Stuck on Mars

One of the most disappointing books I've read. The writer leaves too much to speculation, and I swear to Ra if one of the characters repeats the entire purpose and mission of the party from the start to the present for the hundredth time. In many ways, that's what the book is in its length: the explanation by an Egyptologist for what he's doing and why he's doing it. And someone really compared this piece of slow-burn to The Mummy film series from the 2000s, which is largely why I read it in the first place. Also the title seemed cool. Stoker is good with "scenes", so it feels like reading a horror movie. That's one thing I liked about Dracula, but I liked a lot of other things about that one too. So there were a few parts of this book which felt a little scary.

The overall theme and synopsis is not so bad, especially if you're interested in ancient Egypt or the occult. But most of the arcane things are left to the history or matter-of-fact part of the story, so you don't really get to experience them in their mystery. Even the way Stoker sets up the story and engages you is somewhat appealing, even if it takes time and a lot of inner ramblings by the protagonist. But it soon falls off hard. The atmosphere may remain, but not much goes on in the way of plot and characters then. There is also no consistency in flavor, sometimes it turns to a murder mystery, sometimes to supernatural horror, sometimes to gothic romance, but it doesn't hold on for long to any of the above.

This might be the last Stephen King book I read. I'm done. It's not a bad story but I never got the appeal of King's writing style, it's so slow and over-descriptive. A hundred pages in something scary finally happens. That said, out of all the Stephen King books I've read, this is probably the one I like most and the one that really scared me (yes, even more than The Shining). I love cats and this book made me creeped out by them so that's something.

Great story, a bit slow, but the pay-off is rewarding. Characteristic of Lovecraft, highly atmospheric writing, but the visuals it paints in your mind are grand and eerie. The last few chapters is where it gets really interesting, and more exciting in the vein of adventure, rather than just descriptions and ramblings of geology and architecture. There are parts where Lovecraft deadass uses coordinates, all spelled with latitudes and longitudes, to describe a location. Talk about detailed.

Probably the worst Goosebumps book I've read. Not only is it not "scary", but it's also too predictable even for a children's story, which is not a bad thing on its own, but the premise isn't that interesting either. There is no deeper exploration of the story elements. It feels like R.L. Stine was trying to go the Lovecraft direction, but took the mystery and not explaining part too seriously. The characters suck and don't have much of an impact on the plot anyway. I was excited to finish it to find out what happens, but by the end it turned into a rushed and campy camp horror story. The visuals and body horror was gross and cool though.

More of a political and social commentary than a story. There is very little plot here. I dare say that it's almost a non-fiction book related to political theory, as is the case for most Utopian literature. The worldbuilding is cool, especially for its time. In many ways it reminds me of Lovecraft's writings with its ancient references. Even though this book was written almost fifty years before the rise of fascism, and the writer never insinuated such ideas as directly linking to the latter- he spelled it out clearly that the kind of state and political structure described of the subterranean race he doesn't endorse, as the human race was never accustomed to such methodologies and customs anyway- the inspiration for a proto-Nazi racial and traditional "utopia" can be seen here.

Contrary to supporting such a "utopian" state, where freedom is limited to customs and sayings of an absolute authority, and by whom states following a different way of governance and living are seen as barbaric and inferior, the writer warns of its incompatibility to human civilization, no matter its tranquility and felicity. It's a world so perfect yet so mundane and lacking of art and strife that any person from above the ground will most likely suffocate of the easiness and boredom (as he calls "ennui"). Hence, it could be seen as a kind of praise or reconciliation to our own societal structure and way of life, that even with its problems and inequalities, the perfect utopias that we dream of may not be as appealing to us in reality as we think they ought to be.

The book also speaks at length about women: the rights of women and domestic customs. It's not very clear if it's a feminist point of view, since the mundane society is the one where women have the most rights. But it could also be a switching of the traditional positions and notions of sex, to create an alternate to the world above. For the 19th century, the writer seems progressive in such ideas. Although the domestic ramblings of romantic customs in the world below does get a bit repetitive, as if the writer is trying to force love into a story where it may not belong. And yes, even though the romantic subplot is very important to the story, it does feel somewhat unnecessary.