calico_reaction

Feed (2010)
Written by: Mira Grant
Genre: Horror
Pages: 599 (Mass Market Paperback)
Series: Book One (ongoing)

When I decided to make Zombies! the theme for October, I'll admit to a little trepidation. I'll admit to even MORE trepidation once Feed was selected, because while I admire Seanan McGuire's world-building in her October Daye series, her books really haven't grabbed me the way they've grabbed some of my friends, and since said friends seemed to love this book, I was worried the hype would be too much.

What's this? Why am I talking about Seanan McGuire? Pick up your copy of Feed and flip to the copyright. Yeah, that's right: Seanan McGuire. Mira Grant is a pen name, so if you didn't know it then, you know it now: you just read a book by Seanan McGuire, who writes an urban fantasy with a kick-ass heroine.

But if you forced me to pick between series? Feed would win faster than you could blink, and I'll tell you why. :) In a minute, that is…

The premise: ganked from BN.com: The year was 2014. We had cured cancer. We had beat the common cold. But in doing so we created something new, something terrible that no one could stop. The infection spread, virus blocks taking over bodies and minds with one, unstoppable command: FEED.

NOW, twenty years after the Rising, Georgia and Shaun Mason are on the trail of the biggest story of their lives-the dark conspiracy behind the infected. The truth will out, even if it kills them.

Review style: There's so much to discuss! We'll discuss the future of blogging and how it butts heads with traditional media (yes, this applies to a zombie book), as well as how contemporary issues and pop culture are so at home in this book. Also, a distinct look at the heroine and how she runs circles around October Daye of McGuire's urban fantasy series. Also, I want to discuss the weird feeling I had while reading, that this book is more YA than not, even though the protagonists aren't teens. Spoilers, absolutely. I can't talk about this book without discussing the things that hit me the hardest, so please DO NOT READ THE FULL REVIEW if you haven't yet read this book. Trust me, you'll thank me later.



So, full disclosure: when it comes to zombies, my education comes more from movies than books. Admittedly, I haven't watched any of those classic Romero films, but I've had no interest in them either. In the past, if I watched anything that had zombies (or, in the case of 28 Days Later, something that was really close), it was incidental.

I've become a wee bit more interested in zombies in the past year, thanks to their gaining popularity. Also, some of my favorite authors, like Cherie Priest, are focusing on zombies in their fiction. And then there's the upcoming The Walking Dead, the AMC premiere of which has me positively giddy.

So it's a little hard to get away from those shambling bastards. But then again, that's the point.

I avoided Feed when it first came out. I wasn't into zombies, and since I hadn't read Seanan McGuire, I had no reason to seek out more of her work, even if it was under a pen name. I'd seen good reviews, and when I finally read McGuire, my curiosity piqued a bit, but honestly, if I hadn't decided to make Zombes! my October theme, and if you all hadn't voted on this book, I'm not sure when I would've gotten around to it.

So, let's talk Feed.

I really liked the concept of getting the story from bloggers. Who, in this future, seem to be a hybrid mix of the current style of blogging and traditional media. It's an interesting concept: the traditional media let everyone down when the zombie uprising occurred, and now more people rely on bloggers than traditional news outlets to get their stories. And bloggers, in this world, aren't just people spouting off their opinions about everything under the sun: they go out and seek their stories, and every writer has a specialty to satisfy the various needs of the masses. It's a great concept, though it's a concept that's been picked apart in other reviews for it's lack of realism.

Why so? Well, there's the fact that everyone and their brother can blog, which makes the idea that any single blog could become #1 on some sort of rating system rather unbelievable, because there's so much out there that no single site could really gain a foothold. That's may be true today, but when I consider what the function of blogs are in this future, a combined mix of news and on site stunts and fiction/poetry with a staff besides? I don't know: it makes sense to me. It's not quite what blogging is today, and when you consider that the traditional media is falling by the wayside anyway (younger viewers turn more to the internet or Stephen Colbert than to the Nightly News), it makes sense. You look for sites/blogs that you can trust to give you the content you desire, and if you're good, and if you're providing content no one else can, then you're going to gain followers.

