Brennan, Marie: Midnight Never Come
Midnight Never Come (2008)
Writer: Marie Brennan
Genre: Fantasy
Pages: 379
Marie Brennan is one of those authors I accidentally stumbled upon while surfing the net and so far, I've enjoyed reading her stuff. To top it off, she seems like a really cool, nice, intelligent person on her LJ, which makes me all the more willing to read what she writes, even if I'm not interested in the subject matter.
Case in point: Midnight Never Come: I have absolutely no interest in fairies. In fact, when I see a book is about fairies, my interest wanes in spite of myself. This is nothing like my previous dislike of vampires, because at least when I read vampire books, I'd usually enjoy myself, but to be honest, the only fairy book/series that I continue to read and thoroughly enjoy is Melissa Marr's series. That's it. Nobody else has come close.
So knowing Brennan was doing the whole fairy thing, I was like, "Meh..." But I read her blog while she was working on this project, saw just how much research she was putting into this (fairies during Elizabethan England, yo. It requires research), and decided that when the book came out, I'd give it a try despite my dislike.
The premise: In Elizabethan England, everything is not as it seems. Queen Elizabeth rules all of England, but beneath the London, another Queen rules another city. A Dark Queen who'll do whatever it takes to keep Elizabeth in power, as well as hold on to her throne. But two courtiers have stumbled upon the secret of this darker, shadow rule, and will do anything to break it.
Spoilers ahead.
I'll get this out of the way: I was bored. I was so very bored. Over halfway through the book, I told myself I'd finish it just because I really like the author and I appreciate her, but should she write a sequel, I won't get it.
When I finished, I thought, "Well, MAYBE I'll look into the sequel. I might be tempted."
Let's be clear here as well: my boredom has NOTHING to do with Brennan's writing. For those of you familiar with her previous two books, Doppelganger (now titled Warrior), and Warrior and Witch (now titled Witch), the writing is very different and I want to say it's actually much stronger. Then again, we're dealing with two completely different settings: Brennan's previous books take place in a secondary, made-up fantasy world, whereas Midnight Never Come takes place in Elizabethan England. That alone dictates a difference, and I'm glad to see that Brennan wrote this in such a way that pays tribute to the language of the time without bogging it down with the language of the time. In other words, it reads very easily, but not off-the-cuff modern. Having read Brennan's novels consecutively, I can safely say that I think she's improving as a writer, and that is always promising.
So why the boredom? FAIRIES!!!! I was reading the sections that took place in Onyx Hall, the fairy city beneath London, and I was just bored! I mean, how often am I going to read the story about COMPLEX FAIRY POLITICS and a VERY CRUEL FAIRY QUEEN? That stereotype is everywhere, and so when I see it, I'm yawning because 1) I don't see anything different and 2) I don't have enough to be invested in the story anyway.
Admittedly, Brennan's use of Elizabethan England and its history MAKES this story different than other fairy stories I've read (and so we're clear, here are the other fairy stories I've read: Elizabeth Bear's Blood and Iron, Holly Black's Tithe, and of course, Melissa Marr. I'm sure there've been others, but they're not coming to mind. And yes, I know Elizabeth Bear has her OWN Elizabethan period fairy story, which is part of her Promethean Age series, but I haven't read it and based on the descriptions of the plot, it's very different from this). However, and it shames me to admit this, but that period of history? Holds no interest. It shames me because when I was in high school, I would've eaten this stuff up. I would've LOVED it. In college, had I pursued an English major like I intended, I'm quite sure I would've STILL loved it. However, I'm so far removed from my history and my knowledge of British lit that I'm kinda of meh about the whole thing (though I still love the movies Shakespeare in Love and Elizabeth. I kept picturing Judi Dench as Brennan's Elizabeth!).
So do you see why I was bored? It's not Brennan's fault so much as lack of interest on my part. There was nothing to engage me.
But obviously, something changed. And that change happened when Michael Deven learned who Lune really was and they started working together to figure out what's going on and how to break Invidiana's power. And I want to say something here about plot: once those two started working together, the reader was LEARNING stuff, and I was pretty well invested. Until then, I thought we were wasting time on a plot I already knew all about: Michael Deven discovering that there's a hidden player in Elizabeth's court. Well, DUH. We met that hidden player in the prologue! The reader already KNEW that Elizabeth made a pact with Invidiana, and so was under the impression that said pact was the big deal.
Well, this reader was. Obviously that wasn't quite the case and the history of these characters went further back than that, and that's what caught my interest. I want to say that if said history had been hinted at prior, I would've been better engaged throughout the whole book, but then again, I wonder if, should I ever decide to re-read this (and I know I won't), if I might find said hints there all along? I don't know, but one thing I did wonder once I finished was whether or not Brennan's extensive research got the better of her and she spent more time building up the accurate historical period (the whole plot of Michael Deven and the Gentlemen Pensioners, that was mighty detailed, but how necessary was all of it?) than really weaving the story into the book in such a way to keep the reader turning the pages. I think I got a bit too much history, but then again, I've already explained that the subject matter held little interest to me, so that might not be a fair critique. After all, I got through Dan Simmons's epic tome The Terror just fine, and that book was chock FULL of historical period detail (but then again, I was very engaged in the subject matter). And speaking of Simmons, I might be able to make a better comparison about the necessity of historical detail when I read his latest, Drood, which focuses on Charles Dickens and that particular history.
Anyway. There's an excellent Q&A section in the back of the book where Brennan discusses her idea for the novel, how she developed it, and of course, all the research involved. If you read this book, don't miss out on that. I really like her commentary on the fairy lore she was able to use and why. Oh, and her comment on how this book is LITERALLY the definition of urban fantasy made me laugh, because she's right, technically speaking. :)
My Rating
Give It Away: by time I finished the book, I was enjoying myself and will actually seriously consider getting the sequel. But it took a very long time for my interest to get snagged, and that's more my fault than the author's: I have a strong dislike of fairies and I've sadly lost interest in the Elizabethan period in which this book takes place. I will say that on the surface, this looks like it's another fairy book with an evil Queen who needs to get what she deserves, but there's more to it than that, and once I got to that point in the book, I was very engaged. Like I said, I'll consider reading the sequel. I've read all of Brennan's novels so far, and she's improving as a writer, there's no doubt. I think if there's a flaw in this one, it's that the historical detail sometimes gets in the way of the larger plot, and I'm curious to see if the same happens with In Ashes Lie (the sequel). Who knows? But I intend to read on, despite my dislike of fairies. That's how much I like the author.
Cover Commentary: you can't tell how really lovely this cover is until you see it in person. There's a really pretty spot-varnish design there that you'll catch if you tilt the book in the light just right. I'm not fond of the font, but I love the title (and where the title comes from, that's a very nice section in the book, I must say), so I'll forgive the font, even though I'm annoyed that the front of the "M" of "Midnight" is chopped off.
Next up:
Spiral Hunt by Margaret Ronald