BLACK GIRL MAGIC, actually! This book put such an elegant twist to mythology in terms of race I LOVED it—set in a mysterious large mansion, with a gardenful of fascinating poisonous plants, and intriguing small town drama. The non-white- and non-male-centric storytelling was so, so powerful. The vibe was a combination of Netflix's The Haunting of Bly Manor and The Lie Tree by Frances Hardinge, but written in contemporary YA style. The premise and diversity combined is GOLD and absolutely unlike anything I’ve ever read before.

I think the tone might have actually been my least favourite part—I may just have grown out of YA somewhat, but I feel that having a more complex voice may have increased the depth of the plot and characters for me. I liked it in These Witches Don’t Burn by Isabel Sterling, but I feel like the classical content in this story would have fit better with a less light-hearted tone. I also kind of wish it were a standalone; I don’t feel a HUGE urge to read a whole other book of this (again, this is different from how I felt with the These Witches duology), but that might be just a mood thing. The romance was basically insta-love which I am generally not a big fan of, but I am curious to know how it develops.

That’s all from me! Would highly recommend!

Starstruck: A Memoir of Astrophysics and Finding Light in the Dark by Sarafina El-Badry Nance

Go to review page

dark emotional hopeful informative inspiring reflective sad tense slow-paced

4.5

I was especially excited to pick this up because Sarafina Nance is a fellow UT Physics and Astronomy alum, and I love reading physics and astronomy books by women!

It has some basic astro content, but is mostly about being Egyptian-American, growing up with anxiety and complicated family, domestic abuse, her dad's cancer, and being a breast cancer previvor by getting a double mastectomy at a young age. She touches on her astro career throughout the book. While it’s not the quickest read, I'm really glad I picked it up!

I felt some dust in my eyes everytime Nance talked about how Egypt is just different and more joyous and vibrant compared to the cold, lonely US. She discusses the emotional impact of having major parts of your culture and family in another continent facing political upheavals, plus the emotional mother/daughter gap when you're second gen with the generational trauma that is passed on. It was sad to hear about how Nance had several kinds of slurs thrown at her as a kid in Austin, Texas, because of her ethnically ambiguous features. The talk about curly hair amidst Eurocentric beauty standards hit close to home.

Here, I only wish she were more explicit about her religious background, especially considering she talks about going to a heavily christian-oriented school and then transferring happily to a more secular one—It’s not fully clear to me whether her mom’s side of the family is Muslim, or what she personally identifies as. It’s not information she owes to readers, of course, but I think it would have added important context.

Throughout the book, we pick up clues about Nance's psyche, how her parents kept her on a strict schedule and implied their love was conditional on her success, or that her academic success was holding the family together. Her parents' marriage was terribly rocky, and the subsequent divorce was painfully drawn out. My heart goes out to the younger Nance, especially knowing that she's an only child. It must have been an immense burden to carry.

We watch Nance develop anxiety and workaholism and learn to identity and overcome it. By the end, we watch her dad grow out of his past worldview, too. She has mentioned recently on her public social media that her mom cut off communication and chose not to attend her wedding after this book came out, which is truly devastating.

I wasn’t expecting to read about an abusive college boyfriend that weaponises his own Arab ethnicity as an excuse for his misoginy, but that section, and watching how the impact of the relationship effects Nance for the rest of her life with PTSD, packs a real punch. The narrative is written really well—You can tell why Nance made misguided choices based on how she was raised. I loved how Nance connected the influence of controlling male partners to very direct barriers women in STEM face.

Throughout the book, she cites several other examples of misogyny in astro/physics academia. Fortunately, Nance’s privileges in terms of career opportunities and mental healthcare from a young age largely overshadows these setbacks. In the first third of the book, I found myself wishing the simplistic sections about her childhood were made more condensed (whilst retaining their point). As it is, “Part I: Origins” would perhaps appeal to and inspire young girls, while the other two parts are darker and cover slightly more mature themes.

I want to clarify here, just because she grew up privileged in some ways doesn’t negate the value or significance of her experiences—not at all. In fact, I wish there were more successful women of colour in astro/physics that have faced little to no bigotry or barriers. I don't think someone's story is made “less interesting” because it was free of suffering. We certainly don't have that standard towards books written by cisheterosexual white men. But considering the wide array of past and current WoC experiences in astro/physics, I did find myself greatly wishing for more social data in the book, so that her personal narrative would perhaps fits into a bigger picture.

