Scan barcode
celjla212's review against another edition
1.0
I made it through 80 ish pages of this book and that way more than enough. I consider myself a well read girl, but I considered using a dictionary for some of the vocabulary this author was using. I just felt it was trying too hard. Also, all three main characters are basically the worst, most pretentious an NYC grad student could be. The novel was going nowhere so I am done reading.
marino_sln's review against another edition
dark
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.0
abigailhaze's review against another edition
2.0
The only thing the author seems to enjoy more than jerking off to her overuse of SAT vocab words is fruit jam.
allyem_reads's review against another edition
DNF at 40%
I tried so hard. I really did. I wanted to like this book because it’s shelved as dark academia which is one of my preferred genres. And the premise sounded right up my alley: three college grads are working to create an interactive game when they get caught up in another that brings Euripides’ tragedies to life. Game theory and Greek history?? Uhm, yes! Sign me up!
But...
The execution was atrocious, if I am being completely honest. The part about game theory were interesting, I’ll give it that, but the whole book was just...info dumpy exposition. Like, there was an entire page on what one of the characters was getting from the store. It was ridiculous. Not to mention, I was nearly half-way through, and we hadn’t gotten ANY of the Greek interaction. I was waiting and waiting for it to come, but it never did!
Really I should have looked at the ratings on here before I added it to my wishlist. Next time I see a dark academia book, or any book really, I’ll take a closer look at the reviews before making a decision to read it or not. At least I learned my lesson, even if it was the hard way.
I tried so hard. I really did. I wanted to like this book because it’s shelved as dark academia which is one of my preferred genres. And the premise sounded right up my alley: three college grads are working to create an interactive game when they get caught up in another that brings Euripides’ tragedies to life. Game theory and Greek history?? Uhm, yes! Sign me up!
But...
The execution was atrocious, if I am being completely honest. The part about game theory were interesting, I’ll give it that, but the whole book was just...info dumpy exposition. Like, there was an entire page on what one of the characters was getting from the store. It was ridiculous. Not to mention, I was nearly half-way through, and we hadn’t gotten ANY of the Greek interaction. I was waiting and waiting for it to come, but it never did!
Really I should have looked at the ratings on here before I added it to my wishlist. Next time I see a dark academia book, or any book really, I’ll take a closer look at the reviews before making a decision to read it or not. At least I learned my lesson, even if it was the hard way.
kyuropii's review against another edition
1.0
Too unnecessarily verbose. Didn't help that three main characters doesn't feel far from one another. There was no plot, no agency, not a thing to guarantee me some interest.
alicihonest's review against another edition
2.0
A weird book, but not weird in the sinister and foreboding way it was so, so desperately trying to achieve. In fact, while technically sinister things happened, the pacing and total lack of ability to summon up any dramatic tension just failed the concept completely.
I'm a sucker for the concept, it's that old "young adults create a subculture to do scandalous or just fun but strange things in the theme of some antiquity but everything goes deadly wrong and also there's an inappropriate sexual proclivity here somewhere," an attempt in the spirit of A Secret History, The Finishing School, The Lake of Dead Languages, If We Were Villains, sort of The Shadow Year, but it's so bad. The pacing is bad, the characters are ill developed, it's too short to make anything that happens seem important, the characters all have the same voice which is bizarre, that one voice is stilted and formal in an inexplicable way (it would work for 1.5 of them but not all of them), and things are brought up and have inordinate amounts of time spent on them with no payoff or reflection whatsoever.
I would be prepared to be forgiving to this book if it were the author's first work, but it's not. It's earnest, and I can appreciate what she was trying to go for. But at this point, she needs to be better at getting there. It's short, so it's not a waste of much time, but it's a pathetic attempt at a novel.
I'm a sucker for the concept, it's that old "young adults create a subculture to do scandalous or just fun but strange things in the theme of some antiquity but everything goes deadly wrong and also there's an inappropriate sexual proclivity here somewhere," an attempt in the spirit of A Secret History, The Finishing School, The Lake of Dead Languages, If We Were Villains, sort of The Shadow Year, but it's so bad. The pacing is bad, the characters are ill developed, it's too short to make anything that happens seem important, the characters all have the same voice which is bizarre, that one voice is stilted and formal in an inexplicable way (it would work for 1.5 of them but not all of them), and things are brought up and have inordinate amounts of time spent on them with no payoff or reflection whatsoever.
I would be prepared to be forgiving to this book if it were the author's first work, but it's not. It's earnest, and I can appreciate what she was trying to go for. But at this point, she needs to be better at getting there. It's short, so it's not a waste of much time, but it's a pathetic attempt at a novel.
kellikaos's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
What even was this book? I still have very little idea what was going on. This was clearly for a certain kind of person and I was not that person. The writing is also super pretentious.
leiaslegacy84's review against another edition
4.0
Some other reviewers are correct in pointing out the flaws of this book and the author's writing style, which is a bit scattershot and overripe with academic language that even academics (I've hung out with plenty) would not use in conversation. However, at only 191 pages it moves fast and was still - for me at least - a highly engaging read that went by in a flash. Since "The Secret History" is one of my favorite books, this one's subject matter naturally appealed to me. Though a little predictable, I found the story thrilling and could not put it down.
emmagetz's review against another edition
2.0
I am really disappointed by this book. The concept was extremely interesting and I think there was real potential at a story to be told, but this fell completely flat.
The writing was messy, adverb-heavy, and a weird mix of informal and too formal. There was no character development and the dialogue was very forced and unnatural. I wasn't drawn into any of the characters, so the ending made me feel nothing.
On a positive note, though, the information about game theory and such was interesting. The novel itself was not.
The writing was messy, adverb-heavy, and a weird mix of informal and too formal. There was no character development and the dialogue was very forced and unnatural. I wasn't drawn into any of the characters, so the ending made me feel nothing.
On a positive note, though, the information about game theory and such was interesting. The novel itself was not.