What do you think?
Rate this book
Ride, Sally, Ride
It's two decades in the future, and a Christian college student named Ace Hartwick has just destroyed his neighbor's so-called "wife" -- actually a sexbot named Sally -- in a trash compactor. Soon, Ace will be on trial for murder.
Unfortunately for Ace, everyone despises his kind of "radical" Christianity, and, in the fragile America of the future, all the juries are fixed.
Unfortunately for Ace, everyone despises his kind of "radical" Christianity, and, in the fragile America of the future, all the juries are fixed.
310 pages, Paperback
First published August 25, 2020
107 people are currently reading
503 people want to read
About the author
Douglas Wilson
319 books4,539 followersI write in order to make the little voices in my head go away. Thus far it hasn't worked.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 254 reviews
August 21, 2020
Brilliant. Gutsy. Hilarious. Scathing. Perfect for 2020. One of my favorite novels of all time.
Ride, Sally, Ride picks a joyful fight on every page. Doug Wilson is a Phineas telling a Phineas story. He grabs today’s sexual revolution by the horns and doesn’t let go. Some readers might object to the fact that his main characters’ dialogue basically sounds alike, but that is the book’s only narratival weakness, and is reflective of some of Doug’s greatest strengths: insight into character, deep introspection and self-analysis, a cutting cognizance of one’s own sins, and the neat knack for articulating everything.
What this means is that many of his protagonists sound like Doug when they talk, which seems technically implausible because precious few people in real life share his wisdom (and his ability to articulate it). But absolute realism (on that score) is not the point of the book.
The point is that we should be like these characters: confronting and confessing sin, courageously sailing into the fight of the hour, obeying God and refusing to consider the consequences, getting married and having babies.
Asahel is the bravest man I’ve met in fiction in a long time. Stephanie is a shrewd, fearless, lovely bride. Jon and Vickie are the gospel. And Kathryn! What a crown to her husband. I am not just a better writer, having read this book, I am a better person.
Ride, Sally, Ride picks a joyful fight on every page. Doug Wilson is a Phineas telling a Phineas story. He grabs today’s sexual revolution by the horns and doesn’t let go. Some readers might object to the fact that his main characters’ dialogue basically sounds alike, but that is the book’s only narratival weakness, and is reflective of some of Doug’s greatest strengths: insight into character, deep introspection and self-analysis, a cutting cognizance of one’s own sins, and the neat knack for articulating everything.
What this means is that many of his protagonists sound like Doug when they talk, which seems technically implausible because precious few people in real life share his wisdom (and his ability to articulate it). But absolute realism (on that score) is not the point of the book.
The point is that we should be like these characters: confronting and confessing sin, courageously sailing into the fight of the hour, obeying God and refusing to consider the consequences, getting married and having babies.
Asahel is the bravest man I’ve met in fiction in a long time. Stephanie is a shrewd, fearless, lovely bride. Jon and Vickie are the gospel. And Kathryn! What a crown to her husband. I am not just a better writer, having read this book, I am a better person.
November 10, 2020
Wodehouse meets Brave New World meets That Hideous Strength. Some fun twists and turns. High gospel sanity in the midst of PoMo chaos. Read a full review here: https://crosspolitic.com/forgiveness-...
October 5, 2020
There are really two ways to categorize this book. The first one is as a cultural commentary on the given state of things. In that regard, RSR is a real knock out. Wilson is pretty on the money on his assessment of the trajectory of culture. Very astute observations which are to be expected from Wilson.
As a novel, though, it's pretty forced in some areas and just bad in others. There's a lot of disbelief that you have to suspend and at least a couple of scenes seem exaggerated to make a point but in doing so take away from the rest of the story. The dialogue isn't believable a lot of the times ("golly" and "ninnyhammer" aren't exactly part of common vernacular) and if you've read anything else by Wilson it just comes across as him playing every character throughout the story as opposed to giving character's their own voices.
It's hard for me to get over how bad RSR is as a novel, but it's also difficult for me to get over how good it is at analyzing and diagnosing societal ills. For that reason I'm splitting the difference at a very strong 3 stars.
As a novel, though, it's pretty forced in some areas and just bad in others. There's a lot of disbelief that you have to suspend and at least a couple of scenes seem exaggerated to make a point but in doing so take away from the rest of the story. The dialogue isn't believable a lot of the times ("golly" and "ninnyhammer" aren't exactly part of common vernacular) and if you've read anything else by Wilson it just comes across as him playing every character throughout the story as opposed to giving character's their own voices.
It's hard for me to get over how bad RSR is as a novel, but it's also difficult for me to get over how good it is at analyzing and diagnosing societal ills. For that reason I'm splitting the difference at a very strong 3 stars.
April 2, 2021
[4/1/2021 — No foolin'...I'm gonna get my wish! https://www.facebook.com/joseph.grada...]
Feisty, festive, and fun! Gripping, not graphic!
Some faves: Gonzo justice. Crazy-creative courage. Seeing the spirit of Sabina Wurmbrand alive and well in a minor character. The Curtsy. The author's rather lavish granting of redemption to lots of characters.
Some could-use-improvements: Subheadings do not belong in fiction. Too many characters talk like sixty-something sermonizers. Excessive use of "and so."
I want an audiobook. And a movie.
Feisty, festive, and fun! Gripping, not graphic!
Some faves: Gonzo justice. Crazy-creative courage. Seeing the spirit of Sabina Wurmbrand alive and well in a minor character. The Curtsy. The author's rather lavish granting of redemption to lots of characters.
Some could-use-improvements: Subheadings do not belong in fiction. Too many characters talk like sixty-something sermonizers. Excessive use of "and so."
I want an audiobook. And a movie.
