Book Review: Vox

Vox by Christina Dalcher

My rating: 2 of 5 stars

Due to the controversial nature of this book, and that I have a lot of things to say I have broken my review down into five segments. Please note: Item 5 has spoilers, you can easily scroll past it to the conclusion of the review as I have left space so you don't skim it by accident. Please keep in mind that reviews are about how the reviewer felt and perceived a book. They are no right or wrong reviews as you cannot tell someone their feelings are invalid.

There are so many aspects of Vox to talk about which makes it's difficult to figure out what to focus on. However, I've gotten my list down to 5 key areas: 1) Christina Dalcher's writing & expertise, 2) Use of Christianity, 3) Fear mongering, 4) Comparison to Handmaiden's Tale, 5) The Ending (and Patrick)

1 - Christina Dalcher's Writing & Expertise
Without even reading Dalcher's bio or Q/A at the end of the book I could have told anyone that she was very intelligent and probably has linguistic or neurological credentials. The linguistics, chemistry and general medical knowledge that Dalcher displays in Vox is superb; without being over the top. She gives just enough science to feel like it's legitimate; without overwhelming the reader.
Dalcher has a beautiful writing technique and knack for keeping the reader engaged. Vox is a quick read and one I didn't want to put down for even a minute. While the end was a little disjointed (more on that later) and some of the characters a bit too archetypal for my taste; I can't discount that I was entranced by the writing. Vox is written at a level similar to that of Dan Brown and Michael Crichton, where you don't need to be educated to read it and understand it; but where the experienced reader is still likely to enjoy portions of the book. I cannot speak to the accuracy to other scientists in these areas but I feel like Dalcher has likely captured the essence of what is important. In fact, the sole reason for my 2-stars for Vox is because of the writing and readability of Vox. My rating has nothing to do with the content, plot, characters or message of the story. Vox is proof that good writing cannot save a novel.

2 - Use of Christianity
Two major points here:
A) Christianity is a patriarch. If you are Christian and this is new to you then I recommend you read the Bible and pay attention to the words used. The scriptures quoted in Vox are word for word. Dalcher didn't change them or take then out of context. If you are offended that the Bible is written this way then I recommend you question that via your choice of faith support and not blame Dalcher for it. I was raised Christian and it was never a secret that women were 'different' and not as 'valued' as men. I'm sorry if this upsets some, but it's the truth. Women in Christianity are really only good for one thing: having babies. Otherwise women are born with sin and the root of all problems/evil. If you feel it's out of context please read point B below.
B) If you are Christian and feel offended by this book's use of your religion to 'justify' the actions taken by the government then probably you are being too sensitive. It wouldn't have mattered what religion or set of beliefs was used to justify the actions. I don't think this book engages in Christian bashing at all. It merely takes an existing belief system and applies it in an extreme way. This has been done thousands of times to all different groups of people in literature whether by religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, etc. Welcome to the club of feeling like you were misrepresented in literature. To date you have been lucky that the majority of readily available novels have been in your favour, but that doesn't mean that your safe from criticism. Every other religion has had its values and ideals be subject to interpretation and fictionalization that isn't positive. I realize you feel the way you do, and I cannot (nor would I) presume to tell you you don't feel that way. Instead I encourage you to take a critical look at why you're upset and remind you that the rest of the world has felt this way forever and we all got told to suck it up. So my 'suck it up' message is just consistent with what I've been told over the years regarding my own beliefs since I left Christianity behind. Grab a chair and join everyone on this side of the line; just maybe don't drink the Kool-Aid.

