Metro 2034 — What is a story and what is it worth?
Metro 2034, an indirect sequel to both 2033 and the game Last Light, is… odd. I don’t dislike it, at all, but it sits in a strange space. It’s written very allegorically at times, and while the book itself is sold as the story of a man named Hunter (the same Hunter that sent Artyom on his own dangerous quest) Hunter himself is barely, if ever, the POV character of this book. Instead, interestingly enough, you follow Hunter’s companions and are relegated to what he says to them out loud, or what they think of him.
Off, but interesting. So, the story! A plague is breaking out near Sebastopol station and it’s Hunter’s duty to stop it. Hunter himself has been declared dead for over a year after an encounter with those terrifying Dark Ones that Artyom had to deal with in the previous book. He’s a broken man, Hunter. He’s quiet, violent, horribly scarred, and quick to turn aggressive. Now, following Hunter is an old man named Homer (after the famous Greek poet). He must endeavor to halt the plague before it consumes the metro. Along the way they bump into an orphan girl, Sasha, who was more or less kept prisoner at the very edge of the Metro’s lines.
The story flows between dark, horrible moments and almost ethereal prose about humanity and the tunnels as parts of a living being, and with that comes a lot of confusing writing. The group is separated several times, and a character or two from Last Light even make appearances during the trio’s fateful quest. Homer himself is trying to write a book, one about the journey itself; the heroes, their mythical enemy, and this very goal shapes not only the characters’ perceptions but the actual, physical book itself. By the end, I felt as though I was reading Homer’s embellished story, not a story OF Homer and his comrades, and I have to wonder if that was the whole point. How much of it happened? How much of it was a lie? Only Homer himself seems to know.
I apologize, I really don’t have as much to write about 2034 as I did its predecessor, but I did still really enjoy the book even when I was confused as can be.
But hey, maybe this is all an embellishment? Maybe I’m lying about details or omitting key things in the book? The only way you’ll know is if you read it!
(Recommended)
