Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.63 AVERAGE
3.63 AVERAGE
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual content, Toxic relationship, Blood, Gaslighting
Minor: Death of parent
i liked this book. i think girl needed to do more research. I’m not Episcopalian but I don’t think they pray the rosary, and other things in there seemed fishy. Also girl. the leaves are green in early september in mass
adventurous
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
dark
medium-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:
No
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
dark
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
This summer I decided to properly focus on vampire media--actually understanding genre conventions, reading it for the sake of reading about vampires, and so on--because I realized I kept accidentally consuming vampire media for reasons unrelated to the vampires (homosexuality, mainly, but also other themes). I wanted to see if I could enjoy, you know, the actual point of all of this for its own sake, despite being a rare gay person who's never really been into vampires conceptually (I'm more of a pirate girl. Have you ever seen the TV show Black Sai- ok fine not the time). To this end, I checked out several vampire books from the library, including two by this author at the recommendation of a friend, and Dracula, which I probably should have read first but I was just coming off of finishing Emma by Jane Austen and I wasn't really in the mood for another older novel just yet. I started with the one I thought I was most likely to enjoy--this one, because I like toxic sapphic relationships in fiction already.
Now maybe I just don't get it. I am in fact willing to change my rating upon further reflection if I decide I actually just didn't get it, or it wasn't for me. But I did not enjoy reading this book.
[summary here]
The writing style was immediately off-putting to me. I think within several pages I had already had the thought that this would have worked much better in third person limited than in first person, because the style of narration felt very impersonal. Certainly there are interesting turns of phrase and metaphors, although I'm not necessarily the right person to appreciate this (I have always cared more about content than style, across all forms of media), but I think the fact that it was in first person made it feel very much like we were being told things, rather than shown them. I almost got the sense at times that this was written as if it was meant to be a journal, with the narration in the moment being more impersonal because it was filtered through what the character would actually write down, although this didn't quite work for me either. I guess it was a little interesting to read Laura matter-of-factly announce that she was an anxious person early on in the book, then only actually witness this anxiety from Carmilla's perspective of Laura, without the very on-the-nose narration to distract from any actual feeling of anxiety from Laura in the moment. Does this make sense?
Either way, this style of narration created a lot of distance from the characters and made them feel either very one-dimensional or like we were being told they were complex rather than being shown this. This, of course, was another very big negative for me specifically, because I tend to enjoy things specifically for the characters. I never felt like Laura, Carmilla, or De Lafontaine were real people, to say nothing of the other relatively irrelevant side characters who to be honest didn't even need to be in this book (I get that maybe we were trying to flesh out the world of the campus outside of this one class and this one student, or maybe we were trying to show positive female friendships, but it might even have worked better if the side characters had actually been even less present and we could have gotten a better sense of Laura's tunnel vision and obsession by their obvious exclusion/lack of development). In addition, because of the writing style, I found it hard to distinguish between Laura's voice and Carmilla's voice in the book, outside of certain thoughts or plot events that were unique to each (e.g., Carmilla would mention how obsessed she was with De Lafontaine, Laura might mention Elenore, but otherwise there wasn't much to distinguish them).
I think, ultimately, I might just not like the genre of this book, unrelated to the vampire part. I know this is completely a matter of personal taste, but I generally don't like reading stories where other books or writing in general play a significant role. I understand literary allusions or parallels in general, but I often find it lazy when other literature is referenced as directly as it is in this book? I still need to think about what specifically annoys me because I do think literary allusions/parallels can be used successfully--maybe it's the lack of subtlety here. It feels lazy to borrow themes and aesthetics from classic literature with the intention of pointing out that your novel shares these themes or aesthetics with this well-known story. I don't even like when this is done just for the "fun" of it or for set dressing in a "dark academia" novel. Ultimately I think I just find it pretentious and annoying to read stories about, well, English majors. Thinking back to A Dark and Drowning Tide, which also went for an academic vibe, I actually liked the integration of Lorelei's field of study as a folklorist within the story--I think it made thematic sense and I also think it might have been better executed there, or maybe it was just that Lorelei's field of study involved more actual study and knowledge rather than hyping up how good of a writer she was with no technical discussion of what made her that good. But I may be off base here with trying to come up with specific criticisms--maybe I just didn't like this book because it wasn't my thing. Regardless, this book, and A Dark and Drowning Tide to a lesser extent, were both very...obvious in the way they were written, without much room for interpretation (you’re always being hit over the head with exactly what you should think, either by a character saying it in their internal monologue or via some very heavy handed literary allusions). This is fine if an easy read is what you're looking for, but I tend to prefer books with more subtlety, even for light reading.
As to how this book measures up to my goal of understanding the conventions of vampire media: I'm going to be honest, there was nothing new here. All the vampire stuff I'd seen before in other media, leaving this book feeling like it was more about the academic side of things, which I did not find was executed well. It was an easy read, and you'd probably like it if you like the aesthetics of vampires or academia or whatever. I'm willing to give this author another chance, and of course I'm willing to continue reading vampire media for my personal study since I feel like this wasn't a fair representation of the genre, but it was unfortunately not really to my taste at all.
Now maybe I just don't get it. I am in fact willing to change my rating upon further reflection if I decide I actually just didn't get it, or it wasn't for me. But I did not enjoy reading this book.
