giocoree's review against another edition
2.0
its a nice subject but it should have stayed on twitter
dannycakez8808's review against another edition
4.0
4.5 stars
I love the illustrations and the writing style of this book. The author is funny yet informative. This is a must-read if you like empowering women in a practical history lesson
I love the illustrations and the writing style of this book. The author is funny yet informative. This is a must-read if you like empowering women in a practical history lesson
chandraleereads's review against another edition
4.0
I have seen some reviewers who’ve rated this book lower for a variety of reasons. These reasons include the casual/Twitter style of the writing, how the author handles trans and enby content, and some of the author’s in real life statements and treatment regarding fans and/or the trans community. I understand why each and all of these factors have lead to bad reviews. That said, for me, the most valuable part of the book was hearing about so many awesome (and mostly forgotten/unknown) women of history. I can’t express how thankful I am to have all these women on my radar now!! I do plan NOT to read any other books by this author (I already owned this one when I learned of her behavior). It’s a slippery math for ratings when all of the above is involved, but for now I’ve landed on 4/5 stars.
tetiana's review against another edition
3.0
Really entertaining, with amazing illustrations.
Unfortunately, the entry on Mariya Oktyabrskaya made me want to shake the book, yelling, “THIS IS NOT HOW IT WORKED!”
Two points that irked me the most:
Born into dirt-eating levels of poverty
Yeah, you know why? Because in 1930s her Ukrainian family underwent “dekulakization”, which left them, along with countless other well-to-do Ukrainian farmers (including my family), destitute.
She also didn’t start as Oktyabrskaya. Her maiden name is Garagulya, her husband’s original last name – Ryadnenko. Both are very Ukrainian-sounding, which is a strong factor in them taking a politically-appropriate name of Oktyabrskiye (after the revolution of 1917).
The confusion Lee experiences between Russia and Ukraine is typical of Americans, but not something I’m willing to overlook.
Also, this:
Being a good communist housewife, Mariya stayed home and hated the Nazis from a distance.
Communist housewife, LOL. It makes me doubt all the other entries as well. Not ideal for a historical nonfiction book. I mean, I had fun, but do I 100% believe what’s in here? Not really.
Unfortunately, the entry on Mariya Oktyabrskaya made me want to shake the book, yelling, “THIS IS NOT HOW IT WORKED!”
Two points that irked me the most:
Born into dirt-eating levels of poverty
Yeah, you know why? Because in 1930s her Ukrainian family underwent “dekulakization”, which left them, along with countless other well-to-do Ukrainian farmers (including my family), destitute.
She also didn’t start as Oktyabrskaya. Her maiden name is Garagulya, her husband’s original last name – Ryadnenko. Both are very Ukrainian-sounding, which is a strong factor in them taking a politically-appropriate name of Oktyabrskiye (after the revolution of 1917).
The confusion Lee experiences between Russia and Ukraine is typical of Americans, but not something I’m willing to overlook.
Also, this:
Being a good communist housewife, Mariya stayed home and hated the Nazis from a distance.
Communist housewife, LOL. It makes me doubt all the other entries as well. Not ideal for a historical nonfiction book. I mean, I had fun, but do I 100% believe what’s in here? Not really.
pleasureoftheclouds's review against another edition
it reads like a twitter thread
aschwartz184's review against another edition
2.0
Ugh. Here I come again with my unpopular opinion.
I respect what Mackenzi Lee tried to do here. It's easy to make history dry and not remotely entertaining. How do you make it accessible for youth and more importantly the masses? Apparently by peppering your writing with phrases like "Yaaaaas, Queen."
Many of you smiled or internally chuckled at these editorial remarks. I cringed. Maybe I was in a bad mood when I read it. Maybe I am too entrenched in slang in my daily work life and can't stomach it in my personal time. Maybe I'm a grump who is overly pedantic. Maybe Lee is onto something and I just didn't 'get' it. Or maybe this is best served in small doses, like on a Twitter feed where it originated.
But I found the idiomatic social media-imbued tone a little distracting, like she didn't give her audience enough credit. Because let's face it - if someone is going to pick up this book, they'll have at least a passing interest in history and might not need the achingly modern interjections that I humbly found to be disruptive.
I respect what Mackenzi Lee tried to do here. It's easy to make history dry and not remotely entertaining. How do you make it accessible for youth and more importantly the masses? Apparently by peppering your writing with phrases like "Yaaaaas, Queen."
Many of you smiled or internally chuckled at these editorial remarks. I cringed. Maybe I was in a bad mood when I read it. Maybe I am too entrenched in slang in my daily work life and can't stomach it in my personal time. Maybe I'm a grump who is overly pedantic. Maybe Lee is onto something and I just didn't 'get' it. Or maybe this is best served in small doses, like on a Twitter feed where it originated.
But I found the idiomatic social media-imbued tone a little distracting, like she didn't give her audience enough credit. Because let's face it - if someone is going to pick up this book, they'll have at least a passing interest in history and might not need the achingly modern interjections that I humbly found to be disruptive.
marianavert's review against another edition
4.0
3.5.
Las historias están bien pero la redacción meh...
Las historias están bien pero la redacción meh...