Scan barcode
Reviews tagging 'Child abuse'
The Strange Case of the Alchemist's Daughter by Theodora Goss
10 reviews
danaburrreads's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
funny
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal death and Murder
Moderate: Child abuse and Misogyny
navayiota's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
informative
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
I'm upset with myself for not starting it earlier. What a stunning fantasy period piece, also a retelling of three separate classics. I rarely read blurbs so I was flabbergasted when Sherlock Holmes entered the picture. How smart, and masterfully done. It took me a while to adjust to the writing style as it was difficult to understand what was going on by ear, but after I caught on, I was utterly charmed. I have a few nitpicks, like the fact that in real life, corsetry was a way for women to take back an aspect of their lives and not something they rebelled against. It turns out that the myth was perpetuated by men who found it ridiculous to undermine the women (which worked, since so many people believe that it was constricting. Tight lacing was extremely rare and frowned upon, so there was no reason for Beatrice to be so emphatically against it)
Also, I found the narrator slightly irritating in the way she voiced Beatrice, sometimes pushing her accent too far to the point where it was a bit ridiculous. Other than that, I enjoyed the narration.
Also, I found the narrator slightly irritating in the way she voiced Beatrice, sometimes pushing her accent too far to the point where it was a bit ridiculous. Other than that, I enjoyed the narration.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Abandonment, Death of parent, Grief, Gun violence, Injury/Injury detail, Kidnapping, Murder, Child abuse, Death, Suicidal thoughts, and Toxic relationship
Moderate: Fire/Fire injury, Medical content, and Infidelity
gabi_tron's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder, Death of parent, Child abuse, Animal cruelty, and Violence
greebkit's review against another edition
adventurous
lighthearted
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
I picked up the book because I felt the premise could be interesting. Essentially the daughters of Dr. Jekyll, Mr. Hyde, Dr. Rappaccini, Dr. Frankenstein, and Dr. Moreau find each other and team up to investigate a mysterious Alchemist Society that is specifically experimenting on girls, even their own daughters (them), to further science. However, the Whitechapel/Jack the Ripper murders are thrown in as are Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson plus other literary and real characters that make it a bit of a mess. It doesn't help that the author chose to interject dialogue from the characters commenting on what was going on in the main story as if reading over the writer's shoulder to add comic relief to tense moments. I don't think it added anything to the story and actually detracted from it. It felt like a clumsy way to write from different points of views when it was clearly possible to just announce X chapter was Character Y's POV as she sometimes did.
What was genuinely confusing to me is that Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein, is mentioned repeatedly for her novel and frequently blamed for changing the "facts," but Robert Louis Stevenson, author of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, H.G. Wells, author of the Island of Doctor Moreau, and Nathaniel Hawthorne, author of Rappaccini's Daughter, are not real in this world. I believe it's because Frankenstein is the only one with a female author, but, if so, she gets a lot of flack for "misrepresenting" the events of Frankenstein. Only at the end is Mary Shelley given some grace for possibly intending to protect Frankenstein's daughter by pretending she was destroyed, but that makes no sense in the context of the book's events because the one Ms. Frankenstein is hiding from knows that Dr. Frankenstein didn't destroy her.
The other confusing thing to me is the inclusion of Sherlock Holmes mainly because his depiction is reduced to having a crush on the main character with little else except to provide several deus ex machina for the story. He seems to be in the story solely to send the main characters to investigate for him. This story might have been interesting if it had been a more accurate depiction. I am mainly thinking of Sherlock Holmes, the skeptic of the supernatural, being forced to reckon with supernatural characters, Frankenstein, a Jaguar Woman, the original Poison Ivy, etc.
I also didn't like that a nasty person was allowed to escape from repurcussions for no reason. The nun in charge of St. Magdalen's for some reason is allowed to continue despite literally selling girls to their deaths. They know she did it. They know where she is, but all the main characters just dismiss her saying they'll keep an eye on her. That's it? Really? It was just annoying. At least Mr. Hyde escaped.
