Scan barcode
books_ergo_sum's reviews
759 reviews
Married to the Alien Cowboy by Ursa Dax
adventurous
emotional
funny
fast-paced
5.0
This book was perfect.
An alien cowboy guy, of the strong silent type variety. An absolutely clueless (truly, remarkably clueless) virgin MMC. A chatty but resilient heroine with a hilarious internal monologue. And a hint of late stage intergalactic capitalism critique.
I was living my best life reading this book, honestly. I laughed (like, actually laughed out loud), I swooned, I stayed up way too late reading.
Highly recommend!
Alliance by Etta Pierce
adventurous
emotional
fast-paced
5.0
Loved it!
🫶 This book was hot (we had primal and switch Dom/sub dynamics)
🫶 The twisty overarching plot of the series just got dialed up to a 100 (seriously, what is happening? Who are even the bad guys?? Things are getting so intense)
🫶 And I love an arctic survival story
But mostly, how this book approached Dom/sub sexy times was so cool—that I can’t stop thinking about it.
Here’s the setup: our heroine Roz was a human sex doll. Literally, a robot (that’s just cool all by itself). And our hero Fásach was an alien whose species is prey-predator fluid, their bodies transforming based on their role.
And the plot of the story needed him change from Prey Daddy to Predator Daddy in order for them to survive. Cue the delightfully campy ‘we need to bone in order to live’ trope.
But do you know what this book *did not* do? Buy into any of the “strong = dominant = man = good / weak = submissive = woman = bad” nonsense.
Because for Roz, advanced illegal “living code” technology (plus an accident) meant that she had autonomy and selfhood. Being willful felt reassuring—following orders, on the other hand, took enormous strength of character. And for Fásach, prey and predator were both himself, neither one stronger or better than the other.
I can’t wait for the next book. I need answers!
The Governess Affair by Courtney Milan
emotional
5.0
The perfect novella doesn't ex—
I loooved this!! It was perfect. Why didn't anyone tell me that Courtney Milan writes kinda angsty stuff?
(I know, I know. Everyone has been telling me. But I'd only read The Duke Who Didn't [which is lovely, just thoroughgoingly lighthearted] so I didn't believe you 😝)
A "ruined" heroine. A working class hero. Some 'screw rich people' storyline.
And LETTERS. Horny-yet-hostile letters.
When I started this, l'd just DNFed the most lame-o enemies to lovers Reylo epic fantasy book. And this novella had more enemies to lovers storyline in its pinky toe.
Kudos for making this hero kinda evil (gimme evil heroes who fall hard for our heroine and start being evil FOR her). Kudos to him being the most tender consent king, that sexy time was everything. And kudos for making our heroine such a strong character.
Plus, a free novella, who doesn't love that?
I loooved this!! It was perfect. Why didn't anyone tell me that Courtney Milan writes kinda angsty stuff?
(I know, I know. Everyone has been telling me. But I'd only read The Duke Who Didn't [which is lovely, just thoroughgoingly lighthearted] so I didn't believe you 😝)
A "ruined" heroine. A working class hero. Some 'screw rich people' storyline.
And LETTERS. Horny-yet-hostile letters.
When I started this, l'd just DNFed the most lame-o enemies to lovers Reylo epic fantasy book. And this novella had more enemies to lovers storyline in its pinky toe.
Kudos for making this hero kinda evil (gimme evil heroes who fall hard for our heroine and start being evil FOR her). Kudos to him being the most tender consent king, that sexy time was everything. And kudos for making our heroine such a strong character.
Plus, a free novella, who doesn't love that?
The Right Kind of White: A Memoir by Garrett Bucks
informative
reflective
4.0
This was a four star memoire, but I actually 10/10 recommend it. If that makes sense.
Because I can't stop thinking about its topic, namely:
✨ The way a certain (progressive, empathetic, university educated) type of White person's commitment to being "the right kind of White"...
A) leads inescapably to toxic White Saviourism in advocacy for marginalized people, and
B) causes them to turn their back on other struggling groups-just because they're also White (but poor, less educated, possibly bigoted).
It reminded me of a quote from a book (Too Late to Awaken by Zizek) | read earlier that also stuck with me, of an Australian Aboriginal woman saying to a
"rich white compassionate liberal":
✨ "If you have come here to help me, then don't waste your time. But if you have come here because your liberation is bound up with mine, then come, let us work together."
What made this memoire so good was how earnest and intimate it was. What made it so important was its topic: how a White person who wants to make the world a better place can actually make the world worse—but not the way you'd expect.
