I just finished A Discovery of Witches and am proud to say it’s now in a three-way tie for my all time favorite book. The very fact that I wanted to read it again right away and was actually sad to have to return it to the library says a lot.

Others have summarized the plot of this book, so I’m not going to waste your time with that. It contains three of my very favorite things: ornate libraries, an old, mysterious book, and magic (the earth-based kind, not so much the Harry Potter kind), so I was hooked immediately. Even if that doesn’t do it for you, the mystery surrounding the manuscript of Ashmole 782 will.

I’m a huge fan of character-driven fiction and a Discovery of Witches excels in character development, You learn so much about them from their day-to-day lives and interactions with each other. Some are likeable, others are not, and there are a few you don’t know if you can trust. Diana is by far my favorite, but then again, I relate to her on a number of levels, including her love of history, old books and unfortunate propensity toward panic attacks. For some odd reason, I was captivated by Diana’s hobby of rowing (sculling to be precise) and plan to take that up myself as a result of having read this book. Matthew, despite being the main love interest, doesn’t make me fall in love with him. I like him as a character, but I think it’s my inability to trust him that keeps me at a distance. My favorite character is Marthe. Somehow, her mix of humor and down-to-earth wisdom is the perfect offset to Diana, Matthew and Ysabeau, all of whom can be too serious.

The world and plot of this book are also handled with expertise. I’ve never been to any of the locations, nor had I ever seen sculling before, but thanks to Harkness’ evocative descriptions, I could see and hear it all. And all of the meals and wine that were described kept me hungry and in need of a drink (in a good way)! I especially love the Bishop House, which really is a character unto itself. It gave the book some much needed levity.

I’d like to respond to some of the criticism I’ve seen, especially in negative reviews on this site. Everyone is certainly entitled their opinions and God knows there have been books I’ve hated that others have loved, but it seems to me that a lot of the points made in scathing reviews result from a surface reading of the book. It’s a very layered story, and if you only take the time to focus on one point, you’re going to miss a lot. (Please do yourself a favor and wait until after you’ve read the book to read this section and the one following. I don’t want my opinions to color yours.)

Here are some of the most common complaints and my response to them.

(view spoiler)[ 1.Diana isn’t a strong heroine. I think she is. She’s just flawed and in love. Love makes you do really stupid things and blindly accept all the red flags in a relationship without a second thought. And that usually gets you in trouble. I haven’t read the second book yet, but I have a feeling it’s going to get Diana in trouble, too. As for her dependence on Matthew, she’s in a completely foreign situation that she has no idea how to handle. He’s 1,500 years old and has dealt with witches, the Congregation and other things she’s experiencing before. Of course she’s going to rely on him. Maybe she does so a little blindly, but again, she’s in love. Had she steadfastly resisted him, a lot of people would have called her cold and heartless (one of my few issues with Katniss in the Hunger Games), so there’s really no pleasing everyone.

2. Matthew isn’t scary. Apparently some people don’t find the idea of domestic violence scary. From what we’re told of Matthew’s back story, he’s a time bomb waiting to go off. We know he’s killed before (even beyond the need to feed) and is given to extremely violent fits of rage. The constant threat of that is enough to make him scary to me. Add that to his controlling nature (see below) and you’ve got enough to scare the crap out of me. He’s like the best and worst boyfriend all rolled into one. Maybe the people who feel like he’s not scary are looking for a horror movie kind of scary, but I think Matthew is a great example of modern, psychological scary, especially for any woman who doesn’t like to be dominated.

3. Matthew is controlling. Yes, he is. But that seems to be a theme with vampires. He exhibits come of the same traits that people have criticized Edward Cullen for (possessiveness, quick to anger, a creepy tendency to watch Diana sleep, etc.) but seems to be par for the course in modern vampire novels. Chloe Neill’s character of Ethan is very similar in that regard and let’s face it, Anne Rice’s Lestat is no prince. Even in the original vampire stories by Bram Stoker and the Nosferatu tales, compulsion (the ability to control) is one of the classic vampire powers. It’s what lures their victims and makes them such fierce predators. Why shouldn’t that power extend to those they love? I’m not saying it is right, it’s just natural. People have complained about his need to hover over Diana and protect her. Men feel the need to do that. Society has told them that’s what makes them manly (this would be especially true for someone raised 1,500 years ago and who has lived through many male-dominated generations). I think it’s also an expression of his concern for her. Hovering isn’t necessarily a bad thing; it just depends on how far it’s taken. And in Matthew’s case it’s both good and bad, and most importantly, serves to show you a lot about his character.

4. I’ve even seen this book described as “Twilight for the academic set.” That’s like comparing foie gras with a hot dog. Yes, they both have controlling vampires. That’s where the similarities begin and end, in my opinion. (And this is coming from someone who LOVED the Twilight series, except for Breaking Dawn. Yes, I just admitted it.) If you want to see it that way, you will, but I think leaving it at that does this book a massive injustice. Twilight was a teenage love story with nothing more at stake (no pun intended) than Bella’s life and heartbreak. This book is about the interaction of witches, humans, vampires and demons (which could be seen as an analogy for racism), evolution and the future of all of their kinds. It’s about magic and mystery and their place in a scientifically dominated world. I’d say the stakes are a little higher here.

