Showing posts with label close-up review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label close-up review. Show all posts

July 20, 2014

The False Prince: A Close-Up Review

"THE FALSE PRINCE is the thrilling first book in a brand-new trilogy filled with danger and deceit and hidden identities that will have readers rushing breathlessly to the end.

In a discontent kingdom, civil war is brewing. To unify the divided people, Conner, a nobleman of the court, devises a cunning plan to find an impersonator of the king's long-lost son and install him as a puppet prince. Four orphans are recruited to compete for the role, including a defiant boy named Sage. Sage knows that Conner's motives are more than questionable, yet his life balances on a sword's point -- he must be chosen to play the prince or he will certainly be killed. But Sage's rivals have their own agendas as well.

As Sage moves from a rundown orphanage to Conner's sumptuous palace, layer upon layer of treachery and deceit unfold, until finally, a truth is revealed that, in the end, may very well prove more dangerous than all of the lies taken together.

An extraordinary adventure filled with danger and action, lies and deadly truths that will have readers clinging to the edge of their seats.
" (from Goodreads)
The False Prince by Jennifer A. Nielsen

Characters:

Sage: he has an inviting, appealing sort of voice. He's clever and self-assured but not overly cocky, with a good sense of both justice and compassion. He doesn't like to kill people unnecessarily; he tends to show mercy rather than being vindictive. Ultimately, he's disarmingly likeable.

That said, one of my biggest gripes with this book is its use of the unreliable narrator technique. This is a technique that can easily rub me the wrong way, as I have said before. I have certainly seen it employed effectively, but all too often it just frustrates me unbelievably. Unfortunately, The False Prince falls into the latter category. I can certainly see from an objective standpoint why the author chose to use this technique, but it meant we were left not understanding a lot of what Sage was doing, even though Sage was the one telling the story. The implicit trust the reader has that they are receiving the true version of the story — or at least, the way the narrator sees it — is ruined when you find out that the narrator is keeping things from you. Major spoilers, highlight to read: Like that gold rock! It just came out of nowhere and really confused me. And the reason that Sage is sneaking out all the time. Not to mention stealing the sword. Oh, and the fact that HE IS THE LOST PRINCE. 

The villains: I didn't think any of the baddies were that bad in here, erring on the side of comic villains. A couple were despicable, but didn't scare me, and another was just pretty ridiculous. Hopefully in future books the villains will be nastier and more ruthless — villains to strike fear into your heart! In this book, it felt like Sage had the situation pretty much under control, and that nothing too terrible was going to happen.

Imogen: I wish Imogen had played a bigger role in helping/saving people. Mostly she just nurses Sage's wounds and gives him a shoulder to cry on, metaphorically speaking. I think there's more that could be done with her character. Her status as a young female servant in this setting makes her more vulnerable than some of the other characters, but I still think she came off a little too weak and passive. I'd like to be shown that she too is smart, and can fight for herself and what she wants.

Amarinda: I feel like we've only tapped the surface of her character in this book. I like that she, in contrast to Imogen, seems to better know what she wants. She's been brought up to think people will obey her, so she has more of a presence and commanding voice. Amarinda is so sure of herself, poised and calm — what she wants to get done is what happens. Of course, along with this she comes across as a bit conceited and snobby, too used to getting her own way — but hopefully this will change.

Premise/plot:

The False Prince is a good representation of traditional YA fantasy for younger readers. Many of the typical archetypes and familiar elements of the genre are present — a crown in danger, scheming lords, a competition...

I found the middle chunk of the book somewhat boring and repetitive; it could have used more action. Instead, similar conversations are had multiple times with different characters. None of the boys trust each other (hardly surprising, given they're being pitted against each other in a do-or-die situation) and there's plenty of backstabbing and showing off that goes on. A lot of the conversations are filled with empty threats, bluffing, and meaningless posturing that I feel could have been cut down or taken out, since it reads like filler. We don't actually see much of the training beyond a bit of sword practice and horse riding.

I have to give credit to the author, though, for clever plotting — small, seemingly insignificant details thrown in casually during the beginning and middle sections become more important towards the end. Sometimes authors seem to forget about thoughtful plotting and just pull a rabbit out of a hat to tie things up, so I always appreciate when it's clear the author has planned the storyline carefully. Given the unreliable narrator factor, I suspect this is one of those books that makes more sense when you read it a second time.

Writing style:

It's very readable and engaging, not weighed down with dense prose. There's quite a bit of dialogue (some which could have been cut, as I mentioned before). 

Final verdict: 3.5 shooting stars. This first book really just seems to set up the rest of the series. It was enjoyable enough, but I don't think it has the "wow" factor that some readers think it has.


June 26, 2014

Throne of Glass: A Close-Up Review

"Meet Celaena Sardothien.
Beautiful. Deadly. Destined for greatness.
In the dark, filthy salt mines of Endovier, an eighteen-year-old girl is serving a life sentence. She is a trained assassin, the best of her kind, but she made a fatal mistake: she got caught.

Young Captain Westfall offers her a deal: her freedom in return for one huge sacrifice. Celaena must represent the prince in a to-the-death tournament—fighting the most gifted thieves and assassins in the land. Live or die, Celaena will be free. Win or lose, she is about to discover her true destiny. But will her assassin’s heart be melted?
" (from Goodreads)
Throne of Glass by Sarah J. Maas

Characters:

Celaena: I wasn't a big fan of Celaena at the beginning, but she grew on me. She has a lot of self-respect, to the point of (at least initially) coming off as full of herself. By the end of the book, though, we see that she can at times be rather brutally taken down. I think at least some of her cocky attitude is a cover so that she doesn't show her vulnerability. Her continual, lightning-fast flip-flopping with emotions and judgments of others irritated me, however — in some cases this led to behaviour that felt out of character, overall making Celaena's characterization feel somewhat inconsistent.

Also, I wish we'd seen flashbacks to when she'd done assassin-y sorts of things. We keep getting told she's a fantastic assassin, sure, but we don't see it. All we get is a lot of her either a) wearing fancy dresses, b) training, or c) competing. She does well in the competition, it's true, but so do many of the other criminals. Celaena's supposed to be Adarlan's GREATEST assassin, and I just didn't feel like I could fully believe it. Especially considering a decision she makes at one point in the story (spoilers): WHY does she pick a wooden staff over a sword when she knows her opponent will be wielding a sword? Unless it's a magical staff that does not break, you are screwed if you do that. Metal shears wood, case closed. Why didn't she choose Chaol's sword? (It was a romantic gesture, too!)

