Scan barcode
books_ergo_sum's reviews
877 reviews
I Will Steal You The Stars by Alivia Fleur
emotional
4.0
Ooh this book got me so excited!
It was a short little novella. A childhood friends to lovers story where their intimacy was grandfathered-in to the story’s timeline—a story detail that never gets full marks from me (I need my on-page falling in love).
But the setting! The characters! The language! I’m obsessed. It was so immersive and vibe-y. The accent that came through the dialogue was so unique. I loved that our hero was 5 feet tall but also had so much Daddy energy.
This was just so lovely, I can’t wait to read more from this author!
It was a short little novella. A childhood friends to lovers story where their intimacy was grandfathered-in to the story’s timeline—a story detail that never gets full marks from me (I need my on-page falling in love).
But the setting! The characters! The language! I’m obsessed. It was so immersive and vibe-y. The accent that came through the dialogue was so unique. I loved that our hero was 5 feet tall but also had so much Daddy energy.
This was just so lovely, I can’t wait to read more from this author!
Sinful Mate by Trish Heinrich
adventurous
2.0
Dr. Spock in the streets, freak in the sheets. Star Trek inspired friends to lovers where our human lady was a medical genius. I was ready to love this—and it started out great.
In terms of spice:
👍 aliens who can read your mind by touching you is super fun (also hot)
👎 I think knotting is the most awkward thing I can possibly imagine. The sexy time is over and now they’re just… stuck together? Nightmare fuel
Make of that what you will 😆
That said, the second half of the book lost me. It had one of my least favourite relationship dramas (the “I love you too much to be with you”). We didn’t lean into the culture clash as much as I wanted. There was a villainous monologue I rolled my eyes at. And I never figured out why this was called “sinful mate”(who was the sinner? What religion were we sinning in?)—it bothered me 😆
In terms of spice:
👍 aliens who can read your mind by touching you is super fun (also hot)
👎 I think knotting is the most awkward thing I can possibly imagine. The sexy time is over and now they’re just… stuck together? Nightmare fuel
Make of that what you will 😆
That said, the second half of the book lost me. It had one of my least favourite relationship dramas (the “I love you too much to be with you”). We didn’t lean into the culture clash as much as I wanted. There was a villainous monologue I rolled my eyes at. And I never figured out why this was called “sinful mate”(who was the sinner? What religion were we sinning in?)—it bothered me 😆
Half a Soul by Olivia Atwater
emotional
4.0
This book was lovely. I read it in a day. Loved the mix of regency historical romance and fae magic fantasy. Great characters, cute romance.
I particularly enjoyed the single POV in here. And I thought the ‘half a soul’ metaphor for neurodivergence (which seems like it could be derogatory at first glance) was actually super beautiful and emotional.
For me, it had one flaw though. A major theme in here was a social critique of war, inequality, and child labour—social critiques I love. But this one was way too twee.
If you’ve read this, did you find the social critique twee? (I read a bunch of reviews that found it compelling) But here’s my criteria—and tell me what you think—if the 19th century social critique is less than 50% as gritty as Charles Dickens (who writes silly characters like Wackford Squeers and Serjeant Buzfuz), then it’s very solidly twee.
I particularly enjoyed the single POV in here. And I thought the ‘half a soul’ metaphor for neurodivergence (which seems like it could be derogatory at first glance) was actually super beautiful and emotional.
For me, it had one flaw though. A major theme in here was a social critique of war, inequality, and child labour—social critiques I love. But this one was way too twee.
If you’ve read this, did you find the social critique twee? (I read a bunch of reviews that found it compelling) But here’s my criteria—and tell me what you think—if the 19th century social critique is less than 50% as gritty as Charles Dickens (who writes silly characters like Wackford Squeers and Serjeant Buzfuz), then it’s very solidly twee.
An Unexpected Kiss: A Regency Historical Romance by Alexa Aston
emotional
4.0
Earnest. That’s the word for this book.
Our down-to-earth hottie was surprised to inherit a title. Our diamond of the first water heroine helped him fit in. Found family, being honest with one another, honour, cuteness.
It was so earnest! It felt like a k-drama. There was something really charming and cozy about it. The characters were all likable, everything happened on page, he didn’t think he deserved her, they were pining. It was super sweet.
The writing style was very on the nose and it had one of my least favourite things holding them apart (the ‘I love you too much to be with you’ trope). But I forgive it.