5. The book needed editing. Yes, it was a little slow in places, but almost every book has that problem at some point. Its part of the nature of storytelling – at some point you have to slow down and explain a few things. This book wasn’t written to be a page turning thriller. Not every book needs to be. It was written in more of a literary style that focuses on character and relationship building. Some people have complained that nothing happens. Did we read the same book? Yes, there is a lot of focus on what they eat and drink and what they do, but that’s part of putting your squarely in their day-to-day reality. To me, those descriptions were part of the literary beauty of the book.

6. Diana says she doesn’t use magic and then she goes and uses magic. Yes, she does. But remember, Diana is fighting against her magic. Haven’t you ever sworn you won’t do something and then gone and done it anyway? We all do it. And in many ways, she can’t control it. Unbeknownst to her, she’s spellbound, but her magic wants out, so it comes out without her permission. Even once she begins to admit she has it, she’s loathe to use it. I think that struggle is part of what makes her relatable and human.

7. I saw one review that scoffed at the idea of a vampire who specializes in DNA science, but yet does yoga and believes in magic. Why do modern people insist that science and magic can’t coexist? I feel bad for them because I think if you focus too much on one or the other, you’re missing out on an important part of life. Science attempts to explain to us why we’re here and why things happen; magic shows us why we’ll never know for sure.

8. The author wrote too much of herself into this book. An author wrote about what she knows? Oh, the horror! That’s never, ever happened before. So what if Diana’s background and hobbies are similar to the author’s? What does that matter? I think it’s actually a good thing, because it allows her to include detail she otherwise wouldn’t know or would have to learn through research, which can come across as inauthentic. Personally, I would rather see a character influenced by her author that I can believe in, rather than one forcibly created in whom I can see the artifice.

9. There isn’t any sex. Literally speaking, no there’s not, but there is some physical activity and a lot of romance. I think too many people equate the two, while forgetting that they can be separate. Matthew was raised in a very different era with very different morals from ours. And it’s clear that he’s had his own stretch of libertine activity and has tired of it. He has found the woman of his dreams and wants to treat her (and the act of loving making) with the respect and emotion both deserve. What woman doesn’t want that? Yes, as a reader I found it a little frustrating that they didn’t do it, especially after being “wed” (at least in the vampire sense), but given the danger they are in and the possibility of her getting pregnant, I don’t blame them. Besides, the tension building up to the actual act is a great way to keep readers hooked (even if it is a little unfair).

10. Diana has Stockholm Syndrome. No she doesn’t. Stockholm syndrome is when you fall in love with your captors and feel the need to defend them. Diana never did that. After what Satu did to her, she has post traumatic stress disorder. You would too, if you went through what she did. (hide spoiler)]

All this being said, there were some things that bothered me about this book, but I have yet to find one that doesn’t have some flaws.

(view spoiler)[ 1. I cringed when the possibility of Diana getting pregnant came up. (I don’t care who the author is, vampires are dead. They cannot breed. End of story.) But at least Harkness’ explanation about evolution and DNA is more plausible than others I’ve seen.

2. I also had a hard time with the witch water. I get the concept, but I couldn’t picture the full extent of it and felt like it was a little over the top in coming out of her mouth and hair in addition to her eyes, hands and feet. But as someone how has overactive sweat glands in her hands and feet, I appreciate having a new tongue-in-cheek name for my condition!

3. It bothered me that some important things were glossed over, such as when Matthew confirms that he did do the things Satu alleges. It was like “yes, I did that” and then they moved on. I wanted more detail, more of a conversation around why. In a similar vein, I felt the appearance of Nate and Sophie toward the end was just added on. Unless I missed some foreshadowing when Diana was talking to Nate’s mother toward the beginning, it seemed like the reader was unprepared for their arrival.

4. I also had a problem with the scene with the Goddess Diana where the character Diana saves Matthew’s life. It felt a little contrived to me, like Harkness wrote herself into a situation she couldn’t get out of any other way or was forcing the exchange of blood between Diana and Matthew for reasons we don’t yet understand. But I’m choosing to trust the author has her reasons and that this scene will come back to bite Diana in the butt, even if not until book 3. (hide spoiler)]

But that’s one of the problems with not being able to read a series all the way through. A lot of times the author does things a certain way that will make perfect sense once you can see the story as a whole as she does. But as readers, we don’t have that option along the way (at least not until all the books come out). That’s where faith in the author and her process come in.

I, for one, can’t wait until it’s my turn to get the sequel out from the library. If that one is as good as this one is, you’ll see another review from me here.

PS – If you get the chance to listen to the audio book, Jennifer Ikeda does an incredible job as the narrator.