Read This Next! discussion

Feel free to add more questions. These are just some I came up with as I was reading.

1. Countess Nadasdy. Is she suppose to represent the infamous Blood Countess, Elizabeth Bathory who married Count Nadasdy. If so, what works about this association with a historical folklore figure. What makes you think this is a 'different' Nadasdy?

2. What do you think about the BUR and its role in social progress?

3. What do you think about government monitoring in order to bring about social tolerance of outlining groups? Is this good or bad?

4. Why hives and clones to describe vampires? What characteristics do they share or not share? Is this fitting or would you choose another insect or animal group to describe them?

If you have a blog and would like to post answers there and link up, you can do it through Bitsy Bling Books: Read This Next!!!

2.) and 3.)
Social tolerance of outlying groups seems to be a perfect function for government. Ideally people would tend to this on their own and the society at large would not need enforcement from government. But, often humans behave in a manner far from ideal.

The BUR does bring up interesting comparisons. And sometimes it is indeed the government agency that facilitates the oppression and victimization of those it is supposed to protect. In the Americas government agencies exist to protect the rights of Natives, etc. But these agencies have often failed worse than collective individuals.

If the balance between the Hives and Packs becomes unbalanced with normative/mortal society what role will the BUR play? One of brutal enforcer or liberator? I guess it will depend on who wins...

What is the value of life in this book? I love the wit and humor but it feels as if the true moral questions are glazed over. Is life valued? By whom -- supernaturals or humans? The question that wasn't answered, or maybe I've missed it (which is possible), does the 'soul' have anything to do with feeling. Does it have a use or purpose for the living or after death.

I guess I'm trying to wrap my brain around the carnage at the end. Without discussing anything that would cause spoilers.

I posted by review of Soulless here at Goodreads and also at my book blog Bitsy Bling Books

Charlie wrote: "What is the value of life in this book? I love the wit and humor but it feels as if the true moral questions are glazed over. Is life valued? By whom -- supernaturals or humans? The question th..."

Yes, I enjoyed the book, but I did spend a lot of time wondering what exactly was being defined as "soul" and what BUR's real purpose was. At points, it seemed like soul was being used describe creativity or inspiration. There was something written about Alexia's fashion sense being uninspired due to her soulessness and the supernaturals choose to turn artists because of their "excess soul". I have a hard time swallowing that it was strictly creativity though. Alexia is too imaginative in other ways.

I read the carnage at the end as just a sort of grand tidying up with enough wiggle room that someone could show up and cause trouble again in the future. A classic adventure story sort of treatment like the end of a James Bond movie. Lazy, but at least more satisfying than a cliffhanger.

I think a lot of room is being left for those questions to play out over the series. At least, I hope so. It would be a shame to never pick them up.

That is an interesting point, the connection between creativity and soul. Alexia was very imaginative and creative, just look at her uses for a parasol! Hum...I will have to give that some more thought!