Reviews

The Luminaries by Susan Dennard

Only show reviews with written explanations

chinama's review against another edition

adventurous dark mysterious tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

3.5

I enjoyed this book! It kept me engaged, I was excited to watch the forest's secrets emerge and I thought the monsters were very cool. The many mysteries of Hemlock Falls are intriguing enough that I'll probably read the sequel.

My biggest issue was with the romance--huuuuge eye-roller for me. He's reserved and mysterious and that's about his entire personality. And yeah I get it, she's oblivious, but I'm not so I could do without the constant references to it.

That aside, I was pleased to see some nuance regarding everyone's feelings about the whole outcast thing.

Content Warnings

zopro95's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous dark mysterious slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

everybody's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

This is, at least partially, a case of "it's not you, it's me." I would recommend the first 90% to a YA audience without question. Very little in this book is really new or original, but the execution is great.
The author did a great job of bringing the ominous but intriguing woods to life. The occasionally flowery and creative language does an incredible job of immersing me in this strange environment.
I've read many complaints about the love interest being boring and the MC being stupid. I can understand both criticisms, but I would argue that the former is more a case of people looking for instant gratification, as the romance pacing here is quite slow. I thought it was decently well done. The only point I agree with is that there is a bit too much telling, causing the attraction to feel less tangible than it could have.

In regards to the MC behaving stupidly, I think the book does a great job of building empathy with the MC. In most cases, even though I, as an outsider, can recognize stupid thoughts or decisions, I could also understand where she was coming from. I was close enough to the MC and invested enough to see her viewpoint, which is a very hard thing to do as a writer.

However, I have one objective criticism. There are quite a few plot-convenient coincidences that leave the MC unable to convince her peers of a big and looming threat, which they all attribute to something else in willful ignorance. This works as a great vehicle to drive engagement through indignation and frustration on the reader's part. But, it's incredibly important not to overdo it, and that is precisely what happens towards the end. The number of coincidences the author inserts grows far beyond credulity. And because this is the main tool the author uses to hold the tension, I cannot see her letting go of this any time soon in the sequel (I am speculating here).

Now, I want to talk about the things that rubbed me the wrong way in the story, but which I see more as personal preferences, though they might still give you an idea of whether you might enjoy the story.

First, the setting is basically a closed society that operates like a classic cult, divided into factions (because of course they are). I really dislike this cult trope because it frequently gets abused to eliminate the influence of a larger society. This is also true for many post-apocalyptic settings. However, contrary to reality, the characters in these societies, as well as the authors, typically don't understand cult dynamics. Cults have incredibly strong hierarchies in some regards but are basically anarchical in others, and I have not read a single book that does these social dynamics justice. My bigger problem is that most authors introduce these settings not because they serve as an interesting environment, but as an excuse for cheap plot steering and to justify all sorts of nonsense that wouldn't otherwise be acceptable if there were an actual government or police involved, which is just lazy and I hate it.

My second, somewhat related, problem is how the author uses cult-like fanaticism to excuse the figurative blindness of many of its members. To any experienced reader, the entire story is utterly transparent in how it uses certain elements to set up specific motivations, reveals, and twists. It's equally obvious in how it prepares emotional entanglements and future inner turmoil and split loyalties, etc. Everything the book does is very transparent to an experienced reader. The author tries to leave subtle breadcrumbs here and there for later reveals, but they all were exceedingly obvious to me immediately. However, there is a target audience for this type of story, probably mainly younger and less experienced readers who might not recognize all this immediately, so I can imagine how much more ingenious the story will appear to anyone who is actually surprised by these elements.