There's a sort-of love triangle here involving Celaena and two guys, and the way it was written did not endear me to Celaena. I dislike it when the heroine leads on two men, and I'm sorry to say that she does that a bit here. It's certainly not the worst case I've ever seen, but I wish she had made an effort to establish the boundaries of her relationships with Chaol and Dorian. As for how the love triangle turned out, here are my spoilery thoughts on that: I was pleased when she finally broke it off with Dorian, as I never felt a spark between them. 

Dorian: I found him rather bland and boring...truthfully, he seemed like a wuss with not much of a spine. It took him forever to stand up to his father about anything. Also, he was all talk and no action! He didn't back up his fine, fancy words. Case in point (spoilers): Dorian kept berating himself after the fact for not doing anything to help Celaena during the duel, and I was like, "Um, YEAH, dude, you sucked. You just stood there and watched her get beat up." Really, Dorian reminded me of nothing so much as an immature puppy dog.

Chaol: While I think I was predisposed to like Chaol because I'd seen readers raving about him, there is no question that he was by far superior to Dorian. He's the strong, silent, stoic, steadfast type (say that 10 times fast!). I think he and Celaena share more values than either of them cares to admit, and certainly more than Celaena and Dorian do.

Other characters: I liked the mystery surrounding what side Nehemia was on. Spoilers: it was interesting to make her out to be a potential villain for a while, and then have it turn out that she was actually one of the people saving Celaena a lot of the time. As for Kaltain, I thought her role wasn't fleshed out enough. Her character just seemed to be there for the convenience of the plotline.

Premise: I'd heard Throne of Glass previously described as the story of "Cinderella as an assassin." Now, they didn't market it that way on my physical copy of the book (rather, they claimed it was "hotter than the Hunger Games!" which I would dispute both metaphorically and, well, literally, considering the castle is made of glass), which was a smart choice since as far as I'm concerned it's a rather misleading comparison. Sure, there are a few similarities: Celaena's an orphan, her work in the mines could be seen as slaving away doing "chores," she attends a masked ball at one point (and dances with a prince), and she has anywhere from one to three potential "fairy godmothers." But thematically, I don't see Throne of Glass as capturing the heart of the Cinderella story. (Perhaps it started out as a retelling, and then expanded and changed in the writing of it?)

Plot: It takes a little while for anything to happen, but things pick up about halfway through (spoilers: once the Wyrdmarks come into effect and the Fae queen starts appearing to Celaena) which is when I started getting more into it. However, a lot of this book is just conversations interspersed with deaths (sometimes off-screen).

There were also a few plot points that confused me. I was never too sure on which cover story about "Lady Lilian" was being fed to whom, and who knew what about Celaena's participation in the competition. I was also left bemused by the Duke Perrington-Kaltain storyline (spoilers: I know he was using the black rings, but how exactly, and to what effect, was Duke Perrington exerting his influence on Kaltain?)

And the rules regarding a certain magic ritual seemed to get contradicted when put into action. Spoilers: I thought Cain needed the victim's blood to summon the Ridderach, but he does not stab Celaena before he calls the creature. Did I just misread this, or is there something I'm missing here? Perhaps someone can enlighten me?

Writing style: Unfortunately, I found the writing less than spectacular. Throne of Glass is written by a debut author and it shows, with plenty of cliched metaphors and overly dramatic phrasing.

Caveat: To be perfectly fair to Throne of Glass, I should really mention the circumstances under which I was reading it. It was during my first term in a highly intense, stressful Master's degree program, and I was really tired all the time! It took me absolutely forever to get through this book because of that (although once I had some time to finish it, I did within a couple of days). Of course, this coloured my reading experience of the book, so take from that what you will.

Final verdict: 3.5 shooting stars. It just didn't live up to all the hype and glowing reviews for me.

Note: there is some mature content (namely violence) in this book.

July 5, 2013

Insurgent: A Close-Up Review


"One choice can transform you, or destroy you. Every choice has consequences, and as unrest surges in the factions all around her, Tris Prior must continue trying to save those she loves, and herself, while grappling with haunting questions of grief and forgiveness, identity and loyalty, politics and love." (from Goodreads)



 Insurgent by Veronica Roth

*Note: There will be spoilers here for events that occurred in the first book, Divergent, so you have been warned! If you'd like to read it, here's my review of Divergent.

Characters:

Tris: she undergoes a lot more introspection and personal analysis in this second book in the series. She's a little more vulnerable than in Divergent, as she hasn't gotten over shooting Will and it's given her major post-traumatic stress disorder.

Tris really develops the "Abnegation" part of herself here and even though she's quite ruthless at times, she'll put herself out for people she cares about if they're in danger. She also shows her "Erudite" side more as well. We actually get to see Tris using her intellectual capabilities more — thinking more logically and strategizing — and I appreciated that the power of intellect is displayed this way, showing that these abilities can be used in positive ways as well. Although, it's kind of difficult to say "positive" or "negative" about anything in this book, really — things are not as black and white as Candor would have them be. Still, Tris tries to do what's "right" most of the time.

Tobias: I didn't like his character that much in this one. He seems to have pretty high standards for Tris, and then gets disappointed easily when she doesn't come through for him. He needs to stop building up all these expectations about her, because he makes mistakes and he has to expect that she'll make some too. He definitely had a point about her being reckless, but I feel like he didn't appreciate Tris' selfless side enough. He seemed to get almost hardened towards the end, very "Dauntless", and wasn't allowing himself to be open-minded to different possibilities. Instead, he had a very narrow focus and seemed blind to the pitfalls of the path he was going down.

Tris & Tobias: their relationship is very tense and tumultuous in this one. They both make a lot of mistakes and need to grow up — which I think Tris accomplishes more than Tobias. He still has to work on trusting Tris, and become more aware of his own biases (spoiler, highlight to read: in particular, how blinded he was by prejudice towards his father).

Because they're both keeping things from each other, unfortunately a lot of their intimate scenes just didn't feel authentic. Plus, neither of them was very happy in this book, so they couldn't be happy together; usually when one was feeling content, the other was worrying about something. Basically, they were not in a very good spot for most of Insurgent. That said, I think they needed to get it out of their systems, and I suspect the third book will show a united front from them. That's usually how it goes in a trilogy, especially a YA dystopian one (just to break it down quickly: in book 1 the characters fall in love, in book 2 there's conflict in the relationship, and in book 3 they unite once again to fight a common enemy). I have the feeling that's the way this one's going to go. But I'm glad there wasn't a love triangle — I think that would have been pointless and contrived. Rather, the problem here was all about their own misunderstandings and mistrust, and not sharing everything they should have with each other was their downfall in this book. I'm hoping that they learn from that and aren't hiding stuff from each other all the time in book 3.