August 19, 2020
This was timely. And hilarious. DW’s strongest talents are not in fiction (his dialogues often come across as somewhat didactic/Socratic, for instance), but this was nevertheless highly entertaining and insightful. I actually laughed out loud a few times because of lines like this:
“The other attorneys looked at him expectantly, like two rows of sea lions on either side of the table waiting for the trainer to throw a fish over the Plexiglas. And as Connor looked at them, he felt a surge of pride welling up in him. This was a crackerjack team. They knew the law, they knew what justice ought to be, and as each of them had slept with pretty much all of the others, they knew one another. They were going to craft their future. With their own hands they would craft it. They would build a tower to the heavens. It would be totally great.” - p34
It was also SO REFRESHING to read a book in which the author actually believes, and makes you remember, that God not only has a sense of humor but is actively orchestrating every little piece of Creation, from the plots of presidents and governors to the motor skills of a bored five year old in a church service. AND that his plan is always for his glory and the good of his people. What may seem like overwhelming odds to us are just tools in a much mightier hand than ours.
“The other attorneys looked at him expectantly, like two rows of sea lions on either side of the table waiting for the trainer to throw a fish over the Plexiglas. And as Connor looked at them, he felt a surge of pride welling up in him. This was a crackerjack team. They knew the law, they knew what justice ought to be, and as each of them had slept with pretty much all of the others, they knew one another. They were going to craft their future. With their own hands they would craft it. They would build a tower to the heavens. It would be totally great.” - p34
It was also SO REFRESHING to read a book in which the author actually believes, and makes you remember, that God not only has a sense of humor but is actively orchestrating every little piece of Creation, from the plots of presidents and governors to the motor skills of a bored five year old in a church service. AND that his plan is always for his glory and the good of his people. What may seem like overwhelming odds to us are just tools in a much mightier hand than ours.
January 17, 2022
I have to begin by saying this is not the worst novel I’ve ever read. Those of you who know and hate Doug Wilson, the polemicist pastor of Moscow, Idaho, may be alarmed by my opening thesis. Fear not; I am, as Alexander Pope would say, damning him with faint praise. For we already know that Wilson is quick with a quip and always has a stinging metaphor in his holster. We now see that he can tell a story in a straightforward, linear fashion for 311 pages. And he cares enough for his human creations that he makes a sincere effort at characterization, although amateurly depicting his protagonists as rounded characters, and his antagonists as flat. I have read authors who could not accomplish as much.
For those familiar with the Facebook page, “Examining Doug Wilson & Moscow, Idaho,” let me dispense with their objection to the novel: that it is about a sex doll, and it is pornographic. In this PG-worthy story, sex bot Sally is the MacGuffin, and a MacGuffin that Wilson clearly condemns. Spoiler alert: The hero of the book, Ace Hartwick, throws Sally, property of a neighbor, into a thrash compactor and is charged by the state of Colorado with murder, for the neighbor had presented the doll as his wife.
In terms of his general level of craft, we need not awaken the Pulitzer or Nobel committees. While Wilson can write well, he cannot do so consistently, at least not in Ride, Sally, Ride. We need to blink through awkward use of passive voice, jarring shifts in perspective, unskilled repetition of words and phrases, far too many instances where he should have been showing instead of telling, and a paucity of sensory input aside from the visual. To give one cogent example, spoiler, spoiler, spoiler, a “helicopter touched down” on a rooftop to rescue the heroes of the story. I guess we saw this action, but we did not hear the thrumming blades, nor feel the wind whipping the bystanders or blowing dust into their eyes or mouths. The helicopter accepts its holy cargo and takes off, with nary a mention of how anyone’s stomach plummets. As Wilson treats an invitingly visceral experience, so he treats many other passages: artlessly.
He begins several subplots that seem to be dropped at various parts of the novel, and that would have been well enough. But one by one, he picks them up at the end to make tidy. It calls to recollection the dime store detective novel where all the mechanics are revealed in the end. “Ah, so Lionel wasn’t really a nincompoop; he was just playing one for Nebraska’s secret service!”
To understand the real guts of the story, we need to turn our attention to the narrator, who unveils himself, often uncomfortably, in the first person, even presuming to occasionally use the “royal we.” Returning to the fact that Wilson is a fledgeling novelist, and also recalling his various public statements and writings, I have to come to a simple conclusion about the narrator: He is no artistic conjuring, but the man Douglas Wilson himself. The narrator’s need for the spotlight is Wilson’s need for the spotlight, his values are Wilson’s values, his beliefs are Wilson’s beliefs, and his voice is Wilson’s voice.
Therefore, both when the narrator speaks explicitly in the first person, and when we only hear him through the telling of the story, we can have a strong degree of reliability that these are Wilson’s thoughts, beliefs, and prejudices.
So what does Wilson believe?
Lesbians are rotund. And a married woman who runs off with another woman has the motivation of damaging her husband’s pride.
Atheist chicks are ugly.
Non-Christians are inherently stupid. He creates a dichotomy of non-Christian and Christian states, using red state/blue state voting patterns as a proxy for religion. The Democratic states become increasingly impoverished due to the stupidity of their business leaders. He doesn’t mention the fact that in the real world, states with Republican majorities receive more in tax benefits than they pay, so he need not overcome this inconvenient truth. Remember, his version of the future is based on fantasy, not on extrapolation from current realities. Speaking of which, aside from faith in God, the red states can attribute their success to two things: increased oil extraction and encouraging men to marry young and impregnate their wives as often as possible. All of Wilson’s fantasies are replete with gushers.
