Scan barcode
A review by dawn_chen
The Reckless Afterlife of Harriet Stoker by Lauren James
3.0
3 stars. I am so conflicted about this book.
For the first 2/3 I thought it's a 4 to 5 stars book, I didn't know going in to this that this is going to be a villain protagonist story, so I'm so pleasantly surprised to read about Harriet's character development direction. As the "big reveal" begins I thought it was a 2 stars because the reveal is utterly impossible to predict and honestly hilariously bad (the main character's grandma is the evil older brother, wow, i mean it's not completely unhinted at, but it's still not a good twist bc of how ridiculous it is), but the last 20 pages made me regain a bit of faith and love in this book because of how Harriet's arc ended.
What I liked about the book:
- the main found family has fantastic dynamics and chemistry! (Especially between Leah and Rima, Felix and Casper) Their banter made me laugh, their moment made me cry. I love all of their individual personality as well as them as a group together. Can't ask for more for a hero found family group, they're all my babies and I'll die for them.
-The world building of ghost lore is really interesting! The power and limitation of ghosts are fun to read and discover. But some part I don't really like. The setting is limited in the haunted student hall (which is set in MY UNI, it's kind of endearing since this is the first book I read that's set in uni of warwick, some reference made me cackle).
- I like how intricate and complex the author's foreshadowing and misdirections are in this book. Despite the twist being ridiculous, one thing I have to admit is that the author did foreshadow it from the start, unlike in GoT(the show).
- How the titular character is a villain protagonist! I didn't go in knowing Harriet will be a villain POV story so it was such a refreshing experience. Think it's the first time seen a mc like this, too bad her character arc falls flat later on.
What I didn't like:
- The twist of reincarnation and NORMAN (Harriet's grandma) being Leah's husband and The Big Bad(TM). Like sure there are foreshadowing for this to be the case but it is just so outlandish I don't think anyone can predict it even given all the clues. This link also lead to my second complaint.
- Where Harriet's redemption arc is treated. The author spend the first 2/3 of the book writing a corruption arc, just to have her have another redemption arc at the last minute??? This feels forced and rushed - seeing a character from marginally neutral to bad (not just bad but A BLOODY MURDERER WHO MURDERED ONE OF THE MAIN FOUND FAMILY MEMBER'S BROTHER) to good is…not as fun as it sounds. Frankly I don't think she should have had a redemption arc at all.
You can't have a conflict 2/3 through your book with your main protagonist as your main villain, just to flip it on the whole development with a plot twist with a Big Bad no one anticipated to show up until the last 60 pages and think that can push a character to redemption.
Harriet literally showed no remorse to even MURDER up until that point?? All she felt was marginally uncomfortable. The only reason I think she turned to the good side is because her abuser showed and turned out to be a bigger dick than she was.
Yes, I know the book try to paint her monstrous behavior as a product of abuse. But that's my problem with so many redemption arcs, a good redemption arc should SHOW US THE CHARACTER HAS REDEEMING QUALITY and THE ACT OF REDEMPTION SHOULD ACTIVELY COME FROM THAT CHARACTER INSTEAD OF OUTSIDE CIRCUMSTANCE.
Harriet fell into both of my pet peeves regarding a redemption arcs. 1) she did unforgivable things up to that point and never showed any sigh of good quality "shimmering through" 2) she didn't start her redemption arc due to inner question regarding her morale, she only started to change bc she also hates the big bad. She literally murdered a character for the big bad 3 pages before her redemption arc full in kick-starter.
Like, I love a good redemption arc, but when your villain character MURDERED SEVERAL PEOPLE WITHOUT REMORSE. That's where I draw the line of beyond redemption.
Here's a paragraph of another character's inner reasoning to forgive Harriet:
"I understand Harriet better than anyone. She was abused and made to feel like nothing, just like my mother and me. I don’t blame her for basing her behaviour on her grandmother’s. Being a good person isn’t an option when someone so strong-willed tells you that you’re weak, makes you feel helpless and spends all their time chipping away at you. Just being functional is hard enough."
BUT YOUR MOTHER (Leah) and YOU (Claudia) didn't actively murder INNOCENT PEOPLE FOR NO REASON WHAT SO EVER. You can't make that comparison when the actions of these characters being INCOMPATIBLE.
Another point Harriet contemplated her morality by pointing out against the True Bad Guys how she was not willing to torture every ghost in her way, as if that puts her at a moral high ground against them.
But honestly? What is this? Is the morality bar so low that IT'S OKAY TO MURDER BUT AS LONG AS YOU DON'T WANT TO ACTIVELY TORTURE EVERYONE YOU'RE A GOOD PERSON? SINCE WHEN IS THIS AN INDICATION OF A SPARK OF GOODNESS IN SOMEONE'S HEART??? HELLO???
The only up side to this is that the main found family didn't forgive Harriet by the end of the story. That's why I pumped this up to a three stars, since I find that as an acknowledgement on the book's part of the gravity of Harriet's crimes. Also her action to save one of the characters without gaining anything herself also calmed a little when I almost lost interest in the climax.
Anyway, seeing the ending I think there'll probably be a sequel? I look forward to it, but for now I'm gonna take a nap before my conflicted feelings tore a hole in my chest and I get stuck in my uni library as a ghost too for eternity.
