Tildes Book Club Discussion - The City We Became by N K Jemisin
This is the ninth of an ongoing series of book discussions here on Tildes. We are discussing The City We Became by N K Jemisin. Our next book will be Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson at the end of January.
I don't have a particular format in mind for this discussion, but I will post some prompts and questions as comments to get things started. You're not obligated to respond to them or vote on them though. So feel free to make your own top-level comment for whatever you wish to discuss, questions you have of others, or even just to post a review of the book you have written yourself.
For latecomers, don't worry if you didn't read the book in time for this Discussion topic. You can always join in once you finish it. Tildes Activity sort, and "Collapse old comments" feature should keep the topic going for as long as people are still replying.
And for anyone uninterested in this topic please use the Ignore Topic feature on this so it doesn't keep popping up in your Activity sort, since it's likely to keep doing that while I set this discussion up, and once people start joining in.
Ping @maximum_bake, @RheingoldRiver, @carsonc, @kwyjibo, @syllo, @kfwyre, @PnkNBlck71817, @rosco, @first-must-burn, @CannibalisticApple, @public, @DefinitelyNotAFae, @Melvincible, @slothywaffle, @Bifrost51, @skybrian @Sodliddesu, @azaadi @fraughtGYRE @Nsutdwa @PnkNBlck71817 @chocobean @lackofaname, @OnlyGhosts @csos95 @Wes, @cfabbro, @georgeboff @Everdoor, @zorind @Palimpsest @CrazyProfessor02 @maevens @cdb @OceanBreezy @joshs, @pekt, @jawedzebra @Schnupfenheld , @davek804, @elight, @Captain_calico @hexagonsun @CharlieBeans @pu1pfriction @Lonan @DialecticCake @kej @LazarWolf @eyechoirs @Thales, @Idalium
@Rudism @crespyl @rsl12 @thermopesos @archevel, @611828750722
@Shevanel , @crialpaca @Weldawadyathink,@blivet ,@syllo, @lhamil64, @tanglisha, @requirement
I didn’t actually read this book for book club this month, but I have read it and I love that it was the book of the month! I’ve read every N. K. Jemisin novel aside from this book’s sequel, The World We Make, and the second Dreamblood book, The Shadowed Sun.
This book felt pretty ambitious to me; it was a lot to take on from a character perspective, and I feel like Jemisin’s characters are where she shines brightest. Overall, in my opinion the bar was pretty high for Jemisin’s work (The Broken Earth is maybe my favorite book series), and I think this one fell a little flat in comparison. It was still a very fun read, and it won some points from me for sheer novelty.
The Broken Earth is so good and is probably my favorite besides her short story collection. I think the pandemic hurt the sequel to this book whether directly or through the malaise that comes from it. She hasn't released a book for a few years so I wonder if she's working on a larger project or taking a break or both.
Thanks for sharing your perspective and insight. Are you interested in reading more books with us, or was this just a fortunate coincidence that we chose one you had read?
If you were going to suggest a jemisin book or short series, which one would you choose as an introduction to her work?
I actually just finished reading twelve Mark Lawrence books in a row, and could use something new, and I’m always looking for new books, so I think I will in fact join you all for the next one! Ministry for the Future?
I think it depends a little bit on who I’m recommending to! Inheritance is maybe a bit lighter and more approachable than The Broken Earth. It’s much more fantastical, and has more religious elements, and more romance. The Broken Earth is grim throughout, but the story is outstanding and the characters are heartbreaking.
Yes, Ministry for the future, end of January.
Well, I suppose it's time to face the music. I'm still only about 45% of the way through this one. I started late last month and just couldn't find the time to put aside for it. So I'm going to skip reading the discussion prompts and other comments for right now, and I'll revisit them once I've finished the book in a week or two (hopefully).
I will share some early thoughts, though to be completely honest I still have little understanding of this story at this point.