The right wing, to which I’ll include Wilson, has an interesting pattern of seeing “the enemy” as it knows its own nature to be, in an act of projection. The right tries to pack the judiciary and rig trials, and so Wilson accuses the left in his novel of doing this. Conservative whites seek to persecute minorities and women, and Wilson claims the religious right is persecuted. And thus an antagonist female heathen is counseled, “when you make something up, you are not ‘concocting’ anything. You are a member of an oppressed class.”
Unsurprisingly, in Wilson’s fantasy of a future, men and women have different standards and different expectations. Women are not exactly reduced to their physical characteristics, including attractiveness to men, but it is a primary consideration in their merit. It always bears mentioning. In a novel that uses a sex doll as its primary domino, a hero-lawyer unironically addresses his heroine daughter, Stephanie, as “doll babe.” A woman is expected to be dutiful and pretty, “well-proportioned without being in any way a hazard or public nuisance.” A young woman who develops into maturity wants a man to whom she can “submit… fully, completely.” When nudged in the right direction, women will “rediscover what they are for,” which is implied to be housekeeping and procreation. If a woman is virtuous, even if she is not Christian, it will be her natural and obvious inclination to become Christian. And she will go to the altar a virgin. Her groom need not be a virgin, as long as he can claim that a heathen had seduced him. And soon after the nuptials, the bride will be pregnant.
And I don’t know what to make of Wilson’s beauty standards, beyond WTF, as exemplified by the sex doll so I must emphasize that this is a direct quote: “Her lips had that come-hither pout, that sexy look, like she had just been hit in the mouth with a brick.”
Time for discussion of a literary technique: rule vs. exception. Suppose an author was to write a story about a vicious dog. It attacks and kills other dogs, cats, people, endangered snails, etc. If the author believes dogs are as a rule inherently and irredeemably bad, we need only see his one dog to illustrate the point. If the author wants us to understand that not all dogs are like this, and his main character dog is an exception, then he shows us another dog, or dogs, being gentle, loving, and saving infants from burning buildings.
In chapter 8 of Ride, Sally, Ride, “The Plot Thickens,” we have a shyster buffoon of a lawyer who tries to defame the novel’s hero on the principle of “believing all women.” He presents a woman who transparently lies that Ace had abused her sexually. There are many ways an author can have the heroes respond to this challenge. Wilson’s choice is telling. The righteous heroine, Stephanie, invents an incident of molestation that slimeball attorney Glastonbury supposedly perpetrated on her. The implication is clear: A woman claiming sexual assault is not to be believed. She is a liar. Every one of them, no matter who she is or what the circumstance. Women are not to be believed regarding sexual assault.
So there you have it: the novel, Ride, Sally, Ride, a product of its creator.
But wait! There’s more!
Mr. Wilson surprises us at a couple points. He truly does. For while we may expect the kind of inviolable, top-down patriarchy that hearkens back to the Third Reich, Wilson shows us that disobedience, inservitute, is allowed, and actually welcome at some points. The hero, Ace Hartwick, does not respect the wishes of his Christian, but apparently insufficiently Christian, father in regards to our beloved sex bot Sally. Ace’s mother wrings her hands in deference to her husband, but only for so long, for she breaks from him to take the side of her righteous son. And Wilson also implies that a woman may decline to take her husband past third base.
Take note, women and children of Wilson’s Christ Church. The narrator of Ride, Sally, Ride, aka Pastor Doug Wilson, says it is OK to disobey the patriarchy. So show your faith the way you want, withhold sex from your husband, I guess you can even vote the way you want, assured by the fact that Wilson allows a bit of autonomy in his characters, and therefore, he will allow it in you.
For those familiar with the Facebook page, “Examining Doug Wilson & Moscow, Idaho,” let me dispense with their objection to the novel: that it is about a sex doll, and it is pornographic. In this PG-worthy story, sex bot Sally is the MacGuffin, and a MacGuffin that Wilson clearly condemns. Spoiler alert: The hero of the book, Ace Hartwick, throws Sally, property of a neighbor, into a thrash compactor and is charged by the state of Colorado with murder, for the neighbor had presented the doll as his wife.
In terms of his general level of craft, we need not awaken the Pulitzer or Nobel committees. While Wilson can write well, he cannot do so consistently, at least not in Ride, Sally, Ride. We need to blink through awkward use of passive voice, jarring shifts in perspective, unskilled repetition of words and phrases, far too many instances where he should have been showing instead of telling, and a paucity of sensory input aside from the visual. To give one cogent example, spoiler, spoiler, spoiler, a “helicopter touched down” on a rooftop to rescue the heroes of the story. I guess we saw this action, but we did not hear the thrumming blades, nor feel the wind whipping the bystanders or blowing dust into their eyes or mouths. The helicopter accepts its holy cargo and takes off, with nary a mention of how anyone’s stomach plummets. As Wilson treats an invitingly visceral experience, so he treats many other passages: artlessly.
He begins several subplots that seem to be dropped at various parts of the novel, and that would have been well enough. But one by one, he picks them up at the end to make tidy. It calls to recollection the dime store detective novel where all the mechanics are revealed in the end. “Ah, so Lionel wasn’t really a nincompoop; he was just playing one for Nebraska’s secret service!”
To understand the real guts of the story, we need to turn our attention to the narrator, who unveils himself, often uncomfortably, in the first person, even presuming to occasionally use the “royal we.” Returning to the fact that Wilson is a fledgeling novelist, and also recalling his various public statements and writings, I have to come to a simple conclusion about the narrator: He is no artistic conjuring, but the man Douglas Wilson himself. The narrator’s need for the spotlight is Wilson’s need for the spotlight, his values are Wilson’s values, his beliefs are Wilson’s beliefs, and his voice is Wilson’s voice.
Therefore, both when the narrator speaks explicitly in the first person, and when we only hear him through the telling of the story, we can have a strong degree of reliability that these are Wilson’s thoughts, beliefs, and prejudices.
