arayo's review
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Graphic: Child death, Grief, Injury/Injury detail, Body horror, Death, Medical trauma, Rape, Violence, and Vomit
Moderate: Suicidal thoughts, Trafficking, and Cannibalism
Minor: Pregnancy and Infertility
julesloyola's review
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
Graphic: Rape, Sexual assault, Cannibalism, Child death, Death, Violence, Body horror, and Injury/Injury detail
Moderate: Confinement, Medical content, Medical trauma, Mental illness, Panic attacks/disorders, and Slavery
Minor: Antisemitism, Car accident, and Child abuse
brenna_kcw's review
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.5
Graphic: Panic attacks/disorders, Trafficking, War, Suicidal thoughts, Rape, Murder, Vomit, Sexual assault, Body horror, Torture, and Sexual violence
Moderate: Vomit, Blood, Death of parent, Confinement, Sexual harassment, Panic attacks/disorders, and Colonisation
The book includes a lot of descriptions of a character with intense and ongoing mental and physical illness including vomiting, body horror/medical consent stuff, which would be more difficult for some audiences. There is a VERY explicit although I wouldn’t say gratuitous description of rape. It centers the fear and horror of rape which is better than the often creepy sexualisation of rape, but it’s really awful to read so pls be aware, it’s within the last 2 chapters that any graphic description is made, the rest is vague.caintooth's review
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Graphic: Death
Moderate: Grief, Sexual violence, Slavery, Medical content, Body horror, Cannibalism, Child death, Cursing, Injury/Injury detail, Rape, Sexual assault, Suicidal thoughts, Torture, and Violence
Minor: Confinement and Self harm
jenniferbbookdragon's review against another edition
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
Graphic: Grief and Injury/Injury detail
Moderate: Classism, Cursing, Death, Injury/Injury detail, and Sexual assault
Minor: Bullying, Cannibalism, Emotional abuse, Slavery, Body horror, Confinement, and Physical abuse
brookiebridge's review
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
5.0
Graphic: Violence, Injury/Injury detail, Grief, Rape, and Death
Moderate: Child death, Gore, Sexual violence, Blood, Body horror, Slavery, Cannibalism, Confinement, Injury/Injury detail, Sexual assault, and Panic attacks/disorders
Minor: Homophobia, Sexual content, Pregnancy, and Torture
The book builds up to the reveal of why the main character survived and what happened to him.Spoiler
He watched as alien children were killed and eaten, and his friends died trying to stand up for them. He was then forced to also eat the alien children to survive, him and his friend underwent medical disfigurement of their hands and his friend died as a result. He was then sold to a brothel where he was raped repeatedly, and accidentally killed a child who had come to try to help him, thinking the child was a rapist at first. He is repeatedly confined to small spaces and isolated. Half of the story is him being investigated by his superiors, who don’t know he was raped but believe he committed murder and had illicit sex, since he is a priest. He has severe ptsd but the investigation forces him to confront his past.barry_x's review
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
The Sparrow is the story of a Jesuit mission to the planet of Rakhat, following the receipt of transmissions from the planet as part of a SETI project in the then near-future of 2019. The story is told in two parts, with alternating chapters from 2019 when the missionaries plan their mission and 2060 telling the story of the sole survivor from the mission.
In this review I'll be talking about the themes of the book, the cultures on the planet of Rakhat and also minor points about the characterisation so whilst there won't be any major spoilers I will mention things which only become apparent during the reading of the book.
So, let's start with some positives. First of all, I did like the structure of the book. The alternating chapters of the build up to the mission and the chapters covering the return of the priest Emilio Sandez largely works. We learn very early in the book that Sandez has returned in disgrace, he has clearly undergone a kind of horrific body trauma and of course, all his fellow companions who he left Earth with are dead. That works quite effectively with the sense of hope that the characters have as they come together to prepare to jet off to several light years away. There's always some good juxtaposition of where the characters are at a point in the story and how it ends up.
Also, at times I found the writing rather beautiful. I'll share more about my relationship to faith and religion in the book later in the review, but there was scene in the book that truly touched my heart. When Sandez first meets a member of the native intelligent species on Rakhat, I could feel his joy, his rapture, that sense that god was shining on him and was 'proof' god walked beside him. That power, in that scene becomes very important later on in the book, but reading it I was struck with the notion that, 'I get why people have faith'. I love moments of beauty in a book, and I think this particular scene gave it us in spades.