World-building:

As in the first book, the serum mind-control thing still bugged me. I think it's one of the weakest aspects of the world-building; people wandering around like zombies just seems a little far-fetched. I'd also like more explanation of the science behind being Divergent, as well as the science behind the assessment test and simulation serums. Insurgent goes into the neurophysiology of Divergence a little in discussing Tris's brain scans, which I found quite interesting, and I thought the psychology behind that was fairly accurate and made sense (spoilers: Divergent individuals have more mirror neurons, leading to greater empathy; a small reward-seeking center; and a larger than average prefrontal lateral cortex). The author must have taken the time to look up parts of the brain and figure out how they might be different in a Divergent. What I don't get, though, is how these people developed — why some are Divergent and others aren't. It seems to be treated like flipping a switch, either you're Divergent or you're not, but you can't be just slightly Divergent...which doesn't seem very realistic.

Plot:

Insurgent is darker than Divergent, with more emotional gravitas. It deals with PTSD, plenty of dangerous situations, people dying left, right and center, war criminals, psychological torture...it's intense. Insurgent shows how entrenched a memory can be, and how traumatic stress can linger and affect someone in the present. It's made clear that PTSD isn't something you can just "snap out of", and on the whole I thought the illustration of PTSD was very well done.

There were a lot of twists I didn't see coming (major spoilers: her brother betraying her! Also, Peter being the one to save her — which I thought was fitting.) I thought the climactic scene could have been improved upon in some ways; it was shorter than I expected and featured a rather predictable obstacle. Spoilers: Tris has to kill "herself" in order to get to the door, which is an idea that's been done before. I liked that there was an intellectual activity that needed to be completed before you could breach security, but I wish there were more! I thought it was going to be like the first Harry Potter book, with all of these tricky traps you have to think through.

I wish Amity had been involved more. Quite frankly, I agree with the other bloggers who've said that the cover is misleading. It's not a huge mental leap to assume that because the first book had fire on the cover and focused on the Dauntless faction, that a cover with a tree as the symbol would focus on Amity. But there is more fighting than peace that goes on in here, and really I ended up feeling a little cheated that we didn't get to see more of Amity! If anything I think a more accurate cover would have alluded to Candor, since a lot of this book revolves around truth. I'm hoping that Amity plays a bigger role in the next book, as I feel like we've still only scraped the surface of their faction. It feels like they get somewhat dismissed by Tris, as though she thinks they're a bunch of useless cowards. I'd like to see Roth showing a stronger, more positive side to them.

Spoilers for the ending: I kinda liked the whole idea that this was an experiment. It's like a much better version of The Maze Runner, in that the reason they developed this society was originally to try again and make humanity better. Obviously that hasn't exactly worked out, but I think this revelation will lead really well into a totally different third book, where we learn about what's outside the gates!

The end left me feeling a little unsettled; I think I wanted more resolution to the Tobias/Tris feud than I got, or perhaps the way it was resolved just felt too easy and cliched. Spoilers: I wanted more of an apology from Tobias at the end, or for Tris not to forgive him so easily for turning his back on her. His quick reversal from not believing her to believing her came off as somewhat predictable and contrived. 

I also had some difficulty visualizing the places mentioned and remembering who was who (there are a lot of deaths in here!), and I found it challenging to keep track of the timeline of events.

Final verdict: 4.5 shooting stars. This, like Divergent, is an captivating whirlwind of a read, but it has broadened in scale from the first book, becoming more epic. I didn't like a lot of the choices the characters made, but I appreciated that Tris really grew in this book.



Note: there is some mature content (namely violence) in this book.

June 17, 2013

The Lost Girl: A Close-Up Review

"Eva's life is not her own. She is a creation, an abomination—an echo. She was made by the Weavers as a copy of someone else, expected to replace a girl named Amarra, her "other," if she ever died. Eva spends every day studying that girl from far away, learning what Amarra does, what she eats, what it's like to kiss her boyfriend, Ray. So when Amarra is killed in a car crash, Eva should be ready.

But sixteen years of studying never prepared her for this.

Now she must abandon everything and everyone she's ever known—the guardians who raised her, the boy she's forbidden to love—to move to India and convince the world that Amarra is still alive.

What Eva finds is a grief-stricken family; parents unsure how to handle this echo they thought they wanted; and Ray, who knew every detail, every contour of Amarra. And when Eva is unexpectedly dealt a fatal blow that will change her existence forever, she is forced to choose: Stay and live out her years as a copy or leave and risk it all for the freedom to be an original. To be Eva.

From debut novelist Sangu Mandanna comes the dazzling story of a girl who was always told what she had to be—until she found the strength to decide for herself.
"
(from Goodreads)
The Lost Girl by Sangu Mandanna

Premise/worldbuilding: 

The basic premise of The Lost Girl: Eva was created to be a replica of someone else, and when that girl dies, Eva is forced to leave everyone she cares about to take up a completely new, fake life. The process of creating these "Echoes" is described in a rather vague, artistic, romanticized way in this first book, and I'm hoping to get more answers in the sequel. The expression "dust and bones" is used to describe what the Echoes are made from, but Eva also mentions "cells" at some point. Considering she is an exact look-alike for Amarra, and she appears to have "inherited" certain traits from Amarra's mother, I figure there must be some sort of manipulation at the genetic level going on. This process has been going on for something like 200 years, so I'm assuming that this is either set in an alternate reality or the future (as far as I recall it isn't made clear).

You'll have to suspend some disbelief for this one, because aspects of the worldbuilding strain credulity. For instance, the idea that Eva's consciousness is linked to Amarra's (as evidenced by dream-sharing) or the fact that the Weavers only implant the Echoes with a tracker once they're needed as a replacement. (Why don't they just stick trackers in them when they create the Echoes, so they can keep tabs on them from the very beginning and don't have to worry about escape attempts and that sort of thing?)

I was also a little skeptical about how the Weavers' job fits into the society. People know about the Echoes, but there are a lot of rumors, and the Echoes need to remain hidden so that vigilante hunters don't find and kill them. I'm not sure how feasible it would be to have people hiding these individual clones all over the place and hiring tutors/trainers for them. The whole thing is a bit far-fetched if you think about it in practical terms.

