and privileged ingenue who isn’t SOILED by financial concerns and realities, cares or life, etc. is clearly meant as a foil to the bad woman. She’s a PROPER female heroine. She breaks just enough rules to be « sassy » (loves bugs! #notliketheothergirls) but most importantly she’s young and innocent and doesn’t need for anything. That means she can’t be motivated by money and since her loving family won’t sell her off into sexual slavery she gets to stay « pure ». Guys she likes books and bugs too - she’s not like ALL the other women (you know those shallow creatures who like hairdos and dresses)? In case that’s not enough once again the reader really drives that point home by making sure you know how innocent and childlike and virginal and pure and bubbly the character is. It’s nails on a chalkboard annoying.

Excuse me a second Sylvia M-G, I think I’m going to be sick

It’s bad - terrible dialogue and terribly annoying performance, lots of telling and little showing, shallow and idiotic motivations and emotions, etc. But it’s not JUST bad… It’s also offensive, SEXIST drivel.

Thanks but no thanks. I made it halfway through and I’m done done done. Not listening to the last half of a book written by someone who had nothing to say when they wrote it, just a Victorian understanding of women.

You voted on this review!

You reported this review!