Firstly, I want to acknowledge that this book occupies an important place in the literary landscape. It tells a story that was important to tell, and I'm glad it's been received with acclaim. I don't doubt that this novel has done a lot of important things for a lot of people -- and I don't wish for my criticism to be taken as a mark that this was a "bad book." It wasn't.

This being said, it didn't quite work for me.

For a novel that is (should have been) character-driven, the ten-odd POV characters lacked distinct voices. There are two types of third person writing: that which comes from inside a character, and that which comes from outside, i.e. from an omniscient narrator. Technically, this book has both, with some chapters from an almost pansophical ancestral chorus. For the most part, however, chapters are from the POV of "The Prophets" vast cast of characters on the Mississipi plantation. The problem is that these characters voices are mostly indistinguishable from each other; every character speaks, thinks, and philosophises in the exact same voice. For me, this made it hard to form an emotional connection with the characters, and left the story feeling unthethered. I think this novel would have benefitted from leaning into the 'external' third person -- this would have allowed Jones to observe and describe in the way he wanted to, without it feeling like the characters coherence suffered.

While at times gorgeous, Robert Jones Jr's prose erred on the side of being overwritten. I will be the first to admit that there were definitely metaphors and references here that went over my head -- I am a white Australian, and Jones has said that he wrote with a black American audience in mind. But, this incongruence doesn't account for the entire novel. I think perhaps this writing style would have worked for me had this been a 150 pg novella, but as it stands, it became exhausting, and worsened the afformentioned probems with character voice.

Plot-wise, this book works. Story-wise, this book works. Conceptually, the characters are excellent. It's just a shame that the prose ultimately lets itself down. 

I just hope this book makes enough white readers feel enough anger and shame to contact our electeds about reparations.

Mixed feelings about this one! Some aspects of the book weren't developed enough (imho) and I felt a bit let down by the ending but there were lots of aspects I did enjoy., including the writing itself and the main characters of Samuel and Kayode.
Pros: 
-Everyone has already said this but yeah obviously the writing is really good. 
- Enjoyed that we get a perspective chapter from almost every enslaved character. Especially enjoyed Maggie and Sarah's perspectives. 
-Samuel and Kayodes relationship is beautifully written. Its the first book I've read set during the transatlantic slave trade with focuses on queer black characters, and it was really interesting to read a perspective on that.
-I loved loved loved the King Asuka chapters, my only complaint there is that I wish there had been a lot more of that narrative in general. Same for Sarah's narrative. The exploration of black queerness and transness as not yet warped by slavery and colonialism is definitely one of the strongest aspects of this book to me. 
-

And of course, white people being killed by the people they enslaved is always V satisfying, Samuel killing Timothy was great 10/10

Cons:
-Not enough time spent with each characters, and I didn't see the need for Paul's chapters being so long. 
-I personally don't enjoy too much description/poetic language which gets in the way of the actual narrative, which I think this book suffered from a bit. Its all very well-written but I think some of it could have definitely been cut down. But this is a personal bias of mine obvy. 
-Some elements of the book were underdeveloped, for example the Beulah/Be Auntie connection, the Seven/Vs the Seven aunts, etc 
-So so so much (trigger warning) rape. I understand it's historically accurate to the enslavement of black individuals in America but the explicitness and repeated graphic descriptions seemed unnecessary and kinda excessive for me. For example,

having both Ruth and Timothy assault Samuel seemed like way too much. Ruths assault of Samuel didn't add anything to the story and could have easily either been removed or referred to rather than graphically described.

 

-A lot of the characters don't get a conclusive ending, of course that's hard to do when most of the characters are enslaved individuals and escape from slavery was practically impossible.

  However we never have any idea what happens to Adam, we leave Beulah/Be Aunties story the moment Beulah actually takes control (which felt like a cop-out to me), and I didnt see the need for Samuel to lead Kayode away from the plantation as a ghost, just for Kayode to die almost immediately anyway. And of course what happens to Essie, Puah, Maggie etc is all left up in the air.

 

Robert Jones Jr. weaves an ultimately gorgeous tapestry from an ugly point in history using  the voices of enslaved people, their African ancestors, and the enslavers. The language is poetic throughout, drawing reality truthfully yet landing on the ways people rose above, how they survived and dreamed and loved, and created the life they deserved. 

