Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.83 AVERAGE
3.83 AVERAGE
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
It was super slow. And Matthew is a red flag dressed in a sexy vampire suit in many ways.
The pacing keeps this from being a five star for me - it’s a lot of slowing down for science when I’m about seeing the supernaturals interacting - but I still enjoy the story so I’ll be continuing. And things did seem to speed up the further I got into the book.
(that said, it’s entirely possible this might be the rare case where I prefer the tv adaptation over the books in the end)
The relationship between Diana and Matthew feels like it moves impossibly fast and slow at the same time, which is a strange sort of magic of its own, I guess
The book’s timeline being less than two months, and they’re already ‘married’ and talking about a future with potential children. So that’s quick.
But slow in that they’ve not done things that typical married people wanting kids might do to accomplish that goal…if you catch my drift? Seems odd?
adventurous
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The story is everything I hoped it would be when I began reading it.
The scholarly atmosphere in the library, nothing is cliché, the characters are captivating and you don't know how the story will go.
I couldn't let go of the book, and all my free time went to reading.
The scholarly atmosphere in the library, nothing is cliché, the characters are captivating and you don't know how the story will go.
I couldn't let go of the book, and all my free time went to reading.
adventurous
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Interesting premise, no executed well. It reads more like a diary of what Diana did today. Banter has no chemistry.
This is truly the first book I would ever call "an adult Harry Potter". There is magic, magical creatures and adventure set just below reality.
This is definitely the first of a series. The ending introduced several new characters and then left it with a bit of a cliffhanger. I really enjoyed it. Such a different interpretation of Vampires and Witches and the other supernaturals.
Recommended to fans of UF and urban romance.
This is definitely the first of a series. The ending introduced several new characters and then left it with a bit of a cliffhanger. I really enjoyed it. Such a different interpretation of Vampires and Witches and the other supernaturals.
Recommended to fans of UF and urban romance.
A Discovery of Witches
A Discovery of Witches is a lush, intellectually playful mash-up: library romance, supernatural politics, and a meditation on how we inherit and revise the past. It’s not a thrill-a-minute ride; it’s a long, candle-lit evening in good company—sometimes overlong, often captivating. If you enjoy historically grounded fantasy, forbidden-love stakes, and scholar-protagonists who solve problems by reading as much as by fighting, this will hit the spot.
Spoilers (lite in this section)
Why it works:
1) Scholarship as worldbuilding, not wallpaper
Harkness (herself a historian) builds a fantasy that smells of vellum and tea leaves. The Bodleian routines, alchemical marginalia, wine notes, rowing on the Isis—these lived-in details make the supernatural feel plausibly stitched into academia. The bewitched manuscript isn’t just a MacGuffin; it’s an argument about how knowledge is preserved, lost, and sometimes defended by those who fear it.
2) Science and magic in conversation
The book is most interesting when it treats “creatures” as a biological and historical puzzle. Matthew’s genetic research and Diana’s history of alchemy sit in productive tension: one reads the world through data, the other through texts. Harkness uses that tension to ask what counts as evidence—and who gets to decide.
3) A romance with thematic teeth
Diana and Matthew aren’t just fated lovers; they’re a clash of temperaments, eras, and ethics. Their magnetism is believable because it’s built on curiosity and competence before heat. The forbidden-love frame (the Covenant’s ban on interspecies relationships) isn’t mere melodrama; it exposes how institutions police boundaries to maintain power.
4) A sense of place (and time) that keeps expanding
Book one moves from Oxford’s cloisters to Sept-Tours in France and a haunted, memory-laden house in upstate New York. Each setting refracts the central questions—who owns history, who enforces it, who resists it—while steadily widening the story’s scope.
Prose & pacing: Clear, unfussy sentences with a scholar’s eye for objects. The opening third is superb—library rhythms, scholarly sparring, tension humming under civility. The middle luxuriates in history and relationship; the finale tilts into domestic gothic and supernatural politics. If you like a slow burn that prioritizes atmosphere and research over constant combat, you’ll be delighted. If you want nonstop action, the digressions (botany, wine, genealogy) may test your patience.
Characterization: Diana’s arc—from avoidance to agency—rings true, especially once she confronts the cost of suppressing what she is. Matthew is compelling but deliberately problematic: protective to a fault, shaped by centuries of hierarchy. The novel knows this about him, and part of the tension is Diana naming (and pushing back on) his control.