Now, onto the astrophysics! … Sadly, I didn't find the science communication very engaging, detailed, or ... well-written, really. The paragraphs felt rushed and summarized, like passages from a kids’ encyclopedia. The chronology about stars, planets, and the universe was a bit all over the place.

I definitely saw the goal—Nance wants us to see how the optimistic nihilism astronomy provides has been a comfort and a guiding light in her life. And so every chapter begins with astronomical or cosmological nuggets and then cuts off to continue her personal memoir—and in theory that sounds really cool. And perhaps my own expectations were just misplaced; I expected it to have more science-for-laymen bits, like a lot of other combined memoir/sci-com books by women. Regardless, her execution just … doesn't land—the explanations are so generalized that I really can't tell what specifically about astrophysics research she's really passionate about as a scientist, how specifically the math in her physics classes she worked so hard for have been tools for astronomy. I can’t help but think that if I were a laymen who didn’t know how math fits into physics and physics fits into astronomy, this book wouldn’t have left me any wiser. If you ask me about the day in the life of an astrophysicist, I … still don’t know. It’s mentioned that that they go to classes, do math, code, and present research—but the real technicality of astrophysics is left as ambiguous as ever. And beyond her statements about the nihilism, the book doesn't try too hard to dissect and show us her feelings and perspectives to that end.

And I think during the beginning of the book, I just couldn't “see the vision”, as they say. I felt like I was reading about a kid with regular (albeit rough and unfair) struggles and typical (though admirably ambitious) dreams. But I very much saw the real goal of the book by the end, after I had flown through the latter two thirds.

Sometimes a child grows up in a moderately stable, loving, privileged home, and expects their life is going to be “normal”. They'll go to college, maybe grad school, find a job, find a partner and start their own family perhaps, take care of their parents in their old age.

But then they end up experiencing something completely different, unprecedented events that feel bigger than their life should have been. My understanding of this book is that Nance's personal profound experience was her dad's cancer—and her own following preventative double mastectomy—which she had to go through as a very young adult.

She was 23 before the epilogue, my age right now. While many parts of her life are completely different from mine, her crippling fear of death, her need for a support system, her attachment to the familiarity of her body, and her unease towards medical decisions and environments were extremely relatable. These are universal feelings, for most young women.

When shit hits the fan (and/or miracles happen) like that and turn your entire world turns upside down, it makes you contemplate every step of the wild ride that has been your life to lead you to this moment. (In her author’s note, Nance says that this book started as a cathartic personal project.) You realise you have a unique story, one that’s worth telling.

I’m glad Nance was able to tell hers.

A solid 4.5 stars, and so glad I picked up a signed copy at BookPeople during the Texas Book Fest! Highly recommended!

Love, Theoretically by Ali Hazelwood

Go to review page

emotional funny hopeful informative inspiring lighthearted relaxing medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

FIRST, A QUICK ROMANCE NOVEL REVIEW!

spoiler: it wasn’t my favorite but I gave it a ⭐️⭐️⭐️.75 because being a writer has made me a generally more appreciative reader + I am so starved of woman in physics rep.

the good

It just felt good to read about a woman physicist, who are still incredibly underrepresented in fiction, especially as protagonists. (I’ll go off about that in a minute.)
The romance is so swoony with shoujo manga vibes, I haven’t read straight M/F adult romance novels in a while and I just loved the flutteriness of it.
A couple of chapters were so soft with excellent pillowtalk. There was something about the ambience of the snow, the hypnotic sadness of failure, the prescence of a comforting person.
I enjoyed identifying the relatable parts about physics academia. Hazelwood clearly did a lot of research, and I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. It definitely kept me reading!

