tanya_the_spack's review against another edition
2.0
The good: I like the concept (I love a good apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic tale, and this is a pleasantly realistic concept). It's fun that it is set in Washington DC and nearabouts. (You'd probably get a big kick out of it if you're familiar with American University.)
The bad: Could use another pass through an editor. Mediocre writing. Hardly anything actually happens; it's more exposition than story. Overtly preachy.
I really wish there was more of an actual plot. Such a good concept wasted on a short-story amount of plot buried under a novel amount of exposition. It was a bear to get through because of that. Would make a good non-fiction book about post-apocalyptic survival techniques.
The bad: Could use another pass through an editor. Mediocre writing. Hardly anything actually happens; it's more exposition than story. Overtly preachy.
I really wish there was more of an actual plot. Such a good concept wasted on a short-story amount of plot buried under a novel amount of exposition. It was a bear to get through because of that. Would make a good non-fiction book about post-apocalyptic survival techniques.
thepagemistress's review
2.0
I liked the book well enough. Decent apocalypse story but sometimes it was distracting following the characters thoughts and his focus on the present. He just seemed more scatter brained at some parts so that's when I would almost lose interest in some chapters. There was a lot of imagery so you really could paint the picture. Overall good apocalypse story, not the best but still good.
errantdreams's review
4.0
I’m not sure how I feel about the dragging out of the details of “The Event”. The narrative comes together around it later, but at first it’s just this weird mystery. I would have liked at least a little more information on it. It’s the ‘killer flu’ variant of the apocalypse, which primarily matters in how it affects the preparations people make, as well as what they’re willing to do depending on how scarcely occupied the city is.
The narrative style is talkative, garrulous, almost a stream-of-consciousness sort of thing, coming from John’s point of view. It isn’t a style I normally go for, but I thought it worked in Partholon. It did take me a little while to get into it, though. I love that while John’s human friends are few and far between, most of his companionship comes in the form of dogs: Hairbag and Lupus run free but come back for food; Snuffy is largely an indoor dog. Despite his desolate part of the city, he comes up with ways to keep himself from going totally mad. There seems to be some limited amount of phone calling available; John’s calls with his son Collier help to give Collier at least a little bit of hope.
To be clear–John is absolutely a racist figure, using epithets like “towel-heads”. I never felt like it was the author standing on a soapbox and speaking through John; it felt like a legitimate part of John’s character. (At least I sincerely hope that’s all it is.)
It took me a while to figure out what the deal was with Collier, and some of the other groups in town. Of course, in a bio-kill you have to wonder why it is that the nice people seem to get disproportionately killed. (Or maybe it’s just a statement arguing that even nice people will go bad if you put them under pressure. That’s one thing John didn’t seem to philosophize over.) As it is, John does a lot of philosophizing about the event, the people he knows, the future that’s coming. Somehow Krauss makes that philosophizing interesting. Partholon may not be my favorite post-apocalypse story, but John’s point of view makes it better than many I’ve read.
Original review on my site: http://www.errantdreams.com/2016/05/review-partholon-d-krauss/
The narrative style is talkative, garrulous, almost a stream-of-consciousness sort of thing, coming from John’s point of view. It isn’t a style I normally go for, but I thought it worked in Partholon. It did take me a little while to get into it, though. I love that while John’s human friends are few and far between, most of his companionship comes in the form of dogs: Hairbag and Lupus run free but come back for food; Snuffy is largely an indoor dog. Despite his desolate part of the city, he comes up with ways to keep himself from going totally mad. There seems to be some limited amount of phone calling available; John’s calls with his son Collier help to give Collier at least a little bit of hope.
To be clear–John is absolutely a racist figure, using epithets like “towel-heads”. I never felt like it was the author standing on a soapbox and speaking through John; it felt like a legitimate part of John’s character. (At least I sincerely hope that’s all it is.)
It took me a while to figure out what the deal was with Collier, and some of the other groups in town. Of course, in a bio-kill you have to wonder why it is that the nice people seem to get disproportionately killed. (Or maybe it’s just a statement arguing that even nice people will go bad if you put them under pressure. That’s one thing John didn’t seem to philosophize over.) As it is, John does a lot of philosophizing about the event, the people he knows, the future that’s coming. Somehow Krauss makes that philosophizing interesting. Partholon may not be my favorite post-apocalypse story, but John’s point of view makes it better than many I’ve read.
Original review on my site: http://www.errantdreams.com/2016/05/review-partholon-d-krauss/
More...