The audiobook narrator was incredible. It’s hard for me to judge how fast or slow this book was just because audiobooks go really fast for me. Strong strong content warnings on this one but it was so beautiful and important to me.

Brutally and beautifully told, The Prophets portrays how love and identity endure and transcend even the most desecrated of places. While Isaiah and Samuel are the worthy leading couple of The Prophets, the novel heavily focuses on the unwanted strength the Black women of the story have been shouldered with, and how they uplift themselves and their families for generations. Each of Jones' characters are fully realized, complex people. He does not shy away from exploring their deepest angers and darkest secrets, pushing us to understand their actions even if we do not, or should not, forgive them. He writes with a style is so lyrical it's almost poetic, and instills wisdom and truth on every page. Throughout the book, Jones unflinchingly depicts the horror of slavery without reveling in it. He tells traumatic scenarios from multiple perspectives and many understandings, shadowing survivors in hope and their perpetrators with terror. This book is sure to become a modern classic, and I'd highly recommend it to others. However, please note the content warnings below.

This is a book that begins built on two ideas I thought were really gripping:
1) The polyphonic choral concept, which is overall the strongest thing about the book, and
2) The concept of the growth of an idea in a community, in this case homophobia among the enslaved.

The choral narration, as stated above, is the strongest thing about the novel as it runs throughout its entirety and often provided relief when I wanted to abandon the story. The chorus serves as a kind of chaotic good to our main focus, Samuel and Isaiah, and to tie in ancestral practices that remind us of that second concept the novel is ruminating on.

This second concept, the growth of homophobia in the enslaved community at the heart of the novel, is also incredibly interesting. Watching how and why a community might adopt an idea they heretofore had no concept of or interest in was an interesting piece of, likely historically accurate, social experimentation. And watching it played against the ideas on gender and sexuality brought over from tribal communities made it all the more impactful.

My biggest struggle in the book was when the story began to devolve from this second concept as we begin to have chapters from the perspective of the white characters in the story. The idea still lives in the novel as the driving force, but we are introduced to the narrative interests of the white enslavers, which becomes the central focus of most of the novel's back third. While I understand why the choice was made in the interest of servicing Jones's plot, it was far less interesting than the work he had been doing so far.

While significantly smaller, I also had a couple of other issues with my reading of the story. The first is that I wanted Isaiah and Samuel to be the focus of the novel, as I had been led to believe. Even though I knew going in that the vast majority of the story was not told from their point of view, I thought more of the story would be about them, yet the story was really more about the way they are used as pawns to play out the interests of other characters. I am also curious about the cultural conversations of the characters. I would have to read more firsthand writing from the period, but it sometimes seemed like the cultural ideas were more reflective of our modern revisiting of the period rather than period appropriate.

Despite my qualms, this book does have incredibly important things to say that I think make it a great pick for a book club discussion, which is the context for which I read it. There are lots of ideas and perspectives that feel new, either in their discussion or in their approach. Furthermore, until we begin to get some of those later white-perspective chapters, I think this is one of the gentler books on slavery as Jones seeks to both love his Black characters and show the love between them. Finally, the last three chapters go a long way toward making the ending of the novel a powerful piece that will stick with you.

Quotes:
"Our responsibility is to tell you the truth. But since you were never told the truth, you will believe it is a lie. Lies are more affectionate than truth and embrace you with both arms. Prying you loose is our punishment." (Page 2)
"That was good, though, because some things should never be mentioned, didn't have to be, not even among friends. There were many ways to hide and save one's self from doom, and keeping tender secrets was one of them." (Page 40)
"This wasn't a framework for liberty; this was the same tyranny of Europe, only naked and devoid of baubles." (Page 126)
"'Some people pain is eternal. Some people worship they pain. Don't know who they are without it. Hold on to it like they gon' die if they let it go.'" (Page 167)
"The North, meanwhile, still couldn't answer the questions of who would do the work freed slaves would necessarily leave behind and how those unfortunate souls would be paid once the position of slave was abolished. These men were bad at business, though there was every indication they were just as greed." (Page 202)