the bad

The academia issues are so over-simplified it’s almost juvenile. For an adult novel, even one marketed as a romcom, I expect more nuance, more explanations, more explicit lingering in tight positions.
And then the romance tries to be complex (and has a lot of potential!) but not a lot of conflict really happens.
A fictional physics fued between theorists and experimentalists is a really fun (and actually not far off) concept, but I would have expected some things to be the other way around. (More on that later!)
Okay this is personal but the main couple both have terrible taste in movies. Twilight vs white male rage movies??? There is no lesser evil here
Elsie’s hardships aren’t put in a very serious light. Her diabetes and lack of access to health insurance is used as a plot device to engineer romantic momentum between the characters and/or comic relief.
Just overall, the book tried so hard to remain “light” that I think it fails to garner depth. Because adult lives really aren’t that light all the time, and a book can bring relaxation and joy whilst including real worldly negative experiences.
There were aroace and sapphic side characters, but I wanted so bad for Elsie to be demisexual. It’s set up so perfectly only for it to be averted—As a demisexual person myself, Elsie’s feelings about attraction felt acutely familiar to me, and every other reader I’ve spoken to has agreed that the book took a dissapointing and unexpected turn. I understand Hazelwood may not feel equipped to write queer protagonists but if I were her editor, I would have flagged that and recommended she make it canon. It would have added so much more context and dimension to Elsie, and would’ve put hetero demisexuals on the map. </3
Following up on the above: The smut tries so hard to be meaningful but it … really is icky, stereotypical, unrealistic allocishetero stuff. Think: the shy inexperienced girl vs the man who knows exactly how to advise her. The characters try to subvert the trope by calling it out, but it feels performative because all is forgotten in the next second. The PiV sex is weirdly conventionally idealistic considering the pairing’s size difference. I’m picky about smut but also forgiving when I do like the dynamic. I just didn’t here.
Following up once again: I was ready to ignore all the repetitive comments about how sexy Jack’s height and muscles were, because sure, I guess Elsie has a type. But the sex scenes solidified the redundancy of it all. I’ve read this same dynamic in countless smutty heteronormative M/F paperbacks. And I have also been made aware by every Hazelwood reader that all her books focus on this kind of physical build pairing. I just want more diversity, you know?
IDK, I just wanted more physics in here than complaining about teaching, glossed over toxic mentors, and using some quirky physics term in every other sentence. (More on that below!)
I just wanted … more? It’s not an extremely short novel, but both the plot and the character development fell flat. The ups and downs were too fast and easy, and the placement felt off. I finished the book and wondered, “That’s it? That’s all that happened?” It just wasn’t fulfilling. The side characters aren’t expanded upon, and don’t get enough pagetime. My other romance reads this year were Bellefleur’s The Fiancee Farce and Mcquiston’s One Last Stop. In both of those novels, the drama was fleshed out with so much care and detail. In comparison, Love, Theoretically may mention similar social difficulties in passing, but failed to really, really show us.

Overall … the novel was fun for being about physicists but I really don’t see myself picking up another Hazelwood book, especially considering this isn’t even a debut novel. The conventional white steminist vibe and the particular allocishetero M/F dynamic just isn’t my thing.

But perhaps a reader wanting more of a novel and its characters is a good problem to have. Never say never, I guess! I look forward to keeping tabs on what Hazelwood publishes in the future!

NOW, ONTO THE PHYSICS!

First, most physicists, as good scientists, understand that theory and experimentation are fundamentally linked. It’s true that we each are often biased towards our own methods of research, but it is quite a stretch to imagine full professors so blatantly feud against others solely because of theory vs experimentation. Regardless, I was happy to suspend my disbelief for the sake of the plot that was framed in a genre-specific, lighthearted, humorous way.

Secondly, both theory and experimentation have sources of funding that are motivated in different ways, and Hazelwood’s decision to have the theorists struggle with funding cuts due to declining interest in pop culture/the general public is actually quite credible. Experimentation garners a lot more interest from the application and engineering end of society, parts that are easily fueled by capitalism.

However, I think experimentalists in general are far less likely to be mean to theorists than the reverse scenario. Dr Fatima Abdurrahman has a great video essay about that called on her YouTube channel called “Quantum Physics, Feminism, and Objective Reality: What Physicists Don’t Want You to Know About Quantum Mechanics.” Dr Fatima outlines how old white men in physics have maintained this image of unwavering scientific objectivity in the name of rigor, despite studying a field that fundamentally is barely fathomable for humans. In simpler terms: Men, even in theory, pretend to be better, smarter, and more valid as physicists despite being in an infamously iffy field. And I would have liked to see that represented. It was just really hard for me to buy narcissistic grad students mansplaining Elsie about her field, and Elsie’s righteous feminine rage, when the field in question is … physics theory? It just didn’t make sense to me, when all of my personal experiences point to the opposite.