It could have been interesting, but, on the whole, the book felt messy. Like a bunch of stuff was thrown together and meant to be an adventure but was instead just a mess. That being said, I was able to read it through, but I have no intention to read the next book.
What was genuinely confusing to me is that Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein, is mentioned repeatedly for her novel and frequently blamed for changing the "facts," but Robert Louis Stevenson, author of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, H.G. Wells, author of the Island of Doctor Moreau, and Nathaniel Hawthorne, author of Rappaccini's Daughter, are not real in this world. I believe it's because Frankenstein is the only one with a female author, but, if so, she gets a lot of flack for "misrepresenting" the events of Frankenstein. Only at the end
The other confusing thing to me is the inclusion of Sherlock Holmes mainly because his depiction is reduced to having a crush on the main character with little else except to provide several deus ex machina for the story. He seems to be in the story solely to send the main characters to investigate for him. This story might have been interesting if it had been a more accurate depiction. I am mainly thinking of Sherlock Holmes, the skeptic of the supernatural, being forced to reckon with supernatural characters, Frankenstein, a Jaguar Woman, the original Poison Ivy, etc.
I also didn't like that a nasty person was allowed to escape from repurcussions for no reason.
It could have been interesting, but, on the whole, the book felt messy. Like a bunch of stuff was thrown together and meant to be an adventure but was instead just a mess. That being said, I was able to read it through, but I have no intention to read the next book.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Self harm and Child abuse
clarabooksit's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
Content Warnings
Moderate: Murder, Violence, Death, Animal cruelty, Sexism, Misogyny, Toxic relationship, Injury/Injury detail, Grief, Fire/Fire injury, Death of parent, Confinement, and Child abuse
Minor: Infertility
sorcha_rosa's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.0
This book contains so much ableism is was really hard to read. It is actively harmful, and no one seems to be talking about it.
Also, it is racist. There were only two (that I spotted) accounts of racism, compared to the dozens of accounts of ableism, however, it was no less harmful. I understand they're Victorian, but you cannot use this as an excuse for the author to be a bigot.
Also, it is racist. There were only two (that I spotted) accounts of racism, compared to the dozens of accounts of ableism, however, it was no less harmful. I understand they're Victorian, but you cannot use this as an excuse for the author to be a bigot.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Racial slurs, Ableism, Child abuse, Trafficking, and Racism
shoshin's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
I just loved this book. The characters were compelling, the story was intriguing, and the prose was pitch perfect for what it was going for. I listened to it without realizing it was a YA book, and started gushingly recommending it to other people who turned up their noses because it's a YA book. Their loss.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Confinement, Child abuse, and Sexism
rrovezzi's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
hopeful
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child abuse and Death of parent
beholderess's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
hopeful
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
4.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Animal cruelty, Animal death, Child abuse, Cursing, Death of parent, Kidnapping, and Sexism
typedtruths's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
funny
mysterious
slow-paced
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.25
quick thoughts:
the moment riley marie talked about this book in her vlog, i knew it was going to be a new favourite of mine too.
PROS
• fun. i read this, mostly, during my state's first proper lockdown and it was a breath of fresh air.
• found family. i sound like a broken record at this point but found family is my favourite trope. there's nothing quite like a ragtag group of misfits finding each other and making a home where they can all be their unabashed selves.
• the writing style. the book itself is written like the girls are writing an account of their adventures. catherine, a novelist, is in charge but the other characters write in the margins & interrupt when they think catherine is romanticising a certain moment or interject to say, 'no, i wasn't *scared* then, i don't get scared' or 'i was not blushing! the sun had gotten to my cheeks'. it adds this whole other layer to the story, and the banter? top notch.
• the whole cast. it is rare that i don't have a favourite narrator in a book with multiple perspectives, but the entire cast was delightful. i loved the whole crew, down to charlie & mrs poole.