[summary here]
The writing style was immediately off-putting to me. I think within several pages I had already had the thought that this would have worked much better in third person limited than in first person, because the style of narration felt very impersonal. Certainly there are interesting turns of phrase and metaphors, although I'm not necessarily the right person to appreciate this (I have always cared more about content than style, across all forms of media), but I think the fact that it was in first person made it feel very much like we were being told things, rather than shown them. I almost got the sense at times that this was written as if it was meant to be a journal, with the narration in the moment being more impersonal because it was filtered through what the character would actually write down, although this didn't quite work for me either. I guess it was a little interesting to read Laura matter-of-factly announce that she was an anxious person early on in the book, then only actually witness this anxiety from Carmilla's perspective of Laura, without the very on-the-nose narration to distract from any actual feeling of anxiety from Laura in the moment. Does this make sense?
Either way, this style of narration created a lot of distance from the characters and made them feel either very one-dimensional or like we were being told they were complex rather than being shown this. This, of course, was another very big negative for me specifically, because I tend to enjoy things specifically for the characters. I never felt like Laura, Carmilla, or De Lafontaine were real people, to say nothing of the other relatively irrelevant side characters who to be honest didn't even need to be in this book (I get that maybe we were trying to flesh out the world of the campus outside of this one class and this one student, or maybe we were trying to show positive female friendships, but it might even have worked better if the side characters had actually been even less present and we could have gotten a better sense of Laura's tunnel vision and obsession by their obvious exclusion/lack of development). In addition, because of the writing style, I found it hard to distinguish between Laura's voice and Carmilla's voice in the book, outside of certain thoughts or plot events that were unique to each (e.g., Carmilla would mention how obsessed she was with De Lafontaine, Laura might mention Elenore, but otherwise there wasn't much to distinguish them).
I think, ultimately, I might just not like the genre of this book, unrelated to the vampire part. I know this is completely a matter of personal taste, but I generally don't like reading stories where other books or writing in general play a significant role. I understand literary allusions or parallels in general, but I often find it lazy when other literature is referenced as directly as it is in this book? I still need to think about what specifically annoys me because I do think literary allusions/parallels can be used successfully--maybe it's the lack of subtlety here. It feels lazy to borrow themes and aesthetics from classic literature with the intention of pointing out that your novel shares these themes or aesthetics with this well-known story. I don't even like when this is done just for the "fun" of it or for set dressing in a "dark academia" novel. Ultimately I think I just find it pretentious and annoying to read stories about, well, English majors. Thinking back to A Dark and Drowning Tide, which also went for an academic vibe, I actually liked the integration of Lorelei's field of study as a folklorist within the story--I think it made thematic sense and I also think it might have been better executed there, or maybe it was just that Lorelei's field of study involved more actual study and knowledge rather than hyping up how good of a writer she was with no technical discussion of what made her that good. But I may be off base here with trying to come up with specific criticisms--maybe I just didn't like this book because it wasn't my thing. Regardless, this book, and A Dark and Drowning Tide to a lesser extent, were both very...obvious in the way they were written, without much room for interpretation (you’re always being hit over the head with exactly what you should think, either by a character saying it in their internal monologue or via some very heavy handed literary allusions). This is fine if an easy read is what you're looking for, but I tend to prefer books with more subtlety, even for light reading.
As to how this book measures up to my goal of understanding the conventions of vampire media: I'm going to be honest, there was nothing new here. All the vampire stuff I'd seen before in other media, leaving this book feeling like it was more about the academic side of things, which I did not find was executed well. It was an easy read, and you'd probably like it if you like the aesthetics of vampires or academia or whatever. I'm willing to give this author another chance, and of course I'm willing to continue reading vampire media for my personal study since I feel like this wasn't a fair representation of the genre, but it was unfortunately not really to my taste at all.
#1 book completed for the r/Fantasy bingo - Dark Academia prompt (HM)
as much as i enjoy the aesthetics of dark academia and gothic themes as a whole, i don't usually have the best experience reading them. i was very pleasantly surprised with s.t. gibson's previous book - so naturally i dove into this one with the highest of expectations. and it wasn't a bad book, despite it taking me so freaking long to finish (mostly a fault of my own lack of organization than the book's), but it was definitely missing the genuine spark of joy my previous experience with the author's books had given me.
the writing attempted to be evocative, but to me it missed the mark and felt just like generic, rupi kaur inspired imagery. the plot was more meandering than anything, and the whole story relied heavily on the relationship between the two main characters, which i desperately wanted to enjoy, but felt very out of left field for me especially with the way the rivalry between them was established in the first few chapters.
it's not a terrible book by any means, but it wasn't one that gave me much incentive to finish it either. i probably would've put it down if it didn't fit a hard mode prompt lol
as much as i enjoy the aesthetics of dark academia and gothic themes as a whole, i don't usually have the best experience reading them. i was very pleasantly surprised with s.t. gibson's previous book - so naturally i dove into this one with the highest of expectations. and it wasn't a bad book, despite it taking me so freaking long to finish (mostly a fault of my own lack of organization than the book's), but it was definitely missing the genuine spark of joy my previous experience with the author's books had given me.
the writing attempted to be evocative, but to me it missed the mark and felt just like generic, rupi kaur inspired imagery. the plot was more meandering than anything, and the whole story relied heavily on the relationship between the two main characters, which i desperately wanted to enjoy, but felt very out of left field for me especially with the way the rivalry between them was established in the first few chapters.
it's not a terrible book by any means, but it wasn't one that gave me much incentive to finish it either. i probably would've put it down if it didn't fit a hard mode prompt lol