3 - Fear mongering
Books that hit close to home or resemble our existing society are sometimes dangerous. Authors need to be careful that they are not planting the seed of an idea in their readers. It's very easy for inception to happen because of something that we read. Every self help book ever written is based on the premise that by presenting an idea to you is enough that you can turn it into a value or change your life. Given this is true and happens, there is danger in Vox. That danger is that some people may think the restriction of women's words is a good thing. As I read Vox on my lunch hour at my office, upon returning to my desk, I noticed how many men were around me. Instantly I wondered how many wish I didn't speak (a lot I'm willing to bet, lol), and if I needed to be looking for the root causes, that Jackie speaks of, that could result in a society like that of Vox. Now, you may be thinking, come on Mel really? You're smarter than that. But a well written, well argued story that invokes emotion and a reaction in people could be the beginning of women becoming paranoid and acting out in a way that results in restriction of their voices. Vox gave me a real panic attack when I returned to my cubicle surrounded by men. This is a testament to good writing; but it's also a testament to how dangerous some ideas are.
When Dalcher used existing political jargon to demonstrate her point it made me very nervous. The slogan "Make American Morale Again" really put me off. Is Dalcher is trying to make every woman that reads this book afraid of men? How does that relate it to today's society. One word change is easy enough right? She's trying to in still in us a paranoia that is not healthy.
The more we distinguish ourselves (in any way), from one another, the more likely we are to see problems where there might not be any. That's not to say that our world isn't male-dominated. It certainly is; but it's getting bette. Books like Vox do NOT help the equality cause. Instead they create a fear that can result in poor judgements being made and in people seeing monsters where there are none. I hate fear mongering, not just because it spikes my anxiety disorder, but because it's a horrible device used to control people. Stalin used it, Hitler perfected it, and Trump is borrowing from it. Creating a society of fear does not allow people to feel free; instead it's just a way of convincing someone that their 'freedoms' are being infringed upon for in order to 'keep them safe'. It's rarely about safety, instead it's about control. I don't like that Vox puts ideas in people's heads and perpetuates irrational, but easily relatable fear. This makes Vox a very dangerous book in the hands of someone who may be easily influenced... like a teenager.
We don't need to create more fear in our society. There is already way too much fear. Just think, Vox could lead us to a world where women call 911 because a man stopped them and asked for the time. That woman might claim they felt dominated and 'required' to answer. You laugh and assume I'm kidding; but examples in the USA of white folks calling in ridiculous accusations to black people are happening right now. And why? Because society has perpetuated a culture of fear.
I wish Dalcher had written a story about linguistics that wasn't based on government control; but instead was based on how important it is to educate children before the age of 5 in order for them to really grasp the idea of language. This is certainly stated in Vox, but I believe it's too difficult for it to be heard over all the noise created by the controversial situation of restricting women to 100 words a day.

4 - Comparison to Handmaiden's Tale
Certainly there are obvious comparisons to be made to Margaret Atwood's literary triumph The Handmaiden's Tale. Yet, there are distinct differences that make Atwood's book one of the best dystopian books of all time. In Handmaiden's Tale we really connect with the characters; whereas in Vox I hated the main character whom we experience the story from. Not only is she immoral herself (I will never be okay with lying and cheating on a spouse), but she's also really annoying. While she may be a mother of four I felt like she was really a mother of two. Her daughter of 5 and her oldest son. The twins were virtually ignored and her relationship with her husband is a mess because she's incredible selfish. There's a misconception here that just because someone is able to be do something that will result in good that they are inherently good. This is not true. Just because our leading lady is a scientist and intelligent doesn't mean she knows what is best or is the 'key' to everything. It bothered me a lot that Dalcher seemed to think we should just like her main character when in fact I really hated her.
The other major variation from Handmaiden's Tale is that the abuse (of any kind) the women go through in Vox is really disjointed. Unlike in Atwood's masterpiece where we see and feel escalation of events, Vox feels like it goes from nothing to something almost overnight. And the 'hints' of what was happening, presented by Jackie, don't feel significant enough to have developed into bracelets that count words. This is a major plot issue that I couldn't get over. Never mind that those points Dalcher gets right (women being banned from working, banned from certain areas or tasks, etc.) are identical to Atwood's. Given that the whole book is focused on how they got into this mess, it's important that we understand the nuances that got the society to this point.

