Nichole's comments (member since Mar 03, 2009)

Nichole's comments from the Fantasy Book Club group.

Congrats, Leslie! I'm so excited to hear that you found a new home for your books. :) And Michael's covers look great.

I liked the twist that the Marquis seemed shady but he turned out to be good. Morally gray characters are so much more interesting than black or white.
However, I thought the twist with Islington being the bad guy was okay but could have packed a bit more punch if we'd learned a little bit more about him earlier in the book. I mean, I was surprised and it was cool and all, but I just couldn't escape the feeling that it could have been more.

I liked that it didn't have to be a romance as well, but I found that one scene where they had that "almost kiss" to be a little weird. Not just because it felt a bit like cradle robbing (because it did), but also because it just didn't really seem to fit. It wasn't a romance, and that was fine, so what was that? They had that moment and then nothing ever got mentioned again. It was weird.

I don't know if they ever said Richard's age, but they mentioned that Jessica was 26, so I'm guessing he's somewhere in the late 20's, early 30's range. My personal guess is 28.

John wrote: "Did I miss anyone or do you disagree with any of my points? I'm not trying to argue, I'm just curious if you saw something there that I missed."

Of course not. I love a good discussion. Bring it on!

So here goes. Basically I felt like all the characters in the book with the exception of Richard were treated with the same lack of exploration or depth.
Now, for Croup and Vandemar, they are deliciously creepy villains who did not need further exploration. Agreed - they are fine as is.
The Marquis was a great character who benefitted from as much mystery as possible, so again, he really did not need any further exploration. He too was fine as is.
Anesthesia's role in the book was regrettably but necessarily brief, so her lack of dimension, much like the character itself, was an acceptable casualty.
You agree that Hunter was pretty flat.

Basically the only place we disagree is Door. Even though she was young, she still could have been so much more than she was. She was on a very personal, very meaningful and pivotal journey. Yet I didn't feel like we got to know her at all.

As Libby stated, she's a character leaving childhood behind and trying to find who she is - or at least that's what she should have been. But we never got to see beyond the surface. We saw her actions, but very little of her motivation beyond "I want to know who killed my family."
Door was a flat archetype who never rose above her function in the plot to become a fully realized character.

I would also argue that Islington, the angel, deserved FAR more time and attention than he (it?) received. Again, this was a character with both a history and a psyche that could have been fascinating but was practically glossed over until the very end.

I read this a few weeks ago for the group read, and I liked it a lot. I think I really liked that it was a quick read, because I had so many books I was trying to get done last month.
At first I really liked the quick, easy pace but by the end I think it felt like it was missing something. This could have been a five star book with a little more character development and backstory. As it was, I think it was more along the lines of "adequate." But even though it didn't rock my world, I certainly enjoyed it. I liked it better than American Gods, which I liked but didn't ever quite click for me.

I'll throw in my vote for the Marquis. He was awesome.
Unfortunately, I felt like the characters in this book were a little flat. Richard himself was fairly well written, but I think only because it was all from his point of view. Everyone else lacked dimension, except, I think, the Marquis who somehow shone through despite that.
While I enjoyed the quick pace of this book, and how it didn't get bogged down by description and exposition, I think there were some elements that failed because of it and characterization was one of those things.

Astra wrote: "Nice idea, I like the romantic bit but I dislike all the unnecessary bits about art, music, literature etc. I am not familiar with most of them and these bits are very boring and have nothing to do with the story line."

Those are the very things that took that book from good to awesome for me. But I can see how they would probably appeal to a very specific type of person, and I think a lot of people didn't like those things. But for me they helped create a larger picture, something that made Henry and Clare's world a place I wanted to stay in, beyond the plot and story and characters. I absolutely love that book, it's my favorite.

As far as genre, it's not really fantasy or sci fi really. I see it as more of a general fiction book with some fantasy elements, but it's really not the focus and the way it's written makes those elements negligible.

Sad. So many people did not like this book.

I LOVED it. It was harder to get into, but once I did (about 200 pages in), I absolutely couldn't put it down. The mystery is a bit more academic and not really action based, but it is a mystery and it gets revealed bit by bit. To me it was really exciting.

I wouldn't classify it as sci-fi or fantasy really. It's more like the da Vinci code with vampires. It's suspense, and draws heavily on the myth of Dracula and the history of Vlad the Impaler.

I guess I'm in a small group, but I felt like every page revealed a new piece of the mystery and I was completely hooked. It was a page turner for me.