Scan barcode
bzliz's review
dark
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Please consult the content warnings prior to reading.
I’ve never struggled so much to rate a book. I’ve been thinking about it for several hours and all I keep thinking is “what the hell did I just read?” And other reviews seem just as perplexed or they had a gut reaction and stuck to it. Some people hated it, some people thought it was interesting and thought provoking. I’ve decided on 4 stars because I haven’t been able to stop thinking about it but it was upsetting so I can’t bring myself to rate it 5 stars.
I’ve settled on it being an excellent catalyst for discussions about consent. Our main character Jonathon is a dirt bag who cheats on his wife but believes himself to be a good man. His moral code clearly defines rape and pedophilia as “bad” and he believes he’d never do that. Yet when he is confronted with the reality that his workplace is complicit in the sexual exploitation of female employees, he does nothing. He wonders to himself about which man he’s interacting with daily is capable of performing such an act, but he doesn’t really comprehend that it’s all of them including himself. In fact, it isn’t until a confrontation set up by his wife that he realizes he himself has caused harm because at least one of the women he had sex with at work didn’t want to do it. She just froze. Men so often have the luxury of ignorance about issues of consent, which defies the reality of life for endless women throughout history.
All that said, I am still struggling to see how becoming a supplicant to the Vaik was going to train him into being a good person. He struggles to follow their rules, which is somewhat understandable. Learning a new culture while not being allowed to ask questions would be beyond frustrating. And when their culture (men in the Fortress cannot defy orders from nor refuse sex with any woman) clashes with his moral code from the outside world (someone Jonathon views as a child chooses him to be her first sexual encounter), how can that be reconciled? In her culture, she has the right to demand this of him and he must comply. It is a crime for him to deny her. In his culture, this is a crime and would put him closer- morally- to the isvestyii than he ever wants to be. (See content warnings if you want to know what his crime was and how it is handled.) Although he consented to his life in the Fortress, could he really consent to that act if he didn’t know it was possible? Could he consent to having sex with another man at the command of a woman, if he didn’t know that might happen? Would he have even gone in if had known? I don’t think he would have.
I’ve never struggled so much to rate a book. I’ve been thinking about it for several hours and all I keep thinking is “what the hell did I just read?” And other reviews seem just as perplexed or they had a gut reaction and stuck to it. Some people hated it, some people thought it was interesting and thought provoking. I’ve decided on 4 stars because I haven’t been able to stop thinking about it but it was upsetting so I can’t bring myself to rate it 5 stars.
I’ve settled on it being an excellent catalyst for discussions about consent. Our main character Jonathon is a dirt bag who cheats on his wife but believes himself to be a good man. His moral code clearly defines rape and pedophilia as “bad” and he believes he’d never do that. Yet when he is confronted with the reality that his workplace is complicit in the sexual exploitation of female employees, he does nothing. He wonders to himself about which man he’s interacting with daily is capable of performing such an act, but he doesn’t really comprehend that it’s all of them including himself. In fact, it isn’t until a confrontation set up by his wife that he realizes he himself has caused harm because at least one of the women he had sex with at work didn’t want to do it. She just froze. Men so often have the luxury of ignorance about issues of consent, which defies the reality of life for endless women throughout history.
All that said, I am still struggling to see how becoming a supplicant to the Vaik was going to train him into being a good person. He struggles to follow their rules, which is somewhat understandable. Learning a new culture while not being allowed to ask questions would be beyond frustrating. And when their culture (men in the Fortress cannot defy orders from nor refuse sex with any woman) clashes with his moral code from the outside world (someone Jonathon views as a child chooses him to be her first sexual encounter), how can that be reconciled? In her culture, she has the right to demand this of him and he must comply. It is a crime for him to deny her. In his culture, this is a crime and would put him closer- morally- to the isvestyii than he ever wants to be. (See content warnings if you want to know what his crime was and how it is handled.) Although he consented to his life in the Fortress, could he really consent to that act if he didn’t know it was possible? Could he consent to having sex with another man at the command of a woman, if he didn’t know that might happen? Would he have even gone in if had known? I don’t think he would have.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child death, Infidelity, Pedophilia, Rape, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Sexual violence, and Suicide
Moderate: Homophobia, Transphobia, and Blood
The isvestyii is a pedophile. He is being punished because hereadmeforfilth's review against another edition
challenging
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Confinement, Infidelity, Misogyny, Pedophilia, Physical abuse, Rape, Sexism, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Sexual violence, Suicide, and Sexual harassment
Minor: Transphobia
pjchappie's review against another edition
2.0
I normally have a specific rating system that I used to rate books. It has a 20-point checklist ranging from grammar to plot to characters and everything in between. I am not using it to rate this book, because of one reason.
