Scan barcode
A review by triplebriiii
Throne of Jade by Naomi Novik
3.5
I was uncomfortable with the portrayel of the Chinese in this one but reading reviews i seem to be the only one??? So idk, idk anyway..
A lot slower than the first book. While I still love the relationship between Temeraire and Laurence, there seemed to be a... block... this book???? Like they were saying the right things, but I wasn't feeling it?? The pacing was also off, I would have appreciated more time actually spent in China, instead of on the boat. I also missed the other characters๐ฉ๐ฉ๐ฉ.
Also comparing this trip to China to Robin's trip in Babel (shut up, I know they are two separate books with different themes and POVs shut up) was stark when it comes to Chinese-British relations and who is portrayed as the bad guy.
I felt weird, I'm looking forward to getting back to the Napoleonic Wars.
EDIT: Okay, apparently I just needed time to process bc I thought about this more and changed my rating ๐ ๐ ๐ . So it's not that I was uncomfortable with the portrayel of the Chinese characters in this one, it was that I was uncomfortable with how our MC thought about said characters, as well as the culture, in particular the food.
This is the catch-22 white authors face when writing historical fiction - they can 1) only have white characters pretty much and stick to European or Colonial settings, 2) include POC characters and those settings and have the MCs (if they are not POC themselves) act and behave in a more "modern" framework and mindset, or 3) include POC characters and settings and have the MC act in more "historically accurate" ways.
Now I think the whole "historically accurate" argument is flimsy at best, while it's true that racism and other bigoted attitudes were more socially acceptable in the 1800s, there are plenty of examples of real people in those times who did not subscribe to these "norms." So it is 100% a choice on the author's part how they choose to present their characters and what attitudes and beliefs they choose to give them.
Which is not to say that I thought Laurence was a violent bigoted racist through this, not at all. But he was very much the centrist white liberal who is uncomfortable trying new things and adheres to the supremacist idea of white people's "right to comfort." The good news is that it's been clear since book 1 that Laurence is going to go through some sigificant character development over the course of the series that will move him away from this archetype, bad news is that we still have to suffer through it on his ~journey~.
A lot slower than the first book. While I still love the relationship between Temeraire and Laurence, there seemed to be a... block... this book???? Like they were saying the right things, but I wasn't feeling it?? The pacing was also off, I would have appreciated more time actually spent in China, instead of on the boat. I also missed the other characters๐ฉ๐ฉ๐ฉ.
Also comparing this trip to China to Robin's trip in Babel (shut up, I know they are two separate books with different themes and POVs shut up) was stark when it comes to Chinese-British relations and who is portrayed as the bad guy.
I felt weird, I'm looking forward to getting back to the Napoleonic Wars.
EDIT: Okay, apparently I just needed time to process bc I thought about this more and changed my rating ๐ ๐ ๐ . So it's not that I was uncomfortable with the portrayel of the Chinese characters in this one, it was that I was uncomfortable with how our MC thought about said characters, as well as the culture, in particular the food.
This is the catch-22 white authors face when writing historical fiction - they can 1) only have white characters pretty much and stick to European or Colonial settings, 2) include POC characters and those settings and have the MCs (if they are not POC themselves) act and behave in a more "modern" framework and mindset, or 3) include POC characters and settings and have the MC act in more "historically accurate" ways.
Now I think the whole "historically accurate" argument is flimsy at best, while it's true that racism and other bigoted attitudes were more socially acceptable in the 1800s, there are plenty of examples of real people in those times who did not subscribe to these "norms." So it is 100% a choice on the author's part how they choose to present their characters and what attitudes and beliefs they choose to give them.
Which is not to say that I thought Laurence was a violent bigoted racist through this, not at all. But he was very much the centrist white liberal who is uncomfortable trying new things and adheres to the supremacist idea of white people's "right to comfort." The good news is that it's been clear since book 1 that Laurence is going to go through some sigificant character development over the course of the series that will move him away from this archetype, bad news is that we still have to suffer through it on his ~journey~.