I couldn’t make head nor tail of this. I could follow the basic narrative – but what was it all really about? It’s been called a satire – but I couldn’t see the satire. Or not what I call satire anyway. In an interview the author said that the title is an anagram (of what?) as well as an acronym for Trump’s MAGA. How can actual words be an acronym? Then he states that the book is for “An individual interested in mastering cultural intelligence. Above all someone who wishes to raise their personal burden of proof used to judge everyday situations in the Global Age.” I have no idea what this means. And in general I found the language and sentence structure in the book baffling. Sentences simply don’t make sense. Words are used in strange ways. For example….”As revelation began to take shape of semiexistent plausibility, mingled with derision of his own situational ostentatiousness, the bulb of truth seemed to flicker easily in his frontal lobe.” What is he trying to say here? And then someone creeps in to a building “slothfully”. Surely not. “…the weaning months of the Gregorian calendar…” Weaning? Typo? Mistake? Or how about “I know not why they had summoned me for such a blasé diction.” I just couldn’t cope with all this misuse of language. The basic plot concerns Arnold Esche, the head of a media company, and his rather unorthodox management techniques, but it didn’t engage me at all, and none of the characters were realistic or relatable. Not for me, this one.

I'm afraid I didn't take to this .. the writing was sometimes baffling, and some times references were confusing. After I settled into style ( although I still could not always see who was being talked about, and what I was supposed to feel,I realised I was perhaps looking too deep. Expecting too much of the writing. It looks like a morality tale, and I suppose I know all the tropes, but it still circles round. Unable to engage, I’m afraid I stopped .. ..

I really struggled to finish this book, and found it very difficult to engage with the characters and the overall plot. The writing style was in keeping with the period but I found it quite grating after a few chapters. However, I persevered and sadly I really didn’t enjoy the novel. I am sure that it will appeal to readers who appreciate this particular genre of book.

As I read, I thought that this was an allegory or a cautionary tale. If it was, I didn't understand it. It was slow, but I kept with it since I was waiting for a huge revelation. Yes, earlier characters reappear that might surprise the reader, but not in ways that make the story worthwhile.

On the positive side, the author kept the vernacular of the 19th century time, but then again, was the term "misogyny" used in 19th century England?

Sorry, I didn't find any reason to recommend this book.

‘An extraordinary political satire. Really?’

I read this book after being told it was ‘an extraordinary political satire’. I enjoy clever satire and was looking forward to this. Sigh. After I finished reading, I went looking for a definition of satire to see what I missed:

‘Satire(n) the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.’

Right. Okay. I didn’t see a lot of humour and while it is possible that the irony was smothered by exaggeration, I almost stopped reading very early in the book.

‘Alfred was a bit of a recluse when it came to the actualization of another’s tendencies, while Arnold took them strictly to heart.’

I continued just in case the satire was hiding further on. After all, I cannot review a book I did not finish, can I?

‘In a matter of mere months, this famed apogee of a business had soared into a new realm of legitimacy.’

About here I started suffering from acute cognitive dissonance. I rallied, though only to encounter the following:

‘An adherent woman of about twenty, she was no stranger to hard work.’

I was confused about whether ‘adherent’ was being used as an adjective or a noun. A very sticky situation. Perhaps a psychologist could help?

‘A psychologist by profession, he had been at a standstill in his own undertakings due to his failing personal efforts.’

Perhaps not. Let me share this visual:

‘This arousal of thought in his head had been quite a long time coming.’

Okay. It is entirely possible that this is the most brilliant book I have ever misread.

Here’s an extract from the blurb:

‘Created to be read by the fantastic character of the ‘American Aristocrat’ readers will be taken through the fortnight leading up to a cataclysmic event that young/adults can surely resonate with in the trying times of infinite change that are constantly upon them.’

Ah! There’s the problem: I am unfamiliar with the ‘American Aristocrat’, and while I am dealing with ‘the trying times of infinite change’, I am clearly too old for such resonance.

No, I did not enjoy this novel and I cannot recommend it.

Note: My thanks to NetGalley and Loudhailer Books for providing me with a free electronic copy of this book for review purposes.

Jennifer Cameron-Smith

I'm sure the author had a message here, but I just didn't "get" it. It was obviously allegorical, but for me it was simply a rather bizarre story with unlikely action.

I appreciate this ARC from NetGalley and the publisher and am sorry that I wasn't able to understand and appreciate what the author was saying.