So what does Wilson believe?
Lesbians are rotund. And a married woman who runs off with another woman has the motivation of damaging her husband’s pride.
Atheist chicks are ugly.
Non-Christians are inherently stupid. He creates a dichotomy of non-Christian and Christian states, using red state/blue state voting patterns as a proxy for religion. The Democratic states become increasingly impoverished due to the stupidity of their business leaders. He doesn’t mention the fact that in the real world, states with Republican majorities receive more in tax benefits than they pay, so he need not overcome this inconvenient truth. Remember, his version of the future is based on fantasy, not on extrapolation from current realities. Speaking of which, aside from faith in God, the red states can attribute their success to two things: increased oil extraction and encouraging men to marry young and impregnate their wives as often as possible. All of Wilson’s fantasies are replete with gushers.
The right wing, to which I’ll include Wilson, has an interesting pattern of seeing “the enemy” as it knows its own nature to be, in an act of projection. The right tries to pack the judiciary and rig trials, and so Wilson accuses the left in his novel of doing this. Conservative whites seek to persecute minorities and women, and Wilson claims the religious right is persecuted. And thus an antagonist female heathen is counseled, “when you make something up, you are not ‘concocting’ anything. You are a member of an oppressed class.”
Unsurprisingly, in Wilson’s fantasy of a future, men and women have different standards and different expectations. Women are not exactly reduced to their physical characteristics, including attractiveness to men, but it is a primary consideration in their merit. It always bears mentioning. In a novel that uses a sex doll as its primary domino, a hero-lawyer unironically addresses his heroine daughter, Stephanie, as “doll babe.” A woman is expected to be dutiful and pretty, “well-proportioned without being in any way a hazard or public nuisance.” A young woman who develops into maturity wants a man to whom she can “submit… fully, completely.” When nudged in the right direction, women will “rediscover what they are for,” which is implied to be housekeeping and procreation. If a woman is virtuous, even if she is not Christian, it will be her natural and obvious inclination to become Christian. And she will go to the altar a virgin. Her groom need not be a virgin, as long as he can claim that a heathen had seduced him. And soon after the nuptials, the bride will be pregnant.
And I don’t know what to make of Wilson’s beauty standards, beyond WTF, as exemplified by the sex doll so I must emphasize that this is a direct quote: “Her lips had that come-hither pout, that sexy look, like she had just been hit in the mouth with a brick.”
Time for discussion of a literary technique: rule vs. exception. Suppose an author was to write a story about a vicious dog. It attacks and kills other dogs, cats, people, endangered snails, etc. If the author believes dogs are as a rule inherently and irredeemably bad, we need only see his one dog to illustrate the point. If the author wants us to understand that not all dogs are like this, and his main character dog is an exception, then he shows us another dog, or dogs, being gentle, loving, and saving infants from burning buildings.
In chapter 8 of Ride, Sally, Ride, “The Plot Thickens,” we have a shyster buffoon of a lawyer who tries to defame the novel’s hero on the principle of “believing all women.” He presents a woman who transparently lies that Ace had abused her sexually. There are many ways an author can have the heroes respond to this challenge. Wilson’s choice is telling. The righteous heroine, Stephanie, invents an incident of molestation that slimeball attorney Glastonbury supposedly perpetrated on her. The implication is clear: A woman claiming sexual assault is not to be believed. She is a liar. Every one of them, no matter who she is or what the circumstance. Women are not to be believed regarding sexual assault.
So there you have it: the novel, Ride, Sally, Ride, a product of its creator.
But wait! There’s more!
Mr. Wilson surprises us at a couple points. He truly does. For while we may expect the kind of inviolable, top-down patriarchy that hearkens back to the Third Reich, Wilson shows us that disobedience, inservitute, is allowed, and actually welcome at some points. The hero, Ace Hartwick, does not respect the wishes of his Christian, but apparently insufficiently Christian, father in regards to our beloved sex bot Sally. Ace’s mother wrings her hands in deference to her husband, but only for so long, for she breaks from him to take the side of her righteous son. And Wilson also implies that a woman may decline to take her husband past third base.
Take note, women and children of Wilson’s Christ Church. The narrator of Ride, Sally, Ride, aka Pastor Doug Wilson, says it is OK to disobey the patriarchy. So show your faith the way you want, withhold sex from your husband, I guess you can even vote the way you want, assured by the fact that Wilson allows a bit of autonomy in his characters, and therefore, he will allow it in you.
August 9, 2024
First of all, those who objected to this book when it was published by calling it pornographic clearly never read the book. It was not, in fact, pornographic in any way.
Second, I hoped to give this book a higher rating, as I've really enjoyed Doug's fiction books in the past. This one had a great premise and clever plotting all the way through. Sadly though, a lot of the dialogue was clunky, and there was a great deal more telling than showing going on. Doug's prose usually pops like Wodehouse, but it felt a little flat and lacked some zest this time around. Still, a fun read overall.
Second, I hoped to give this book a higher rating, as I've really enjoyed Doug's fiction books in the past. This one had a great premise and clever plotting all the way through. Sadly though, a lot of the dialogue was clunky, and there was a great deal more telling than showing going on. Doug's prose usually pops like Wodehouse, but it felt a little flat and lacked some zest this time around. Still, a fun read overall.
January 14, 2022
5/5 for a Satire
2/5 for a novel
(as a novel)
Dialogue is terrible. Pacing (as a novel) needs some serious work. There's a few chapters that could be cut entirely and the entire thing would read better. The ending is pretty canned.