I also really appreciated the world building here. This is the second novel I have read in the last month or so that has 'First Contact' as a theme and is written by an author with anthropological knowledge (the other being The Left Hand of Darkness). I observed in Le Guin's novel that she was detached as an author, viewing her world as if in a petri dish. Russell isn't like that, I feel that she is very much part of her world and characters (perhaps too much). I also think she is far gentler on her readers. Instead of mirroring the experience of the humans by continually confusing the reader like Le Guin did in 'The Left Hand of Darkness' here we have no real sense the reader is the 'stranger in a strange land'. We discover things retrospectively (mostly due to the alternating chapters) and we are gently led to work things out and discover more about Rakhat culture and join the dots. Even though it is difficult for the characters and they pay for their mistakes and misunderstandings dearly, at least it isn't difficult for the reader! There is some fine world building in here, there are no 'info dumps', it's all done well from multiple perspectives.
I really enjoyed the teasing explorations of sexuality and gender in the book. My main reason for picking up this book was to include as part of my speculative fiction LGBTQ reading challenge. In that regard I am a little disappointed as the only LGBTQ content is that one of the characters is an in the closet gay man, and other than a couple of pages eluding that others are aware it is quickly forgotten about. I suppose in 1992 it may have been considered noteworthy but I don't think, 'one of my friends is gay, but it's okay because he is a celibate priest who can never live as a gay man' is as forward thinking as it could be.
One of the characters, a nearly retired doctor and anthropologist has some quite forthright views on sexuality that are teased, and I'd have loved them to be explored more. Dr. Anne Edwards, in this regard shares many of my own views - that monogamy, and, or celibacy can struggle when they bounce into the real world and relationships. That actually, no one is bothered if you are attracted to different genders. That attraction can take many forms, and that love, friendship, romantic attraction and sexual attraction can fluctuate and are not always necessarily best packaged up into single relationships. Since many of the characters are priests, the role of celibacy is explored throughout and Anne often draws focus to celibate life intersecting with romantic and, or sexual needs being met temporarily elsewhere and how it may not impact a relationship with god (or a partner). There is some flipping of gender roles and misunderstandings of gender but not enough to make it feel like LGBTQ content.
Indeed, in the book there is a wonderful opportunity to explore this, and it is kind of teased in the form of a potential love triangle, but in the end, in an attempt to reconcile I kind of think it ends as a cop-out and a much more interesting novel would be for characters not to conveniently settle elsewhere, but instead be more daring in how they feel.
In places this is quite a challenging read for me as an atheist who has a strong sense of my own spirituality, whilst having a youth spent as a practicing Catholic. I guess this is where the novel becomes quite problematic for me. I mentioned that Russell is part of the world-building, that Dr. Anne effectively speaks for her. In matters of faith, sexuality and colonialism I get a strong sense throughout I am being preached at, that Russell the author is asking me to consider the questions she is interested in, and also that I am bombarded with her world view (which at times has a racist undercurrent to it). This may sound unfair - after all, what writer doesn't inject some of their self into their writing? I know my own values scream out in any creative writing I have undertaken, and yet throughout the book it is so obvious I just want to ask her to shut up and just tell me a story.
The general question of faith in the book can largely be distilled into, 'does god exist'? and 'what is god responsible for?' which then leads to an additional question from me which is, 'so what is the purpose of god?' The way the characters come together so perfectly, the way that the mission overcomes insurmountable odds, the fact that they can make contact with an alien species - all this is 'proof' that god is guiding the way and 'everything happens because god wants it to'. Obviously, when everything goes disastrously wrong, this leads to the challenge back of, 'if god gets the credit for all the good stuff, why isn't god blamed for all the bad stuff too'? There is some theological discussion throughout the book but the same points appear to be made multiple times. It's interesting to a point, but if one has no faith, or are assured in their faith and has little interest in the question then I feel there are slim pickings here. As characters wrestled with this stuff, as a reader I wasn't to fussed.
The pacing isn't to great. It seemingly takes hundreds of pages to get the mission together, bring the characters into the same place and set off for Rakhat. It is very slow to start. The key plot in the novel, 'so what happened to everyone' is exceptionally rushed, including the reveal of what happened to Sandez. I know I sound unkind but it reminded me of writing a story at school and not knowing how to end it so just writing, 'and then everyone died. The end'. It's quite unfulfilling and a huge disappointment. Likewise, it seems hundreds of pages are spent with a bunch of priests interrogating Sandez as to what happened, in pages that just go nowhere fast.