I thought the setting of India could have been highlighted more. From time to time certain aspects are mentioned (for example, the crowdedness) but I didn't feel like I was immersed in India, unfortunately.

Characters: 

Matthew: he may well be my favourite character of the book. I really loved him — he just brims with personality. He's so over-the-top sinister, with this dark sense of humor and a real bite to his words. His bravado, overwhelming self-confidence and suave style make him very entertaining. Admittedly, sometimes it's hard to take everything he's saying seriously — personally I didn't find him that scary — but at the same time you don't want to get on his bad side, because I expect he could back up his words. Matthew has a really acerbic, cynical way of looking at the world. He always acts like he's very much in control, even though it is sometimes all just a pretense. I definitely want to see more of him and his past to understand how he became who he is, and I'd love to see more of how he actually feels about Eva. Everything goes according to his whims, and he plays games a lot with people, but I think there is a kernel of emotion buried deep within him of the memory of love.

Eva: she's a little flatter than Matthew (although not necessarily in a bad way) — more timid, more naive. She definitely sees the darker side of life; I'd venture to say she's a pessimist, and often comes across as depressed, cautious, sad or morose. I think she views her situation quite realistically and realizes how hard things are going to be for her as well as Amarra's family. Since she's not the cheeriest narrator, it's a bit of a slog, being in her head. We can see from her perspective how difficult everything is for her. But I don't think there's any way you couldn't sympathize and align yourself with her because her situation is so bleak, and not of her own making.

Eva changes somewhat throughout, in both positive and negative ways. In the beginning she seems more objective, but she also sort of objectifies herself. I think she sees herself as something that's being used and she's okay with going along with it because she believes that's her purpose. But then as the book progresses she really starts to develop a sense of self and identity, standing alone from Amarra, and placing her own wants and needs above the Weavers' and her "destiny". She begins taking control of her life, not as content to sit back and let the Weavers do as they like.

Unlike Matthew, Eva has a real talent for assessing situations accurately, reading people and their emotions, and understanding others' perspectives. However, I think her ability to see both sides of an issue diminishes somewhat in the later part of the book, because she becomes so focused on her own survival that she starts to put other things in jeopardy. It seems like she starts to see this ability as a weakness/liability, since it means she's thinking about others' happiness and safety, which might make her less likely to prioritize her own. She gets a little overdramatic towards the end, becoming more of a typical YA protagonist, so in that regard I liked her better at the beginning. It almost feels like she's regressing in a way, behaving like an "angsty teen" as she lets her emotions leak to the surface — although perhaps it's also partly due to the fact that as the story goes on she's put in increasingly dangerous situations with greater stakes.

I can understand why she gets so desperate to save herself above all else, though, and in many ways I did like her a lot. She's very observant of both herself and others, and she places loyalty to friends quite high on her list of priorities. Despite the fact she's an Echo, she obviously has emotions and has really come to care about these people in her life — and she does the same for several of the people she meets in India.

Sean: he struck me as a lot more mature than 16, but I liked his romance with Eva. They're friends first, but at the same time it's a "forbidden" romance. He's her protector, someone she's known for the past couple years, whom she has grown quite close to and feels she can rely on. It's obvious he respects her as an individual and doesn't care that she's an Echo — he recognizes that she's her own person. To Eva, he feels like home to her; she feels safe and completely at ease with him. It's great to see that even if time and distance comes between them, they can pick up again where they left off and still have that connection.

Their opportunities for romantic interludes in Part 3 are limited because they're on the run, but they are obviously very devoted to each other. They feel so intensely about the other person that there doesn't need to be a lot of sexual stuff, because it's so clear that they're on the same page emotionally. (And when they do kiss, oh yeah...) They both want to protect each other, and it's nice to see that equality and balance in a relationship — that the girl doesn't always feel like she needs to be the one getting saved, and when she does get saved, it isn't always by the guy.

More minor characters: we don't get to know most of the side characters very well, but I liked what I saw of Eva's friend, Lekha, and I hope her character will get fleshed out in future books. We don't get to see her that often, but when we do her lighthearted nature and eccentricities burst off the page. She's quite unintentionally funny, and it helped to have that humour lightening things up, since the general tone of the story is rather bleak. I love the way she makes up and confuses words!

Themes:

The themes The Lost Girl raises are fantastic, many of which echo Frankenstein, unsurprisingly. The Lost Girl touches on topics like: the ethics of creating life/playing God; nature vs. nurture; artifice vs. reality, and where the lines blur between pretense and truth; what family means; the power people who have died can still have on those who remain; the rights of a clone; the issues surrounding the decision to make a copy of your child and the emotional repercussions of that. This last I found particularly mind-stretching. If you order a copy of your child to be made (in case your child dies) does that prove your love, or does that prove you think they can be copied? Is it a stronger proof of your love for them if you let them go and don't get a copy, or if you love them so badly and are so desperate not to lose them that you want them in any form? Wouldn't it hurt more if you see someone who looks like your child every day and yet know, deep down, that it isn't them? I'd think so. I don't really understand the mindset of someone who would want to risk living with a copy who isn't the real thing, but it's certainly a very complicated, fascinating decision.

Given the potential for these themes to spark discussion questions, I think this would be a great pick for older YA readers (grades 10-12), perhaps even as a companion book to read alongside Frankenstein.

Plot: 

The first two sections of the book are relatively slow. In Part 1, the author introduces the reader to the world and Eva, and all of the challenges Eva grapples with just in being who she is. Part 2 thrusts Eva into India and having to fake a new life, so we see a lot of typical daily activities for a high-schooler. It's only in Part 3 that the pace picks up and things become more gripping. Overall, it isn't action-packed, but there are a few scenes that involve a lot of action, tension or both (mostly in the later part of the book). 

As with the worldbuilding, some suspension of disbelief is needed for the plot. There are some plot holes and far-fetched scenes. Spoilery examples, highlight to read: if being an Echo is illegal in India, how did Eva get the entire school not to squeal on her? The majority of them didn't like her, so I find it hard to believe that no one went to the police. And I thought it was a stretch that the hunter trusted high school kids about Eva's identity as an Echo...it seemed to cross the natural adult-teen divide in an implausible way. In particular, one element of the climactic scene gave me pause. Spoilers: I thought the plan involving the knife and Ophelia was pretty lame, and the scene at the stairs was not believable. Seriously, the guard could've disarmed Eva in a second if he wanted to...why would he feel threatened by a 17-year-old with a knife she doesn't know how to use? She didn't even have the knife at Ophelia's throat, just the flat of the blade pressed against her ribs! That said, I appreciated the twist with Ophelia's death.

