Review of The River of Teeth by Sarah Gailey

The River of Teeth has a killer concept. It riffs off a cockamamie scheme to deal with invasive vegetation and a meat shortage in America by importing hippos en masse. In Gailey’s world, Congress went forward with the scheme (at a slightly different time than proposed), and instead of a Wild West we got wild bayous in Louisiana full of hippo-riding cowboys and riverboat casinos. How could you screw up such a great concept? Let me tell you in excruciating detail, gentle reader, because this book is terrible.

There has been a lot of back and forth about message fiction over the last few years. Frankly, I like message fiction, provided that it is well done. But of course, like anything else, it often isn’t. And it’s worse than that. I have a subscription to The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction. It publishes some great short fiction. But it also publishes some duds, like any magazine. Some of it I just bounce off of for whatever reason, but the very worst stories published there are almost invariably the most leftist, the wokest. Not because that necessarily leads to bad fiction, but because it helps sneak bad fiction that would otherwise be rejected by the gatekeeper in by appealing to the editor’s biases. I say that because River of Teeth is by far the worst novella I have read, and it is by far the wokest.

I have much more to say about how that ties into the issues with the book, but first some exposition.

Winslow Remington Houndstooth is putting together the operation (never a caper, a joke that got old to me long, long before it got old to Gailey). He’s going to make a pretty penny driving the feral hippos infesting the lower Mississippi into the Gulf, but he has a more personal motive: revenge. Revenge for the arson that cost him his ranch and his beloved breeding stock of hippos. He is bisexual. This is not relevant, but is emphasized.

Four more round up the team for the operation (never a…nevermind). Archie is a con artist and thief. She is fat. This is not relevant, but is emphasized.

Hero is a demolition expert. Hero is evidently multiple people, as they are only referred to using a plural pronoun (I should cut Gailey some slack here; the limitations of the English language are not her fault).*

Cal is a gunslinger. He is a drunk, cheats at cards, works for the big bad, and certainly betrayed Houndstooth previously. You would think any and all of those would be relevant, but the others mainly seem offended that he is a white boy (yes, really):

“We can’t do this without Cal.” He began to pace the suite, running his hands through his hair.

Hero didn’t look up from their whittling. “If you’re so beside yourself about it, Winslow, I can chew on toothpicks and sling racial slurs with the best of ’em. Might need to practice some, but I’m sure I can get in fightin’ shape by mornin’.”

Houndstooth laughed—a genuine, easy laugh—and then sat heavily on the bed next to Archie.

“Look around the room, Hero. What’s missing?”

Hero glanced around the suite. “Palpable body odor.”

Houndstooth laughed again, but this time, the laugh seemed forced. Adelia and Archie exchanged a glance.

“We’re missing a white boy,” Adelia murmured, stroking her belly.

“So what?” Archie huffed. “If we need one so bad, I am sure I can drag one back up here for you, Winslow. There’s no shortage.”

Really, you had better reasons to be a bit glad. Oh, and this is a western, if a weird one. A gunslinger is the sort of thing that would come in handy in, say, the fight at the end of the book. Of course it would have been good not to hand over your guns to the big bad too. (Don’t just hand over your guns is the most effective political message in The River of Teeth.)

Adelia is a contract killer. She is also very pregnant, which would seem pretty damn relevant, but has the main apparent purpose of giving her an excuse to say things like this:

“When my little nina is born, she will ride with me, and she will be just as strong as I am. Stronger, perhaps.”

“What if it’s a boy?” Neville asked, clutching at the saddle.

“It won’t be a boy.”

Neville stared at her for a few moments without speaking, his eyes lingering on her belly.

“You are wondering about the father,” she said, unsmiling. Neville stammered an incoherent denial, his blush destroying his credibility.

“There is no father,” Adelia said. “There is a man who gave me the child I wanted from him.”

Neville stared hard at his hands. “Alright ma’am,” he whispered, mortified. She grinned at his embarrassment.