Maybe people a little more into the technical aspects of media and blogging can explain why Grant's future blogging scenario is faulty (some have in other reviews), but their reasons so far haven't been compelling. Sure, it's more likely that if the internet's the first source to break news of a zombie uprising, we're less likely to hear about it from a blog than we are Facebook or Twitter (and there's an additional question: what would THOSE sites look like in the future, if they exist at all?), but it's not such a big deal to me that I'm gonna get torn up about it.

Sure, you could say that technology, especially that of any social networking site, is changing at the speed of light, which makes Grant's imagined future of blogging and near current level technology rather unrealistic, and if only she'd put as much thought into the technology as she did into the virus, we'd have an awesome book.

But I disagree.

If we suffer from a zombie apocalypse, doesn't stand to reason that society and technology would remain mostly stagnant, with the only advances being those that focused on anything relating to zombies and survival? If a book is labeled as horror but takes place in the future (and not in space either), is it required to extrapolate the future like science fiction writers are? Furthermore, if you want to slap the science fiction label on the book, then one must remember that the role of science fiction isn't to predict the future, but rather to use the future to highlight the current state of affairs. Wait, let me clarify:

The role of science fiction is not to predict the future.

However, science fiction CAN use the "future" to comment on the current state of affairs.

But it doesn't have to. But if it does, it doesn't make it any less science fiction. It's called soft science fiction. Of course, this feels more like futuristic fiction than anything, but let's not get too picky. The point is this:

So Grant is using the aftermath of a zombie uprising to talk about how society's priorities change and how society's priorities stay the same. Both are illuminating to the way the world works here and now.

That's not to say she does a perfect job, or that if you feel cheated that she didn't do enough, that you're wrong to feel that way. Admittedly I think that you're looking at it from the wrong angle, if you're reading this book just to get more futuristic fiction goodness, and naturally, if you read this book solely from a horror aspect, you might be horrified that there isn't a whole lot of horrific-zombie-action in the book. But that doesn't mean there isn't horror.

Because what's more horrifying than blowing the brains out of the one person you love most in the world?

There is the question about why zombies have stuck around so long, about why the government hasn't done something to completely eradicate them. Feed's answer is that the government wants its people to stay afraid, because if people are afraid, it's easier to take control and do what you want. That's not a new message by any means, and it's not particularly a patriotic one either. But it does reflect the general distrust people have had since 9-11, if not longer. People, no matter what side of the political spectrum they're on, really don't trust their government any longer. It's easy to come up with conspiracy theories, and it makes sense to see such theories as reality in fiction. No, it's not original, but it is a reflection of the world we live in today, and in some ways, it's a warning. Because if people continue to let fear control them, then those in power are going to take advantage, and the country's going to be worse off than it was before.

So instead of trying to come up with a new, original message, Grant, like Georgia, is asking her readers: when are going to going stop letting fear consume us? When are we going to rise up, in any manner, and take back the control of our own lives and find our own solutions?

It's a lot to take in, and if you're looking at Feed as commentary for the current state of affairs, it's a good thing to consider. For those of you who want Feed to show us how humanity and its governments have evolved and changed with time and technology, then you're looking in the wrong place. Because, as I said before, Feed is all about the now, not the future.

Why not place it now, instead of the future? Well, there's something to be said for distance. Placing it in the future is enough of a buffer that we don't totally feel the message is being hammered down our throats (though some readers might feel that way anyway). It also allows for a reasonable amount of time for the work that goes into the cures that ended up causing the zombie uprising. So for me, it works.

Plus, I loved all the pop culture-isms, which is something other readers have complained about. But come on: once the zombie apocalypse happens, the pop culture bubble is going to pop, and you're going to be left with the past, as current events are going to be a little too dominated with the various methods of survival. So I was thrilled with what I had, especially the references to the departed Steve Irwin, because the Irwin label was so appropriate, yet it was also in its own way very respectable. It's a nod to the people who go out, do dangerous and at times stupid things, because they love what they do. Of course, if Steve Irwin were alive during a zombie apocalypse, I'm not sure he'd switch from crocs to zombies, but still, the spirit of adventure is there.

