As always: SPOILERS.
Before I get into my typical format, I have one large and very specific hang up with the book. Have any of you heard of doppelgängers? A person who looks exactly like you, but is oftentimes a darker version of you? Well, this book is a doppelgänger of the Daphne du Maurier novel, Rebecca. I'm serious, this book's main plot is just a teen remake of the book.
Rebecca: A young woman known only as the Second Mrs. de Winter marries a much older widower, Maxim de Winter, whose wife Rebecca drowned a year earlier. They return to Maxim's ancestral home of Manderly, and she worries constantly that she will never be as beautiful, as smart, as accomplished, as perfect as Rebecca, and that Maxim will never love her the way he loved Rebecca. However, Maxim soon tells his wife the truth: that Rebecca was cruel, a liar, and cheated on him constantly, most often with a man named Favall. They hated each other. When she revealed to Maxim that she was pregnant with another man's baby, he finally had enough of her emotional abuse and accidentally killed her (it's later revealed that it was a twisted form of assisted suicide due to her cancer diagnosis).
The Innocents: A young girl named Alice moves to Serenity Point, and meets then falls for a boy named Tommy. Tommy was the former boyfriend of Camilla, the deceased daughter of Alice's new stepfather, who drowned about a year ago. Alice constantly worries that she will never be as beautiful, as smart, as accomplished, as perfect as Camilla, and that Tommy will never love her the way he loved Camilla. However, Tommy soon tells Alice the truth: that Camilla was cruel, a liar, and cheated on him constantly, most often with Jude. They hated each other. It's also revealed in the novel that Camilla committed suicide by driving her car off a bridge.
See the similarities? The entire main Camilla plot is lifted almost word for word from du Maurier's book, and nowhere have I found Peloquin giving any sort of credit to Rebecca or du Maurier, nor has she given any indication this is inspired from Rebecca's plot. So basically, Lili Peloquin somehow got away with blatant plagiarism. Not only that, but there are no hints of Camilla's dual nature. In Rebecca, while it does come as a huge shock, there are hints in the novel that Rebecca wasn't perfect, and even had possible psychopathic traits, such as the story where she whipped a horse so cruelly that it bled. In The Innocents, there is nothing to suggest that Camilla wasn't the kind, volunteering, sweet girl that she seemed. So it's just another cheap twist to make readers gasp.
Now, on to my more usual review format now that I've gotten this issue out of the way.
THE PLOT.
The plot is average, at best. Beyond the glaring similarities to Rebecca that I've mentioned above, there's really nothing else that grabs my attention. Alice's desire to learn more about Camilla wasn't necessarily all that fascinating, and it just felt like any clue was just dumped on us, rather than built up to in an interesting way. Charlie's storyline was just boring. I didn't care about her obsession with Jude, and seeing as that's basically the only thing her particular arc is about, I just found myself trying to speed-read through her stuff to get back to Alice's POV faster. As for the big twist that isn't about Camilla being a blond Rebecca de Winter, I'll come back to that later.
THE CHARACTERS.
I disliked almost every single character in this book. They all felt boring and one dimensional, like caricatures of every single teen drama ever put to either novel, TV, or cinema. There's Alice, who's the serious, creative do gooder. There's Charlie, the fierce and independent girl who wants to fit in. There's Tommy, who's essentially an anthropomorphic loaf of bread. There's Jude, the rich bad boy who's damaged by no parental influence and has a hidden vulnerability. There's Stan, the poor, smart boy who makes up the third part of the dumb Jude/Charlie/Stan love triangle. They're all clichés. And that's not inherently a bad thing. Clichés are clichés for a reason; they're tried and true and work so often people try to use them whenever they can. And it's possible to breathe new life into a cliché, provided it's well written. In this case, it simply isn't. It just feels tired. Honestly, the only characters I liked were Cybil (because I appreciated how unapologetic she was about being a bad girl), Richard (who was an actual character with depth and flaws and good parts and bad parts), and Camilla (who is more interesting than both of our lead girls combined). And if I like a minor character, a dead one at that, you've got a problem.
A subjective side note: I have a huge issue with Alice's immediate and consistent dislike of Richard. It makes sense once she finds out about her mother and Richard's real relationship, but when she doesn't know, it just comes off as bizarre. She actively dislikes someone who, so far, has only committed the crime of marrying her mother and having them move. It's especially weird when you take into account the fact that Alice knows that Richard's wife and daughter both died in rapid succession just a short time ago, and it really made me hate her. Her hatred of someone who's done nothing but make her mother happy after being abandoned by her father, someone who's gone through two huge losses, just makes her seem juvenile and mean.
THE WRITING.
It's...eh. It's not atrocious enough to distract me, but make no mistake, it's not good. The dialogue, like the characters that speak it, is riddled with cliché after cliché, the descriptions are OK if somewhat repetitive, and the characterization is, as I said, very one dimensional. That's the only thing I can say about it.
THE ENDING.
I'll give this to Peloquin, she built up towards this ending. There are hints dropped about all of this throughout, and it was a satisfying payoff. The only reason I wasn't surprised was because I read this at the same time as my sister, and she spoiled the ending for me. But, to be honest, this ending felt very John Edwards-esque to me. John Edwards is an American politician who, during his 2008 bid for President, had it revealed that he was cheating on his cancer-stricken wife with a woman named Rielle Hunter, and had a child with her (note: Edwards didn't initial say the kid was his, but eventually admitted to it). After his wife died, Edwards formally got together with Hunter, and they stayed together until early 2015. Now, this time, there's nothing wrong with Peloquin potentially getting inspiration from this incident, as it's not blatantly based on another book, but it does present a problem: it makes it very hard to sympathize when one of the few sympathetic characters in the book. Throughout The Innocents, I actually quite liked Maggie. Upon finding out about the true nature of her relationship with Richard, any possible liking of her vanished. It's not just because I was drawing comparisons to Rielle Hunter, who I actively can't stand; it's not because of the cheating thing; it's because of Maggie's own separate attitude about the relationship. After telling Alice about this whole thing, she acts incredibly smug about it, as if she's happy Martha died and that Maggie won. Just to be clear: Maggie acts smugly happy, like some older Regina George, that a woman died and that said death caused unbearable suffering to her teenage daughter, just because it allowed Maggie to win. Yes, the ending ties up the plot threads put out there by Peloquin, but it makes it so that the only likable main character is someone we are not supposed to like. And if you end up liking the characters the author wants you to hate, and hating the characters the author wants you to like, there's a serious problem.
OVERALL THOUGHTS.
The Innocents is thoroughly mediocre in every way. The plot is basic, the characters are cardboard cutouts, the twists are predictable, and the writing passable. The only thing stunning about this is how Lili Peloquin plagiarized one of the most iconic novels in the world and somehow got away with it.