![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The City and the City: Novel Review
Apr. 10th, 2011 10:26 pmA brief review of China Miéville's The City and the City.
Summary:
In a fictional setting within present day Eastern Europe, two countries simultaneously occupy the same city by intricately mapping out which country owns which regions (some are shared) and acculturating their citizens from birth to "unsee" the other city. When a murder leads inspector Borlú to suspect involvement spanning both cities, international relations and his life become complicated and a complex plot (both literarily and sociopolitically) begins to unfold.
Review: Not Very Spoilery
The Good:
The conceptualization of the two cities is awesome, wonderful world building in the SF sense, as well as a wonderful sense (as far as I dare claim as an American) of present day Eastern Europe. Miéville shows sensitive attention to how cultures are constructed, and while I doubt that such a dual city could actually have evolved to the extreme he presents, he presents it as plausibly as anyone could and with a lot of echoes of the subtler "unseeing" we all do every day to avoid engaging with other classes, ethnicities, whatever.
Borlú is a thoroughly enjoyable character: smart and nicely idiosyncratic, while still an ordinary citizen of his country struggling in circumstances beyond his ken. Other characters are less developed but consistently not annoying, which is a high compliment from the easily annoyed me.
The plot is intricate and well handled with many twists that are both unexpected and entirely plausible and well motivated: an excellent mystery plot.
The Less Good
This book is first and foremost a mystery, and as with most mysteries, once you've figured out the mystery, most of the reason for reading is over. For me, this means I won't read the book again for a very long time. Like most detective literature, too, the book subordinates character to plot, which means, again, that, the mystery being solved, there's not much left to engage with. The characters are good but not deep. The cities are interesting, but without characters to explore them with (the mystery having been solved), their just a setting without a story. This is why I have so little to say about the book. It's a good read, but when it's over, it's pretty over.
(Note: In writing this review, I found myself repeatedly writing "cities" and then referring to them as "it" and having to correct to "them." Make of that what you will.)
Summary:
In a fictional setting within present day Eastern Europe, two countries simultaneously occupy the same city by intricately mapping out which country owns which regions (some are shared) and acculturating their citizens from birth to "unsee" the other city. When a murder leads inspector Borlú to suspect involvement spanning both cities, international relations and his life become complicated and a complex plot (both literarily and sociopolitically) begins to unfold.
Review: Not Very Spoilery
The Good:
The conceptualization of the two cities is awesome, wonderful world building in the SF sense, as well as a wonderful sense (as far as I dare claim as an American) of present day Eastern Europe. Miéville shows sensitive attention to how cultures are constructed, and while I doubt that such a dual city could actually have evolved to the extreme he presents, he presents it as plausibly as anyone could and with a lot of echoes of the subtler "unseeing" we all do every day to avoid engaging with other classes, ethnicities, whatever.
Borlú is a thoroughly enjoyable character: smart and nicely idiosyncratic, while still an ordinary citizen of his country struggling in circumstances beyond his ken. Other characters are less developed but consistently not annoying, which is a high compliment from the easily annoyed me.
The plot is intricate and well handled with many twists that are both unexpected and entirely plausible and well motivated: an excellent mystery plot.
The Less Good
This book is first and foremost a mystery, and as with most mysteries, once you've figured out the mystery, most of the reason for reading is over. For me, this means I won't read the book again for a very long time. Like most detective literature, too, the book subordinates character to plot, which means, again, that, the mystery being solved, there's not much left to engage with. The characters are good but not deep. The cities are interesting, but without characters to explore them with (the mystery having been solved), their just a setting without a story. This is why I have so little to say about the book. It's a good read, but when it's over, it's pretty over.
(Note: In writing this review, I found myself repeatedly writing "cities" and then referring to them as "it" and having to correct to "them." Make of that what you will.)