The characterisation is off. Everyone is just a little too perfect, to friendly, and 'perfectly suited'. One character Sofia Mendes at least has the opportunity to be interesting as she has a harrowing introduction, is treated as a hyper intelligent, yet emotionally cold and distant woman yet all the men are insanely attracted to her. Considering she is a love interest, and she shows limited to no interest in the male characters for a long time it's clear it is her body and face that people fall in love with and not her. When she does open her heart she loses everything that makes her interesting and becomes a housewife (more or less).
The mission has a cast of eight and other than a couple of them they kind of just drop in and out. Sometimes a minor character you haven't read about for 300 pages suddenly has a personality for a chapter. I'm not sure it works.
I am not sure the author intended it but the reader has to suspend a lot of disbelief in how they get to Rakhat and also the dumb stuff they do when they land. It's like if the A-Team had a space travel church group. I'm all for hand-waving in a novel to get to the good stuff, but in a novel that questions the nature of faith so strongly the reader shouldn't be laughing at the inept way they get to another planet. It's definitely not a strong part of the book, and it takes a while to get there.
Likewise, I had a reflection that I haven't seen anywhere, and it's the comparator to how brutally unfair and morally wrong speciesim is. There are two intelligent species on Rakhat, a dominant 4% carnivore species and a vegetarian species making up the 96% who do all the work and are effectively bred for different types of servitude. At times it is considered a systemic relationship rather than a brutally oppressive one. The Ruana, who are the 'lesser' species take our party in, feed them, let them have access to their homes, have no notion of private property and a strong sense of community occasionally leave. Our brave heroes then go murdering the local wildlife because they miss meat so much. They completely miss the point about the relationships on the planet, or how they are perceived. I'm struck by the notion that when bad stuff happens to our characters that they kind of deserve it, that their uncaring and unfeeling sense of entitlement to other life despite their faith means they have it coming.
I mentioned about the worldview of the author and how it is loud and clear in the book. Indeed, the reason for writing the book is a critique against 'revisionist' histories of Columbus and to not put modern values on their actions. That alone means we should never review the history and impact of actions and instead just say, 'well they knew no better?' Does she really think the quest for gold and slavery has been unfairly judged? She mentions the PKK as a possible influence for a war that devastates the Middle East - yeah because the Kurds are the bad guys in Syria, Iraq and Turkey? She describes Sandez's journey as a 'personal Holocaust' and compares his relationship to god with that of modern day Jews. There is a line about 'modern day Israel rising from the ashes of the Holocaust' which feels exceptionally problematic in a book that seems to be an apologia for colonialism. A blasé approach to, and justification of subjugated people on Rakhat feels a bit grubby when you read lines which use real world history and exclude perspectives from the oppressed. Indeed, the concept of Catholic men lusting after a Jewish woman based on her superficiality, rather than who she really is kind of makes me uncomfortable.
This 'ick' factor is compounded towards the end of the book (see content warnings). I think I get what she is trying to say about the nature of god and real life analogies but in answering her big questions, I am finding her answers and I am not sure I can accept them.
I'll go back and forth on this one. It's quite well written, there is an interesting story and it definitely makes you think. But, it's the first time in a long time I've felt I've read a book by an author I don't think I'd like. I doubt I'll be reading the second book in the series.
Graphic: Forced institutionalization, Rape, Body horror, and Sexual violence
Moderate: Cannibalism, Pregnancy, Animal cruelty, Animal death, Murder, and Grief
Minor: Antisemitism and Colonisation
anblott's review
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
Graphic: Rape and Violence
Moderate: Body horror
kbbru's review
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
Graphic: Body horror and Torture
y_rui's review
1.25
A decent story mired in poor worldbuilding, poor writing, lots of telling-not-showing, poor pacing, capricious characters, ham-fisted plot contrivances, etc. It took me two weeks to read the first 40% of the book and one day to read the rest. The blurb is misleading, it certainly did not make me question my humanity. (Maybe how stupid humanity is because
Spoiler
the Father General decides to send another mission. I can see some dumbfuck world/co-orporation leader doing this. lolSometimes I wonder if I read the same book as everyone else.