NOTE: Spoilers in segment 5
Scroll to bottom quickly to read conclusion only











5 - The Ending (and Patrick) Spoilers ahead
First, let me say that Patrick is pretty much the only character worth giving your time to in this book. I don't include Sonia here as she is only five years old and clearly just a victim of everything. I also liked Del but he is not developed enough as a character to really say much about him.
Patrick is the only stoic, respectable main character in the whole book. He is a perfect example of the average man who is caught between keeping his family safe and doing the right thing. The hate which his wife (our leading lady) spews towards him is just wrong. Were the world to go the way of Vox tomorrow I would NOT want my husband to sacrifice himself for me. Perhaps this is Dalcher's way of showing how little our leading lady cared about her marriage that she believes he should have done more. But for me it ultimately just felt cheap. Maybe had Dalcher elaborated on Patrick's power and influence at the White House I'd feel differently but that is not how this is played out... until the end.
The ending of Vox is about as convenient as they come. And anyone who has read a couple of my reviews knows that convenience is one of my top annoyances in all literature. Sacrificing Patrick, not only takes him out of the family equation so that our leading lady gets what she wants (even if she doesn't deserve it...), allows him to 'save society' and be the hero. This is pure lazy writing to me. Dalcher ties it all up in a bow (of her choosing); but not in a bow that feels realistic. In fact, the last 1/4 of this book looses something. It almost feels as if someone else wrote it. Vox goes from being a dystopian social commentary to a cheap suspense/thriller that requires a resolution. To think that 'suddenly' the government corrects itself is just naive. There's easily an entire novel that could be written about what Patrick does and how things fall out afterwards. At the very least it deserves more than a couple pages tacked onto the end of this book.
Even if I didn't think that there was fear mongering and character issues in Vox, I'd still dislike this book because of how the ending is handled. It's cheap, convenient and frankly, ridiculous.












Conclusion
Overall the outrage about this book relating to Christianity should be a non-issue as at no time does Dalcher blame Christianity; she merely uses it's words to create a justification. It is certainly not her fault that it's so easy to take a patriarchal text like the Bible and apply it to the situation. This part of the 'controversy' is a non-starter for me.
However, the outrage about how women and men are portrayed in Vox is justified in my mind. This idea that there are enough men in the world that hate women so much they'd want to make them all mutes is ridiculous. What is even more crazy is to think that in any first world country the political structure is so fragile as to be easily taken down. I am Canadian and confident that this would not be possible in Canada due to our legislation, Supreme Court oversight, etc. I don't even think it could happen in the USA. Look at Trump, in ~2 years he's managed to do almost none of the things he's wanted. Yes he's terrifying and his policies are abhorrent (to me); but almost every step he's taken to push immigrants out of the USA, put on travel bans, build walls, etc. has been met with a stop action at some government level. This is proof that the system works. No one person, be it a: President, Prime Minister, Governor, etc; that governs a country or state with a good democratic foundation could inflict this on it's people unless the marginalized group supported it. This is where Handmaiden's Tale got the system fall out correct. There were women who supported the transition in Atwood's story; whereas in Vox we are presented with the idea that women were just 'pushed out'. How weak does Dalcher think her own gender is?!
I realize Dalcher likely didn't intend this fear mongering story to prey on the readers mind and make them think of women as vulnerable, weak and powerless. Instead it was meant to warn us; but its 'warning' is wrapped up in so much nonsense that message is invalidated. This invalidation happens not only by of what happens in the book but because of how it's written. I am very frustrated that Dalcher (and her publisher) felt there was merit to publishing a story that creates more division between the two genders. There's nothing to 'learn' here about an evolution of society; all there is to 'learn' here is that fear continues to fuel our society.
Fear is (clearly) hype worthy and therefore the seller of the fear (in any format) profits by gaining power and money. At least I can say I read a copy from my library and didn't put money into the pockets of those who think that these types of stories help our society; when in fact all they do is bring society down and make everyone more fearful and paranoid.
This lover of dystopian fiction does not endorse Vox or it's brand of fear.
(word count = 2,747 or ~28 days worth of women's words in Vox)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oct 25, 2018 - 'Pre-review'
I have a lot to say and am working on a full review. But here are the three key things:
1) This is a well written and well researched book. Author is clearly intelligent.
2) It is a fear mongering story that can make the reader paranoid and perpetuate the issues themselves in real life.
3) Those unhappy about the use of Christianity need to think carefully about their outrage. Christianity is a patriarchal religion.
In essence: this is a dangerous book but probably not for the reasons you might think...



View all my reviews