The Romero talk got boring to me really fast, though I appreciate what it meant for this future. I like how George was named after the filmmaker, and Shaun was a nod to Shaun of the Dead and how Buffy was a clear nod to Buffy the Vampire Slayer. There's now an Urban Survival Barbie, which is awesome, because Barbie's been around FOREVER and it's going to take a lot more than zombies to put a lid on that franchise. And intentional or not, the reference to a "Byron Bloom" movie immediately made me think of Orlando Bloom, and honestly, I like to think that was intentional. Because dude, Orlando (whom I liked far better during his LOTR years and it hasn't been the same since).

Characterization was fun and interesting here. Tate as the villain was obvious, but I really enjoyed how it was all put together. Also, and I wish I'd marked this in my text, Tate is the kind of person Georgia warns her readers not to dismiss: that just because they're extremist and therefore crazy to rational eyes, it doesn't make them any less real or dangerous or, for that matter, human. That was a poignant little section in her blog, but damned if I can find it now.

And can I just say? I loved Georgia. That's been another complaint leveled against this book, how Georgia is completely unlikable, but I loved her. She was focused and motivated, and I believed her as a journalist (whether I should've or not is a different question) and a blogger. I liked how distant she was from people, even though I can understand how that might make her appear unlikable. But she was a narrator I could rely on, who could keep me gamely reading even though sections that were slower than they should've been.

As to her relationship with Shaun, I'm of two minds: I'm really glad it was a brother/sister relationship instead of a potential romantic hook-up. I loved the banter between them and the love between them and the ease between them. It was different, and not something I've come across before.

BUT.

There's a few sentences in the book that made me wonder if they were truly biological brother and sister. One was a comment from Georgia about having the same color of hair, which makes it an easier sell that they're twins. If you have to sell something like that, it implies, to me, that it's not true. So I spent most of this book debating whether or not Georgia and Shaun were actual twins adopted by the Masons, or if they were two children born the same day to different parents who were adopted by the Masons.

The latter made me wonder if Shaun was in love with Georgia. Oh, I know he loved her as a sister and a friend, and I know she loved him. But I mean love. The kind of forbidden love that even if the two involved really aren't related but grew up believing they were, is forbidden.

If anyone has any interpretations to this (or if the author would like to clarify), I'm all ears.

In the end, it doesn't matter. In an exceptionally moving scene, Shaun blew Georgia's brains out as she was converting, which left him an absolute wreck. Because, by the end, it didn't matter how appropriate or inappropriate that love was. What mattered was that it was love, dependence, and shattered expectations of the world. Shaun always thought he'd be the first to go, and the world's betrayed him by taking Georgia first.

Kudos to Grant, btw, for this very untraditional and bold move: killing your first person narrator right before the end and finishing in someone else's POV. Shaun's POV was less dry and a little more interesting in terms of angst and tone, and I can't wait to see his journey in the sequel.

Also, Grant's decision to kill Georgia is a slap in the face reminder to her readers: NO ONE IS SAFE. This provides a fantastic tension in the pages, because we can't rely on the fact that our narrator is going to make it safe and sound to the end. To which I say EXCELLENT.

Now, as to why I felt this book read like a YA (especially at first): for starters, you rarely have your primary characters as siblings unless it's a YA, because in an adult book, why would the main character be hanging out with his or her brother/sister? Then there's the fact they live with their parents and they're relatively young, though not teens (wait, how old was Buffy?). The YA feel was very strong for the first part of then novel, but once they started the campaign trail, the feeling evaporated, especially as I saw our bloggers in action. I hope that the next book doesn't give me that same feel, but even if it does, it's not like I'm anti-YA. Plus, the darkness of this particular book, the things that Grant's not afraid to do to her characters, pushes the title firmly into adult territory, IMHO.