“I am not ashamed, boy. I have no need of a husband. This girl will have no need of a father. Perhaps a second mother, someday—but if not?” She shrugged. “It makes no difference.”

Contrary to what the movies might lead you to believe, contract killing is not conducive to single parenting.

There is also an evil casino owner standing in as big bad (so long as the ferals rule the dammed up Mississippi, it isn’t good for anything but casino boats). He doesn’t twirl a mustache, to my recollection, but he is otherwise a bland plot device, showing up exactly when and where you would expect him to, doing exactly what you would expect him to do.

The real stars are the hippos. The vicious, vicious hippos.

Gailey does decent work when she can bear to be subtle. An unasked question about Hero calls back to and contrasts with an indirect question regarding the contrast between Houndstooth’s appearance and his accent early, and an unasked question about Hero a bit later. The romance between Houndstooth and Hero is touching and vulnerable. I love the fact that the Bureau of Land Management isn’t paying Houndstooth to solve the problem; they’re paying him to make it the Coast Guard’s problem.

But Gailey rarely has the confidence as a writer to make anything subtle. She usually opts instead to hit the reader over the head with it like a meteor hammer. And while it was the extreme wokeness that had me rolling my eyes, that’s a distraction from the fact that this simply isn’t a good book. I made the mistake of picking up The River of Teeth at the same time as Edgar Rice Burroughs’ At the Earth’s Core. Burroughs’ short novel zips along; Gailey’s novella drags despite its length. Very little happens, and what does happen is dull and trite. Reading without the benefit of a map, I was left very confused by the geography. The map clears some things up, but also makes clear that the climax relies on a 19th century remote detonator working at a distance of over 50 miles. The action set pieces are limp and too few.  The plot twists are embarrassingly obvious. Instead of a fully satisfying conclusion, we get a hook for a sequel that, no, hard no.

If you’re looking for a weird western, you would be better off picking up The Builders, also published by and edited by Justin Landon. Or picking up Elizabeth Bear’s Karen Memory, which succeeds at much of what The River of Teeth tries and fails at.

The bottom line is that The River of Teeth never should have been greenlit as is. It is a book with major issues in essentially every aspect beyond the premise. It doesn’t work as a weird western. It doesn’t work as grimdark. It doesn’t work as a caper. The premise does make it work as alternate history, but I’m bored by alt-history that doesn’t have an interesting story to go along with the premise. And there is a meaness to it that turned me off, though it may appeal to the sort of reader who cheers when a character of the right ethnicity and gender dies.

But the hippos? The hippos are awesome.

2 of 5 Stars.


Disclosure: I received a review copy of The River of Teeth from the publisher.


*I’ve given up on my opposition to the use of “they” to refer to a single person. It remains clunky, but there really isn’t a better option. And I shouldn’t give Gailey crap for Hero—Hero is the only decent character in the book.

About H.P.

Blogs on books at Every Day Should Be Tuesday (speculative fiction) and Hillbilly Highways (country noir and nonfiction).
This entry was posted in Alternate History, Book Reviews and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Review of The River of Teeth by Sarah Gailey

  1. Tammy says:

    I actually really enjoyed this, but I loved reading your take on it. My only wish was that the hippos had been more front and center. They actually felt like background noise at times.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Huh! I saw this book getting some buzz on (unsurprising, given they’re publishing it), but it’s a bit disappointing that the book doesn’t focus on hippo mayhem.

    I will agree The Builders was great, even if the cover art’s misleading. How hard is it to draw a mouse with a shotgun?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. danielshumphreys says:

    That sounds like a super-cool concept that just fell flat. Bummer.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Dagnabit! I was looking forward to this. Thanks for taking the bullet.

    Terrifying hippo attack footage, though. I may never be able to sit in a bathtub again.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Reblogged this on Planetary Defense Command and commented:
    Fellow blogger H.P. takes one for the team:

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Joseph Nebus says:

    I dimly remember hearing of the plan to bring hippos to United States marshlands in the hopes of really messing things up. I like the principle of an alternate history where that happened and am disappointed the reality isn’t so good.