It's pretty clear to me that the manifestations of the city into avatars are meant to be a metaphor. What they represent, I'm not entirely sure. At first I thought it was as simple as distilling the stereotypes and culture of these microcosms into something more tangible to be able to make commentary with. Manny's violent past, Bronca's creativity. That seems to be what the author is telling us, at least.
Somehow though, that feels a little too shallow. So I began to wonder if the author was making the opposite point, that you can't distill something as complex as a city or borough into a single personality, and everybody is an individual. Maybe these are examples of why it simply doesn't work to generalize in this way, because you only create caricatures in your mind. You end up with characters like Aislyn, who seem to be defined entirely through sheltered bigotry.
Or, maybe it's an argument for taking action. A belief that a city holds power in its people, and so action of course must come from the individuals within. A reminder that any of us can act to affect change, if we really want to, and that's what defines the city (and not the other way around).
Honestly, I don't know. I probably just need to read further to refine these ideas, because I'm working on incomplete data.
I feel I may also be missing a little context as a non-American, because I really don't know much about New York or its culture. I've needed occasional reminders as to what the different boroughs are all about. Thankfully, the story recognizes this and gives us Manny the amnesiac, a blank slate to stand-in for the audience. We learn as he learns, and other characters begrudgingly explain things to him as he goes along. It's an old trope, but a welcome one here. And it's a little amusing to me that Manny is acting as an avatar for both Manhattan and the reader.
Anyway, I'm finally through the character introductions and the book is starting to pick up for me now. It's still very abstract in its ideas, and I'm a bit more of a literal thinker, so I'm trying not to focus too much on the details. The antagonist is just "the evil lady" so far. Why is she evil? I don't know, and it may not matter. She may just be playing a necessarily role in this story to put the events into motion. I'd like to see things like the multiverse plotline explained, but again that may just be the backdrop, and unimportant to the real story being told.
I hope that by the end I'll better understand. Or that some of you fine folks will be able to explain it to me in simple terms. :)
Sorry for coming up a little short; I feel like I'm handing in incomplete homework. But I wanted to get something in at least. I hope everyone else has enjoyed the read, and has a wonderful break during December!
I’ve done worse than you - I meant to read it during my flights this past week, but I spent the time sleeping on the plane instead. I only made it through the introduction chapter about Staten Island!
I am enjoying it so far, but will have to see when I have the time to pick it back up.
Okay, I've finished now!
To be completely honest, I had a hard time getting through this one. Usually I reach a point in a book where I feel completely invested and my pace picks up, but that never happened here. The story just didn't sink its hooks into me. Or perhaps I should say that it never placed its tendrils on me. When returning this one to the library, I saw I had just 20 minutes left on my return deadline. Cutting it very close!
I wrote earlier that this story feels very abstract, and one that leans heavily on metaphor. I still feel there is metaphor lying just beneath the surface, but it seemed to give way to the foreground story more in the second half. The vague descriptions and illusions solidified into more concrete explanations and mechanical breakdowns. This made things easier to digest, though it also became more clear that the narrative being told just didn't jibe much with me.
At its heart, this does feel like a book written for New Yorkers. Despite the author making some efforts to explain things, it's difficult to communicate the significance of a certain bridge or building if you aren't already familiar. It felt like great import was placed even on random roads like "the FDR", despite meaning nothing to me. As a non-New Yorker, or maybe as a non-American, I wasn't able to come in with the full context that this book seems to expect of the reader.
There were still themes I could pick up on. Some were very blunt, like the anti-racism messaging. Others were a little more subtle, like being willing to offer forgiveness (as in the case of Brooklyn's offensive song lyrics). Some messaging though felt almost contradictory, and I'm not sure where exactly the author was going with it.
As one example, our heroes make comments throughout their adventure about specific ways in which cities can grow and change. Gentrification, condos, and Starbucks are typically vilified (at one point quite literally). Older culture though is revered: beautiful brownstone homes, smaller shops and bodegas, and anything quintessentially "New York".