The Duke's Only Desire by Anna Harrington
emotional
3.0
I loved the first half of this book. She was engaged to his brother, our MCs sent letters to each other instead, it turned into this Beauty and the Beast situation. Lots of pining, lots of yearning. It was melodramatic, but in a fun way!
I was even ready for forgive the fact that we never got any of those letters on-page (a crime, tbh). And that our heroine, though extremely likable, was being the “I’m a Cool Mom” version of a duchess (which I was kinda rolling my eyes at).
But then the second half of the book went in an evil uncle, impending court case direction. And I just didn’t care enough about it. A lot of my favourite romance plot elements felt ‘settled’ at that point and the story started to drag, for me. Plus there was a detail about the ending that wasn’t my fav.
Three Worlds: Memoir of an Arab-Jew by Avi Shlaim
reflective
4.0
“Palestinians are the main victims of the Zionist project. More than half of their number became refugees and the name Palestine was wiped off the map. But there was another category of victims, less well known and much less talked about: the Jews of the Arab lands.”
Avi Shlaim was born a as Jew in Iraq and moved to Israel as a child. And this memoir was about growing up as an oxymoron (according to Israeli society), aka an Arab Jew.
It was:
▪️ part residential school story (the pressure to erase his Arab language and culture at school and in public),
▪️ part refugee story (they were forced to flee with almost nothing),
▪️ part living as a racialized minority in a white supremacist country story.
The way that European Jews in Israel a) strongly believed in and b) politically entrenched race science about the mental and moral inferiority of “orientals” (Jews from “Asia and Africa” to quote Shlaim)… was just oof. And the way Israeli society viewed itself as both anti-Arab and a home for Jews made Shlaim’s entire existence as an Arab Jew just so freaking complicated.
Plus the way this contrasted with his family’s life in Iraq (where they were accepted, wealthy, privileged, cosmopolitan, had British passports, spoke English and French as well as Arabic). It was just a lot.
This book’s only flaw, for me, with was its tendency to lean into an academic, rather than narrative, tone. Avi Shlaim is an academic historian, so it did make sense. And there was a lot of history debunking myths about the role Israel played in making the Jews of the Arab countries refugees in the first place, which was interesting.
Avi Shlaim was born a as Jew in Iraq and moved to Israel as a child. And this memoir was about growing up as an oxymoron (according to Israeli society), aka an Arab Jew.
It was:
▪️ part residential school story (the pressure to erase his Arab language and culture at school and in public),
▪️ part refugee story (they were forced to flee with almost nothing),
▪️ part living as a racialized minority in a white supremacist country story.
The way that European Jews in Israel a) strongly believed in and b) politically entrenched race science about the mental and moral inferiority of “orientals” (Jews from “Asia and Africa” to quote Shlaim)… was just oof. And the way Israeli society viewed itself as both anti-Arab and a home for Jews made Shlaim’s entire existence as an Arab Jew just so freaking complicated.
Plus the way this contrasted with his family’s life in Iraq (where they were accepted, wealthy, privileged, cosmopolitan, had British passports, spoke English and French as well as Arabic). It was just a lot.
This book’s only flaw, for me, with was its tendency to lean into an academic, rather than narrative, tone. Avi Shlaim is an academic historian, so it did make sense. And there was a lot of history debunking myths about the role Israel played in making the Jews of the Arab countries refugees in the first place, which was interesting.
His Reluctant Lady by Aydra Richards
emotional
4.0
This was one of those ‘these characters are idiots and it fills me with glee’ historical romances. First comes ruination, then comes (reluctant) marriage? Then comes well-earned HEA 🥰
We had:
✨ spying on his liaisons for ‘research’
✨ sexy blackmail is all fun and games until you’re forced to marry
✨ “Courting his wife was going to be a damn sight more difficult than he’d expected” [actual quote]
✨ one of my favourite types of FMCs: the poor-yet-genteel older sister scheming (in this case, secretly earning money as an author) to get her younger sisters well married
✨ one of my favourite types of MMCs: a total idiot (making it through life with Pretty Peer Privilege™️ alone)
This is definitely a high four star. Our girl made him work for it. And I loved her for that. Apparently grovels are this authors thing? I’m excited for this backlist!