I just wish this book had drawn a sharper conclusion.
Because I think everything it needed was already there.
Garrett Bucks did all the right things. He was so committed to progressive activism that he became a Quaker, studied intersectional feminism at university, and worked full time in various activism organizations. But he was too aware of his white cis male privilege-and White Saviourism crept into his work despite his best efforts. And, he was too aware of his small town midwestern upbringing-and he stopped caring about certain people's struggles despite his commitment to compassion.
The events that turned this all around (BLM movement misadventures, getting a debilitating chronic illness, recognizing the seed company logo on a hat of a Trump rally supporter) were really interesting. I just wanted a firmer conclusion. Because I actually think he's more correct than he believes.
Because I can't stop thinking about its topic, namely:
✨ The way a certain (progressive, empathetic, university educated) type of White person's commitment to being "the right kind of White"...
A) leads inescapably to toxic White Saviourism in advocacy for marginalized people, and
B) causes them to turn their back on other struggling groups-just because they're also White (but poor, less educated, possibly bigoted).
It reminded me of a quote from a book (Too Late to Awaken by Zizek) | read earlier that also stuck with me, of an Australian Aboriginal woman saying to a
"rich white compassionate liberal":
✨ "If you have come here to help me, then don't waste your time. But if you have come here because your liberation is bound up with mine, then come, let us work together."
What made this memoire so good was how earnest and intimate it was. What made it so important was its topic: how a White person who wants to make the world a better place can actually make the world worse—but not the way you'd expect.
I just wish this book had drawn a sharper conclusion.
Because I think everything it needed was already there.
Garrett Bucks did all the right things. He was so committed to progressive activism that he became a Quaker, studied intersectional feminism at university, and worked full time in various activism organizations. But he was too aware of his white cis male privilege-and White Saviourism crept into his work despite his best efforts. And, he was too aware of his small town midwestern upbringing-and he stopped caring about certain people's struggles despite his commitment to compassion.
The events that turned this all around (BLM movement misadventures, getting a debilitating chronic illness, recognizing the seed company logo on a hat of a Trump rally supporter) were really interesting. I just wanted a firmer conclusion. Because I actually think he's more correct than he believes.
What World Is This?: A Pandemic Phenomenology by Judith Butler
informative
3.0
I love Judith Butler. And I love when philosophers reflect on Zeitgeist-y moments like the pandemic.
But this book was just okay.
It did something I expected: it applied my favourite part of Butler's philosophy, grievability, to the pandemic. That is, their ideas about how some people live a life with the knowledge that their death doesn't matter, that society won't grieve them. The way that the economy was prioritized over people's lives, the unequal access to medical care, Zoom funerals—Butler talked about it all.
But, I don't think greivability was explained as deeply in this book as in their other books, The Force of Nonviolence especially. And Butler seemed to agree (there was a lot of 'see The Force or Nonviolence for more info' going on). So, the book didn't add a ton to the way l'd already mentally applied grievability to the pandemic going into this.
And the book's main focus was a part of the pandemic mindset that... I don't think has persisted, unfortunately. That is, the concept of a post-pandemic radical permeability of the self and interconnectedness of society. Like, a concrete awareness that we all breathe the same air, for example.
And, I don't know. Has this stuck around? I feel like we've returned (since this book was published in
2022) to the fantasy of liberal individualism pretty hard, ngl.
But this book was just okay.
It did something I expected: it applied my favourite part of Butler's philosophy, grievability, to the pandemic. That is, their ideas about how some people live a life with the knowledge that their death doesn't matter, that society won't grieve them. The way that the economy was prioritized over people's lives, the unequal access to medical care, Zoom funerals—Butler talked about it all.
But, I don't think greivability was explained as deeply in this book as in their other books, The Force of Nonviolence especially. And Butler seemed to agree (there was a lot of 'see The Force or Nonviolence for more info' going on). So, the book didn't add a ton to the way l'd already mentally applied grievability to the pandemic going into this.
And the book's main focus was a part of the pandemic mindset that... I don't think has persisted, unfortunately. That is, the concept of a post-pandemic radical permeability of the self and interconnectedness of society. Like, a concrete awareness that we all breathe the same air, for example.
And, I don't know. Has this stuck around? I feel like we've returned (since this book was published in
2022) to the fantasy of liberal individualism pretty hard, ngl.
Inglorious Empire: What the British Did to India by Shashi Tharoor
informative
5.0
This book asked the question: Did colonialism benefit India in any way?