For the first 2/3 I thought it's a 4 to 5 stars book, I didn't know going in to this that this is going to be a villain protagonist story, so I'm so pleasantly surprised to read about Harriet's character development direction. As the "big reveal" begins I thought it was a 2 stars because the reveal is utterly impossible to predict and honestly hilariously bad (the main character's grandma is the evil older brother, wow, i mean it's not completely unhinted at, but it's still not a good twist bc of how ridiculous it is), but the last 20 pages made me regain a bit of faith and love in this book because of how Harriet's arc ended.
What I liked about the book:
- the main found family has fantastic dynamics and chemistry! (Especially between Leah and Rima, Felix and Casper) Their banter made me laugh, their moment made me cry. I love all of their individual personality as well as them as a group together. Can't ask for more for a hero found family group, they're all my babies and I'll die for them.
-The world building of ghost lore is really interesting! The power and limitation of ghosts are fun to read and discover. But some part I don't really like. The setting is limited in the haunted student hall (which is set in MY UNI, it's kind of endearing since this is the first book I read that's set in uni of warwick, some reference made me cackle).
- I like how intricate and complex the author's foreshadowing and misdirections are in this book. Despite the twist being ridiculous, one thing I have to admit is that the author did foreshadow it from the start, unlike in GoT(the show).
- How the titular character is a villain protagonist! I didn't go in knowing Harriet will be a villain POV story so it was such a refreshing experience. Think it's the first time seen a mc like this, too bad her character arc falls flat later on.
What I didn't like:
- The twist of reincarnation and NORMAN (Harriet's grandma) being Leah's husband and The Big Bad(TM). Like sure there are foreshadowing for this to be the case but it is just so outlandish I don't think anyone can predict it even given all the clues. This link also lead to my second complaint.
- Where Harriet's redemption arc is treated. The author spend the first 2/3 of the book writing a corruption arc, just to have her have another redemption arc at the last minute??? This feels forced and rushed - seeing a character from marginally neutral to bad (not just bad but A BLOODY MURDERER WHO MURDERED ONE OF THE MAIN FOUND FAMILY MEMBER'S BROTHER) to good is…not as fun as it sounds. Frankly I don't think she should have had a redemption arc at all.
You can't have a conflict 2/3 through your book with your main protagonist as your main villain, just to flip it on the whole development with a plot twist with a Big Bad no one anticipated to show up until the last 60 pages and think that can push a character to redemption.
Harriet literally showed no remorse to even MURDER up until that point?? All she felt was marginally uncomfortable. The only reason I think she turned to the good side is because her abuser showed and turned out to be a bigger dick than she was.
Yes, I know the book try to paint her monstrous behavior as a product of abuse. But that's my problem with so many redemption arcs, a good redemption arc should SHOW US THE CHARACTER HAS REDEEMING QUALITY and THE ACT OF REDEMPTION SHOULD ACTIVELY COME FROM THAT CHARACTER INSTEAD OF OUTSIDE CIRCUMSTANCE.
Harriet fell into both of my pet peeves regarding a redemption arcs. 1) she did unforgivable things up to that point and never showed any sigh of good quality "shimmering through" 2) she didn't start her redemption arc due to inner question regarding her morale, she only started to change bc she also hates the big bad. She literally murdered a character for the big bad 3 pages before her redemption arc full in kick-starter.
Like, I love a good redemption arc, but when your villain character MURDERED SEVERAL PEOPLE WITHOUT REMORSE. That's where I draw the line of beyond redemption.
Here's a paragraph of another character's inner reasoning to forgive Harriet:
"I understand Harriet better than anyone. She was abused and made to feel like nothing, just like my mother and me. I don’t blame her for basing her behaviour on her grandmother’s. Being a good person isn’t an option when someone so strong-willed tells you that you’re weak, makes you feel helpless and spends all their time chipping away at you. Just being functional is hard enough."
BUT YOUR MOTHER (Leah) and YOU (Claudia) didn't actively murder INNOCENT PEOPLE FOR NO REASON WHAT SO EVER. You can't make that comparison when the actions of these characters being INCOMPATIBLE.
Another point Harriet contemplated her morality by pointing out against the True Bad Guys how she was not willing to torture every ghost in her way, as if that puts her at a moral high ground against them.
But honestly? What is this? Is the morality bar so low that IT'S OKAY TO MURDER BUT AS LONG AS YOU DON'T WANT TO ACTIVELY TORTURE EVERYONE YOU'RE A GOOD PERSON? SINCE WHEN IS THIS AN INDICATION OF A SPARK OF GOODNESS IN SOMEONE'S HEART??? HELLO???
The only up side to this is that the main found family didn't forgive Harriet by the end of the story. That's why I pumped this up to a three stars, since I find that as an acknowledgement on the book's part of the gravity of Harriet's crimes. Also her action to save one of the characters without gaining anything herself also calmed a little when I almost lost interest in the climax.
Anyway, seeing the ending I think there'll probably be a sequel? I look forward to it, but for now I'm gonna take a nap before my conflicted feelings tore a hole in my chest and I get stuck in my uni library as a ghost too for eternity.