I wish one could hide only part of a review when there were spoilers. I would say this outside of the cut: I am so freaking disappointed. And the rating doesn't reflect some really good things about this book.

Anyway, there will be a spoiler. I will warn you before it happens and you can stop reading there if you don't want to be "spoiled."

My mom gave me this book and I've put off reading it for a long time. Some books, you just have to look at every once in a while and wait for the feeling that says, "Time to read it, now." This was such a book for me.

I did not like it in the beginning. It starts with a page-and-a-half of exposition on the history of what you're getting into at the beginning of the story (which starts with the Romans obliterating Jerusalem over a decade after the Crucifixion of Jesus.) Translation: One Big Fat Info-dump. And to make it worse, it's all information that's in the story, relayed in so much better-absorbed ways. So it's pointless and it would have been responsible for me never reading this book---but this was a gift from my mother.

Then, just as I'd get to feeling sympathy for a character, we'd flip away and be introduced to another character. Now, I realized this was all going to come together, but it still made it really hard for me to get into this book at first.

And then, dude, the vocabulary lessons. So we’re in ancient times, mostly Rome. I understand there’re going to be a lot of terms that I wouldn’t know. I guess I’m just spoiled by good fantasy writers---you know, those who let you know what something is without doing something like, say, this:

“He held the vafireir, or window-opening device.”

Um. So, like, that’s not an example from the book, in case you were scared. But you see what I mean. It just comes off as lazy writing.

Now, I haven’t looked this up, but Mom told me the author, or Francine Rivers, used to write “trashy romance novels,” and then found her calling here. That intrigued me. And you know what? If it’s not precisely true, I still believe it. And it was something I enjoyed about this book. That there was an ability to write romantic passion in here, which is not something I’ve ever seen in Christian fiction before. That is, it’s always something the writing itself shrinks away from. And Rivers does not. Rivers’ characters are human. Even her strong Christian protagonist.

I was impressed with Hadassah, in that there were none of the usual writing ploys with such characters: she stayed strong, but she was still human.

What really impressed me, though, was her love for others. Because I believed it. I believed her love for those who hurt and hated her. I believed that she completely embraced the Christian ideal of loving one’s enemy. It’s, of course, an ideal I’ve read a lot of, heard a lot of, but it’s always approached with this sort of arrogantly polite disdain. Like it’s nothing more than a way of putting one above the enemy.

“Ha! Well I love you, and that makes me better! Thdddddpppp.”

Okay, so make that outburst worded in a arrogantly polite, disdainful way and you’ll know what I mean. The point is, I never thought that’s what God meant. And I’ve heard sermons about how that moral superiority is not what God meant, but even the sermons teach the polite disdain in their tone and methods.

This book doesn’t promote that polite disdain. It promotes the pure-hearted way of loving one’s enemy, and I love that.

There were times I thought I’d be rating this Four Stars, no problem whatsoever, with a couple of dips up to Five, when I was reminded of the way Hadassah loved those around her, and the way it was completely believable. Five, in spite of the vocabulary lessons, the slow, jerky beginning, and the character history lesson via dialogue (in the beginning.)

Oh, and some of the ideals did get on my nerves. And I just can’t make myself believe that people actually felt darkness when worshipping their Roman gods. And I’ve never been able to condemn homosexuality, and I’m really tired of homosexuals being the “bad guys.”

I’ve read Chapter 18 of Leviticus. It doesn’t read right, to me. I feel like there’s gaps and things lost in translation, copying, and everything else. It frustrates me to no end that some Christians take it as a laundry list of who they’re “allowed” to hate. That sort of attitude is hypocritical nonsense; it’s the darkest kind of shame that it gets so many people hurt.

See, I’m getting all worked up? And the book did do that, so...yeah. But I should go on while I can still get back to talking about the book. Only one thing left, really, though.


SPOILERS. SKIP ITALICIZED BLOCKQUOTE TO AVOID.

I have not felt so blatantly apathetic about an ending since City of Angels. I saw this coming and I thought, “Oh, but Rivers, you’ve impressed me, I’ve been into the Christian ideals in this book instead of curling my lip at them like I do with other Christian writers.” Like I said, the usual curling of my lip has to do with the close-minded ways they tend to relay Christian ideals.

But I had hope. Surely, surely Rivers knows she doesn’t have to martyr anyone to prove a point. And I understand completely why she did. I understood it completely with City of Angels, too. And I just don’t...feel anything about it. And I realize a lot of Christians would say this proves I don’t understand.

After a book of feeling truth, it didn’t feel true. I’m tired of the story where someone has to die for others to see the light. And of course that’s the turning point! Yeah, and God gives us suffering to light the path to him and all that, but you know what? I got that drill. And I had thought this story above the rote. And it was just very disappointing to find out it wasn’t.

BACK TO NO SPOILERS:

But, well, I do love Marcus and I do love Atretes. And the second book looks to be about Marcus, the third about Atretes. So I will read them. Just not yet, not yet.

Oh yeah, that was another high mark: I did totally fall in love with the characters. I even love Julia, though I admit it’s all Hadassah’s doing. It’s like I love her on Hadassah’s behalf or something.