At other points in the story though, the author talks about growth being a critical feature of cities. The merging together of cultures, ideas, even culinary techniques. That we learn best from each other. That is ostensibly where cities derive their power, and the ability to awaken.
It all sounds nice and agreeable in isolation, but it's hard not to see these as contradictory views. Where are people meant to live if there are no condos? How can a city grow without affordable housing, or shopping centres that can accomodate more people? It isn't practical for every individual to have their own lovely brownstone (or two, in Brooklyn's case).
These ideas feel at odds to me, and I don't see that it's possible to grow a city without also changing its culture. Sure, you can try to manage things carefully: slow growth and new developments, maintain historic landmarks, use strict zoning laws to avoid redevelopment, or enact rent control to reduce gentrification. These will have some effect, but they're just stopgap measures.
Change is inevitable, and that's true of any community. Adding a person to a friend group changes its dynamic. Adding a Walmart to a town changes its dynamic. Adding jet planes and wireless communication to an entire planet changes its dynamic. When you bring people together in any form, they change and grow. This process is a weakening of the culture that was, but the strengthening of a new, shared culture. It isn't good or bad, it just is.
So while I don't find it strange to celebrate individual cultures and heritages, I do see it as somewhat contradicting the idea of growth as a universal good. In practice I think we just need to find and maintain a balance as best we can. We should make improvements to communities if possible, without it turning into full-blown gentrification. We should preserve historic sights and important structures, while still building new developments to house people. We can acknowledge NIMBY complaints, while searching for solutions that inconvenience the fewest people.
I see that some have already touched on the Lovecraftian influence, and I felt that was important, too. I actually missed the significance of R'lyeh's name, though did feel there were some strong connections, especially with the often-aquatic references to the other world of the woman in white.
Lovecraft was also name dropped directly at least once or twice, as well as some of his works (like Innsmouth, which was dismissed as "rambly"). At first I thought the author was simply invoking Lovecraft to more easily describe the otherworldly creatures, but over time it began to feel more like a refutation of the man himself. Here was a city of very different people coming together to vanquish the evil monsters, and their openly racist allies.
On that note, I'm a little disappointed with Aislyn's character. Don't get me wrong, I'm actually glad her story arc had her turn on the others in the end. It was more interesting than the usual "terrible person is shown kindness then sees the error of their ways" redemption arc we normally see. However, I did feel that there wasn't enough time devoted to actually justifying her actions in the end. Some time was spent explaining her father's terrible parenting, but I still found that she came off as rather petulant and dull throughout her perspectives. I guess I'd have preferred a "victim of her environment" story more than what we got, which is hard to read as anything other than "Staten Island just kind of sucks".
Most of the characters I did like. Bronca especially felt like she had great growth, especially towards the end. Some of the art discussions were also enjoyable, and it made me genuinely curious if people can really look at a piece and see what it represents so clearly. Brooklyn felt like a well-rounded character, with some slightly-too-convenient at times hookups.
I expected Padmini to be a little more helpful. She used "math" once in her introduction to hop through a wall, then basically became useless for the rest of the adventure. Her bravery in saving the kids established her as a strong character, but she basically just tagged along thereafter. Even Veneza played a larger role than she did (though it later became more obvious as to why).
Manny is a curious one. I mentioned that I saw him as a stand-in for the audience. That got a little awkward when he started acting more violently, and then became infatuated with the Primary. I enjoyed his earlier chapters during his introduction to the city though, and his attempts at understanding all the strangeness happening around him.
I felt the ending was a little lackluster. They all basically held hands and then the evil was vanquished. No more fighting using abstract concepts like in the prologue. It would have been nice to see the boroughs working together to undo the damage once they'd finally reunited.