System design: Witches, vampires, and daemons are defined by talents and tendencies rather than game-manual rules. It’s elegant but occasionally vague, especially early on, which can make some stakes feel hand-wavy until later clarifications land.
Themes that linger-
Inheritance vs. self-making: Diana’s refusal of magic is about autonomy and grief; accepting power means accepting history—familial and collective.
Policing difference: The Congregation/Covenant operate like a cartel of “order,” using fear of hybridity to justify control. The book’s politics are sharper than the romance marketing suggests.
Knowledge as intimacy: The love story doubles as a research partnership. Reading, tasting, training—Harkness treats learning itself as courtship, which is refreshing.
Where it wobbles
Information density: Exposition sometimes arrives in lecture blocks (lineages, councils, medieval sidebars). Fascinating if you’re into it; draggy if you’re not.
Power dynamics in the romance: Matthew’s alpha tendencies (surveillance, unilateral decisions) may raise eyebrows. The narrative critiques this, but readers’ tolerance will vary.
Tonality shifts: The jump from academic intrigue to clan politics to haunted-house hijinks is fun but can feel like three novels stitched together.
Verdict-
Recommended for: fans of The Historian, Outlander’s slower historical sections, and anyone who happily lingers over marginalia, wine notes, and old houses with opinions.
My take — richly imagined, occasionally indulgent, ultimately rewarding.
A Discovery of Witches is a lush, intellectually playful mash-up: library romance, supernatural politics, and a meditation on how we inherit and revise the past. It’s not a thrill-a-minute ride; it’s a long, candle-lit evening in good company—sometimes overlong, often captivating. If you enjoy historically grounded fantasy, forbidden-love stakes, and scholar-protagonists who solve problems by reading as much as by fighting, this will hit the spot.
Spoilers (lite in this section)
Why it works:
1) Scholarship as worldbuilding, not wallpaper
Harkness (herself a historian) builds a fantasy that smells of vellum and tea leaves. The Bodleian routines, alchemical marginalia, wine notes, rowing on the Isis—these lived-in details make the supernatural feel plausibly stitched into academia. The bewitched manuscript isn’t just a MacGuffin; it’s an argument about how knowledge is preserved, lost, and sometimes defended by those who fear it.
2) Science and magic in conversation
The book is most interesting when it treats “creatures” as a biological and historical puzzle. Matthew’s genetic research and Diana’s history of alchemy sit in productive tension: one reads the world through data, the other through texts. Harkness uses that tension to ask what counts as evidence—and who gets to decide.
3) A romance with thematic teeth
Diana and Matthew aren’t just fated lovers; they’re a clash of temperaments, eras, and ethics. Their magnetism is believable because it’s built on curiosity and competence before heat. The forbidden-love frame (the Covenant’s ban on interspecies relationships) isn’t mere melodrama; it exposes how institutions police boundaries to maintain power.
4) A sense of place (and time) that keeps expanding
Book one moves from Oxford’s cloisters to Sept-Tours in France and a haunted, memory-laden house in upstate New York. Each setting refracts the central questions—who owns history, who enforces it, who resists it—while steadily widening the story’s scope.
Prose & pacing: Clear, unfussy sentences with a scholar’s eye for objects. The opening third is superb—library rhythms, scholarly sparring, tension humming under civility. The middle luxuriates in history and relationship; the finale tilts into domestic gothic and supernatural politics. If you like a slow burn that prioritizes atmosphere and research over constant combat, you’ll be delighted. If you want nonstop action, the digressions (botany, wine, genealogy) may test your patience.
Characterization: Diana’s arc—from avoidance to agency—rings true, especially once she confronts the cost of suppressing what she is. Matthew is compelling but deliberately problematic: protective to a fault, shaped by centuries of hierarchy. The novel knows this about him, and part of the tension is Diana naming (and pushing back on) his control.
System design: Witches, vampires, and daemons are defined by talents and tendencies rather than game-manual rules. It’s elegant but occasionally vague, especially early on, which can make some stakes feel hand-wavy until later clarifications land.
Themes that linger-
Inheritance vs. self-making: Diana’s refusal of magic is about autonomy and grief; accepting power means accepting history—familial and collective.
