A Darker Shade of Magic Mini Review
I'd written about half of a review for V.E. Schwab's A Darker Shade of Magic before the creeping lethargy of a cold started to take over me. I realized then that if I posted this newer review, then my old one would be lost to the universe. And this saddened me, as the first time I reviewed this book, it was after reading about 100 pages at work (it's okay, I'm allowed to read there). What I didn't realize upon fully reading it was that this short review I wrote then still reflects my feelings about the book, just not in great detail. So to preserve it, I figured I'd post it here.
Just a tip for myself: perhaps reading adult books by authors who predominantly write young adult is not the greatest idea. Catherynne M. Valente's Deathless is proving that this is a trend you should avoid, me.
A Darker Shade of Magic by V.E. Schwab
I should start a shelf for the books I sample at work. While I was sucked into Margaret Atwood's Stone Mattress, I did not have the same affection for V.E. Schwab's A Darker Shade of Magic. Granted, I have only read the first 100 pages of it, but I figure if the book would have grabbed me, it would have been by the first 100 pages at least.
My major gripes with fantasy are probably due to the fact that I was in love with the genre between the ages of 14-19, until I read so much of it that books became checklists of tropes. And there are parts of this book that are so incredibly obvious - such as a certain villainous character.
Strangely, I also felt as though I knew absolutely nothing about the characters because there was far too much time taken up with the dumping of information. I get it - it's a fantasy world, there's much to explain. But there are better ways to go about this. The writing didn't intrigue me, I couldn't find a sentence that made me pause for thought. There was far too much telling as well.
That being said, I think there are a lot of interesting ideas within the book. I like magic being based in blood (I have an unhealthy fascination with blood), I like the idea of a character who can travel through three different worlds, I like characters with very obvious physical faults. Had the book been written differently, I think it would have won me over. Had everything not been told. For that matter, had any of the worlds involved (Gray London, Red London, White London) had some sort of atmosphere. I will say that I enjoyed the interactions between Kell and Rhy, but I wanted more of that and less of explanation-junction.
What intrigued me greatly about this book was the use of magic through blood and making gateways with it. But all I could think about was Phillip Pullman's The Subtle Knife and how fifteen years after I had read it, Will was still a memorable character to me. There is an incredible amount of gruesomeness in that book, which A Darker Shade of Magic is lacking.
Addendum: Just kidding, I hate the interactions between Kell and Rhy.
Addendum addendum: A Darker Shade of Magic follows every single fantasy cliche, to the point that I even knew what the characters were going to say to each other. I can't stress how incredibly boring this foray was.
Just a tip for myself: perhaps reading adult books by authors who predominantly write young adult is not the greatest idea. Catherynne M. Valente's Deathless is proving that this is a trend you should avoid, me.
A Darker Shade of Magic by V.E. Schwab
I should start a shelf for the books I sample at work. While I was sucked into Margaret Atwood's Stone Mattress, I did not have the same affection for V.E. Schwab's A Darker Shade of Magic. Granted, I have only read the first 100 pages of it, but I figure if the book would have grabbed me, it would have been by the first 100 pages at least.
My major gripes with fantasy are probably due to the fact that I was in love with the genre between the ages of 14-19, until I read so much of it that books became checklists of tropes. And there are parts of this book that are so incredibly obvious - such as a certain villainous character.
Strangely, I also felt as though I knew absolutely nothing about the characters because there was far too much time taken up with the dumping of information. I get it - it's a fantasy world, there's much to explain. But there are better ways to go about this. The writing didn't intrigue me, I couldn't find a sentence that made me pause for thought. There was far too much telling as well.
That being said, I think there are a lot of interesting ideas within the book. I like magic being based in blood (I have an unhealthy fascination with blood), I like the idea of a character who can travel through three different worlds, I like characters with very obvious physical faults. Had the book been written differently, I think it would have won me over. Had everything not been told. For that matter, had any of the worlds involved (Gray London, Red London, White London) had some sort of atmosphere. I will say that I enjoyed the interactions between Kell and Rhy, but I wanted more of that and less of explanation-junction.
What intrigued me greatly about this book was the use of magic through blood and making gateways with it. But all I could think about was Phillip Pullman's The Subtle Knife and how fifteen years after I had read it, Will was still a memorable character to me. There is an incredible amount of gruesomeness in that book, which A Darker Shade of Magic is lacking.
Addendum: Just kidding, I hate the interactions between Kell and Rhy.
Addendum addendum: A Darker Shade of Magic follows every single fantasy cliche, to the point that I even knew what the characters were going to say to each other. I can't stress how incredibly boring this foray was.