Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by gubuchu
Crimson Bound by Rosamund Hodge
3.0
Edited to add: 11/11 It's been months (wow) since I last read Crimson Bound but I've been thinking more and more about it recently and I have to say that my harsh feelings for it have wavered some and I'm a bit more positive now about it. I think a lot of the faults lay in the fact that I completely misinterpreted what the book was going to be (my fault for not reading the summary before I read it, instead of relying on my memories of the summary I read a while ago).
Anyways, I have to say, in terms of writing ability, Rosamund Hodge really, really did improve with Crimson Bound in comparison to Cruel Beauty. I don't know if she reads reviews, but you can tell that whatever people complained about with Cruel Beauty, she amended here and made her protagonist more proactive. So in terms of strength, Crimson Bound is a major improvement. But in terms of likability, I personally still have my heart bound (pun intended??) to Gilded Ashes.
Backstory:
At the time I first read Cruel Beauty, I hadn't read much YA in a long, long time (or read anything in general actually because I was in a reading slump). But I bought Cruel Beauty because it was on sale for kindle and I'm a sucker for that kind of stuff SO I bought it and although I had some complaints, overall I enjoyed it. So, I'd like to credit Rosamund Hodge for getting me back into reading. Kudos. (As a result of my reading Cruel Beauty, I ended up reading Gilded Ashes, the Cinderella retelling and liked that one a LOT.)
So when I saw that Crimson Bound was coming out next year, I was pretty excited!
And then I read it.
I decided to buy it at 3 AM and told myself to just read like a few chapters and then go to sleep, but I ended up reading it all the way to the end, when I saw the sun rise and morning come.
Anyways, there are many things to say about Crimson Bound. For starters, I should have read the summary before I read into the book cold turkey because I was honestly really confused and had a very incorrect idea about what the book was supposed to be about (for some reason I thought it was supposed to be set in the woods instead of a palace) so that affected my reading experience quite a bit. Kind of my fault though, so not the story.
Anyways I tried to highlight on my kindle, but it didn't seem to work because I ended up liking the quote. Basically, I'm pretty okay in first person perspectives where the main character has some self-loathing because of a certain event. I'm fine with that and I have a pretty high tolerance. But eventually Rachelle's self-loathing and her constant mentioning of defeating the Devourer got on my nerves because of how much she referenced to it. It's understandable why she constantly self-loathes, but the way it's put in the story is kinda grating. Like let's say if she's just talking to somebody, on the inside she'll be thinking "Little do they know that I must defeat the Devourer, so I can't indulge myself in these kind of things." Maybe I'm exaggerating. Who knows.
I don't really know how to conclude this review, so I'm just going to mention some more plot points.
Also, I've said many times before but I really should have read the summary. For some reason I thought it was connected to Cruel Beauty so I didn't mind the novel's worldbuilding lack of explanation. But it's not. So woops on my part. But it really is kinda similar to Cruel Beauty, in the love triangle and how the plot works (I feel like Rosamund Hodge addressed people's criticisms to Cruel Beauty and had Rachelle be more active in finding the sword), as well as the action really picking off in the last 150 pages or so. I enjoy how she makes the action pick up toward the end, so that's why I still enjoyed this.
Final nitpick, is it just me but since Rachelle is no longer bloodbound, doesn't that mean she can go back to her family? Not that I mind her staying with Armand, but seriously? Her only thoughts are that she has no where else to go is that she might as well stay with Armand? You can reunite with your family, you know! You don't have to stay with them, but you're not bloodbound! You kinda saved the world! And your aunt forgives you, so you can just explain to your family (and I'm sure if you ask Armand and his half-brother for help) so they won't roast you on the spot.)
But I digress. Overall, it was nice. The Cinderella retelling has to be my favorite, though. Even though I really like red riding hood a lot.