My Rating

Must Have: The book does have some flaws: it's a bit long, and certain repetitions of information can get tedious (except for the blood tests: that was important and needed to be reinforced EVERY TIME). But this book, by the end, was a serious emotional kick to the head, and I was marveling by time I was finished. Sure, the villain is a little too obvious, and yes, for a zombie book, you don't get a whole lot of zombie action. But what kept me turning the pages was the similarities between Georgia's and Shaun's world to our own. Sure, there's differences in the way people live their lives, but the similarities are striking, especially in that people, and their governments, don't change, and if we want change, we have to make it happen for ourselves. I loved this book, and while I don't see myself reading it again, I really look forward to finishing the rest of this trilogy. Grant has given us a dark, gritty tale that on one level will feel familiar to readers of the October Daye series (Mira Grant is the pen name for Seanan McGuire), and the detailed level of world-building is similar too. But I far preferred Feed's heroine over McGuire's, but that may be just a personal preference. The point: if you're a fan of McGuire's work, you definitely need to check this out. If you're a fan of futuristic fiction, you should check this out. Fans of zombies in general may be a little put out, but I still think the book is worth reading just to see how society survives and keeps functioning long after a zombie uprising.

Cover Commentary: Okay, it's a clever cover, and once you see it, it's not a cover you really forget. However, it's not one that's totally eye-catching either, and while this is random, I have to say this was the first "oversized" mass market I've read (you know, the taller mass markets?), and it kind of hurt my hands. I don't know WHY, but I found it really hard to hold. Then again, maybe it's because my hands are quite tiny for my age, and the publishers don't expect someone with child-sized hands to be reading this particular book? ;) Oh, and speaking of publishers:

Dear Orbit:

I know you're a UK publisher that also publishes in the US. But for your US titles, please make sure you keep Britishisms out of the back cover copy. Because while someone in the UK might know exactly what you mean by "The truth will out," someone in the US thinks that's a typo, and typos on back cover copy REALLY don't help to sell books.

Sincerely,
The Inner Devil

Further Reading: You want zombies? Let's give you zombies!

First, there's the original book club poll, which features three more titles besides Feed. Click here.

Then, there's Cherie Priest's Clockwork Century, so check out Boneshaker and Dreadnought.

Richard Kadrey's Kill the Dead features zombies, but you need to read Sandman Slim first, which does not.

Carrie Ryan has a YA zombie trilogy (the third won't be published until 2011), starting with The Forest of Hands and Teeth and continuing with The Dead-Tossed Waves.

If you're into short stories, check out Better Off Undead edited by Martin H. Greenburg. Not all the stories are zombies stories, but some are.

And lastly, if you're into graphic novels, check out Robert Kirkman's ongoing series The Walking Dead. And/or check out the television adaptation on AMC.

That's what I've got. I know there's more out there though, so tell me, what are YOUR favorite zombie books?

More Reviews: check out the reviews book club participants have posted! If you reviewed this book but are not featured here, please comment below with a link to your review and I'll add it below.

crowinator: Review Here
Dreams & Speculation: Review Here
inverarity: Review Here
Jawas Read, Too!: Review Here
kellicat: Review Here
miritsu: Review Here
mondyboy: Review Here
pling: Review Here
starmetal_oak: Review Here
talekyn: Review Here
temporaryworlds: Review Here
tenaya_owlcat: Review Here

Book Club Poll: this is the only way I can really track participation, so if you follow this journal, answer, okay? :) If, however, you participated but do not have an LJ account, please simply leave a comment saying so. :)

PLEASE NOTE: The poll's a little different this go around, and there's two questions instead of just one! Don't answer the second if you haven't read the book.



If you started but couldn't finish it, please comment and talk about the reasons why. What turned you off from the book? How far did you go before throwing in the towel?

And as you already know, the November Book Club selection is N.K. Jemisin's The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms. Some of you may have started it already, but if need additional details on the title, just click here. Be sure to sign up on November 1st!