Writing style:

The writing is first-class quality. While Sangu Mandanna uses some techniques I'm not a fan of (for instance, a bunch of short sentences all in a row), I think she gets across her points really well, and not usually in a preachy or condescending way, despite the fact that she's dealing with a lot of heavy issues. It's handled very maturely, coming off as more of an adult writing style than typical YA. She definitely doesn't spoon-feed the reader.

It's written from Eva's POV, but it's a bit of a distant first-person. A narrator discussing herself in 3rd-person can be a rookie mistake on the part of a debut author, but I don't think that's the case here. The more distant perspective works because Eva sees herself as a copy to be used, with a purpose she needs to fulfill. While she recognizes she has qualities that separate her from Amarra and make her different, she still sees herself (at least initially) as something that was created for a reason, rather than as a person in her own right.

The writing can seem a little overly dramatic in places, but Mandanna has an ear for a poetic turn of phrase and there are some very quotable sections.

Final verdict: 4 shooting stars.



 

April 19, 2013

The Humming Room: A Close-Up Review

"Hiding is Roo Fanshaw's special skill. Living in a frighteningly unstable family, she often needs to disappear at a moment's notice. When her parents are murdered, it's her special hiding place under the trailer that saves her life.

As it turns out, Roo, much to her surprise, has a wealthy if eccentric uncle, who has agreed to take her into his home on Cough Rock Island. Once a tuberculosis sanitarium for children of the rich, the strange house is teeming with ghost stories and secrets. Roo doesn't believe in ghosts or fairy stories, but what are those eerie noises she keeps hearing? And who is that strange wild boy who lives on the river? People are lying to her, and Roo becomes determined to find the truth.

Despite the best efforts of her uncle's assistants, Roo discovers the house's hidden room--a garden with a tragic secret.

Inspired by The Secret Garden, this tale full of unusual characters and mysterious secrets is a story that only Ellen Potter could write."
(from Goodreads)

The Humming Room by Ellen Potter

Premise: My ARC (and Goodreads' description) says that it's inspired by The Secret Garden. I'd like to take a moment to say: this book is more than "inspired" by that classic. This book is basically a retelling of The Secret Garden with the names and details changed. This was my number one problem with The Humming Room, because really — The Secret Garden is a classic for a reason. Sure, Ellen Potter has modernized the story a little, and yes, the behaviour of the character of Colin in the original has been given a more practical, plausible explanation. But apart from that, this book doesn't really add anything new to the story!

Characters: Be warned, I will be referring to The Secret Garden characters a lot (from my memory of the 1975 film version, though, to be perfectly honest).

Roo: She's a gritty character and I liked her, perhaps more than Mary from the original because Mary was selfish and bossy, and Roo isn't like that (she doesn't come from the privileged background Mary did). She does share other characteristics with Mary, though, like tenacity and curiosity. They're both sort of prickly with others, determined and stubborn, and know their own minds. Roo barely takes the point here, but since she's not all condescending like Mary, she does.

Jack: otherwise known as "The Faigne," he's obviously supposed to be Dickon's counterpart. He's a natural with animals, lives on the river, and doesn't really need the company of people (although he likes Roo). Jack's a cool guy, but Dickon wins this one, for being such a sweetheart. (It doesn't hurt that as a kid I thought the actor who played him was cute.)

Phillip: he's The Humming Room's take on Colin. He's pretty similar to Colin in terms of personality — a whiny, bossy child who feels sorry for himself. The biggest difference between them (and indeed, between the two novels) is that instead of being a physically disabled boy with a bad attitude, he is a depressed, grieving boy with a bad attitude. Making the character's challenges about mental illness and grief rather than a physical problem actually makes more sense given how The Secret Garden ends (spoiler for The Secret Garden, highlight to read: it was always a little far-fetched that the garden helped him walk again). Anyway, I liked him more than Colin because I didn't find him quite as irritating. Point goes to Phillip.

Violet: Cough Rock's equivalent of Martha, the maid from the moors. No contest here: I liked Martha better. To be fair, this might be partly because she had an awesome accent. But I didn't think Violet's personality shone, and it honestly doesn't feel like her role is that necessary. We also don't see much of a connection forming between her and Roo like we do in the original.

The squirrel: the requisite animal friend that helpfully leads the main character to the hidden garden. In Mary's case, it was a robin; in Roo's case, it is a black squirrel. I like robins and squirrels, so they cancel each other out. 

Plot:  

I don't think it'll come as a large surprise that The Humming Room follows a lot of the same plot points as The Secret Garden. Roo is an orphan, taken in by her uncle, who finds a secret garden (have I spoiled anything yet?). Really, I just don't see the point of, essentially, rewriting The Secret Garden without doing anything radically different with it. This is not even just a "loosely based on" sort of retelling. You can pretty much map out, plot point by plot point, how the storyline matches up with the original. If you don't know beforehand there's a connection to The Secret Garden, perhaps it isn't so obvious; I couldn't say because I knew going into it. At the start I didn't think it was so strongly reminiscent of the classic, but the parallels become blatantly obvious midway through. You couldn't really get much closer to the original if you tried.

Ellen Potter does handle Roo's character transformation well here. It's really brought home towards the end — how much more lively and open she is with people, rather than being closed-off and withdrawn, trusting only herself, as she was at the beginning. She's become much more motivated and optimistic, embracing the world, and that was a wonderful change to see.

The ending seemed a little bittersweet to me, ultimately happy but with a revelation containing a sad irony (which is in keeping with the original). There's also arguably a very slight magical realism element involved, but I think it works within the context of the story. Cough Rock has a certain sort of mystical charm to it, after all, where you believe miracles can happen. I think the end was missing a much-needed father-son discussion, however. We never get to see them spilling their emotional guts out to each other, for the sake of some closure.

Writing style: The writing is, for the most part, one of the marks in the book's favour. Some of the descriptions are quite picturesque, giving the reader a good visual and sense of the atmosphere without lapsing into purple prose or becoming too detailed. The garden sounds really beautiful and I'd love to hang out there (spoiler: minus the creepy spider, of course).

However, sometimes there's a weird POV switch that happens. We're getting it 3rd-person attached to Roo, and then all of a sudden it will sort of abruptly "head-hop" to someone else, right in the middle of a scene. I found it a little awkward and jarring at times.

