You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
mishmashedmagic's Reviews (323)
Note: This review contains lots of spoilers.
This book...I have a lot of mixed feelings about this book. It's one of those books where the more I think about it, more the more issues I start to find with it, but I'll break that down in just a minute.
I want to start on a positive note. I really enjoyed how atmospheric this book was, it definitely has an unsettling, gothic vibe to it. While I wasn't really scared/creeped out until a couple parts during the end, I did enjoy the overall "mood" this book gave off. Author did a great job of painting the mental picture of The Bridge and all the characters in it. I found that even though I had some serious issues with the book, the played out late enough in the book where I felt compelled to finish it. Honestly, the first half of the book was stacking up to be around a 4 star read for me. A lot of other readers mentioned the book felt slow, but I liked the slow build up of tension.
Annnnd then the second half of the book happened.
So basically, I think we can break down the book into two different theories. 1. Elsie was insane, imagined up the whole Companions-are-after-her thing and Sarah-who-may-or-may-not-exist-because-there-are-no-records-of-her thought she was a crazy pants and fed into her delusions out of self-preservation/fear or 2. Sarah at one point in the story was possessed/taken over by Hetta, a demon-child and ancestor of the Bainbridges, because she needed a host to live in and decided to frame Elsie/kill everyone else along the way because that's what demon kids do. The author plants several seeds of doubt to both theories, which leaves the ending open to interpretation. And while I love a good open-ended story, both theories have too many holes for me to want to subscribe to either.
Let's start with theory number one, that Elsie is insane. Supporting evidence that she might be crazy are things like (1) she killed her parents with no remorse (her mother to protect her brother and her father because child abuse), (2) She has questionable memory, such as Sarah not being present at her wedding, (3) Sarah later comes back and claims to have fed into Elsie's delusions out of fear that Elsie might kill her too. (4) Her brother thinks she's crazy, and it would make sense if the final slip into insanity (and thus killing her brother) is seeing her brother show signs of being like her father after all that she had done to protect him.
Plausible right? But then there would be no point in having Anne's diary in the story. Especially because Elsie was not privy to the contents of the diary until long after her "crazy" manifests itself with "delusions" such as seeing moving Companions or the handprint in the window. That would mean that Anne's story is only there to paint doubt on the reader, to imply that maybe something more sinister and supernatural is taking place. But then how do some of the characters get killed, when Elsie does not appear to be present? The book briefly suggests a split personality, but even that falls apart because Sarah shows back up. Ultimately, there is too much reader knowledge against the insanity theory to make it really worth considering.
Okay, theory number two (which I definitely think the author is trying to push the reader towards): that Sarah is possessed by Hetta (though there is no real indication of when this happened). This theory seems to be spelled out a little more clearly, particularly during a conversation toward the end where Elsie explains to Sarah that Anne killed Hetta, that Hetta's blood seeped into the companions, and Sarah suggests that Hetta, possibly trapped in these companions, is seeking a more permanent host. Other supporting evidence includes the diary, wherein Anne alleges Hetta's evil nature, strange description of Sarah's behavior (her eyes...expanded, darker and strangely glittering), Sarah's interest and later stealing of Elsie's diamonds (Hetta had a similar fascination with the diamonds), her refusal to let the 'Hetta' companion be destroyed, Sarah's odd, un-healing wound, and that she sees Hetta's reflection when Sarah stands in front of the mirror at the end, thus implying Hetta was behind these shenanigans all along and Elsie has become the scape goat (you know, as demon children do.)
But that then begs the question. When was Sarah taken over by Hetta? HOW was she taken over by Hetta? Why frame Elsie when, besides marrying into the family, really had nothing to do with Hetta's sinister past? Why take over Sarah and not Elsie? I mean, she could have just taken over someone and then left, sans killing everyone else. What relevance does Elsie's past have with this conclusion (because now her killing to protect her brother and all that feels completely irrelevant to the story). What was the point of new companions being created? What was driving Hetta?
That said, I have other questions too: Mercy. What was the point of Mercy? Or Mr. Underwood? I feel like there are several characters that serve little purpose to the story. And I was so disappointed by painting the decrepit residents of Fayford being nothing more than a far away backdrop to add to the creepiness. Even the poor cow was nothing more than a head to chop off.
I feel like the author had a lot of opportunity to successfully paint two different scenarios that cast doubt on each other (say if Elsie had been Anne's ancestor and been the one to read the diary), but in the end it felt like two different scenarios that both don't seem to quite fit.
Plot: 2/5
Characters: 2/5
Writing: 4/5
Atmosphere: 4/5
Overall: 3/5
This book...I have a lot of mixed feelings about this book. It's one of those books where the more I think about it, more the more issues I start to find with it, but I'll break that down in just a minute.
