This book was originally published in 2009, and unfortunately, for everything I enjoyed about it, there was another slur spoken that drew me out of it. And I get it: it was a different time.

I knew from the cover of this book that it was probably not going to be my thing, but because it's about "Hamlet," I decided to give it a shot anyway. I thought that perhaps it could be fun in an "early 2000s teen movie" kind of way. What I got instead was a lazy, reductive version of this play that talks down to its readers and shows a blatant disregard for the things that make the original so loved.

I really enjoyed this book, although I was curious whether I liked it because it's about "Hamlet" or if I liked it because I truly thought it was a good book. But with how beautifully written and highly emotional it was, I think it's fine to say I just liked it.

This book was fine. It wasn't great, but it wasn't awful. It reminded me a lot of The Haunting of Hill House (both the movie and the show), but not as good. The concepts in this book had some real potential, but I don't think the execution matched up to expectations.

I'm a huge fan of Stevenson's Ernest Cunningham books, but those are highly stylized, so I was really excited to see how his work held up in a "normal" mystery setting. And I actually really liked this book. The sense of humor and artful reveal of held-back information are familiar enough while still being its own distinct story. It's a good, solid mystery.

I knew I was going to love this book, but it's taken me such a long time to read it. I'm so glad that I finally did, though. It's a very unique book, and I never would've guessed that an octopus having a point of view would be endearing instead of silly, but it worked really well.

This book wasn't good. Had I not won it in a Goodreads giveaway, I probably would've stopped reading it.

There are some books that are good as you're reading them, and then as you finish them you are suddenly flooded with the flaws. This was one of those books for me.

Overall, this book was fine. I'm glad I read it, because it was a sweet story that was clearly written by a lover of a books, which I appreciate. But it's certainly not my favorite book ever.

Looks can be deceiving, and in keeping with the tradition of Shakespearean tragedies, this book starts off in a rough spot and gets worse.

Looks can be deceiving, and in keeping with the tradition of Shakespearean tragedies, this book starts off in a rough spot and gets worse.

I enjoyed this book, but I'm worried it was overhyped and that hindered my enjoyment.

This book taught me a very valuable lesson about picking books to read just because there's a dramatic flower bouquet on the cover.

Congratulations, McEwan. You've written the first retelling of Hamlet that even I couldn't find it in myself to like.

I thought the premise was so funny that I just had to read it. But honestly, as far as fun romance book go, I enjoyed this one.

Where to begin with this book. I wasn't sold from the very beginning, and it went downhill from there.

Overall, this book was fine. I didn't love it, but I didn't hate it.

The Dead Father's Club by Matt Haig Pages: 336 Genre: literary fiction, retelling Rating: 4 Star Kindle Notes and Highlights Philip...

Less by Andrew Sean Greer Pages: 273 Genre: literary fiction Rating: 4 Star Kindle Notes and Highlights Less-than-successful author...

Onyx Storm by Rebecca Yarros Pages: 527 Genre: romantasy Rating: 2.5 Star Book Club Pick Warning: I'm going to avoid spoilers for this...