Final verdict: 3 shooting stars. Certainly, the storyline is decent...we know that already because it's been done before! I'm just not sure why anyone would pick up The Humming Room and prefer it to The Secret Garden, except perhaps for the fact that the language is likely more accessible to young readers nowadays, since it wasn't written in the 1900s. It's not a bad book in and of itself, but it shouldn't have been marketed as anything but a retelling — and even as that, it's not exceptional.



Disclaimer: I received an ARC from the publisher for review.


January 17, 2013

The Unquiet: A Close-Up Review

"Sixteen-year-old Rinn Jacobs has secrets: One, she’s bipolar. Two, she killed her grandmother.

After a suicide attempt, and now her parents' separation, Rinn and her mom move from California to the rural Ohio town where her mother grew up. Back on her medications and hoping to stay well, Rinn settles into her new home, undaunted by the fact that the previous owner hanged herself in Rinn's bedroom. At school, her classmates believe the school pool is haunted by Annaliese, a girl who drowned there. But when a reckless séance goes awry, and terrible things start happening to her new friends—yet not to her—Rinn is determined to find out why she can’t be "touched" by Annaliese...or if Annaliese even exists.

With the help of Nate Brenner, the hunky “farmer boy” she’s rapidly falling for, Rinn devises a dangerous plan to uncover the truth. Soon reality and fantasy meld into one, till Rinn finds it nearly impossible to tell the difference. When a malevolent force threatens the lives of everyone she cares about--not to mention her own--she can't help wondering: who should she really be afraid of?

Annaliese? Or herself?
" (from Goodreads) 

The Unquiet by Jeannine Garsee

Characters:

Rinn:
For the most part I really liked Rinn. She's a complex character with deep-seated guilt pushed down inside her (some of which she's aware of, like feeling guilty about her grandmother's death). It seems to have come to the point where she doesn't trust herself, and yet she lashes out at other people for not trusting her. She's also got a snarky attitude and a bit of a chip on her shoulder, but she's quite frank and open about who she is.

Nate: Nate's a considerate, good-natured, easygoing, "average" kind of guy. He doesn't have much of a temper and not much fazes him. I thought he was really good for Rinn because she's a little impulsive and unstable at times (especially when she's not on her meds) and she needs someone in her life who's really steady and provides a calming presence. They bicker sometimes, but their romance was cute and I actually could have used a bit more of it — the mystery and ghostly incidents definitely take precedence here. I wish we had more cute scenes with them enjoying themselves, but there are always bad things happening so we don't see a lot of that. Often one or both of them is cranky!

Annaliese: I feel like we could have been given stronger motivations for Annaliese. Spoilers: it seemed a bit farfetched that everything she did was all part of a revenge scheme over this grudge that she had, dating back to her high school days. I suspected there might be some kind of connection there with the parents, though, so I appreciated that the author tried to tie that in, and that there was at least some explanation given.
 
The adults:

In many YA books the adults are just thrust to the side as the storyline centers on the teens, but in The Unquiet the adults end up playing a fairly significant role, especially in the second half. Although some of the parents in here don't seem to notice what's going on with their kids — Meg's tinnitus and Lacy's headaches are prime examples — and wait way too long to take them into the doctor! (Not that it would actually help, but still.)

Frank: we don't get to see much of him, but it's obvious that Rinn genuinely likes and cares about her stepfather, and she's upset that he seems mad at her and apparently can't stand to be in the same house as her (because he blames her for his mom's death, or at least that's what Rinn believes). I like that even though he's no blood relation to her, she cares so much about her stepdad's opinion of her. Usually in step-parent–child relationships we're shown a lot of antagonism from the child toward the step-parent (they resent them for trying to take over the role of mom/dad in their life) but I'm not sure if Frank and Rinn ever had that source of tension in their relationship. Rather, she feels remorseful, as she at least partially blames herself, and she thinks that he blames her as well. Frank is like a dad to her and she wants him to love and trust her again.

Premise:

I very much appreciate that The Unquiet features a protagonist who's already perfectly well aware of how her bipolar disorder affects her and is on medication for it. It's not about her discovering that she has bipolar disorder and getting used to that idea and how to treat it, as is so common in YA "issue books." Instead, The Unquiet deals with someone who has had lots of bad things happen in the past because of her bipolar, and she knows how she acts when she's not on her meds. I liked seeing the insight Rinn has into her disorder.

Jeannine Garsee cleverly ties in Rinn's mental health issues with the paranormal storyline, and we get to see her both on and off her meds. She stops taking them at one point to test a theory about what's going on with the ghost, which both allows us to see how Rinn behaves when not on her meds, but at the same time furthers the paranormal plot. Spoilers: people on medication for mental health problems aren't affected by the ghost; the medications serve as a sort of barrier. This is a bit of a stretch, yes, but you have to take some things in this book with a grain of salt anyway.

I liked the way the mental health issues were tackled. The Unquiet touches upon not only bipolar disorder but also (to a much lesser degree) suicide and bullying, and it was neat to see these issues being addressed in a paranormal novel. The paranormal elements probably end up taking up more "screen time" but the author manages to provide a fairly good balance of both. Bipolar disorder is certainly a significant part of Rinn's life, and as far as I can tell the bipolar aspects are presented quite accurately. Rinn's description of how she acts when not on medication, and what we see from her when she (for a short time) stops taking her meds, is in line with the sort of "acting out" behaviours that people with bipolar may demonstrate. It is a little difficult to tell, though, what is due to Anneliese and what is the effect of Rinn's bipolar (which may be intentional).

The bullying and related high school teen behaviour is also believably portrayed. Jeannine Garsee captures well just how spiteful and cruel teens can act to each other, and how shortsighted and impulsive they can be.

Plot:

It's a little confusing to follow because of the ghostly happenings, as well as that at one point Rinn stops taking her meds, which makes her less reliable as a narrator. As I read, it felt like the plot was meandering and not very coherent, because all of these seemingly unrelated incidents were occurring (that turn out to be related after all).

Compared to the well-done characterization, the paranormal plot is a weaker aspect of The Unquiet. Jeannine Garsee follows a traditional representation of ghosts, which is executed well but doesn't explore anything too different from what's been done before. We don't ever really get a full, satisfying explanation of all the mysterious events. The ghost seems to have a lot of powers without restrictions: she can move around, possess people, make them see hallucinations... and I prefer it when there are specified limits on a fantastical being's powers. Otherwise, too much power is given to the paranormal elements to just explain away all the unusual occurrences.