And the answer was just: Absolutely Not. **
The secret sauce of this book was its ability to teach me—a complete noob (if it wasn't in the Gandhi movie with Ben Kingsley, I didn't know it)—about India's colonial history.
And it was because this book was the complete opposite of one of those 'here's a laundry list of facts; draw your own conclusions' books. Instead, it had a suuuper tight argument (it was based on an Oxford debate that went viral online).
So all those history facts? Directly into my brain. By going through every single benefit supposedly brought by the British-democracy, newspapers, railroads, education systems, naval technology, textile industry-and ripping them to shreds...
(either because the British destroyed what was there and replaced it with something worse-like education, the textile industry, and nationalisms-or because Indians were so thoroughly excluded-like politics and the navy— that you can't say the British 'gave' them anything, or because the supposed benefit was just thinly veiled exploitation-like trains and basically all industries)
... I learned so much from this book.
And it wasn't just historical curiosity. Learning about the Partition of India and Pakistan when politicians are discussing a Two-State Solution somewhere else or historical forms of colonialism when we're questioning modern day forms of colonialism... this book felt extremely relevant.
I highly recommend the audiobook. I devoured it.
** with the exception of bringing tea cultivation and cricket to India 😆
And the answer was just: Absolutely Not. **
The secret sauce of this book was its ability to teach me—a complete noob (if it wasn't in the Gandhi movie with Ben Kingsley, I didn't know it)—about India's colonial history.
And it was because this book was the complete opposite of one of those 'here's a laundry list of facts; draw your own conclusions' books. Instead, it had a suuuper tight argument (it was based on an Oxford debate that went viral online).
So all those history facts? Directly into my brain. By going through every single benefit supposedly brought by the British-democracy, newspapers, railroads, education systems, naval technology, textile industry-and ripping them to shreds...
(either because the British destroyed what was there and replaced it with something worse-like education, the textile industry, and nationalisms-or because Indians were so thoroughly excluded-like politics and the navy— that you can't say the British 'gave' them anything, or because the supposed benefit was just thinly veiled exploitation-like trains and basically all industries)
... I learned so much from this book.
And it wasn't just historical curiosity. Learning about the Partition of India and Pakistan when politicians are discussing a Two-State Solution somewhere else or historical forms of colonialism when we're questioning modern day forms of colonialism... this book felt extremely relevant.
I highly recommend the audiobook. I devoured it.
** with the exception of bringing tea cultivation and cricket to India 😆
Her Baseborn Bridegroom by Alice Coldbreath
emotional
2.0
I should have loved this 😭
I've been enjoying this author. And I love all of this:
✨ A marriage of convenience that turned into inconvenient feelings
✨ A fictional medieval setting
✨ A "I want you for myself" selfishly passionate guy who was possessive, unhinged, angry, and prone to intense staring
✨ A Rapunzel-esque, sheltered but stronger than she looks, heroine
But I kinda hated it?
So I went down a bit of a rabbit hole with reviews and here's my conclusion: Assuming we all like this kind of deranged hero, the jury is still out on whether he has a character arc or not.
And I'm on Team Not. Yes, there was a grand gesture. And he definitely tortured himself.
But... I wanted way more grovel. I wanted a moment when he (self-awarely) did something unselfish, for her. Also, a moment when he showed he could successfully check his violent behaviour (kinda scared for her, ngl).
And the plot structure wasn't helping. Most of the book had nothing going on (except some of the most mediocre sex scenes of all time—she was 💦-ing through shere book-magic alone because this man had no game). And then there was a third act plot thing we saw coming a mile away that annoyed me because the scenes had a literal elephant in the room (a person responsible for all the drama was literally in the room but we never addressed it for some reason?)
So it all ended up being a slog. And yet, I can see why some people love this book (because this hero was a nut 😆)
I've been enjoying this author. And I love all of this:
✨ A marriage of convenience that turned into inconvenient feelings
✨ A fictional medieval setting
✨ A "I want you for myself" selfishly passionate guy who was possessive, unhinged, angry, and prone to intense staring
✨ A Rapunzel-esque, sheltered but stronger than she looks, heroine
But I kinda hated it?
So I went down a bit of a rabbit hole with reviews and here's my conclusion: Assuming we all like this kind of deranged hero, the jury is still out on whether he has a character arc or not.
And I'm on Team Not. Yes, there was a grand gesture. And he definitely tortured himself.
But... I wanted way more grovel. I wanted a moment when he (self-awarely) did something unselfish, for her. Also, a moment when he showed he could successfully check his violent behaviour (kinda scared for her, ngl).
