I really wanted to like this book more than I did.
The pros:
- The mystery aspect is well-imagined. Right when I was about to give up on this book, that’s what sucked me in enough for me to finish it.
- I admired the parallels within this retelling of Jekyll and Hyde. I’m a sucker for literary reimaginings, especially when integral constructs are twisted on their heads.
- I enjoyed that it’s not a modern retelling, but based in what I assume to be the early 2000s. It fit the story well and added a nice layer of nostalgia for me.
The cons:
- I hate to say this, but I did not feel the chemistry between Lottie and Alice. I wanted to so badly, as a lover of sapphic fiction. But it just wasn’t there for me. The author promoted their relationship as a slow burn, but it seemed more like a no burn. These two characters came across more like friends than romantic interests throughout the book, and the “I love you”s exchanged between them felt like they were written by someone who’s entire personal romantic experience begins and ends with mediocre fanfiction. I was rubbed the wrong way by Lottie’s abrupt journey from self-declared asexuality to falling in love. Would it not have been more apt to mention aromanticism? Regardless of semantics, there wasn’t any self-reflection or identity confusion that I could sense, and what is being a teenager if not those things?
- The writing itself isn’t stellar. There are a lot of cliched metaphors and a great deal of the dialogue felt inorganic, particularly the over-embellished monologues by the various professors. The characterization generally felt off to me, too. It wasn’t so long ago that I was an undergraduate student being taught by renowned field experts, and I found the students’ views of the academic professionals off-putting. I think the author tried to convey a bit of the notion that patriarchal academia is one big self-gratuitous circlejerk (which I agree with) but the way the professors were written from the students’ points of view almost perpetuated it? I may return to this thought later.
- I felt there were inconsistencies within the characterization/plot as well. I looped back to this many times while reading, and couldn’t figure out Lottie’s thought process when it came to the first ruby. Why did she not attempt to get medical attention? Even if fear of expulsion or involuntary psychiatric admittance were at the forefront of her rationale, I can’t find any justifiable reason why a terrified teenager wouldn’t seek help even from another student. She doesn’t even consider it. Given that the sleepwalking is brand new to her and she is still completely in the dark, I couldn’t make sense of why she’d just accept it and deal with it alone. I also found it hard to believe that there would be zero legal repercussions for Mordue. Although not a murderer, she did cover up and lie about the circumstances surrounding these deaths. Lastly, I couldn’t make sense of Lottie’s cool acceptance of extreme violence. I do understand that she represents drastic level-headedness in contrast to Alice’s Hyde, but it was too far-fetched for me. Falling in love with someone who threatens to murder you on a regular basis? Who may or may not have snapped the neck of a cat? I very well may not have fully comprehended the author’s intention here, and that would be on me. But whether these are critical inconsistencies or false analyses, they took me out of the story.
- The big reveal of the story’s overall message made me cringe. I feel like a specific audience would really love this, but to me it felt a bit cheap. Maybe I’m jaded when it comes to overarching, substance-less female empowerment in fiction, but it felt like there could have been more to the general intention behind this book. It rubbed me the wrong way that the author elected to take the route of a fight club as the key means to work out deep, injustice-fueled anger. I was also bothered by the overtly gendered structure within this resolution. The characters make a point to dismiss Dacre’s archaic notions of “testosterone = men strong, estrogen = women irrational” as complete and utter bullshit. Then why does the author lean into this instead of the stance that we are all just people? Learning to fight and strength training in a reclaimed space is not the resolution I was hoping for. I think I might just be at a point where I need my heroes to channel that anger caused by injustice into a wild, unrestricted means of dismantling oppressive systems for due process.
Would I read it again? No. Would I recommend it to another adult? No. Would I recommend it to a gloomy, tortured, misunderstood 14 year old girl? Maybe.
This review in no way intends to discount the author’s efforts or intentions. It is just my honest opinion of the story as a whole.