That said, Wilson knows how to surprise his readers when it comes to plot
------------------------------------------
I must warn you: before I read this book, I followed the worm-hole of other reviews already written. It must be noted that those reviews (particularly one or two) shaped my thoughts and approach on this book. Sort of like an admonition from a neighbor to stay off the scallops at the newest restaurant in town.
Thoughts:
First off, fascinating topic that stays a satire and utterly believable at the same time. Bravo. Reads similar to Swift's Modest Proposal, Brave New World, Hideous Strength, and the end of Brother's Karamazov (the court scene, of course).
There's also a distinct similarity to Wilson's recent other work of fiction, "Man in the Dark." I'd say the two main females in either– Susannah and Stephanie– are at least sisters, or maybe cousins. There's also a similar pacing and a few key scenes that read similar. I won't give anything away, but you'll know it if you've read both.
To be honest- I dislike writing this portion, because the nepotistic part of me wants to give the book five stars - the dialogue borders on Pilgrim's Progress-esque sometimes, and can be dry, unbelievable, and preachy. That's Wilson's weakest tool as a writer.
There was also one whole scene that I would have removed or shortened, as it added little to the book in the format that it exists in.
Other than that- the book is delightful, surprising, made me chuckle in multiple parts, and ends with a nice bit of fanfare and hooh-fallah.
There are a fair amount of typos, and Knox asked me to look out for them, so that was a bit destructive to my reading pace.
I'd name a kid Asahel. And if I ever run into an Asahel, I wouldn't mind being a Stephanie.
2/5 for a novel
(as a novel)
Dialogue is terrible. Pacing (as a novel) needs some serious work. There's a few chapters that could be cut entirely and the entire thing would read better. The ending is pretty canned.
That said, Wilson knows how to surprise his readers when it comes to plot
------------------------------------------
I must warn you: before I read this book, I followed the worm-hole of other reviews already written. It must be noted that those reviews (particularly one or two) shaped my thoughts and approach on this book. Sort of like an admonition from a neighbor to stay off the scallops at the newest restaurant in town.
Thoughts:
First off, fascinating topic that stays a satire and utterly believable at the same time. Bravo. Reads similar to Swift's Modest Proposal, Brave New World, Hideous Strength, and the end of Brother's Karamazov (the court scene, of course).
There's also a distinct similarity to Wilson's recent other work of fiction, "Man in the Dark." I'd say the two main females in either– Susannah and Stephanie– are at least sisters, or maybe cousins. There's also a similar pacing and a few key scenes that read similar. I won't give anything away, but you'll know it if you've read both.
To be honest- I dislike writing this portion, because the nepotistic part of me wants to give the book five stars - the dialogue borders on Pilgrim's Progress-esque sometimes, and can be dry, unbelievable, and preachy. That's Wilson's weakest tool as a writer.
There was also one whole scene that I would have removed or shortened, as it added little to the book in the format that it exists in.
Other than that- the book is delightful, surprising, made me chuckle in multiple parts, and ends with a nice bit of fanfare and hooh-fallah.
There are a fair amount of typos, and Knox asked me to look out for them, so that was a bit destructive to my reading pace.
I'd name a kid Asahel. And if I ever run into an Asahel, I wouldn't mind being a Stephanie.
February 2, 2021
I had a lot of issues with the way the world was presented that will take a bit for me to communicate clearly, but I will say this: the writing was mostly telling, not showing, which aggravated me a lot. All of the major events happened "off camera" and in less than a paragraph. There was also a lot of coincidences which took me out of the world entirely multiple times. I think it was presented as a 'hand of God' thing, but one example is how an assassin is 'coincidentally' foiled by accident three times in a row. After a while it felt like lazy plot writing, and took me out of the story entirely.
There was also the issue that anytime someone repented of a sin (which happened a lot), the repentance and forgiveness happened in less than a sentence. I am not sure if that was just bad writing or the literal views of the author, but considering that he is a pastor I am surprised that forgiveness and reconciliation were presented as such a quick process. I thought that a pastor more than anyone else would know of all the toil and tears that mending a broken relationship entails, even IF both parties want to be reconciled.
There was also the issue that anytime someone repented of a sin (which happened a lot), the repentance and forgiveness happened in less than a sentence. I am not sure if that was just bad writing or the literal views of the author, but considering that he is a pastor I am surprised that forgiveness and reconciliation were presented as such a quick process. I thought that a pastor more than anyone else would know of all the toil and tears that mending a broken relationship entails, even IF both parties want to be reconciled.
February 14, 2021
Absolutely insufferable self congratulatory tripe, sprinkled with about three good sentences concerning the nature of truth.
I say this as someone who consumes various other Canon and Apologia content; you can't call me a LiBeRaL hAtEr.
Please stick to nonfiction.
I say this as someone who consumes various other Canon and Apologia content; you can't call me a LiBeRaL hAtEr.
Please stick to nonfiction.
August 20, 2020
A prophetic dystopian novel centered on the future of America and it’s celebration of immorality. Lots of great connections from other classics. Wilson brings out a well written story about a man standing on the truth when the world has gone insane. Unique to the dystopian genre, this novel is saturated with gospel truth, the Christian worldview, and emphasizes the downgrade of the American church.
October 2, 2022
Absolutely spectacular. The flavor is like Austen and McManus meeting Merlin in the bloody banquet hall of the N. I. C. E. 10/10
February 24, 2022
This is a difficult book to review. It's not something you can simply criticize on its merit as a novel, or as a work of dystopian fiction, or as a morality play by a pastor, because it's none of those things - at least not exclusively. It's primarily a satire, and so a lot of the normal things you'd expect - coherent worldbuilding, 3-dimensional characters, dialogue that had notable differences based on the age or gender of the speaker, plot points that didn't resolve through coincidence - don't seem to matter to the author. It's not about those things, per se, it's about the point he is trying to make, the little vignettes of absurd scenarios that parody our times, the little situations that are included to illustrate how real Christians should behave.