I liked the reveal with Veneza. I enjoyed her as a character, and found her writing more believable than most of the others. She also helped balance out the stronger personality of Bronca. The epilogue at the beach was also a nice way to close things out.
So overall, I didn't love the book. I found the symbolism a bit uneven, the moralizing too on-the-nose, and the conclusion not very satisfying. I was also unhappy with the audiobook version I listened to, since it abused reverb and echo effects to the point of unpleasantness.
With that said, I don't regret the read. I'm always happy to try books outside of my usual wheelhouse to better learn what I do and don't enjoy. They can't all be winners, and I'm still happy to be able to participate in these discussions. I'm sorry I wasn't around to participate sooner! I do still plan to read Jemisin's Broken Earth trilogy, which I'm hoping will be a little more my speed.
But until next time, it's been a slice, folks. I'm looking forward to resuming the book club in January.
I think the point of Starbucks as monster is that it is a generic national chain. Big or small, something local would enhance the culture not detract.
And I remember when Walmart put thousands of local markets and smaller chains out of business. Effective antitrust enforcement would have prevented it from happening nationwide.
To be clear, I'm definitely not trying to defend Walmart or capitalism itself as a form of progress. I don't believe they are! I do think there are certain realities of scaling a population up to larger numbers, where it becomes increasingly more difficult to house, feed, and clothe everybody with limited resources. In that case there are economies of scale that benefit condominiums or shopping centres, even if they feel hollow, corporate, and ugly compared to brownstones or bodegas.
With that said, I'm not actually convinced that large cities are in fact the optimal organizational structure for humans, but that's an entirely separate discussion. :)
I look forward to hearing your thoughts when you finish.
Same boat. I'm about half way through, and to be honest, it's a bit of a slog. The Broken Earth books were the same way for me. I found the ending of those very satisfying, but the tip over into being excited to finish came very late, maybe more than halfway through the third book.
To open: I have not yet finished the book, but I'm thinking I'll be wrapping it up tomorrow.
I think this is the book I have struggled with the most this year, certainly of the book club books I've read. Reading this felt like a slog and I really wish I could have felt the enjoyment that others here and in my real world life have found in this book. I'll save the negativity but I'll leave one humorous thought I had while reading: "Thank god conservatives can't read, because they would be having a conniption over this book if they could."
They don't like Jemisin already, so it wouldn't shock me if there weren't plenty (for a novel) of outrage machine vids about it, the way there are star wars and others.
I just refuse to fuck with my search history to go look
What else do you want to say about this book?
I had a pretty good time reading this one, finished it a couple days ago. It definitely kept my attention throughout, though I think I need some more time to processes the mixed reactions I had to some of it. Overall I enjoyed it.
I think that the author comes off as being rather "online" in a way that becomes sort of predictable, some of the anti-racist themes were kind of on-the-nose, and I was a little disappointed that the only white people were... let's just say un-redeemable (SI included). For a book about a city coming together and embracing its fullness and diversity, that was kind of jarring with the theme.
I loved the "inverse-lovecraftian" horror being derived from gentrification and racist white people, and the idea of the cities themselves being a kind of universal horror to everyone else in the multiverse that's being destroyed by all the cities. Any time the cities/boroughs engaged in combat by wielding iconic concepts against each other was a lot of fun. I would've loved to see more experimentation and back and forth to explore that, outside of a couple of scenes the avatars mostly seem to come by their powers when they need them in a way that felt kind of like a comic-book movie. I mean that in a good way, but it would've been more my thing if there had been more scenes like the one in the park by the big rock, where Manny is feeling out his powers before getting rescued by Brooklyn.
I don't think I'm quite in the target audience for this one, but I had a good time with it despite the handful of things that didn't work for me.
Fwiw, if you haven't read her Broken Earth trilogy*, she handles racism and prejudice in entirely different ways there (through earth mages who are functionally slaves in a world always ok the precipice of cataclysm ). She just did a different thing here.
