Foremost, I appreciate what this series strives to accomplish and its abundant, casual diversity. More books should implement this. At the very least, such representation illustrates humanity with much greater accuracy, thus making it easier to suspend disbelief, place faith in the author's world-building and character development skills. Whatever else I (or anyone else) has to say about this book and this trilogy as a whole, Elison's proficiency in this skills is undeniable.

I had high hopes for the finale to The Road to Nowhere trilogy, especially after The Book of Etta evoked such visceral discomfort and emotion from me. The main issues I find in this installment lie in the pacing, nonbinary and transmasc representation, and book blurb. Elaboration follows below, with spoilers.

The strengths of this book: the selection and positionality of the narrator, the world-building, its balance of callbacks and independent narrative, the digestible writing style (some of the analogies in the book are very unique and really shine), and

the execution of a nonlinear narrative

.

All characters made at least one choice I didn't like, but respected and recognized as true to each individual's personality. Elison doesn't sugarcoat the unsavory aspects of humanity and emphasizes the greyness inherent to human behavior. If someone were to ask me for my favorite character of the series, I would choose no one--I like the trilogy and this book no less for that. In fact, I'm delighted to walk away from a series (mostly) pleased with no characters I truly adore. This is a novel and precious experience to me as a reader and writer.

To elaborate on what I believe to be The Book of Flora's glaring shortcomings (again, spoilers ahead):

Book Blurb
The back cover blurb for this book is somewhat misleading in regards to the book's major focuses and beats. The first full paragraph is fine, no issues there.

The first sentence of the second paragraph is okay, but could be improved. 

The ambiguity here could belie readers. What is the catalyst for this navigation? Is it purely because

Nowhere has been decimated

? Not quite.

The neo-Mormon city of Ommun and its leader Alma are equal, if not greater, catalysts for the main characters' expedition.

The book spends a significant chunk of time there, with several major events occurring within that period. It's very odd to me that would not garner a mention in the blurb.

The second sentence of the blurb's second paragraph isn't inaccurate on its own (though I argue gender is not as fluid on the boat as the blurb claims). My issue is the emphasis on this that derives from the significant space it occupies. This sentence is half the second paragraph in a blurb that is 6/7 sentences total. The book doesn't spend half of the time on the boat (mentioned in the blurb). To me, that leg of the journey felt belated in the grand scheme of things. This relates to the next issue--

Pacing
The book blurb doesn't properly set the reader's expectations, in my opinion. It's better to go into the book not reading the blurb at all.

That, however, was not my experience, so the time and attention devoted to certain beats in the story confused me.

The Ommun arc occupies such a significant portion of the book, it ultimately takes away from the other arcs. Brambritch feels underdeveloped in comparison; insular, esoteric, and depleted in activity. Flora relays the place's history, but it is brief and never really shown or felt (as opposed to Nowhere, Ommun, Shy, Florda, etc.). Flora and Connie's relationship feels noticeably artificial (in a way that does not pertain to the characters' behaviors) and under-explored, especially given the ending. I think slightly more time could've been devoted to the Librarians. Ultimately, I think the blurb needed serious revision, and the Ommun arc either shortened to make way for arc on the Ursula or the book lengthened as a whole.

Returning to Connie, who felt disappointingly underdeveloped, ushers this lengthy review to the last issue--

NB + Transmasc Rep.
If this book were published in a literary milieu rife with good genderqueer and trans (especially BIPOC trans) representation, this would likely diminish dissatisfaction with this qualm. However, and unfortunately, this book does not enter into a literary canon with good representation of many marginalized groups. Great strides have been made, are being made, but the issue remains.

The last time we see Eddy,

a Black trans man, at the end of the arc taking place in the year 104N, the Librarians utterly misunderstand and disrespect his gender. Dell asserts that they have "women like [Eddy]" on the Alexandria (a ship on which only women are allowed), but it's clear to me (through repeated assertions in this book) that Eddy isn't a masculine woman--he fully identifies as a man now (recall the scene of Ina's funeral). I'm all for Eddy becoming a Librarian but, the way it's left, the book heavily intimates that, to do so, Eddy has to just acquiesce to chronic misgendering and negation. Eddy's actions throughout this book make it clear that he's done with that, yet this is where his path ends.

Then there's Connie, who feels more like an embodied plot device than a person on their own. Already, that's not great, but add to it that Connie is the only explicitly nonbinary character in the cast, and nonbinary characters are woefully rare in literature. Moreover,

Connie being the Big Bad of the book makes this representation sting all the more, and not in a productive way.

Yes, the world is hyper-gendered in the wake of the Dying (some places less so than others), but no place in the trilogy, as Flora observes multiple times, is truly accepting of all gender expression.
Yes, that factor would undoubtedly weigh heavy on a nonbinary person (identifying as nonbinary myself, I can only begin to imagine).
Yes, that would result in some nonbinary people developing views and acting in ways that are kindred with Connie.
However, we do not get to see nonbinary people. We get one nonbinary person, and that person

is deranged, homicidal, incapable of accepting reality, and, frankly, moronic. Connie's ultimate mission statement (i.e. clearing the way for frags) is astoundingly illogical, especially because Connie studied (and comprehended) ecology, wildlife biology, and environmental science on their own time. Speaking from experience, I can attest that, since Connie was reading textbooks that included the concepts of parthenogenesis, they would've encountered and arguably needed to comprehend a vast hierarchy of concepts preceding that. Teenage Connie makes astute observations on evolution, then apparently their brain rots for four decades and they return to misunderstanding the basics of evolutionary pressures.

The result of this (plus the lack of insight we get into Connie's past, inner dialogue, etc.) is a character that is confounding on a scale that interrupts one's suspension of disbelief. The result is that Connie

is a cartoon villain.

The result is that the one nonbinary character in the trilogy is shallow and stigmatizing, rather than destigmatizing. Even if representation (especially nonbinary rep.) isn't important to a reader, Connie's pivotal role in The Book of Flora cements this as a giant issue.


TLDR; Ultimately, the book earns 2.25 stars, not for deficient worldbuilding or poor quality writing, but for the aforementioned reasons, exacerbated by the fact that this concludes what was a very promising trilogy. (It doesn't ruin the trilogy for me, but I will reread the first two books and not this one in the future)