Spoiler
One pet peeve: first contact aliens are human. Not physically human, but behaviourally human. I know the author is a biological anthropologist; it definitely shows, since she only considers things from a human perspective. BUT THEY'RE ALIENS JESUS CHRIST, IF YOU'RE GONNA WRITE ALIENS MAKE THEM AT LEAST A LITTLE WIERD AND NONSENSICAL. The aliens have two sexes, they think coffee tastes bitter, they abhor the smell of cooked beef (someone explain to me how this makes sense, please. The vegetarian aliens' children are killed for food and somehow this is suggests that they can't stand the smell of beef. Are the aliens made up of the same fat-carb-protein compositions as us? Carbon based? Fuck they're aliens for god's sake, beef stew does not smell like dead cow which does not smell like decaying carcass does not smell like dead alien babies.) The wealthy decorate their palaces with the same diamonds/emeralds/sapphires we use. Their economic system is basically capitalism with this domestic-agricultural slavery thrown in. If a fucking alien that has had no prior contact with humans ever utters the line 'buy low and sell high' or any of this Wall Street douchebag bullshit again I will break my ereader. THE ALIENS, THEY EVEN ORGASM. THEY GAIN SEXUAL PLEASURE BY PENETRATING ORIFICES.Look, I won't get into the thick of things and nitpick everything but the worldbuilding is not there. The aliens have similar technologies, and sure, if it was stated that 'oh this is just the word that can be best used to describe this thing that serves the same purpose but is not completely the same', I can 100% give that a pass. But Rakhat is just Earth but with giant cat people and pseudo-cat people and other funny animals.
Spoiler
Please, tell me more about these idiots. Oh wait, the author tells you everything. Scientists putting random crap in their mouths. Eating the feast the aliens provide them. Doing flight tricks on their landing vehicle. Greeting the first aliens you see because why not. Ignoring someone for 80% of the book while having sexual tension with another man, then marrying the man you've previously discounted. (This love affair takes up the span of a couple paragraphs and the whole relationship is noted for two pages. That’s it.) Somehow a linguist is able to get his friends a seat on a fact-finding mission. Oh his friend is a doctor and married to another useful man who can be an astronaut on the mission, so they deserve a spot. No fuck, that’s not how astronauts work fuck you. These are SCIENTISTS, not 17th Century dimwits. You can't just throw them on a ship to go exploring.Spoiler
Another pet peeve: Mary Sues/Gary Stus. Sofia. On the Mary Sue meter she is a twelve out of ten. Tragic backstory: check. Talented at everything: Check. Everyone likes her even though she is an 'emotional anorexic': check. Beautiful: Check. The narrator will not stop reminding you of how perfect she is. Even bruised and bloodied, a gay man cannot help but admire her beauty, when there is a equally bruised and bloodied and attractive man right beside her. Sometimes I find myself thinking that what she said or did was funny or charming but then the author feels ingratiated to tell you how great she is. She martyrs herself and her speech is made a rallying cry for the oppressed. Stop please.Spoiler
Tell me the lesson to be learned from this book. Tell me what it is, because I cannot for the love of god extract anything of meaning from this godforsaken book. Christopher Columbus is misunderstood? (For reference, author was inspired to write this book due to Columbus's actions. Whole drama there, I won't get too much into it.) Forcing someone to testify to his rape when he does not want to is…somehow a satisfying conclusion? (Look, I know in court they question every action you do to, to establish precedent. And the Church has a long history of not giving a damn about rape victims. This wasn't that. It was meant to shock the readers. He must admit that He Was Raped, in those exact words, to spell it out for the dumbfuck readers. In court they question what happened, did you consent, did you do this or that. This was more in the line of 'state explicitly that you were raped by aliens' to prove it to us. Its fucking disgusting - not what happened, but the audacity of the author. IS ALIEN PROBING TOO SUBTLE A TRAUMA? THE ALIENS HAVE TO BE OUTRIGHT RAPISTS OF THE HUMAN FASHION FOR THE CHARACTERS TO BE CONSIDERED ASSAULTED?) The arrogance of a bunch of dumbasses always gets them killed or tortured? It is not enough to watch people be exploited or a world go to shit or your friends die or your life change forever, one must be brutally tortured on top of that to question their existence and philosophies? What is the revelation?Somewhere in the author's notes she writes (in not so many words) that she consulted a man of the Church and any inaccuracies regarding Christianity are not his fault, but due to her own arrogance. That's what this book is: an author, full of themselves, telling you these Big Important Lessons and throwing in all these things that she found funny or clever or entertaining but failing to account for reality and humanity and the craft of storytelling along the way.
Graphic: Body horror, Colonisation, and Rape