*Each won a Hugo, back to back
In spite of the many references to racial discrimination, neo Nazis etc. Jews are not an ethnic group mentioned in this book about new York City.
What do you think about this choice? Would you have changed either an avatar or minor characters to make them Jewish?
I think Jemisin is writing what she knows, and I could see not wanting to write a Jewish avatar for NYC from outside the community. But also I don't feel she intended to check boxes, but to write the specific people that represented the borroughs to her.
Similarly she doesn't have a physically disabled avatar but has side characters who are physically disabled or Jewish (Jess).
Yeah I agree with this. It actually didn’t even occur to me as I was reading it, even though I am Jewish and lived in NYC for a few years. I think conceivably the Manhattan avatar could have been Jewish, but I wouldn’t necessarily have traded that for Manny’s character, who also felt very right to me.
There was a time where NYC Jews weren’t “white”, and they were more likely to share culture with their other non-white neighbors. But I don’t know if that’s still true in NYC today, and I think it might have detracted from some of the other themes to spend time working hypothetical Jewish character into the group.
I think it was definitely possible to have done different but nearly anything could have been different.
I guess Manny could actually be Jewish, he just doesn't remember it. But it would have been a different arc without him losing his memory, and a different archetype.
I’m starting to read more for personal reasons, and I decided to join the Tildes book club to help motivate that. I’m always more consistent with other people. Thanks to the community and @boxer_dogs_dance for organizing.
——
This book definitely kept me engaged. I finished it over the course of 2 days on Christmas vacation. Jemisin’s writing is illustrative and brilliant, and she does a good job of pulling you through the character’s emotions especially when they remain separated.
Overall, the book read like a love letter to New York, and Jemisin basically says as much in the acknowledgments. I don’t know enough about New York to know if this did that well.
The themes, and especially the twist at the end, felt a bit disjointed. The whole book speaks to how the primary avatar will bring New York together, but the protagonists prevail by literally splitting from Staten Island. I assume this is resolved in the sequel, but ending on that note still left me feeling disappointed.
I found the book was at its best in the first half, when the Enemy represented real issues the characters were facing in the city. I think a much more interesting way to explore the dynamic between the boroughs would have been to introduce conflict between the avatars. The Lady offered Staten Island companionship and won her over. I found that compelling. I think having the Lady tempt boroughs with things they want at the expense of the other boroughs would have highlighted the theme of “winning is bringing New York together” instead of “winning is cutting out what doesn’t fit”.
I enjoyed getting to know all the characters, although I loved the prologue sequencd and the character of New York the most, so I’m sad he only showed up there. Every person felt pretty real. Overall, I enjoyed the read, even if it didn’t leave me with a strong take-home message.
Thanks for jumping in!
How does this book compare to other urban fantasy you have read? How effective do you think Jemisin is at realizing and communicating her vision? If it entertaining? Compelling and fast paced? Creepy? Thought provoking? Did she lose you as a reader at any point?
Most of the things that I mentally put into the urban fantasy category are more similar to Dresden files, than to this book.
However, it absolutely sits very solidly in the category, including being a first world novel (in nominally our world with fantastical elements). It is much more similar to Lovecraft Country where things are mostly normal until the Outsiders start encroaching into our MCs everyday lives. And then underneath the day to day, the Eldritch origins of the horror are revealed.
I was in this one from the jump.
I am curious, what do you mean by "first world novel?"
I defined it in my parenthetical but apparently poorly.
That it takes place in "our" world with fantastical elements, not in a different world. You can also see it called primary vs secondary world in fantasy. Most High fantasy is secondary/second world, most urban fantasy is first/primary world.
Harry Potter is a first world fantasy.
Lord of the Rings is a second world (I know it's a mythological history of England but also no it's not set in England.)
Narnia straddles both, though the fantasy is mostly in the secondary world(s) barring the Magicians Nephew. Most portals fantasy like Narnia is second world.