I want to start on a positive note. I really enjoyed how atmospheric this book was, it definitely has an unsettling, gothic vibe to it. While I wasn't really scared/creeped out until a couple parts during the end, I did enjoy the overall "mood" this book gave off. Author did a great job of painting the mental picture of The Bridge and all the characters in it. I found that even though I had some serious issues with the book, the played out late enough in the book where I felt compelled to finish it. Honestly, the first half of the book was stacking up to be around a 4 star read for me. A lot of other readers mentioned the book felt slow, but I liked the slow build up of tension.
Annnnd then the second half of the book happened.
So basically, I think we can break down the book into two different theories. 1. Elsie was insane, imagined up the whole Companions-are-after-her thing and Sarah-who-may-or-may-not-exist-because-there-are-no-records-of-her thought she was a crazy pants and fed into her delusions out of self-preservation/fear or 2. Sarah at one point in the story was possessed/taken over by Hetta, a demon-child and ancestor of the Bainbridges, because she needed a host to live in and decided to frame Elsie/kill everyone else along the way because that's what demon kids do. The author plants several seeds of doubt to both theories, which leaves the ending open to interpretation. And while I love a good open-ended story, both theories have too many holes for me to want to subscribe to either.
Let's start with theory number one, that Elsie is insane. Supporting evidence that she might be crazy are things like (1) she killed her parents with no remorse (her mother to protect her brother and her father because child abuse), (2) She has questionable memory, such as Sarah not being present at her wedding, (3) Sarah later comes back and claims to have fed into Elsie's delusions out of fear that Elsie might kill her too. (4) Her brother thinks she's crazy, and it would make sense if the final slip into insanity (and thus killing her brother) is seeing her brother show signs of being like her father after all that she had done to protect him.
Plausible right? But then there would be no point in having Anne's diary in the story. Especially because Elsie was not privy to the contents of the diary until long after her "crazy" manifests itself with "delusions" such as seeing moving Companions or the handprint in the window. That would mean that Anne's story is only there to paint doubt on the reader, to imply that maybe something more sinister and supernatural is taking place. But then how do some of the characters get killed, when Elsie does not appear to be present? The book briefly suggests a split personality, but even that falls apart because Sarah shows back up. Ultimately, there is too much reader knowledge against the insanity theory to make it really worth considering.
Okay, theory number two (which I definitely think the author is trying to push the reader towards): that Sarah is possessed by Hetta (though there is no real indication of when this happened). This theory seems to be spelled out a little more clearly, particularly during a conversation toward the end where Elsie explains to Sarah that Anne killed Hetta, that Hetta's blood seeped into the companions, and Sarah suggests that Hetta, possibly trapped in these companions, is seeking a more permanent host. Other supporting evidence includes the diary, wherein Anne alleges Hetta's evil nature, strange description of Sarah's behavior (her eyes...expanded, darker and strangely glittering), Sarah's interest and later stealing of Elsie's diamonds (Hetta had a similar fascination with the diamonds), her refusal to let the 'Hetta' companion be destroyed, Sarah's odd, un-healing wound, and that she sees Hetta's reflection when Sarah stands in front of the mirror at the end, thus implying Hetta was behind these shenanigans all along and Elsie has become the scape goat (you know, as demon children do.)
But that then begs the question. When was Sarah taken over by Hetta? HOW was she taken over by Hetta? Why frame Elsie when, besides marrying into the family, really had nothing to do with Hetta's sinister past? Why take over Sarah and not Elsie? I mean, she could have just taken over someone and then left, sans killing everyone else. What relevance does Elsie's past have with this conclusion (because now her killing to protect her brother and all that feels completely irrelevant to the story). What was the point of new companions being created? What was driving Hetta?
That said, I have other questions too: Mercy. What was the point of Mercy? Or Mr. Underwood? I feel like there are several characters that serve little purpose to the story. And I was so disappointed by painting the decrepit residents of Fayford being nothing more than a far away backdrop to add to the creepiness. Even the poor cow was nothing more than a head to chop off.
I feel like the author had a lot of opportunity to successfully paint two different scenarios that cast doubt on each other (say if Elsie had been Anne's ancestor and been the one to read the diary), but in the end it felt like two different scenarios that both don't seem to quite fit.
Plot: 2/5
Characters: 2/5
Writing: 4/5
Atmosphere: 4/5
Overall: 3/5
Really enjoyed the book but was disappointed by the last 25%. The ending felt really rushed and there were too many problems with quick solutions.
Plot - 3
Characters - 3
Writing - 5
Atmosphere - 4
Overall - 3.75/5 (rounded up to 4 for goodreads)
Plot - 3
Characters - 3
Writing - 5
Atmosphere - 4
Overall - 3.75/5 (rounded up to 4 for goodreads)