And the plot structure wasn't helping. Most of the book had nothing going on (except some of the most mediocre sex scenes of all time—she was 💦-ing through shere book-magic alone because this man had no game). And then there was a third act plot thing we saw coming a mile away that annoyed me because the scenes had a literal elephant in the room (a person responsible for all the drama was literally in the room but we never addressed it for some reason?)
So it all ended up being a slog. And yet, I can see why some people love this book (because this hero was a nut 😆)
Enter Ghost by Isabella Hammad
emotional
reflective
5.0
This book was amazing-it's going to end up being my favourite book of the year.
It felt so real. And it kinda defies explanation. Because of how nuanced it was? I keep erasing everything | write in this review because like, I could say:
✨ it's about a Palestinian woman—welll, it's more complicated than that. She's from Haifa and her family is multigenerationally diasporic. Some of her family members had Israeli passports, some West Bank passports, some European passports, etc.
✨ it's about Palestinian resistance-welll, this meant something different to literally every single character. Disagreements about what resistance is was the subtext to almost every conversation. Our heroine especially didn't have a clear relationship to it.
✨ it's about actors rehearsing for a Hamlet play in the West Bank-welll, nothing was ever that simple in here.
Nothing about this book was direct. And that was kind of the point? I think it says something about living under occupation.
Plus, all the details in this book! There was a moment where I was almost overwhelmed by them. This new character, that conversation, this flashback, that Shakespeare quote, this history fact... and then. All the little details started coming back around, getting resolved, being combined with something else to create a reveal, to create a twist, to create a moment so impactful that it hit me in the gut.
And it was... Moving? Thrilling? Cathartic? It was the kind of (audio) book that stops you in your tracks and you just stand there in the middle of the sidewalk as people walk around you (yup, that happened).
And I highly recommend the audiobook. It was communicating stuff I think I would have missed if l'd read it with my eyeballs. You know how people can say "bless your heart" but mean something completely different? There was a lot of that going on with the conversations between these Palestinian characters.
It felt so real. And it kinda defies explanation. Because of how nuanced it was? I keep erasing everything | write in this review because like, I could say:
✨ it's about a Palestinian woman—welll, it's more complicated than that. She's from Haifa and her family is multigenerationally diasporic. Some of her family members had Israeli passports, some West Bank passports, some European passports, etc.
✨ it's about Palestinian resistance-welll, this meant something different to literally every single character. Disagreements about what resistance is was the subtext to almost every conversation. Our heroine especially didn't have a clear relationship to it.
✨ it's about actors rehearsing for a Hamlet play in the West Bank-welll, nothing was ever that simple in here.
Nothing about this book was direct. And that was kind of the point? I think it says something about living under occupation.
Plus, all the details in this book! There was a moment where I was almost overwhelmed by them. This new character, that conversation, this flashback, that Shakespeare quote, this history fact... and then. All the little details started coming back around, getting resolved, being combined with something else to create a reveal, to create a twist, to create a moment so impactful that it hit me in the gut.
And it was... Moving? Thrilling? Cathartic? It was the kind of (audio) book that stops you in your tracks and you just stand there in the middle of the sidewalk as people walk around you (yup, that happened).
And I highly recommend the audiobook. It was communicating stuff I think I would have missed if l'd read it with my eyeballs. You know how people can say "bless your heart" but mean something completely different? There was a lot of that going on with the conversations between these Palestinian characters.
Too Late to Awaken: What Lies Ahead When There Is No Future? by Slavoj Žižek
informative
reflective
5.0
What made this philosophy book so great was something I didn't expect at all-how much of it was about Israel.
The main theme of this book was: pick your looming crisis-the climate crisis, increasingly nutty political discourse in the West, everyday people struggling while billionaires get richer-and how can we avoid it?
The simple answer: act *as if* the crisis has already happened, in order to stop it from happening.
The methodology was Hegelian, which I loved. And of course, Zizek is an icon of socialist political analysis. But the wildest part of this book (written in late 2022/early 2023, published in autumn 2023) was how immediately it was proven right.
Because his analogy for Russia's invasion of Ukraine (which had already happened)? What he foresaw as an immanent attack on Palestine by Israel (which hadn't happened yet). The JUMP SCARE that was sections explaining Itamar Ben-Gvir (who I now know way too much about, unfortunately). Or, sections on Russian officials who said:
"Imagine [that the war in Ukraine] was happening in Africa, or the Middle East. Imagine that Ukraine is Palestine. Imagine Russia is the United States."