The climactic scene was not particularly impressive. I really dislike it when the magic that is being used to vanquish evil is vaguely described, and that was the case here. Honestly, I couldn't even tell you what happened exactly because it's so confusing. Spoilers: Rinn throws her arms around the ghost and squeezes her and they're fusing together, and then it's like the ghost devours herself?

The book ended on a perfect note, though — just creepy and unsettling enough to make you think it's not quite a happy ending.

Final verdict: 3.5 shooting stars. It's a pretty dark read, and I really liked the concept of combining a paranormal plot with a character who has mental health issues. A stronger climactic scene and better explanations would definitely have improved my rating.


Disclaimer: I received a copy for review from the author.

November 28, 2012

Uncommon Criminals: A Close-Up Review

"Katarina Bishop has worn a lot of labels in her short life. Friend. Niece. Daughter. Thief. But for the last two months she’s simply been known as the girl who ran the crew that robbed the greatest museum in the world. That’s why Kat isn’t surprised when she’s asked to steal the infamous Cleopatra Emerald so it can be returned to its rightful owners.

There are only three problems. First, the gem hasn’t been seen in public in thirty years. Second, since the fall of the Egyptian empire and the suicide of Cleopatra, no one who holds the emerald keeps it for long, and in Kat’s world, history almost always repeats itself. But it’s the third problem that makes Kat’s crew the most nervous and that is simply… the emerald is cursed.

Kat might be in way over her head, but she’s not going down without a fight. After all she has her best friend—the gorgeous Hale—and the rest of her crew with her as they chase the Cleopatra around the globe, dodging curses, realizing that the same tricks and cons her family has used for centuries are useless this time.

Which means, this time, Katarina Bishop is making up her own rules.
" (from Goodreads)

Uncommon Criminals by Ally Carter

Characters:

Kat and Hale: I found Kat insufferably stuck-up at the beginning of Uncommon Criminals. Her ego's inflated from accomplishing all of these jobs that give her an adrenaline high, and all I could think was, "Pride goeth before a fall..." It makes me cringe when characters act like that! Hale also bugged me initially because he was all cranky and grumpy at Kat all the time. Admittedly, he probably had some right to be, but it wasn't fun. However, then she ends up getting conned and realizes she's not the world's most genius, undefeatable thief, and is humbled...which leads to Hale becoming nicer and their relationship turning more amicable, thankfully.

Still, the Kat/Hale dynamic frustrated me more in this book. They just couldn't seem to get their act together! Hale wasn't as charming as in the first book, either. In Heist Society he had this cocky, confident attitude, whereas in this one he was always worrying and saying things like, "We don't have to do this!" And then Kat would reply, "Yeah, but I want to!" They seemed to have this same argument several times throughout the book. Eventually, they do kind of resolve things, as Kat recognizes how important it is to have people on her side, helping her out. But things were tense between them most of the time (and not in a good way), and I wanted more romance. Plus, I found it a little annoying how Hale was always telling Kat, "You can't do that!" Yes, Kat does take risks, but they're all thieves...it kind of comes with the territory.

Also, I don't know if there was as much soul-searching going on here as there was in Heist Society. Or perhaps Kat just annoyed me a little more, with her inability to make a decision in terms of her emotions and love life. She just seemed to keep wavering back and forth between "Hale" and "thieving" and not seeing that she could have both in her life.

Everyone else: We get to see the whole team again here, but we still don't get to know some of them that well (a complaint of mine about the first in the series, Heist Society.) I liked Gabrielle's feisty attitude, and I also enjoyed meeting Charlie, this gruff but lovable hermit in the mountains. Nick wasn't my favourite character in the first one, but he's kind of grown on me — he's a good guy to have around.

Maggie was a well-written addition to the cast of characters. She was a really horrible character — she totally used people and enjoyed it, very manipulative. Spoilers, highlight to read: Although she seemed pretty clever to begin with, at the end she was just rather pathetic. I think she could have been a creepier villain than the Mafia dude from Heist Society, but she didn't turn out to be that evil. Still, in a way I prefer her as a villain, because she was such a low, underhanded user.

Premise/plot:

Uncommon Criminals was a lot more creative in structure than its predecessor. I thought it would follow the standard pattern with the heist at the end, but instead the first heist occurs pretty soon on, and then there are all these new twists and turns throughout as obstacles pile up. I enjoyed all the surprises and found it less predictable than Heist Society. Pacing-wise I think it moved a little faster than the first one, too.

However, there are some parts in the climactic scenes where the reader is led to believe one thing when really, that's not the case at all. While I'm okay with that most of the time, it has to be written in such a way that it's not actually lying to the reader about the character's intentions/emotions. I understand that the author is trying to make the reader believe that this is why a character is doing something. But if it's not why they're doing something, you shouldn't say that it is. If it's a mere matter of a reader interpreting the words a certain way, that's acceptable. But when you're telling the reader "he was angry", when he wasn't really, then you're just lying to the reader — and that's not cool. A few instances in Uncommon Criminals could have been written more cleverly to avoid this.

This may be one of those books that you have to read a few times to figure out exactly what happened, because the ending really confused me. I wish there'd been more explanation — I like being tricked in a book as long as I figure out how it happened! And honestly, I was reading through pretty carefully, and I was still left with a whole lot of questions. I suppose there could be several explanations, but I'd like to know which one the author intended.

Writing style:

The writing style was basically the same as in Heist Society. Every chapter starts out sort of slow and then builds. Since I brushed up on the first book before I read this one, I was pretty much used to that. The spy talk is well-done, just like the previous book; Ally Carter writes like she's part of an inner circle of experts who know all about agencies, spies, and detectives, so it feels authentic. I enjoyed all the names given to the different types of heist methods, like "Cinderella" or "Mary Poppins" or "Anne Boleyn."

Final verdict: 3.5 shooting stars. In some ways it impressed me more than Heist Society, particularly in terms of having a different, less predictable, pattern of plot points. However, in other ways — the relationship, the "lying" to the reader, the somewhat abrupt ending that lacked a satisfying explanation — it bugged me.


Disclaimer: I received this book from the publisher for review.

This book counts towards my goal for the Just Contemporary reading challenge.

November 12, 2012

The Space Between Us: A Close-Up Review

"From the author of Virtuosity, a novel about two sisters and the secrets they tell, the secrets they keep—and the secret that could tear them apart.Amelia is used to being upstaged by her charismatic younger sister, Charly. She doesn’t mind, mostly, that it always falls to her to cover for Charly’s crazy, impulsive antics. But one night, Charly’s thoughtlessness goes way too far, and she lands both sisters in serious trouble.
 

