Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by fishbelly
The Scent of Shadows by Vicki Pettersson
3.0
What's in a name?
I read Pettersson's first Zodiac novel, expecting a somewhat standard urban fantasy--especially since it was being hyped by Kim Harrison, a heavyweight in the field.
The novel has many of the now standard bits found in the urban fantasy genre:
--gritty, wisecracking female protagonist
--a heady mix of humor, fast-paced action, and a sprinkling of romance (perhaps due to the high percentage of female readers of this genre?)
--secret societies at war in an unsuspecting world
--a protagonist that goes through extreme suffering, only to come out on top in the end
So why does this book feel different somehow? I think it has to do mainly with Pettersson's choice of words, one word in particular. About halfway through the novel, as Joana begins to learn about her powers and birthright (another standard), the word gets used for the first time--superhero.
Huh? Usually it's werewolf, vampire, sorcerer, or something of the sort. Not superhero. In fact, if you merely replaced the word superhero with something else, I might not have even noticed a difference. Sure, some geeks in the book create comic books about these super-powerful characters, but if they weren't called superheroes, I don't think I would've thought anything of it.
But once superhero gets bandied about, it changed the "feel" of the novel for me. It felt more over the top, technicolored and cliched. Silly, I know. I've read a slew of novels recently and not blinked with vampire or werewolf characters in an urban setting. Why does this change things?
I'm not sure.
Did I enjoy the novel? Yeah, I did. Pettersson's writing is strong, and some of the choices she made surprised me. Other aspects were fairly standard, but don't we read these books expecting comfort from their familiarity?
Overall, it was a good novel. Will I read the next? I'm not sure. The urban fantasy field is so damn crowded, I can't read too many before getting burned out. We shall see.
I read Pettersson's first Zodiac novel, expecting a somewhat standard urban fantasy--especially since it was being hyped by Kim Harrison, a heavyweight in the field.
The novel has many of the now standard bits found in the urban fantasy genre:
--gritty, wisecracking female protagonist
--a heady mix of humor, fast-paced action, and a sprinkling of romance (perhaps due to the high percentage of female readers of this genre?)
--secret societies at war in an unsuspecting world
--a protagonist that goes through extreme suffering, only to come out on top in the end
So why does this book feel different somehow? I think it has to do mainly with Pettersson's choice of words, one word in particular. About halfway through the novel, as Joana begins to learn about her powers and birthright (another standard), the word gets used for the first time--superhero.
Huh? Usually it's werewolf, vampire, sorcerer, or something of the sort. Not superhero. In fact, if you merely replaced the word superhero with something else, I might not have even noticed a difference. Sure, some geeks in the book create comic books about these super-powerful characters, but if they weren't called superheroes, I don't think I would've thought anything of it.
But once superhero gets bandied about, it changed the "feel" of the novel for me. It felt more over the top, technicolored and cliched. Silly, I know. I've read a slew of novels recently and not blinked with vampire or werewolf characters in an urban setting. Why does this change things?
I'm not sure.
Did I enjoy the novel? Yeah, I did. Pettersson's writing is strong, and some of the choices she made surprised me. Other aspects were fairly standard, but don't we read these books expecting comfort from their familiarity?
Overall, it was a good novel. Will I read the next? I'm not sure. The urban fantasy field is so damn crowded, I can't read too many before getting burned out. We shall see.