Policing difference: The Congregation/Covenant operate like a cartel of “order,” using fear of hybridity to justify control. The book’s politics are sharper than the romance marketing suggests.
Knowledge as intimacy: The love story doubles as a research partnership. Reading, tasting, training—Harkness treats learning itself as courtship, which is refreshing.
Where it wobbles
Information density: Exposition sometimes arrives in lecture blocks (lineages, councils, medieval sidebars). Fascinating if you’re into it; draggy if you’re not.
Power dynamics in the romance: Matthew’s alpha tendencies (surveillance, unilateral decisions) may raise eyebrows. The narrative critiques this, but readers’ tolerance will vary.
Tonality shifts: The jump from academic intrigue to clan politics to haunted-house hijinks is fun but can feel like three novels stitched together.
Verdict-
Recommended for: fans of The Historian, Outlander’s slower historical sections, and anyone who happily lingers over marginalia, wine notes, and old houses with opinions.
My take — richly imagined, occasionally indulgent, ultimately rewarding.
Oh, this book. I went back and forth about this book. A lot. But first...
Dear authors who want a vampire in their novel,
Hello! How are you? I have not read enough novels with vampires to know the ins and outs of their tropes. I have read Twilight, though. And I enjoyed it for what it is. Here are a things that are, at least to me, strongly associated with Twilight that you may want to never include in another book about vampires again.
1) The word dazzling. Words sometimes stick out to me in books. Dazzling vampires make me think of Twilight, which I do not want to do unless I am reading Twilight.
2) Vampires love expensive/flashy cars. I think this sticks out to me because I think it is a super specific and weird detail to include. I very rarely care what real life people drive, so I care less about characters in books. (I don't know why TV is sometimes the exception. Let's blame Supernatural!)
3) A vampire comparing a human, particularly a lady human, to drugs. Whether it's the smell or the taste, just stop it.
Sincerely,
Sarah
So, THIS BOOK. I enjoyed parts of it. Big chunks of it. Other chunks, not so much. I was kind of bored in France. And I think that's because France focused on the "romance." I read romance. This was not super romantic. It was a bit of patriarchal and/or deceitful bullshit in a candy coated shell of, "because we're vampires we're old, there are things you don't understand, blah." Don't get me wrong, the vampires don't have a monopoly on hiding things. I think maybe I prefer witches as a concept. I liked the found family, group of rag tag misfits business. I wanted to know more about the book, because of course I did. And my favorite character in the whole book was a house.
I am intrigued enough to try book two, with reservations because I have a feeling it will focus on two of my least favorite characters.
I finally read this because my friend Sarah promised she would read Neverwhere if I read this; like a favorite books exchange. My pick is about 200 pages shorter. You're welcome!
Dear authors who want a vampire in their novel,
Hello! How are you? I have not read enough novels with vampires to know the ins and outs of their tropes. I have read Twilight, though. And I enjoyed it for what it is. Here are a things that are, at least to me, strongly associated with Twilight that you may want to never include in another book about vampires again.
1) The word dazzling. Words sometimes stick out to me in books. Dazzling vampires make me think of Twilight, which I do not want to do unless I am reading Twilight.
2) Vampires love expensive/flashy cars. I think this sticks out to me because I think it is a super specific and weird detail to include. I very rarely care what real life people drive, so I care less about characters in books. (I don't know why TV is sometimes the exception. Let's blame Supernatural!)
3) A vampire comparing a human, particularly a lady human, to drugs. Whether it's the smell or the taste, just stop it.
Sincerely,
Sarah
So, THIS BOOK. I enjoyed parts of it. Big chunks of it. Other chunks, not so much. I was kind of bored in France. And I think that's because France focused on the "romance." I read romance. This was not super romantic. It was a bit of patriarchal and/or deceitful bullshit in a candy coated shell of, "because we're vampires we're old, there are things you don't understand, blah." Don't get me wrong, the vampires don't have a monopoly on hiding things. I think maybe I prefer witches as a concept. I liked the found family, group of rag tag misfits business. I wanted to know more about the book, because of course I did. And my favorite character in the whole book was a house.
I am intrigued enough to try book two, with reservations because I have a feeling it will focus on two of my least favorite characters.
I finally read this because my friend Sarah promised she would read Neverwhere if I read this; like a favorite books exchange. My pick is about 200 pages shorter. You're welcome!
adventurous
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No