Scan barcode
A review by nightfell
A Dowry of Blood by S.T. Gibson
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
I felt very detached from this book while I was reading, and I think it's because I was just bored throughout. I know this is the type of book where it's atmospheric and character-driven with little plot, and I have enjoyed books like that in the past but this one didn't do it for me.
This type of book would have really benefitted from some beautiful, lyrical writing, and it was at times but mostly, it just felt juvenile and telling instead of showing. Although that is part of the form of the book, as it is written as a reflective account of past events, but I felt like there was little nuance, and the readers were told how Constanta was feeling, and almost how we should feel about it. But again, it was an objectively bad situation, but still, I wish there was more nuance.
A big reason I couldn't get into this book is because a big part of no name's 'appeal' is his 'charm' and I'm guessing his appearance. I seeing as this is Dracula, I know for a fact, this is infamously, the crustiest, dutiest man known to man, and I'm supposed to belive he pulled three gorgeous people?? Every time his 'irresistible' nature was brought up, I just didn't buy it, whether it was my own prior notions of Dracula, or the fact that we barely get to see him at his best.
Altogether, I can see why it's popular but I just didn't feel much throughout; there were certainly highlights, but overall it felt repetitive and dull.
<spolier>
I did like the fact that this is a queer retelling and that every character is bisexual, but I wasn't a fan of the incestuous language. I understood it in part because in a way they were like siblings, but they were also all lovers and having sex with each other sooo it was weird. Like I remember specifically a part where no name tells one of them to "go kiss your sister" and I was getting icked out. I think there was a way to imply their bonds correlate to that of a sibling nature without telling us so explicitly.
This type of book would have really benefitted from some beautiful, lyrical writing, and it was at times but mostly, it just felt juvenile and telling instead of showing. Although that is part of the form of the book, as it is written as a reflective account of past events, but I felt like there was little nuance, and the readers were told how Constanta was feeling, and almost how we should feel about it. But again, it was an objectively bad situation, but still, I wish there was more nuance.
A big reason I couldn't get into this book is because a big part of no name's 'appeal' is his 'charm' and I'm guessing his appearance. I seeing as this is Dracula, I know for a fact, this is infamously, the crustiest, dutiest man known to man, and I'm supposed to belive he pulled three gorgeous people?? Every time his 'irresistible' nature was brought up, I just didn't buy it, whether it was my own prior notions of Dracula, or the fact that we barely get to see him at his best.
Altogether, I can see why it's popular but I just didn't feel much throughout; there were certainly highlights, but overall it felt repetitive and dull.
<spolier>
I did like the fact that this is a queer retelling and that every character is bisexual, but I wasn't a fan of the incestuous language. I understood it in part because in a way they were like siblings, but they were also all lovers and having sex with each other sooo it was weird. Like I remember specifically a part where no name tells one of them to "go kiss your sister" and I was getting icked out. I think there was a way to imply their bonds correlate to that of a sibling nature without telling us so explicitly.