I was frankly surprised by this novella. It is well-written, quite engaging, absorbing, and easy to read, despite the fact it is written in a style that I typically dislike -- that of a collection of in-character communications.

Many decades ago, it was all the rage to write stories as a collection of letters and/or journal entries that might exist in a world where the events of the story actually took place, sometimes with an occasional newspaper article thrown in, but that fad thankfully died out. I think it is a style of writing that is difficult to get right, and when it is done poorly it completely ruins a book. That's probably a big part of the reason that this approach has been so thoroughly supplanted by less contrived first- and third-person narratives as the dominant approaches to writing fiction.

Granite Republic takes that in-world observational approach, telling a story in news articles, opinion columns, reddit posts, and transcripts. This should be a recipe for a dish I'd loathe, but it is done so well that I never found cause to dislike the arrangement of the narrative structure. This is the first work of Medved's that I've read, and I thoroughly enjoyed his style of writing in this story.

The novella describes the political events surrounding the decay of freedoms in the United States, a trend that has been consistently worsening in the real world, where each four-year presidential term has been measurably farther from the supposed ideals of the federal government's founding for at least three decades (which is about how long I have been politically aware). That description of events on the scale of the entire US is seen largely from the perspective of the political conditions in one state: New Hampshire. Hints of things going on in other states are sprinkled in the story, with a couple of much more obvious indications at the very end, lending it a sense of context that could otherwise have been too lacking to be believable.

There were a couple laugh-out-loud moments in the reading, where I found myself amused by how realistically it presented the way people react to events they do not like. There were also times where I could see how someone with different biases than my own would easily come to the conclusion the events of the story are wholly unrealistic, but on the whole I think that, if you choose to accept the premise of the plot for the sake of reading a good story, there is nothing so outrageous as to hinder suspension of disbelief or enjoyment of the tale as an exercise in politically speculative fiction.

All in all, a great read, without glaring flaws to mitigate my enjoyment. It is also a quick read (done in two sittings, in one day, mostly while waiting for code to compile), and a bit of an attention grabber from fairly early on. Its subject matter, quality writing, perfect length for what it does, and surprising enjoyability despite the fact it takes an approach I usually find distasteful all help to push it just far enough up the scale to give it five stars. ( )