Title: The Witches of Moonshyne Manor
Author: Bianca Marais
Series: n/a
Social Justice Warrior: The Novel
I would like to thank Bianca Marais, Harper Audio, and NetGalley for allowing me to listen to a free ARC in exchange for an honest review. Also HUGE thanks to Emer Flounders for inviting me on the blog tour and providing me with an audio version.
On one hand, I respect what Marais did here, and it was executed better than it might have been. On the other hand, much of it wasn’t to my taste.
Pro: Each of the women had distinct personalities. A few leaned hard into stereotypes, right down to their names. But they also owned those stereotypes. I found all but Ursula likable, but I particularly sympathized with Ivy; she and I have some things in common.
Con: Too many characters. I listened to not only the cast list but the first few chapters three times before I felt I had a grasp on who was who (the on-the-nose names did help).
As to Ursula—I’m not sure if it was Marais’s intention, but to me Ursula came across as obsessed with Ruby. I found it off-putting, in part because it was kind of creepy, and in part because none of her supposed sisters ever held an intervention. They just let her fester for sixty or seventy years. And framing Magnus like that . . . The book says you have to forgive family, but you don’t. What she did was a lot more heinous than Marais let on. I’m not sure it was forgivable, especially considering the consequences.
Pro: The novel was inclusive of minorities and encouraged environmentally-friendly habits.
Con: This book definitely had a social agenda. It quickly became irritating. Even the core of the plot, come to find out, was a metaphor for gender reassignment surgery. I think? More or less? Or maybe not even a metaphor but just a magical version of it? I mean, I was glad for Ruby, but I’d have been more entertained by a simple plot to save the family farm, as it were. Yeah—in fact, the heist should have taken place in present day. Was Ruby’s agenda necessary? It just made the timeline convoluted. Although her memory loss was an interesting take on dementia. Hmm . . . debatable.
Pro: The protagonists were of an age rarely chosen for lead characters. It felt fresh, unique, and heart-warming for them to have personalities aside from “grandma,” to be depicted as individuals of will and strength and power. Declining strength and power, but still more than elders are commonly given credit for.
Con: Who wants to spend their free time imagining old people having sex or running around naked? Toning Jezebel down would have helped.
Pro: Magnus, at least, was a great guy. He genuinely loved Ruby, every facet of her. I felt my spirit lighten when I read that, when he was concerned rather than horrified.
Con: Men in general were depicted as selfish, greedy, unreasonable, aggressive, condescending, wife-beating villains and bad fathers. I’m with Persephone in opposing the patriarchy, but we shouldn’t generalize an entire sex like this book did (or profession—all the cops were corrupt idiots). Sure, a lot of men have generalized women and still do, but that doesn’t make it right for us to do it to them. So where were the townswomen in all this? Did they have nothing to say about Mens’ World? Did they not drink the anger-potion? It’s like only one aspect of the consequences was explored—the one that suited the book’s agenda. Not plot—agenda.
Pro: Some of the grimoire recipes were interesting/entertaining. It was a creative device, at any rate, and never broke tone.
Con: But mostly I felt they disrupted the story and were unnecessary. Fluff that didn’t contribute much. Every time one came up, it annoyed me; a few times I groaned out loud. I just wanted to get back to the story. The ones from Jezebel also made me uncomfortable.
Question—so the women paid off their debt, but how will they pay for everything going forward? That was all I could think of at the end. Yay, they cleared their debts . . . but what about next quarter’s taxes? And the quarter after that? I mean, the bills won’t stop. Does the distillery make enough revenue? But if it does, why couldn’t they pay off their loan? Why did they even need a loan? Did sales take that much of a dip due to SWT? Do the women not distribute farther than town? Either I missed something (likely) or some part of that doesn’t add up. More clarification on their financial situation was needed.
Another thing that could have been clarified was why Ruby was in prison. I had to go back and listen to Tabby’s memory of that night again to find out. One, having to repeat-listen to search for missing information always irritates me, and, two, they glance over the reason for Ruby’s arrest so quickly I had to actually stop what I was doing and concentrate on each word to be sure I caught it. It wasn’t helpful to have that night related to us through Tabby’s deep POV, because she was too busy realizing she was dead to really pay attention to the standoff, which made that whole scene rather confusing.
Something that really frustrated me was when Ivy accidentally drank the anger-potion and starting ranting about her frustrations with her sisters. They were legit emotions, she was incredibly stressed, but all her sisters cared about was proving the effects of the anger-potion. Which, yes, were important in that moment, but no one bothered to circle around and talk to Ivy about her frustrations. And Ivy shouldn’t have been keeping secrets. The narrative should have been more about getting those women, supposedly so close, to communicate better, should have been about them all, but instead it was all about Ruby.
So again, I respect what Marais did here, shining light on people and problems often ignored if not scoffed at by society, but it was too heavy-handed for my taste and detracted from what could have been a really fun story with better character development.
Also, vikings hats and face paint? Way to be subtle, Marais. More than once this novel felt like an exercise in venting the author’s own frustration with current events.
Oh, and the narrator, Amy Landon, was great!