Anyways, I have to say, in terms of writing ability, Rosamund Hodge really, really did improve with Crimson Bound in comparison to Cruel Beauty. I don't know if she reads reviews, but you can tell that whatever people complained about with Cruel Beauty, she amended here and made her protagonist more proactive. So in terms of strength, Crimson Bound is a major improvement. But in terms of likability, I personally still have my heart bound (pun intended??) to Gilded Ashes.
Backstory:
At the time I first read Cruel Beauty, I hadn't read much YA in a long, long time (or read anything in general actually because I was in a reading slump). But I bought Cruel Beauty because it was on sale for kindle and I'm a sucker for that kind of stuff SO I bought it and although I had some complaints, overall I enjoyed it. So, I'd like to credit Rosamund Hodge for getting me back into reading. Kudos. (As a result of my reading Cruel Beauty, I ended up reading Gilded Ashes, the Cinderella retelling and liked that one a LOT.)
So when I saw that Crimson Bound was coming out next year, I was pretty excited!
And then I read it.
I decided to buy it at 3 AM and told myself to just read like a few chapters and then go to sleep, but I ended up reading it all the way to the end, when I saw the sun rise and morning come.
Anyways, there are many things to say about Crimson Bound. For starters, I should have read the summary before I read into the book cold turkey because I was honestly really confused and had a very incorrect idea about what the book was supposed to be about (for some reason I thought it was supposed to be set in the woods instead of a palace) so that affected my reading experience quite a bit. Kind of my fault though, so not the story.
Spoiler
I really should have read the summary though, because I didn't realize that Armand was the love interest, because Erec was so interesting even though he was a douche. Like I shouldn't be liking Erec a lot more, even if he was a douche! Armand wasn't that compelling to me, although I liked how his disability was treated in this book. Anyways, Erec ended up being pretty evil and terrible, so screw you Erec, even though your character was pretty interesting and I was kinda devastated when you ended up being evil.Anyways I tried to highlight on my kindle, but it didn't seem to work because I ended up liking the quote. Basically, I'm pretty okay in first person perspectives where the main character has some self-loathing because of a certain event. I'm fine with that and I have a pretty high tolerance. But eventually Rachelle's self-loathing and her constant mentioning of defeating the Devourer got on my nerves because of how much she referenced to it. It's understandable why she constantly self-loathes, but the way it's put in the story is kinda grating. Like let's say if she's just talking to somebody, on the inside she'll be thinking "Little do they know that I must defeat the Devourer, so I can't indulge myself in these kind of things." Maybe I'm exaggerating. Who knows.
I don't really know how to conclude this review, so I'm just going to mention some more plot points.
Spoiler
This is more me addressing the plot, but I feel like a lot of this book's problems would be resolved if people were just truthful and stated who they were. Like Armand really being a good guy, his cousin being a weaver (I think that's what it is? My memory's fuzzy), Amelie's allegiance to Rachelle, etc.Also, I've said many times before but I really should have read the summary. For some reason I thought it was connected to Cruel Beauty so I didn't mind the novel's worldbuilding lack of explanation. But it's not. So woops on my part. But it really is kinda similar to Cruel Beauty, in the love triangle and how the plot works (I feel like Rosamund Hodge addressed people's criticisms to Cruel Beauty and had Rachelle be more active in finding the sword), as well as the action really picking off in the last 150 pages or so. I enjoy how she makes the action pick up toward the end, so that's why I still enjoyed this.
Final nitpick, is it just me but since Rachelle is no longer bloodbound, doesn't that mean she can go back to her family? Not that I mind her staying with Armand, but seriously? Her only thoughts are that she has no where else to go is that she might as well stay with Armand? You can reunite with your family, you know! You don't have to stay with them, but you're not bloodbound! You kinda saved the world! And your aunt forgives you, so you can just explain to your family (and I'm sure if you ask Armand and his half-brother for help) so they won't roast you on the spot.)
But I digress. Overall, it was nice. The Cinderella retelling has to be my favorite, though. Even though I really like red riding hood a lot.