You've heard of rage-quitting, yes? How about rage-reading? I plowed through this book in a day and a half because I angrily had to know how it was going to end. Let me explain.
I was browsing my local bookstore one day, not looking for anything in particular. Sometimes I like to let the books come to me. I was slipping by shelf after shelf waiting for something to catch my eye when I saw it - the orange-reddish spine with the word "FORTRESS" written in bold black letters. It was the only copy. I was intrigued.
The cover was beautiful in its simplicity. Honestly, it's something I would have as an art print hanging on my wall. Matte black with a man curled up in the fetal position, a sword with an old handle behind him almost looking like its pinning him down as if he's a bug in a science project; a sprig of green foliage blooms behind him, while in front the title is over-layed in the same color as the spine.
I flipped the cover over. The blurb on the back defined the book in such a way that it instantly grabbed my attention. A cheating corporate exec volunteers to be a supplicant to an all-women compound in order to save his marriage to his pregnant wife. There are only three rules he must follow:
You've heard of rage-quitting, yes? How about rage-reading? I plowed through this book in a day and a half because I angrily had to know how it was going to end. Let me explain.
I was browsing my local bookstore one day, not looking for anything in particular. Sometimes I like to let the books come to me. I was slipping by shelf after shelf waiting for something to catch my eye when I saw it - the orange-reddish spine with the word "FORTRESS" written in bold black letters. It was the only copy. I was intrigued.
The cover was beautiful in its simplicity. Honestly, it's something I would have as an art print hanging on my wall. Matte black with a man curled up in the fetal position, a sword with an old handle behind him almost looking like its pinning him down as if he's a bug in a science project; a sprig of green foliage blooms behind him, while in front the title is over-layed in the same color as the spine.
I flipped the cover over. The blurb on the back defined the book in such a way that it instantly grabbed my attention. A cheating corporate exec volunteers to be a supplicant to an all-women compound in order to save his marriage to his pregnant wife. There are only three rules he must follow:
- He is forbidden to ask questions
- He is forbidden to raise his hand in anger
- He is forbidden to refuse intercourse or other related acts of intimacy
Talk about intriguing. I had to read this book.
The first few chapters were enough to keep me reading, but by the middle of this book, I was a bit disappointed. Some of the world-building and characterizations made sense, but some of it was just utter bullsh*t. You're going to tell me that there is a fortress where women have bodily autonomy, don't care about the opinions of men, and shove patriarchal societal standards to the side, and yet they all look like bronze-skinned, blonde hair, athletic goddesses???
Now, I've done some digging and read an interview with the author who said that "bronze" in this context meant women of color, and that she made them all blonde to subvert stereotypes of women of color. That these women are not generally "code[d] as powerful". (link to interview below)
But then the main character must go to one of the secluded pools to be, well a pool boy, and the women are much older, with folds of flabby skin, and he is disgusted. So. Not only are the athletic, bronzed goddess type women more predominately featured, but the only plus-sized women are old hags? Got it.
To be honest, I seriously thought a man wrote this book. The author is credited as S. A. Jones. When I went to look them up, I was shocked to find out it was a woman.
Look, I get that we are basically seeing the world through the main character's eyes, and he is a misogynistic a-hole. So I guess I could possibly give that a pass.
But it gets worse. So much worse.
Honestly, I'm not even going to go into it. I couldn't type it if I tried. Just know that if you get the ick from adult men sleeping with underage girls, don't read this book. Albeit the scene is never written but everything leads up to it and then the next chapter begins. And if you have read this book
The book (if I remember correctly, I tried to forget, I really did) never specifies the girl's age. I thought she was six or seven in the beginning because of the way she speaks, but then a chapter or two later it makes it sound like she's older than that. I still have no idea. Maybe she's supposed to be sixteen or seventeen and that makes it okay? (Said in a mocking tone). Also, I get that these women are supposed to be liberated from societal standards and that the girls have agency over their own bodies. This book will make you ask some tough questions. I get that. I still threw this book across the room when I finished it as if it were on fire.
WHEW. This was much more of a rant than a review. If you want to read the author's interview where she talks about this book, here is the link: https://www.theqwillery.com/2020/03/interview-with-s-jones-author-of.html
I'm giving it two stars because the world-building was interesting, the pace and flow were good, and despite the fact that I abhorred the second half of it, the first part had promise and I've also never had such intense hatred for a novel so that has to count for something, right?
Content Warnings
Graphic: Infidelity and Sexual content
Moderate: Adult/minor relationship and Sexual assault
More...