Take the book for what it is: an illustration of Doug Wilson's worldview.
There are some very disappointing elements. A character he creates is a woman who attended a Christian high school and gleefully manufactures a false rape accusation against the main character. Some of the details he includes in her characterization seem dangerously close to real life situations that have occurred in his own church. When it comes to sensitive subject matter like that (and I'm not just talking sexual assault, but also a sensitive issue experienced by his own congregants) is it really appropriate to play so callously with details like that? This is compounded by the fact that every antagonist in this book is not merely "evil" they are also utterly contemptible and without a single redeeming quality. It's not enough to be evil, you must also be ugly, fat, stupid, corrupt, fraudulent, cowardly, weak, etc.
It's also worth mentioning that the love interest, Stephanie (who can't go two pages without someone reminding us she is attractive) is supposedly an agnostic for most of the book - although she seems to have more working knowledge of the Bible and Christian culture than your average agnostic, or even your average Christian. The main character Ace, whose eyeballs are constantly on her, and who admits later he is "manfully resisting" trying to kiss her, because she's an unbeliever, is rewarded by her conversion at the end of the book, at which point they go instantly from not-dating to dating, with a wedding very quickly afterward. Mission(ary dating) accomplished.
To be completely fair to the book, there were several sections that prompted a chuckle. Wilson is nothing if not a sharp wordsmith. I thought the conclusion to his premise in the trial was clever. And there were several scenes that felt real and interesting that I imagine are true to life for him - such as an elder meeting, or an interaction between father and daughter. The premise and the marketing campaign made this book seem like it would be a lot more salacious than it actually is - all things considered.
Still, that's not enough to recommend the book. A complete list of elements I disliked would be long and frankly, unproductive. If you already agree with all aspects of Wilson's worldview I assume you'll read this book without complaint. Some very enthusiastic reviews on this site bear witness to that. And if you don't like Wilson, I hardly need to tell you to skip this book. That would go without saying. But - if for some reason you've been somewhere in the middle - I see enough perplexing and unedifying issues in this book to justify skipping it entirely.
Take the book for what it is: an illustration of Doug Wilson's worldview.
There are some very disappointing elements. A character he creates is a woman who attended a Christian high school and gleefully manufactures a false rape accusation against the main character. Some of the details he includes in her characterization seem dangerously close to real life situations that have occurred in his own church. When it comes to sensitive subject matter like that (and I'm not just talking sexual assault, but also a sensitive issue experienced by his own congregants) is it really appropriate to play so callously with details like that? This is compounded by the fact that every antagonist in this book is not merely "evil" they are also utterly contemptible and without a single redeeming quality. It's not enough to be evil, you must also be ugly, fat, stupid, corrupt, fraudulent, cowardly, weak, etc.
It's also worth mentioning that the love interest, Stephanie (who can't go two pages without someone reminding us she is attractive) is supposedly an agnostic for most of the book - although she seems to have more working knowledge of the Bible and Christian culture than your average agnostic, or even your average Christian. The main character Ace, whose eyeballs are constantly on her, and who admits later he is "manfully resisting" trying to kiss her, because she's an unbeliever, is rewarded by her conversion at the end of the book, at which point they go instantly from not-dating to dating, with a wedding very quickly afterward. Mission(ary dating) accomplished.
To be completely fair to the book, there were several sections that prompted a chuckle. Wilson is nothing if not a sharp wordsmith. I thought the conclusion to his premise in the trial was clever. And there were several scenes that felt real and interesting that I imagine are true to life for him - such as an elder meeting, or an interaction between father and daughter. The premise and the marketing campaign made this book seem like it would be a lot more salacious than it actually is - all things considered.
Still, that's not enough to recommend the book. A complete list of elements I disliked would be long and frankly, unproductive. If you already agree with all aspects of Wilson's worldview I assume you'll read this book without complaint. Some very enthusiastic reviews on this site bear witness to that. And if you don't like Wilson, I hardly need to tell you to skip this book. That would go without saying. But - if for some reason you've been somewhere in the middle - I see enough perplexing and unedifying issues in this book to justify skipping it entirely.
September 5, 2020
4.5/5
Don't listen to the naysayers, this book is both witty and edifying.
Doug Wilson knows how sin works, both individually and socially, and he sees where the West is headed, barring a generous outpouring of repentance from on high. This book is encouragement and ammo for the faithful ones in the years to come.
I did have a question on one page, where I wasn't sure whether the main hero apologized for something he shouldn't have said.
Don't listen to the naysayers, this book is both witty and edifying.
Doug Wilson knows how sin works, both individually and socially, and he sees where the West is headed, barring a generous outpouring of repentance from on high. This book is encouragement and ammo for the faithful ones in the years to come.
I did have a question on one page, where I wasn't sure whether the main hero apologized for something he shouldn't have said.
January 1, 2022
“Dad, this is not really a theology issue . . . well, okay it is. Everything is. But not theology theology. This is more like ‘how-not-to-lose-your-sanity theology.’ This is ‘how water isn’t dry’ theology.”
This book is all “how water isn’t dry” theology. I enjoyed every bit- making it pretty hard to put down. I give it 4 stars and a hearty recommendation. Read it!
This book is all “how water isn’t dry” theology. I enjoyed every bit- making it pretty hard to put down. I give it 4 stars and a hearty recommendation. Read it!
May 16, 2021
As a satire - 5 stars. I wouldn’t be surprised if it turned out to be prophetic.
As a novel - 2 stars. All the characters spoke in Wilson’s voice, and the descriptions were pithy but thick.
As a novel - 2 stars. All the characters spoke in Wilson’s voice, and the descriptions were pithy but thick.