That's roughly what I got from your parenthetical, I just couldn't wrap my head around it for some reason... must have been tired!
Thanks for taking the time to explain it!
Yeah no worries! It's not used a lot except explicitly in discussing fantasy worldbuilding!
I think an additional source of confusion with the terminology is that this is more or less identical how some people define high vs low/urban fantasy, but in a lot of fantasy reading/writing/worldbuilding communities those labels have more specific "vibes" they're trying to evoke that don't neatly match those categories. The vibe I get from "low fantasy" is very different from that of "urban fantasy", even though some people treat both as synonymous with first world fantasy. The wikipedia article on "low fantasy" also does a good job pointing out this dissonance in how the term is used terminologically -- citing "Conan the Barbarian" and "Supernatural" as examples that are high fantasy by one definition and low fantasy by another (in different directions). First and second world don't have this same problem as terms, though ig for first world fantasy it could be confused with the more common definition of "first world" in reference to irl politics/wealth in some contexts.
Language is wobbly wobbly but yeah they don't map exactly to high/low and even 1st/2nd world can get weird sometimes, especially if it isn't obvious that the world is in fact "ours" at first due to time, etc. the Craft sequence is decidedly Urban and based on our world cultures it's not explicitly set on earth (unless I missed something)
And I'm never quite sure how to place some alternate history worlds where they're definitely originally us, but so different that it's questionable. Just because the continent is the same, is there really value in considering it 1st world.
But yeah I suspect primary and secondary get used more often due to avoiding confusion with the geopolitical uses of the terms. I just have 1st/2nd stuck in my head.
You must have loved Stranger Things then?
I wasn't able to get into it actually
I think I enjoyed the first season, but once it was kind of a known thing, I lost interest.
I have a really hard time getting into most TV dramas. I often don't finish them or get bored. I don't have a lot of 80s nostalgia and it just never hooked me.
But yeah I know folks who love it
The use of the avatars for parts of the city leads to a lot of generalization. Did the neighborhood characters match your sense of New York City? Was there too much stereotyping? Was there a different way she could have gone about this or was it inevitable? Were the neighborhood depictions as characters respectful?
I don't have enough personalized knowledge of NYC to speak to accuracy, though NK Jemisin does live there iirc. I'd say the book did a good job of explaining why each person fits the role of avatar. And I always had the impression they were just one representation of the area. Others could have been chosen, especially Manny - how many people come to Manhattan for a fresh start every day - or Aislyn - all of Staten Island isn't racist but it fits as more suburban, more white flight, more conservative, etc.
None of the characters would stand out in their borough while also having the potential to be stand out people IMO.
What do you think of the 'magic system' or powers that the neighborhood avatars bring to bear to solve problems and face enemies? What did you thing of the world building and back story we discover over the course of the book?
There were parts of this that verged on being corny, for me at least, buuuttt they felt so earnest that in the end I cut Jemisin some slack. It was definitely something very different, and that added some fun. Plus, I think there were moments that captured the feeling of extradimensionality really well, which is certainly a feat.
How similar or different was this book from your expectations based on title and reputation?
I had read the short story from How Long Til Black Future Month (highly recommended) and still think this was very different from the more broad strokes of the prologue. Jemisin may not have intended this story to be her response to Lovecraft when she initially wrote it, but it obviously ended up there. I love the idea of personifying a city, that it's alive in a real way, not just because the avatars live but that the avatars just represent the living breathing city. If any city, New York would be the one.
I can't say for sure if I was surprised. This book was published before Lovecraft Country the show came out, and I hadn't read the book yet. But all 3, books and the show, engage with racism as Eldritch Horror in similar (but still different) ways.
I remember loving when tentacles stretched out from Starbucks where gentrification had wiped out independent shops. So I may just be odd.
I also appreciated the use of national chains as examples of foreign invaders and influence in the city.
Did you predict the twist at the end? Did the ending work for you?