Amelia’s not sure she can forgive Charly this time, and not sure she wants to . . . but forgiveness is beside the point. Because Charly is also hiding a terrible secret, and the truth just might tear them apart forever." (from Goodreads)
The Space Between Us by Jessica Martinez
 
*Note: I've whited out the most major spoilery bits, but there are some general mild spoilers in this review.

Characters:

Amelia: I had trouble liking Amelia at some points because of her dismissive, condescending attitude towards Charly. While she does change her attitude partway through — and I have to respect her for trying to be more positive and treat her sister better — I feel like it shouldn't have taken knowledge of a certain fact to get Amelia to realize she'd been treating Charly badly (spoiler, highlight to read: the fact that Charly was date-raped changes Amelia's perspective, but I feel like she shouldn't have had the attitude she did towards Charly even if it had all played out the way Amelia had initially thought, without any instance of date rape). Amelia's behaviour towards Charly wasn't helping anything — not Charly, and not Amelia's mental/emotional health either. All it was doing was creating a negative environment and relationship between the two girls.

However, Amelia actually acknowledges that she'd gotten into the pattern of nasty behaviour towards Charly and that it was difficult to get out of the habit of making fun of her. I thought this was quite realistic — perhaps not something a lot of people would recognize or admit, but something that's very true of human behaviour (old habits die hard and all that). Also, I enjoyed Amelia's sarcastic attitude in some ways. Yes, she's pretty bitter about everything at the beginning, and she slowly mellows out (Ezra helps with that), but it was fun to hear her take on things. I kind of had to admire her for being so self-contained and self-reliant; she wasn't afraid to tell people what she thought, and she ate lunch by herself in the library and didn't care.

Charly: Even though Amelia was far from perfect, I preferred her to Charly. Charly just didn't seem like the kind of person I'd like very much — she's pretty self-centered (although really, Amelia is too) and shallow. We don't get to know her that well, though, and our perspective is admittedly biased since Amelia is the narrator, and so we see Charly through a negative lens through most of the book. I wish we'd been shown more of their relationship both before the book starts (i.e. through flashbacks) as well as once it gets patched up (spoiler: there's one scene where they basically make amends, and then we really don't see much more of them together. It just seemed like a "quick fix" sort of resolution.) The full explanation for Charly's situation makes it easier for us to feel sorry for her, yes, but I never felt that bad for her because she seemed rather annoying through most of the book.


Ezra: he was pretty awesome. He's got a good sense of humor and he's funny — he gets a lot of great lines — but he cares about Amelia too, and the way he tries to win her over is sweet. He presents an interesting mix of geekiness and self-confidence (two attributes you don't see being paired together that often!) Ezra is not without his own issues and flaws, though; he's somewhat guarded, and doesn't like to share information about himself, which really irritates Amelia. It seemed like his family had a lot of issues, but that these issues were being used as more of a plot device, or perhaps a device to explain his character, rather than existing in and of themselves. I feel like we should have seen more of his mother or brother, instead of hearing about them offhand as part of an explanation for Ezra's behaviour.

The romance reminded me of Anna and the French Kiss in style — enjoyable banter between the characters, a sweet progression of the relationship, and a few dollops of drama.

Premise/plot:

The Space Between Us takes a cliched and generic premise (pastor's daughter gets pregnant) and then makes it significantly better with one simple change — the fact that Amelia and Charly go to Canada. All right, I'm Canadian, so I'm a little biased, but let's face it: Canada gets short shrift in the YA department. We're just north of the U.S. but for some reason it's oh so much more glamorous to set a novel in New York or California than Toronto or B.C.

But lo and behold, Amelia and Charly pack their bags and head for...Banff, of all places! I say "of all places" because it's not the first location in Canada I would have imagined choosing to stay for an indeterminate period of time. Banff is a tourist hot spot for the skiing, but not much else. And as the sisters soon find out, it's cold there. (Um, it's Alberta. In the mountains. Of course it's cold.)

So basically, the funny comments and jokes alluding to all things Canadiana (food, customs, weather, etc.) were fantastic. Seeing it from an American perspective was quite amusing at times (Amelia hates some aspects of Canada!) And happily, it was clear that the author understands the cross-border dialogue that occurs. Jessica Martinez has lived in both Canada and the U.S. and obviously gets both sides of the coin.

Moreover, I'm very happy to see Canada getting featured in a book published in the mainstream North American market. Usually we're lucky to even get one or two mentions in a story — generally something along the lines of, "He's escaping to Canada" or "that frozen wasteland to the north" — so it was really cool that almost all of The Space Between Us was set in Canada. I would love to see this more often in YA, where I get a lot of the references and it feels like it means something more to me because it's set in my country.

The teen pregnancy plotline didn't do much for me, and doesn't stand out amongst all the similar stories out there. Spoilers: the storyline involving the date rape wasn't explored enough in my opinion. However, Martinez does touch on the important point of women who are date-raped thinking they are at fault, and feeling buried with guilt and shame even though logically they know that's not the case. I wish we'd seen more of Charly herself, coming into her own. But Amelia's romance with Ezra is cute — I adored the scene where Amelia gets mild hypothermia and heads into the library where, of course, Ezra is working — and I liked how the book ended for the two of them. We're given a glimpse into the near future for Amelia and Ezra and it looks promising.

There's also a small subplot involving a guy back home (Will) that never really gets resolved; the whole thing seemed complicated and unnecessary. Amelia could have had enough sister envy issues on her plate without dragging Will into it. Either that or something more should have happened back in Florida to bring in the characters (like Savannah and Will) that we saw at the beginning, rather than having them just stay on the sidelines.

Writing style:

The writing style is a little bland, but quite relatable and realistic. Martinez has a good ear for dialogue between teens; her characters can have emotional conversations with each other and still remain authentic.

Final verdict: 3.5 shooting stars. While the central premise is hardly fresh, Jessica Martinez skilfully capitalizes on her knowledge of Canada-U.S. differences to provide a good dose of humor, and also demonstrates some astute perceptiveness of human emotions and reactions through Amelia's and Charly's characters and situations.


Disclaimer: I received this as an ARC for review from the author.
 
This book counts towards my goals for the Just Contemporary reading challenge and the Sophomore reading challenge.


Related Posts with Thumbnails