But every cloud has a silver lining, and having a woman theorist in a physics field that’s less popsci-oriented is actually … really cool. And having her love interest be a man in experimentation … sort of subverts gender roles and conventional media expectations.

Let me explain. The reality is that when women are represented in STEM, media prefers to put them in biology, like a nurse to a doctor, a people-oriented nurturer, a mere sidekick to the real “objective” scientist—often a mathematician or an astrophysicist who is always a man. And when women are placed in physics, they are automatically assigned to observational astronomy, which is dismissed as passive and easy. (This is wildly untrue—though styles of research in astronomy has interestingly allowed a somewhat more diverse array of researchers in history. Even today, you’ll see a higher frequency of women and queer people in every astronomy department.)

I think my ideal version of this novel would be retaining Elsie in theory, while also making theorists the overall bad guys in the feud. I would love to have her talk about the unique sexism she faces as a theorist. I would kill for a scene in which Jack gets gobsmacked by how fucking good at math she really is, compared to him (instead of, like, only making fun of it like it’s easy). I would love to read about her getting a tour of his lab, and just more physics content. But maybe I’m the only one saying that, because I’m a physicist. Maybe Hazelwood simplified it all to keep the book appealing to the general masses.

Still, it all read more like a girlpower!!! chant rather than a real commitment to represent a woman in STEM. I savored every moment Elsie or George would go off about physics. I loved Elsie’s conversations with Olive, a different STEM academic. (Monica was more complicated and actually quite interesting, and I wish we could have seen more of her. Heck, I wish we had actually been given any tangible info about Jack’s mom, even.) But I genuinely felt these instances were rare. Elsie referred to being a physicist a lot (and frankly, her mind is more physics-y than any IRL physicist considering the sheer number of physics-inspired figures of speech she uses … but I excused that as silly comic relief, a quirk in Hazelwood’s writing style). But she didn’t tangibly do physics on page. It was disappointing, considering women characters in STEM is what Hazelwood is known for.

And there are physicists who love teaching—even physicists who solely want to teach. Physicists who do pedagogy research. I know the book was mainly trying to criticise the adjunctification and dismissal of physics higher education, and it’s actually quite accurate in representing that most physicists in academia would prefer not to teach. But the excecution also ends up erasing physicists who aren’t in academia just for research. And I say this especially because the validity of teaching physicists as physicists is dismissed in real life. It’s used as justification to further force all physics academics to try to juggle between both research and teaching, whether they want to or not.

Which leads us to bad mentors. I’ve had a bunch of those. As Olive pointed out in an excellent quote, “Academia is so hierarchical, you know? There are all these people who have power over you, who are supposed to guide you and help you become the best possible scientist, but . . . sometimes they don’t know what’s best. Sometimes they don’t care. Sometimes they have their own agenda. […] Sometimes they’re total shitbuckets who deserve to step on a pitchfork and die.” And the thing is, the novel really doesn’t show us any of that (perhaps other than in Monica). We don’t fully get to know what happened to Jack’s mom, or Olive. We are not shown what Dr L’s agenda really was. Their final confrontation was so quick and anticlimactic despite all the build-up, when in reality shitty mentors are often sticky and entwined with your work, hard to cut off and scarier to talk back to even after you’ve finally realized they’re toxic.

Which isn’t to say the novel is just inadequate about everything. It’s correct in how goofy physics faculty are, and how white man-dominated the field is, how students try to mansplain women profs, how theorists madly work on their computers (as an experimentalist, I could never understand), how publishing is finicky (to put it kindly), and how tenured faculty fail to understand the reality of the job market in academia today. There are certain parts (like the quote above!) where I felt incredibly seen as part of a minoritized identity group in STEM academia. It’s rare to have a book written from this PoV, and as a first I think this novel will always be special for me!

If you’re interested in reading about more fictional women physicists, I would highly recommend skimming through this list I made on GoodReads (and feel free to add more!).

And if you’d like to support memoirs and science communication books by IRL women physicists, then look to further than this other list I’ve also made. (We’re actually currently seeing a boom in these which is inanely exciting to me, so again, contributions are always welcome!)

More...

kumishona's reviews 439 reviews

kumishona's reviews
439 reviews