August 18, 2021
Mr. Wilson tries to be clever, witty, and everything else in this book, but ultimately, it sags under the weight of the verbose, suggestively descriptive, writing in this book.
May 14, 2024
Fun times.
December 14, 2025
I wish I had a quote, but alas, I do not.
Similar to my other experiences of rereading Doug Wilson novels, the second time was not as fun. I think this largely is because the plot provides most of the humor and interest. You already know the plot the second time, so oof. Does this mean the book is not well written? I do not think I’d go that far, but it is definitely not very well written. Maybe if I were to read it instead of listening to it I would see new things in it.
Also, this time around everything seemed more unrealistic. Why is everyone so hot? Like what? I did not want to read a romance novel. And there were many times in the story that could have been way more effective if they had been longer and more carefully developed—but perhaps Wilson did not want us to feel anything but amusement.
That said, I do like this story and it has many good points. I would encourage people to read it once, but perhaps not twice.
Similar to my other experiences of rereading Doug Wilson novels, the second time was not as fun. I think this largely is because the plot provides most of the humor and interest. You already know the plot the second time, so oof. Does this mean the book is not well written? I do not think I’d go that far, but it is definitely not very well written. Maybe if I were to read it instead of listening to it I would see new things in it.
Also, this time around everything seemed more unrealistic. Why is everyone so hot? Like what? I did not want to read a romance novel. And there were many times in the story that could have been way more effective if they had been longer and more carefully developed—but perhaps Wilson did not want us to feel anything but amusement.
That said, I do like this story and it has many good points. I would encourage people to read it once, but perhaps not twice.
August 23, 2023
Whatever you think this book is, it's not. What a fun and enjoyable ride.
The ending had me close to tearing up. So good.
Wilson isn't the greatest writer of all time, by any stretch of the imagination. His diaglogs tend to be stilted and out of focus, but he has a way of telling the story as a whole that makes it worth reading anyway.
There are two moments in the story that are horrible and awkward, but that is exactly the point. The redemption that follows shows why those moments were necessary to the story. Could he have written it slightly differently in order to appease the DWDS crowd? Sure. But those moments had a point, and I appreciated them.
The ending had me close to tearing up. So good.
Wilson isn't the greatest writer of all time, by any stretch of the imagination. His diaglogs tend to be stilted and out of focus, but he has a way of telling the story as a whole that makes it worth reading anyway.
There are two moments in the story that are horrible and awkward, but that is exactly the point. The redemption that follows shows why those moments were necessary to the story. Could he have written it slightly differently in order to appease the DWDS crowd? Sure. But those moments had a point, and I appreciated them.
February 5, 2023
Gripping story, except that some of the characters, notably Ace and Stephanie, sounded like they were incarnated lines from Doug Wilson’s blog, which is to say that the main characters in the story were somewhat idealized. I still think it is a fine piece of work and surprisingly prophetic.
October 20, 2022
The first you thing you ought to know about Ride, Sally, Ride is that it absolutely smashed my expectations, and this review does not do it justice. From chapter one, I found myself helplessly riveted from beginning to end. (Which is an absolutely amazing feeling, in case you were wondering.)
Ride, Sally, Ride is utterly inspirational. It makes a better case for Wilson's commitment to traditional gender stereotypes than any nonfiction treatise he could ever write, because Ace is a character you quickly come to love and aspire to be like. You find yourself wanting to be unwaveringly committed to truth and goodness in the face of adversity, wanting to be brave and selfless, because he is, and it's beautiful. (He's not at all a Mary Sue, though—I'd like to make that abundantly clear. Comprendez? Cool. I'll continue.)
Wilson has crafted a wondrous tale of hope. He takes totalitolerant ideology to its logical end, and thereby unveils the insanity of the post-Sexual Revolution world, pointing us to the lightened path forward—to the Gospel and the eternal reign of Jesus Christ.
I could keep on ranting about all the things I love about this book, but for the sake of your time, I'll stop right here.
Ride, Sally, Ride is utterly inspirational. It makes a better case for Wilson's commitment to traditional gender stereotypes than any nonfiction treatise he could ever write, because Ace is a character you quickly come to love and aspire to be like. You find yourself wanting to be unwaveringly committed to truth and goodness in the face of adversity, wanting to be brave and selfless, because he is, and it's beautiful. (He's not at all a Mary Sue, though—I'd like to make that abundantly clear. Comprendez? Cool. I'll continue.)
Wilson has crafted a wondrous tale of hope. He takes totalitolerant ideology to its logical end, and thereby unveils the insanity of the post-Sexual Revolution world, pointing us to the lightened path forward—to the Gospel and the eternal reign of Jesus Christ.
I could keep on ranting about all the things I love about this book, but for the sake of your time, I'll stop right here.
July 2, 2022
Ride Sally Ride sat on my shelf for months before I worked up the nerve to actually read it—I’m glad I finally did! I was even late to an appointment because I was so caught up in the characters’ fate.
I tend to be squeamish at topics in this vein (ie: I avoid Law & Order svu type shows like the plague.) Mr. Wilson handled it with discretion. I especially loved the father/son relationship, but there were many layers of goodness to this story.
Plot twists, captivating, memorable, funny, poignant.
I am familiar with and enjoy the writer’s style, and was pleased once again. I grinned at the Wodehouse nods.
It could have been shorter…many rabbit trails…but I enjoyed not knowing which details were/weren’t important.
I tend to be squeamish at topics in this vein (ie: I avoid Law & Order svu type shows like the plague.) Mr. Wilson handled it with discretion. I especially loved the father/son relationship, but there were many layers of goodness to this story.
Plot twists, captivating, memorable, funny, poignant.