Ummm, yeah. I can imagine that 🥴
And this scarily accurate point spilled over into the other themes of the book: the barbarism of New Right populism and the totalitarianism of Leftist political discourse; Safari subjectivity (how people intervene on the world as if they're not a part of it); how the hypocrisy of Western liberal values is a good thing; and what collective liberation even means.
Highly recommend, a very approachable philosophy book.
The main theme of this book was: pick your looming crisis-the climate crisis, increasingly nutty political discourse in the West, everyday people struggling while billionaires get richer-and how can we avoid it?
The simple answer: act *as if* the crisis has already happened, in order to stop it from happening.
The methodology was Hegelian, which I loved. And of course, Zizek is an icon of socialist political analysis. But the wildest part of this book (written in late 2022/early 2023, published in autumn 2023) was how immediately it was proven right.
Because his analogy for Russia's invasion of Ukraine (which had already happened)? What he foresaw as an immanent attack on Palestine by Israel (which hadn't happened yet). The JUMP SCARE that was sections explaining Itamar Ben-Gvir (who I now know way too much about, unfortunately). Or, sections on Russian officials who said:
"Imagine [that the war in Ukraine] was happening in Africa, or the Middle East. Imagine that Ukraine is Palestine. Imagine Russia is the United States."
Ummm, yeah. I can imagine that 🥴
And this scarily accurate point spilled over into the other themes of the book: the barbarism of New Right populism and the totalitarianism of Leftist political discourse; Safari subjectivity (how people intervene on the world as if they're not a part of it); how the hypocrisy of Western liberal values is a good thing; and what collective liberation even means.
Highly recommend, a very approachable philosophy book.
Reading Hegel by Agon Hamza, Frank Ruda, Slavoj Žižek
informative
reflective
4.0
A great, radical reading of Hegel.
This book was made up of three essays.
✨ Frank Ruda looked at Hegel's Philosophy of Nature using a method I like to call "insisting on the crazy" to challenge interpretations of Hegel that attempt to naturalize him.
✨ Agon Hamza pulled an Uno Reverse Card to argue that we need a Hegelian critique of Marx for a truly radical Marxism.
Those two essays were decent and where the four star rating is coming from.
✨ Slavoj Zizek's essay was perfection, though. On the surface, it was a critique of a prominent American "Hegel scholar" (I can't not scare quotes that 😆) Robert Brandom. But really, it was an excellent demonstration of a radical interpretation of Hegel in action, explaining Hegelian terms like
'determinate negation' and 'concrete universality' without falling into the usual teleological/ conservative traps in the context of current day identity politics. And it made me realize that this Hegelian method is behind a lot of Zizek's movies, lectures, and pop culture analysis books.
I wish this book had been more 'for a pop audience' than it was. I have a very Elle Woods, "what like it's hard?" attitude towards Hegel-unfortunately considered by most to be the most difficult philosopher to read. But I don't think Hegel scholarship needs to be obtuse.
Zizek was pretty clear, though! And if you're thinking about reading some Hegel, I'd highly recommend his essay in this book. It felt both beginner friendly and 100% correct-which is too unique.
This book was made up of three essays.
✨ Frank Ruda looked at Hegel's Philosophy of Nature using a method I like to call "insisting on the crazy" to challenge interpretations of Hegel that attempt to naturalize him.
✨ Agon Hamza pulled an Uno Reverse Card to argue that we need a Hegelian critique of Marx for a truly radical Marxism.
Those two essays were decent and where the four star rating is coming from.
✨ Slavoj Zizek's essay was perfection, though. On the surface, it was a critique of a prominent American "Hegel scholar" (I can't not scare quotes that 😆) Robert Brandom. But really, it was an excellent demonstration of a radical interpretation of Hegel in action, explaining Hegelian terms like
'determinate negation' and 'concrete universality' without falling into the usual teleological/ conservative traps in the context of current day identity politics. And it made me realize that this Hegelian method is behind a lot of Zizek's movies, lectures, and pop culture analysis books.
I wish this book had been more 'for a pop audience' than it was. I have a very Elle Woods, "what like it's hard?" attitude towards Hegel-unfortunately considered by most to be the most difficult philosopher to read. But I don't think Hegel scholarship needs to be obtuse.
Zizek was pretty clear, though! And if you're thinking about reading some Hegel, I'd highly recommend his essay in this book. It felt both beginner friendly and 100% correct-which is too unique.