I had more complaints about the book at the beginning than I do now that I have finished it.
The Amaranth is a well conceived space adventure novel. In the beginning, I was bothered by the transparent similarities with the novel's plot and the American Revolution: Colony planets being harshly taxed by the ruling planet Earth. A systematic, government imposed loss of freedoms. No fair government representation of the colonies in the ultimate governing body. And, who can ignore the similarities of Pacius' non-violent protest of dumping the Helix earrings and our own historical demonstration of the Boston Tea Party? Yet, I find that with the movement of the plot the adherence to American Revolution strictures fell away. The plot became it's own creation and made for a more enjoyable read. I could even go as far as arguing that the resemblance of the repetition of American history could offer credence to one of the more subtle themes - that the loss of history dooms its inheritors to repeat it's mistakes.
I say subtle themes because there is a definite distinction. Some, if not most, of the themes are anything but subtle. A great deal of the first few chapters are inundated with patriotic preaching about the rights of freedom. Please, don't misunderstand me. I agree with the content of the message, but I prefer more finesse. I prefer to let a thought linger on my tongue, to taste it thoroughly before I decide to swallow it or reject it. In my opinion the novel is missing the first half of the story where the characters, probably Lithia and Vijay explore the realities of the Helix earring ownership - having Lithia move from a position of pro-Helix gradually toward and awareness of it's dangers with the understanding that Vijay's friendship brings. This development followed by a knowledge that the Frontier worlds are in a position to fight for their freedom and then ultimately that all the planets should be fighting for their freedom would have been a more palatable thematic development. Discovering the loss of rights rather than having those findings shoved down my throat. The same indoctrination occurs later in the novel with an almost two page diatribe about the ignorance infused in organized religion. I found myself rolling my eyes. Though I do have to admit it was a thematically-good plot device to make the antagonist spout religious indoctrination. Not entirely subtle, but closer.
I am divided about the author's choice of point-of-view for the novel. Basically, any character that had a thought was fair game. The point-of-view could switch through any number of characters in a given scene. While I was able to keep up with the he thinks and she thinks of it, I feel like it was a bit undisciplined. Perhaps the mistake of a rooky novelist. I believe it is more difficult to write from one specific point-of-view (even if the point-of-view changes from chapter to chapter or from scene to scene) but it is all so much more interesting. The author then has the responsibility to imbue the character with the ability to interpret others' chosen words, body language and actions. It also opens up the world of misinterpretation of those elements and misunderstanding of motivations. On the other hand, I did enjoy that the novel included the points-of-view of so many of the characters. It offered anticipation for how the plot might bring them all together.
I do have to say that I didn't pay much attention to the voice of each character. But, I feel like each main character was unique enough to be likeable. Lithia and Aurelius each had their requisite back stories that led them to each other. I would have liked to have learned more about Pacius, Cade, and Jerula's histories. Where I feel the characters' development stalled was with what motivated each individual to act (even for Pacius despite the fact that he was given all the patriotic tirades).
A few last picky details: Some of the dialogue was contrived, again more so in the beginning. And, while the author clearly pointed out that there was such a disparate difference between the language of the Earth's population (the Terrans) and that of the Frontier planets, he still felt it was appropriate to use modern, and sometimes outdated, slang; for people 700 years in our future. The editing had much to be desired with punctuation mistakes, redundancies, and other miscellaneous oddities. Also, plot-wise, why did Lithia reject Vijay's advances but then let her guard down for Aurelius? While I enjoyed the plot development for the romance between Lithia and Aurelius, I feel like it was left undone. I have lingering questions of why they are in love with each other. It was clear that they were attracted to each other, then they became comfortable in each other's presence (Lithia with feelings of safety and Aurelius with admiration for her strength), but when and why did they make that crucial leap to the conviction that they'd die for the other - more than just a heroic self-sacrifice for a fellow human being? One last thing. Jerula would have (or perhaps should have) called Aurelius a pretty boy (or the Frontier equivalent) in their first charged interaction before Aurelius disarmed him with his willingness to say sorry and make amends. Then the reader could have been tipped off that Aurelius was good looking. (I did like that Aurelius never acknowledged his own looks.)
So, what did I like about the novel after all of my fussiness? As I previously stated, both the thematic and romantic plots were enjoyable. I was captivated enough that I would most likely read a sequel if one were presented. The protagonist characters were relate-able, like-able, and each equally flawed and fantastic. I especially appreciated Aurelius' metamorphosis from unmotivated misfit to determined hero. For me, that is enough.
Thank you, Alexander, for the copy of your book!