I enjoyed this despite not being familiar with the Greek tragedy it is based on. I will want to see other books by this author. ( )

I really loved this very quick novella. It was disturbing to imagine that in a future time the government may decide to extract one's essence or soul from the body to house in an archive for later reincarnation. Similar in some respects to The Handmaid's Tale as well as the movie Gattaca, this was a fast read and my only complaint is that it wasn't longer. I really took to the characters and wanted so much more. ( )

First sentence: I asked my father, once, why he chose to curse us before we were born.

Premise/plot: A futuristic (post-apocalyptic/dystopian) retelling of Antigone--this is how this one is being marketed. Is knowledge of the classic (tragic) (Greek) play, "Antigone" a must to reading this one? I'd say no. Is familiarity of it helpful to appreciating it? Maybe. Long story short, Antigone and her siblings are "doomed from the start" or "cursed." Their (tyrant) Uncle Kreon has had them in a "gilded cage" of a "prison" since coming to power (after the murder/death of Antigone (and siblings) parents--Oedipus and Jocasta. Even if the fate of humanity on Earth wasn't in a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad state, these siblings would be in a bad position. When two of the brothers kill each other (Polyneikes and Eteocles), Kreon forbids Polyneikes a proper 'memorial' of sorts. (In this futuristic culture, DNA is extracted from the dead (within twenty-four hours) and preserved in an archive. The genetic material from the dead are used to create new life. Future parents select which 'souls' from the past to join together. Natural born children do not have souls according to this lore.) Antigone made a vow to extract her brother's DNA so his soul (ichor) could live on and be immortal. But she does so at great risk to her own life. If caught, she could face extreme punishment. Those closest to her will face difficult decisions...

My thoughts: I would say I am conflicted about this one, but I'm not conflicted at all. Retelling a classic story can work well in some (but not all) instances. Futuristic dystopian novels can work well in some (but not all) instances.

Typically dystopian novels are written heavy-handed (even if they are not received that way) with an agenda (a dramatized WARNING to 'gently' or not so gently guide the present day away from (perceived) dangers). I expected agenda in Arch-Conspirator as well. In this future-world, women are valued as vessels. Population has plummeted--extinction likely. Women's wombs are extremely valued by society. Now, all humanity has been damaged the effects of by nuclear warfare, but scientists are patching together viable life--using DNA from the Archive--so humanity is surviving (barely) but not thriving. Wanting or not wanting children isn't really a question worth considering.

Retellings can be handled many different ways. Authors can choose to change a LOT or very little. If you change too much, the original might disappear altogether and become unrecognizable. If you change too little, well, you risk it not working in another way. Removed from the original world, original setting, the plot devices, the characters, the themes might not make sense or as much sense as you'd hope.

Long story short, I don't know that the meshing of an Antigone retelling in a futuristic, post-apocalyptic world makes the most sense. If the retelling hadn't stuck so closely to the original, then it might have worked better. ( )

A fantastic retelling of Antigone in Sci Fi form ( )

2023 book #16. 2023. A retelling of the ancient Sophocles' play "Antigone" set in a dying city after a great apocalypse. When her brother revolts against the king and is killed Antigone tries to give her brother's body proper respect. A novella, so it's short, but well written. ( )