We had:
✨ spying on his liaisons for ‘research’
✨ sexy blackmail is all fun and games until you’re forced to marry
✨ “Courting his wife was going to be a damn sight more difficult than he’d expected” [actual quote]
✨ one of my favourite types of FMCs: the poor-yet-genteel older sister scheming (in this case, secretly earning money as an author) to get her younger sisters well married
✨ one of my favourite types of MMCs: a total idiot (making it through life with Pretty Peer Privilege™️ alone)
This is definitely a high four star. Our girl made him work for it. And I loved her for that. Apparently grovels are this authors thing? I’m excited for this backlist!
The Final Strife by Saara El-Arifi
adventurous
1.0
I spent 90% of this book filled with rage because this story read—to be perfectly honest—like a 19th century eugenics narrative 🫤
My specific thoughts on that involve important plot points so I’ll put them behind spoiler tags.
But non-spoiler tldr, this was a very ‘Myth of the Metals’ (you know, from Plato’s Republic) style fantasy setup. Three types of people, three hierarchical roles in society. Except it wasn’t a myth? It involved inherited traits, specifically racial features and blood colours: an elite class (red blood), a working class (blue blood), and a slave class (clear blood).
Immediately. Sceptical. But what really turned this into eugenics/caste system apologia was a plot element that turned this into a whole “nature vs nurture” thing.
And we were kinda going hard on the nature side??? With castes, inherited races, and slavery. No.
That changed at the end? Maybe? But the change involved too illogical of a plot point to remove any of the “this book is eugenics?!” anger. It just transformed that anger into a “that reveal was nonsense!!” anger.
And I had some other issues:
▪️ a romance plot with someone she called her sibling 🫤 Plus, very out of the blue and cringy sexy times all around
▪️ love a bi love triangle. But this was less of a love triangle, more of a cheating trope (minus any grovel) situation
▪️ didn’t love that the slave class POV was the least centred in the story. I think it was actually because this POV had a lot of information that the author was trying to keep from the reader to manufacture reveals. But the result was that the character had a Mammy from Gone With the Wind vibe—mostly there to facilitate the stories of the non-slave POVs, which I don’t want to read in 2025
▪️ a trial with tasks… and yet I felt nothing
▪️ abrupt “I love you”s from everyone
▪️ clunky world building
▪️ this book was fatphobic and tried to gaslight me about it (forcing Anoor to diet and talking about her eating in almost every interaction while simultaneously lusting after and “celebrating” her curvy body was getting on my last nerve)
For me, this book just didn’t hang together well. So many of these ideas—okay on their own—had terrible emergent properties when combined, if that makes sense.
Potential spoiler for the 20% mark: The main premise of this story is a girl with red blood and a girl with blue blood were switched a birth. You know, [insert nature versus nurture debate here]. And we went with nature?
I wish the “biologically lower class” girl raised with privilege had just had privilege person traits. We should have made her a snooty biatch. I wish she had been like a District One person from The Hunger Games: ruthless, self-important, and unfairly advantaged.
But no. Sure, she was spoiled. But she was also credulous and not particularly strategic, noting like her cut-throat and terrifying aristocratic pretend mother. Moreover, the author took great pains to tell us that she was also inelegant and unrefined. She wanted five layers of ruffles on her dress when the fashion was one. She also—and here’s where the fatphobia comes in—“ate too much” and we scrutinized her eating choices CONSTANTLY. It was giving… ‘you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear’ 🫤 Like, her low class blood showed through, despite all her social advantages.
Our red-blooded heroine raised lower class, by contrast, was highly strategic. She had a twisted sense of honour, sure. But she was so honourable that it often got her in trouble with other blue-bloods. She was scrappy and resourceful (could be from her upbringing, could be innate). She was addicted to a drug and, though characters insisted her addiction was a personal failing, it felt more like a foil to the author’s real point: drug addiction is a social illness of the blue-blooded class that nurtured her, not her personal fault (unlike our other FMC’s interest in fatty foods). She was impulsive, but as the main driver of the plot, her boldness was constantly rewarded.
Within the fantasy world, the kids of the “best” rulers also ended up ruling and there was a hint of “is this nepotism?” (and therefore bad?) cultural critique. But the switched at birth trope snuffed that critique right out. The theme of the first 90% of the book was no, it’s not nepotism—it’s aristocracy-by-birth so pure that blood really does dictate character, even when someone with elite blood is raised in the gutter.