• girl fighting their abusive fathers. a squad of women that society has snubbed overcoming systemic obstacles to band together and save other women from their abusive fathers? hell yeah.
• sherlock. i'm basic. i love me a sherlock retelling 🤷
CONS
• the pacing. it was a tiny bit on the dense side. i know a lot of historical fiction favour a slower pace (which i actually like), but it did stagnate a little in the middle.
• the "time-period appropriate" -ism. again, i know historical fiction tends to be as accurate to the era as possible, but i can't deny it is extremely difficult to read blatant ableism, racism & misogyny regardless. there is a fair amount of ableism and sex worker shaming as well as two downright racist sentences (as quoted below) which easily could have been edited out.
the racist comments on pages 199 & 347 respectively (in my edition):
the moment riley marie talked about this book in her vlog, i knew it was going to be a new favourite of mine too.
PROS
• fun. i read this, mostly, during my state's first proper lockdown and it was a breath of fresh air.
• found family. i sound like a broken record at this point but found family is my favourite trope. there's nothing quite like a ragtag group of misfits finding each other and making a home where they can all be their unabashed selves.
• the writing style. the book itself is written like the girls are writing an account of their adventures. catherine, a novelist, is in charge but the other characters write in the margins & interrupt when they think catherine is romanticising a certain moment or interject to say, 'no, i wasn't *scared* then, i don't get scared' or 'i was not blushing! the sun had gotten to my cheeks'. it adds this whole other layer to the story, and the banter? top notch.
• the whole cast. it is rare that i don't have a favourite narrator in a book with multiple perspectives, but the entire cast was delightful. i loved the whole crew, down to charlie & mrs poole.
• girl fighting their abusive fathers. a squad of women that society has snubbed overcoming systemic obstacles to band together and save other women from their abusive fathers? hell yeah.
• sherlock. i'm basic. i love me a sherlock retelling 🤷
CONS
• the pacing. it was a tiny bit on the dense side. i know a lot of historical fiction favour a slower pace (which i actually like), but it did stagnate a little in the middle.
• the "time-period appropriate" -ism. again, i know historical fiction tends to be as accurate to the era as possible, but i can't deny it is extremely difficult to read blatant ableism, racism & misogyny regardless. there is a fair amount of ableism and sex worker shaming as well as two downright racist sentences (as quoted below) which easily could have been edited out.
the racist comments on pages 199 & 347 respectively (in my edition):
"To those readers who are not familiar with London, who may be reading this in the wilds of America, where we hear there are bears and savages, or in the wilds of Australia, where there are also savages but no bears (unless, adds Justine, they are marsupial bears), the problem that now presented itself to Catherine and Diana was as follows."
and
"And he was excited: he had finally decided that we would go to Africa. With our superior strength, we could traverse jungles and desert that made the interior of the continent dangerous for white men. We would see what no European had ever seen. Surely the rude savages would worship us as gods."
➸ Trigger warnings for
Blog • Trigger Warning Database • Twitter • Instagram
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death
Moderate: Ableism, Body horror, Blood, Child abuse, Confinement, Gore, Grief, Gun violence, Kidnapping, Medical trauma, Misogyny, and Violence
Minor: Suicidal thoughts, Suicide, and Racism
misogyny, ableism & ableist language, sex worker shaming & slurs, underage sex work recounted, domestic abuse mentioned, psychiatric hospitalisation, the suicide of a parent mentioned, suicide & suicidal ideation mentioned, alcohol consumption, pregnancy & teen pregnancy mentioned, graphic dead body & body parts, blood & gore depiction, physical injuries & illness, nonconsensual surgery mentioned, dismemberment and decapitation discussed, nonconsensual medical experimentation (central theme), death of father & mother, death of an infant recounted, murder & attempted murder (multiple on-page & recounted), strangulation, poisoning, kidnapping & confinement, animal experimentation (off-page), animal death, and poverty themes
More...