A low 3, high 2. *Spoilers ahead*
Ok. Let's lay the groundwork of the review now. This man is obviously a talented writer. The descriptions have fire, the narrative is coherent and has significant depth to it, and the characters are well thought out. The first half of this book enthralled me, but I experienced significant problems with the text as I advanced from there towards the end. I suspect that many of those problems are actually due to cultural differences between the author and myself, ones which pertain as to what makes a good story. I suspect that if I was also from Okey's native Nigeria, that many of the following writing decisions would have resonated with me much more greatly than they did. This is not the case though, and hence the following opinions and impressions.
Good:
- Tense, taut, well-constructed political environment in the present day. Was enthralling to step into
- Great piece of mystery with the supposedly 'crazy' man standing up and calmly denouncing a dictator
- Interesting format where we read that man's story from a first person point of view
- Great descriptions
- Just very compelling in general
The Bad:
- Introduced characters would be presented as relevant figures to the story, only to turn out to be of staggering non-importance. Or, conversely, generate vague, random characters who have a disproportionate effect on the story:
- Need someone to deliver a crushing blow to the main characters psyche? Introduce a random group of college friends who we had no idea existed, crush his psyche like a wiffle ball, and then vanish out of the story again
- Need to show the decadence of the current political environment? Go to parties with the cabinet members and become a friend of one of them (this was actually a fine writing idea). Then when those same members are eventually slaughtered, completely and utterly fail to even remember or think about the previous good friend
- Character stories trailing off. Want to know why someone made a decision as an adult? Have them tell you their 15+ years of backstory, only to omit the part where they made the decision.
- I think that if I was used to the Nigerian storytelling tradition that this would have been better, but from my perspective this became somewhat agonizing after the third time it was done.
- Flaws in the portrayal of the main characters:
- Bukuru: Pretty good, but in his past retellings I can't help but feel that when he abandons his love interest, that he is absurdly detached from the emotions he would feel at that time. He barely makes note of it. The more damning flaw though is that his past self (which becomes his current self) is frightened out of his wits by the dictator. This is reasonable, but is utterly incongruent with his casual denouncement of the dictator at the beginning of the book. It really felt like two separate characters to me. The Bukuru that I got to know had the opportunity for change, for courage, but could never take it. So who was that dauntless Bukuru from the beginning of the book? Certainly didn't seem like the same person
- Strong, female prostitute character: Overall she was really good, and I have few complaints. Her inability to sever the relationship with the murderous Madia seemed dispiritingly realistic, for example. My one major complaint is her origin story. When asked 'Why did you become a prostitute?', she tells of her entire life leading up to the point where she moved to the city where she would become one. And then she stops. From a storytelling point of view, I can understand the argument that the real reasons behind the decisions have already been said, that that is the way her story points. But why a prostitute and not another low income job? It itches to not know.
- The present day news reporter: Man I was so uninterested in this guy by the end. He was so glaringly a vehicle for Bukuru's story that when Okey wants to have us develop empathy with him at the end, it feels like why bother? Plus I have no idea whether he wants to continue the journalistic fight against Madia or not, because all I know about him is that he's adopted. An admittedly fair job is done developing him at the end, but it's not enough and is still just yet another way to drive Bukuru's story
- The absolute dearth of resolution at the end. Bukuru's arc has now tragically drawn to a close... and so has the book's. Look. I can see how it can be considered a good ending. But it really, I think, just squanders the entire rich political narrative. Will the dictator be challenged or not? Will the son prove more courageous than the father? Will the halls of power shake to any degree?
- And it's honestly kind of lame. Going along with my previous thoughts, it had seemed like Bukuru had changed. And it turns out that he hadn't. Which would normally be ok, except then what the hell was he doing at the beginning of the book then? I thought this character had finally realized some, ANY, courage because of his demonstrated actions, and then just 'nah'?
It was both a searingly good book and a heart-breakingly disappointing one for me.