Spoiler for the 90% mark: The ‘everyone is naturally equally magical’ reveal was my least favourite type of reveal, stylistically. I hate that Anoor “always knew she could bloodwerk” and yet, she never had that thought while she was the POV and she was a) wishing she could bloodwerk? b) lamenting the inconvenience of having to use someone else’s blood to bloodwerk? or c) being shocked that the standard ideology about blood hierarchy everyone repeated was false? I call bullshit. If she knew this enormous secret and we were in her head when the topic came up multiple times, she should have thought about this “reveal” WAY earlier than the 90% mark
My specific thoughts on that involve important plot points so I’ll put them behind spoiler tags.
But non-spoiler tldr, this was a very ‘Myth of the Metals’ (you know, from Plato’s Republic) style fantasy setup. Three types of people, three hierarchical roles in society. Except it wasn’t a myth? It involved inherited traits, specifically racial features and blood colours: an elite class (red blood), a working class (blue blood), and a slave class (clear blood).
Immediately. Sceptical. But what really turned this into eugenics/caste system apologia was a plot element that turned this into a whole “nature vs nurture” thing.
And we were kinda going hard on the nature side??? With castes, inherited races, and slavery. No.
That changed at the end? Maybe? But the change involved too illogical of a plot point to remove any of the “this book is eugenics?!” anger. It just transformed that anger into a “that reveal was nonsense!!” anger.
And I had some other issues:
▪️ a romance plot with someone she called her sibling 🫤 Plus, very out of the blue and cringy sexy times all around
▪️ love a bi love triangle. But this was less of a love triangle, more of a cheating trope (minus any grovel) situation
▪️ didn’t love that the slave class POV was the least centred in the story. I think it was actually because this POV had a lot of information that the author was trying to keep from the reader to manufacture reveals. But the result was that the character had a Mammy from Gone With the Wind vibe—mostly there to facilitate the stories of the non-slave POVs, which I don’t want to read in 2025
▪️ a trial with tasks… and yet I felt nothing
▪️ abrupt “I love you”s from everyone
▪️ clunky world building
▪️ this book was fatphobic and tried to gaslight me about it (forcing Anoor to diet and talking about her eating in almost every interaction while simultaneously lusting after and “celebrating” her curvy body was getting on my last nerve)
For me, this book just didn’t hang together well. So many of these ideas—okay on their own—had terrible emergent properties when combined, if that makes sense.
Potential spoiler for the 20% mark:
I wish the “biologically lower class” girl raised with privilege had just had privilege person traits. We should have made her a snooty biatch. I wish she had been like a District One person from The Hunger Games: ruthless, self-important, and unfairly advantaged.
But no. Sure, she was spoiled. But she was also credulous and not particularly strategic, noting like her cut-throat and terrifying aristocratic pretend mother. Moreover, the author took great pains to tell us that she was also inelegant and unrefined. She wanted five layers of ruffles on her dress when the fashion was one. She also—and here’s where the fatphobia comes in—“ate too much” and we scrutinized her eating choices CONSTANTLY. It was giving… ‘you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear’ 🫤 Like, her low class blood showed through, despite all her social advantages.
Our red-blooded heroine raised lower class, by contrast, was highly strategic. She had a twisted sense of honour, sure. But she was so honourable that it often got her in trouble with other blue-bloods. She was scrappy and resourceful (could be from her upbringing, could be innate). She was addicted to a drug and, though characters insisted her addiction was a personal failing, it felt more like a foil to the author’s real point: drug addiction is a social illness of the blue-blooded class that nurtured her, not her personal fault (unlike our other FMC’s interest in fatty foods). She was impulsive, but as the main driver of the plot, her boldness was constantly rewarded.
Within the fantasy world, the kids of the “best” rulers also ended up ruling and there was a hint of “is this nepotism?” (and therefore bad?) cultural critique. But the switched at birth trope snuffed that critique right out. The theme of the first 90% of the book was no, it’s not nepotism—it’s aristocracy-by-birth so pure that blood really does dictate character, even when someone with elite blood is raised in the gutter.
Spoiler for the 90% mark:
Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? by Mark Fisher
reflective
3.0
Is this the most popular Leftwing White Guy™️ book? It might be. Did I think it was just okay? Yup.
This book was all about: capitalist realism. Aka, an ontology where capitalism is everything/everywhere—even protests and our most intimate thoughts are capitalism. Because capitalism isn’t just a system we exist in, it’s literally everything. Ourselves included.