    Oh, now, what about one with the hippos in the south and elephants imported out west?

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Oh, dear… The cover held so much promise but I’ll pass on this one. The hippo thing, it’s such a stupid illogical concept that it might just have been awesome in the right hands. Pity.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Christy Luis says:

    Oh, drat. Meanness and a lack of perspective can ruin even the best of premises. Fiction is supposed to be about getting into the heads of all sorts and understanding their perspectives better, so fiction like this just falls flat for me. Thanks for the heads up! Great review.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Nathan says:

    Yikes. We disagree completely on this one. I didn’t have it as a new standard for short stories or anything but I thought it was entertaining as hell.

    Liked by 1 person

    • H.P. says:

      This seems to be a love-it-or-hate-it type book. As of now on Amazon it has 69% 5-star reviews, 6% 4-star reviews, and 25% 2-star reviews. No 3-star reviews.


  10. gitabushi says:

    I disliked it. If anything, I disliked it more than you did.
    But for all the same reasons. This is almost exactly the review I would written.

    BTW, the deal with Hero is not that Hero is multiple people, but non-gendered, so uses the pronoun “they”. And everyone else knows this and automatically uses the correct pronoun, as everyone naturally does in the woke world the PC crowd wants to create.

    Liked by 1 person

    • H.P. says:

      Several people missed my point there. It wasn’t that Hero’s unclear gender wasn’t clear, but that “they” is a crude proxy for it.


      • gitabushi says:

        This is what threw me off: “Hero is evidently multiple people.”

        Anyway, I didn’t think their budding romance was touching or vulnerable. Basically just boring.

        There isn’t one character I liked at all. I’d go farther and say I don’t think there was one likeable character in the whole book, except that some effort was probably made to make the characters likeable to people who feel marginalized by society.


        It was a Progressive Assertion Morality Play with a fiction title.

        The only good thing I can say about it is her descriptions, grammar, and word choice were never less than adequate.

        I didn’t really even get any sense of danger from the hippos. Less menacing than Walking Dead Season 6 Zombies.

        If I didn’t think I’d be sued for infringement, I’d steal the universe and write a *good* story.

        Liked by 1 person

        • H.P. says:

          The next line was intended to signal my intent: “(I should cut Gailey some slack here; the limitations of the English language are not her fault),” but evidently not well.

          She may be the first to write on it, but the underlying grist is historical. She didn’t invent the idea of importing hippos to America for meat purposes.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Atan says:

      Personally, I haven’t read an entire book for years because I have trouble focusing, I finished this with ease because I loved it so much. H.P…youre evidently a prick. Not because of your opinion on the book, you’re more than entitled to that, it’s your brain and your loss and it’s a pity you didn’t enjoy it. However;They has been both a singular, and plural pronoun for many years. Get used to it and don’t act like you’re higher than the one who wrote the damn book, please. You’re making a fool out of yourself.


  11. Lots of people use “they” as a singular pronoun, including some who so identify (including me). Which is fine, because singular “they” has a long history of being perfectly correct, contrary to what some pedants imagine. Try Merriam Webster on the subject.


  12. H.P. says:

    It’s not that it is incorrect, it is that it is stylistically clunky, in a book already too poorly written to get away with it.


  13. Pingback: Top Ten Posts Published in 2017 | Every Day Should Be Tuesday

  14. Pingback: Thoughts on best SFF novel of 2017 | Planetary Defense Command

  15. S. C. Flynn says:

    I have not read this, but “not enough hippo action” makes me think of the late Victor Milan’s dinosaur series: a very good basic idea, but the dinos were underused.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Pingback: Double Double | Planetary Defense Command

  17. Great review; lousy book. Everything is a stereotype and predictable. I bought the book because of the concept and want the money back. Stupid book and very poorly written. Clunky and obvious…but, yes, the premise of hippos in Louisiana bayous is delicious.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s