Essentially I liked this book, but it feels strangely disconnected from the first two. Perhaps it was the different setting from urban New York to IdrEssentially I liked this book, but it feels strangely disconnected from the first two. Perhaps it was the different setting from urban New York to Idris which made everyone act differently (not out of character, but reacting to unusual and unprecendented events). It took me a while to reacquaint myself with various characters because of this.
Also, something about the pacing of this book is different. There seems to be more action and much less intricate backstory and worldbuilding overall, despite several long awaited revelations. Events happen and flow quickly into each other, giving a much more compressed timeline than in the previous novels. The inclusion of characters such as Amatis and Jocelyn gives a different dimension to previous characters in terms of interaction and history.
There was an overall tone of desperation and urgency about this final book. Well, society as everyone knows it is crumbling, people are dying and nobody can agree on a course of action. It seems strangely fitting that the teenagers know how to react and what they want, compared to the adults who are still trying to cling to some sembelence of structure and order.
Another change is that the main characters, instead of being together are off on different missions through parts of the book to bring several loose storylines together. I was pleased that I managed to predict what would happen. However with two working theories there were good odds. Still, some revelations did manage to take me by surprise.
Wish that there had been more of Sebastion. Actually, wish the whole thing had been much longer. However, there are still some things that remain tantilisingly unexplained or unexplored.
It's always sad when a trilogy comes to an end. ...more
Strangely reading Heyer's 'Devil's cub' reminded me of this book. They have similarities with the axis of the books partly turning on ruining (or poteStrangely reading Heyer's 'Devil's cub' reminded me of this book. They have similarities with the axis of the books partly turning on ruining (or potentially ruining) a woman's character (basically the whole wife/mistress issue).
But mostly it's the male protagonists, Dominic the Marquis of Vidal from Heyer and Phillip Tempest from Alcott. Of course Dominic becomes a reformed rake when he falls in love while Phillip goes unrepentant to his death (via suicide, after haunting and pursuing the poor girl he ruined to a tragic death).
Anyway, back to my review, events in the novel do seem fairly melodramatic and you do have the sense of the novel originally intended for serialisation. However, what I fell in love with were the characters, would are incredibly vividly drawn and whom you get a strong sense of. They make the story, which flies quickly (too quicky) from one seeming improbabilty to another.
And that's another issue I had with the book. It's soo romanticised as to sound completely preposterous, but raises some valid ideas. The power of the rich over the poor, the idea of reputation, and the 'hero' basically stalking the heroine around Europe and destroying every new life she's made for herself. It is frightening but somehow looses the effect through the overdramatising of the situation. ...more