As someone who lived in NYC for two years, and in New Jersey for most of the rest of my life, I truly loved the ending. I didn’t see it coming until right before it happened, and I genuinely laughed out loud for a few minutes after it hit me
What do you think about how the author shows urban social and political issues in this book? Is it accurate? Does it help or hurt the story or is it just filler?
There are references to H P Lovecraft in the story. Have you read any Lovecraft works? If yes, did that add to your experience of this story?
Yes and yes.
I've read both the original and several modern takes on Shadow over Innsmouth, and whatever the name of the story was where the real eldritch evil was the air conditioning (it's been a while)
I don't think reading Lovecraft is necessary but I think it helps to know that the man was very racist and afraid of everything.
He was certainly more racist than other authors of his time, his cat was named the actual N-word., and he expanded his racism into fears of savages, and Italians alike. And then I think being aware of his ouvre - Eldritch horror - and to an extent his mythos - no matter what the "nice" city in white says, she's really not to be trusted with that name, helps make the realization that things aren't right stronger.
The painting at the beginning of the Bronca's story is named for Lovecraft's racist slurs, referencing a second story of his where the squalor of Brooklyn turns out to be a literal portal to hell, and puts the observer into Lovecraft's "terrified of the other" perspective.
Where that knowledge is actually really useful I think is that Aislyn is almost an avatar for Lovecraft and the people who think like him. Her high levels of anxiety are understandable on their own, but the way they are used is to demonize others and to protect oneself over empathizing with anyone else.
Re the name of the villain city rlyeh in Lovecraft
I was aware of Lovecraft's reputation in fantasy but I had never read his work. I think it would have been helpful to my appreciation of the story if I had.
Learning yesterday that the name of the villain city rlyeh was the original source location and home of Cthulhu in Lovecraft's books showed me how important this theme of answering Lovecraft was to Jemisin's project. Not recognizing these details for myself while reading the book, I missed some of how intentionally crafted it was.
I'm not a huge fan of super hero stories generally. I do read and enjoy fantasy. I feel like I would have enjoyed this book more if I was more familiar with Lovecraft's work even though Cthulhu is a name I am quite familiar with from general fantasy discussions.
Yeah I can see that. It's hard to say "here's how much I know and why that specific level of knowledge was needed or not." I am also the sort of person who will rabbit hole on topics. I still don't think reading him is necessary, but I would agree knowing about his work would help.
At the same time, even if you don't know R'lyeh, for example, there's a level of "oh the person (white woman in particular) whose smile is way too big is definitely bad" present. Much like the Better New York Foundation... That name is suspicious for the jump. At least both are the case if you're someone used to experiencing harm from people and orgs similar to those. It definitely spoke to marginalized experiences there.
The details about neighborhood landmarks, history, architecture, but also organizations and institutional culture, were the parts of the book I enjoyed most.
Yeah it did give me a vibe of a love for New York that I don't share but can appreciate from her telling and from casual exposure to media
It's a very different novel, but The Time Traveler's Wife is a love letter to Chicago in a similar way.
What did you think about the woman/alien city as a villain/monster/antagonist?
I really enjoyed the angle that racism/otherism/tribal antagonism is a tool that can be wielded by established power to destroy culture. The villain isn’t racist, she’s doesn’t even have any meaningful interest in humans, let alone one or another group of them. But her tool of choice to temper and divide the city is nonetheless the banal evil of prejudice and stereotype.
She's a great villain, and yes, villain not antagonist. She claims good motives but who doesn't. She is eliminating competition IMO not on a noble crusade to save lives. She strikes me as an interdimensional fungal spore that we don't have the right treatment for. Or cancer. Or whatever comparison gets the insidiousness of her across. R'lyeh is never going to be a good guy, because you cannot be a good guy while fomenting the worst types of racism and trying to murder a city before it can fully be born (and has been doing so for a long, long time)