And to the surprise of probably no one, I'm throwing in the towel for now. Maybe I'll try again another time, but right now I just don't have the strength. I don't even have anything particularly funny to say about this, other than it makes me want to climb inside the wall like the corpse of William Hill and just rot there for a while until I forget about "Moon Chew".
On the subject of this book's...controversial origins, I'm really not invested enough to get into a debate about it, but I do think a gentle reminder is in order: publishing is a business, and it's about making money, and just because it deals in artwork doesn't make it morally superior or somehow separate from other huge industries that use fads and gimmicks to rake in heaps of cash. There are a lot of confused stans out here wailing, "I can't believe it's not butter!" but...why, exactly? Which charges confuse you, Lord Baelish? Big media companies capitalising on well-known names is so common that it's actually banal. It's what sells, so they’ll keep doing it, and it's naïve to the point of idiocy to be surprised by that.
All of this drama was cooked up by the same people, both without and within the industry, who harp on and on and on about how a "good book" is all you need to get published. "Just write a good book". Girl, spare me. We're all adults here, so stop with the gaslighting and the mind games. The truth is that marketability matters. If a big industry finds a creator with an established audience who they know will be a financial asset (and who can guarantee a certain quantity of sales) then they're going to jump on that. It's exactly the same tactic they employ when it comes to celebrity cookbooks. I mean, who the fuck is buying cookbooks in 2019? Just use Google if you don't know how to make a fucking chowder. But people will spend money when they see a face or a name they recognise and respect. I've certainly bought into that before. It's nothing new and it's not a mystery, and it's not worth getting mad about. It's just business.
Do I think that mining social media for cash-ins is a great and totally foolproof idea? Of course not. It's certainly not in the traditional (dubious) spirit of the artiste. Then again, people don't get this mad when every other YouTuber opens up a merch store, and they certainly don't get this pissed off about book packagers. Whether or not books published in this manner are "morally pure" and whether or not that even fucking matters... I don't care. I might have in the past, but I don't care anymore. I'd just like to put this out there: building a platform on social media is an insane amount of work, and to claim that the author in question has "not worked" for her success is ludicrous. It's a vicious circle: Sasha Alsberg is so good at what she does that her content looks effortless, and people see that effortlessness and actually think it's genuine. It's not. It's effortful to the nth degree. I can't even imagine the hours she spends cleaning, organising, and meticulously arranging her sets, reading under duress, scripting her videos, filming the videos, editing them, replying to kind comments and fielding the cruel ones, attending functions and festivals, hosting meet-and-greets, organising activities in order to update her Instagram story daily, editing and posting Instagram photos, conversing with her audience on Twitter, marketing her brand, writing her book, and all this without mentioning the mammoth task of looking pretty all the fucking time. My point is that her book is fair game as a piece of published work that she released into the world (and that we all spent money on), but to claim she hasn't worked for her success is simply bogus.
As for the quality of the story itself? It's not great, but it's really not the worst book I've ever read. I can see why others might find it fun. It just didn't hold my attention for longer than about seventeen seconds at a time, which doesn't bode well for a book that's over 400 pages. I got about a hundred pages in and realised that there were better things I could be doing, and I put the book down, and that was the end of it. I know this seems a bit click-baity, but I truly have nothing more to add to this other than the aforementioned reality check.
(My initial review of this wasn't quite so spicy, but I'm treating myself to a cigarette to celebrate the new year and after 9 months on diet baby-nicotine vape liquid, it's got me fucked up! Happy 2019 to all of you.)
In my experience, a person needs to be in a certain headspace for a book like this, where "galaxies" are made up of like three planetary systems in a straight line (the Milky Way alone has around 250 billion stars), "dark matter" is marked on a map (??? If you don't know what things are, just don't put them in your book!!!) an asteroid belt has "thousands" of "space rocks" (our asteroid belt has nearly two million asteroids, and it's fairly modest in size), and space battles end with "bodies burning in the sky" (things don't burn in space, not even stars). I'll admit to applying very minimal effort to this one, but when it comes to space I have a delicate constitution; I want it done right or not at all.
FIN