I am familiar with and enjoy the writer’s style, and was pleased once again. I grinned at the Wodehouse nods.
It could have been shorter…many rabbit trails…but I enjoyed not knowing which details were/weren’t important.
July 14, 2021
This book was so juicy. This book sadly could be a reality someday based on where our culture is going but for now, it’s a great fiction book that I think everyone should read. There were a lot of surprises in the book that I didn’t see coming which makes it juicier. I loved the ending as well. Overall Dougie is the man.
January 25, 2022
garbage
Absolute trash. Wilson makes a mockery of domestic violence and sexual assault survivors. It’s quite telling how he makes snide comments about grooming. The book also contains pedophilic elements. I would not recommend this to anyone.
Absolute trash. Wilson makes a mockery of domestic violence and sexual assault survivors. It’s quite telling how he makes snide comments about grooming. The book also contains pedophilic elements. I would not recommend this to anyone.
August 18, 2020
Ha! What a story! Very good.
September 3, 2020
A fun read; mostly I love how optimistic and cheerful Doug is and it does my extremely pessimistic soul good to read.
September 12, 2020
Crazy good. Literally.
October 29, 2020
So funny. So good. So Wilson. It’s barely satire, but that’s not Doug’s fault.
May 23, 2022
Ride Sally Ride
Five stars
On the one hand and in one sense this book does not deserve more than 3 1/2 or four stars. Reasons given below. Let’s start with the good stuff though.
First off, “Ride” is fun. Really fun. Enjoyable, witty. I laughed, a lot. So did the author. Once, he even laughed (or almost laughed) inadvertently as he read his own audiobook. A lot of books are written so earnestly and professionally that they seem detached from the author in some way. Doug absolutely had his tongue in his cheek and his knuckles cracking the whole way through. I can’t say for sure, but there were a couple of times he may have finished a paragraph and just did a little spin in his office chair. At least once he must’ve said, “Hey Honey, come read this.” Upon reading, whether or not Honey laughed, Doug certainly did.
Because he had fun, I had fun. I would like to enjoy whatever I do as much as he enjoyed writing this book.
Secondly, this book is uncommonly hearty and wholesome. That’s remarkable because of the premise, and because Wilson redeem virtually every characters life from the pit. He deals very roughly with them in the set up, and very thoroughly brings each full circle into a mature, likable, redeemed place. Homosexuality, smarmy fathering, sexual deviancy of other kinds, pride, envy, passivity, feminism, chauvinism, Wilson’s characters start dirty. And his affection for them is sufficient that each should find cleanliness before the close. And they find it through the express preaching and submission to the gospel. For this reason and the first, I think God really likes this book.
It must be said, however, that whatever excellence however good the plot (I thought it was quite good), execution of dialogue is not excellent in any tecbgincql sense. Every single line from every single character is dougish—an adjective intentionally more playful and cheery than ‘Wilsonian’, which rhymes with roguish . Not one sentence doesn’t have dougish curly qs—even the antagonist is clearly just Doug behind the mask coming up with the antagonists’s dougish lines. This effect is compounded by Doug giving voice—his own, with no inflections or characterizations—to every one or his dougish characters in his audiobook rendition. Everyone has the same fast-talking, straight shooting, refusing-to be restrained zest for the wisecracking word.
I actually wonder if this could be intentional. The premise of the book is satirical, but the plot and characters really eclipse that basic genre, and so the author mixed his ink with a small pot of glow-in-the-dark dougishness.
In any case, delivered far more than the punchy premise promised.
Five stars
On the one hand and in one sense this book does not deserve more than 3 1/2 or four stars. Reasons given below. Let’s start with the good stuff though.
First off, “Ride” is fun. Really fun. Enjoyable, witty. I laughed, a lot. So did the author. Once, he even laughed (or almost laughed) inadvertently as he read his own audiobook. A lot of books are written so earnestly and professionally that they seem detached from the author in some way. Doug absolutely had his tongue in his cheek and his knuckles cracking the whole way through. I can’t say for sure, but there were a couple of times he may have finished a paragraph and just did a little spin in his office chair. At least once he must’ve said, “Hey Honey, come read this.” Upon reading, whether or not Honey laughed, Doug certainly did.
Because he had fun, I had fun. I would like to enjoy whatever I do as much as he enjoyed writing this book.
Secondly, this book is uncommonly hearty and wholesome. That’s remarkable because of the premise, and because Wilson redeem virtually every characters life from the pit. He deals very roughly with them in the set up, and very thoroughly brings each full circle into a mature, likable, redeemed place. Homosexuality, smarmy fathering, sexual deviancy of other kinds, pride, envy, passivity, feminism, chauvinism, Wilson’s characters start dirty. And his affection for them is sufficient that each should find cleanliness before the close. And they find it through the express preaching and submission to the gospel. For this reason and the first, I think God really likes this book.
It must be said, however, that whatever excellence however good the plot (I thought it was quite good), execution of dialogue is not excellent in any tecbgincql sense. Every single line from every single character is dougish—an adjective intentionally more playful and cheery than ‘Wilsonian’, which rhymes with roguish . Not one sentence doesn’t have dougish curly qs—even the antagonist is clearly just Doug behind the mask coming up with the antagonists’s dougish lines. This effect is compounded by Doug giving voice—his own, with no inflections or characterizations—to every one or his dougish characters in his audiobook rendition. Everyone has the same fast-talking, straight shooting, refusing-to be restrained zest for the wisecracking word.
I actually wonder if this could be intentional. The premise of the book is satirical, but the plot and characters really eclipse that basic genre, and so the author mixed his ink with a small pot of glow-in-the-dark dougishness.
In any case, delivered far more than the punchy premise promised.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 254 reviews