For 2009, this was a great insight. And it definitely makes you think twice about anti-capitalist counterculture movements. I do wonder if capitalism is losing its realist (ontologically everything) quality—but that’s not a problem for this book, really.
There were three things that did made me hesitate, though:
▪️ has capitalism changed?
▪️ WWHS? (what would Hegel say?)
▪️ girl, the Stirner
This book had a very Office Space (1999) movie version of capitalism. And I think the question for the text is: when capitalism evolves, does Fisher’s thesis still hold? Or, to what extent is this book really about “ideological realism”? Which leads me to…
Hegel. You know, that 19th century ‘unity of the unity and difference of the ideal and the real’ ideological realism guy.
👍 points for developing even a limited-ly Hegelian thesis (the realism of capitalism plus the Aufhebung-like way we overturn it through its own internal untenability)
👎 minus points for not mentioning Hegel once (despite quoting people who quote Hegel in their works) and the confusion this lack introduced
Which brings me to Stirner. Fisher argued that the individualism of capitalist realism presupposes the 19th century philosophy of Max Stirner, who he wants to oppose
But this book was ultimately very Stirner-y at its core—individualistic, nihilistic, “union of egoists” vibes. Which was not only in tension with Fisher’s concept of capitalist realism (no one hated Hegel’s ideological realism more than Stirner)…
I also think it just doesn’t work. Take, for example, what Fisher says about Palestine. He argued against the “spectacular politics around (noble) causes like Palestine” in favour of… (the more individualistic) not filling out forms for your boss 🫤 And I think history has proven him wrong here.
This book was all about: capitalist realism. Aka, an ontology where capitalism is everything/everywhere—even protests and our most intimate thoughts are capitalism. Because capitalism isn’t just a system we exist in, it’s literally everything. Ourselves included.
For 2009, this was a great insight. And it definitely makes you think twice about anti-capitalist counterculture movements. I do wonder if capitalism is losing its realist (ontologically everything) quality—but that’s not a problem for this book, really.
There were three things that did made me hesitate, though:
▪️ has capitalism changed?
▪️ WWHS? (what would Hegel say?)
▪️ girl, the Stirner
This book had a very Office Space (1999) movie version of capitalism. And I think the question for the text is: when capitalism evolves, does Fisher’s thesis still hold? Or, to what extent is this book really about “ideological realism”? Which leads me to…
Hegel. You know, that 19th century ‘unity of the unity and difference of the ideal and the real’ ideological realism guy.
👍 points for developing even a limited-ly Hegelian thesis (the realism of capitalism plus the Aufhebung-like way we overturn it through its own internal untenability)
👎 minus points for not mentioning Hegel once (despite quoting people who quote Hegel in their works) and the confusion this lack introduced
Which brings me to Stirner. Fisher argued that the individualism of capitalist realism presupposes the 19th century philosophy of Max Stirner, who he wants to oppose
But this book was ultimately very Stirner-y at its core—individualistic, nihilistic, “union of egoists” vibes. Which was not only in tension with Fisher’s concept of capitalist realism (no one hated Hegel’s ideological realism more than Stirner)…
I also think it just doesn’t work. Take, for example, what Fisher says about Palestine. He argued against the “spectacular politics around (noble) causes like Palestine” in favour of… (the more individualistic) not filling out forms for your boss 🫤 And I think history has proven him wrong here.
Spinning Our Dreams: A Girton Girl's Guide to Fellows in Love by Anne Knight
emotional
fast-paced
- Loveable characters? Yes
5.0
The romance in this novella was great. And the SETTING?? 🥰🥰🥰
Years of pining, they were both in university (yes, her too!), they loved each other’s minds and our guy was so awkward about it. I felt so many feelings about this romance that when they had their first kiss, I cried. And I am not a book crier.
And the setting!! The best historical romance world building I’ve read in a long time. Possibly ever.
Because it was set at Cambridge University at an absolutely bonkers point in its history, the early 1880s. Cambridge fellows like our MMC weren’t allowed to marry (think, priest romance trope), female students like our FMC had to behave like nuns. “Town and Gown” tensions were high, especially since the university had its own private police force and workhouse prison (?!) that would arrest women from the town for even walking near campus—and the town police couldn’t do anything about it.
The book felt simultaneously super sweet and super dangerous. And 0% cartoonish—there was something so human and complicated about the behaviours in this book.
And points for Authors Notes that come with a bibliography, always.