Hellooooooooo dear readers! *Hiccup* It is I, the one and only literate raven masochistic enough to read every Red Tower (RT) book just to prove that the imprint cares more about a book's physical aesthetic than the story inside. *Hiccup* As of right now, the highest I have rated some of their books is three raven feathers out of five, but truly, for my sake, your sake, the author's sake, and the puddle of sour liquid I found under a broken bottle in a ditch's sake, I hope that changes soon, as I am unsure how much longer I can put myself through these books. I have wanted so badly since the imprint was born to find a five feathers out of five read, but at this *hiccup* point, I do believe I will settle for four.
Buuuuuuut, until then, I will be here, writing a review for one of my least anticipated sequels of all time.
(If you have read my review for The Wren in the Holly Library, then you know just how I felt about it, if not, then lucky you, my miserable talons have not touched you yet)
Preface
1. I want to make it abundantly clear that I did not pick up this book with the intent to hate [on] it. I understand that, due to the nature of my reviews surrounding RT books, as well as my one-feathered opinion on the first in the series, it appears as though I get some sort of "below-the-tail" stimulation from seeking out things to hate, but that is simply not true. There is nothing in this world I value more than the written word, and I know that going into something with the mindset of hating it will skew my thoughts and prevent me from analyzing it the way I should. I hated the first one yes, but that did not immediately mean the sequel would not be an improvement.
2. Giving a negative review for book 1 does not, in any way, mean that I (or anyone else for that matter) cannot review book 2. I flew to the store to purchase this over-priced book with my own money, which means I can review it, regardless of how positive my thoughts are.
3. I read this book because it aligned with my foolish goal, not out of any ill-intent.
The Review
Right off the perch, The Robin on the Oak Throne opens with a... well, I do not necessarily wish to say a bang as that definitely is not it, maybe a woosh? No, not that. A cringe-worthy opening line that did an outstanding job of reminding me why I hated the prose of the first book? Yes No need to start the review off so harshly. Ah yes, now I have got it. How about a chapter that not only establishes the present setting of the book, but waxes poetic about how amazing and skilled Kierse is at stealing (a fact I could never possibly forget thanks to Wren spending every other chapter knocking me over the head with it)?
Yes, yes that will do nicely.
The Improvements
As shocking may it be, I, Valerian Wentwitch found there to be some measurable amount of improvements in this installation of the Holly Cycle series. Did they make me rate the sequel higher than book 1? No, absolutely not. I do not rate books based on whether they are comparably better than the first, I rate them as they are in comparison to nothing. Just as you do not rank a collie over a poodle in a dog show because you like the breed better, I do not rate one book over its sibling.
So, what were these said improvements?
1. Graves actually received some characterization outside of being British. I can truly not emphasize enough how glad I was that the author realized, here in book 2, that being British is not a personality trait, and Graves required some well-earned characterization to prevent him from being as flat as a squirrel after a semi ran over it. And it started early in the book as well. The first major example being on page 47 in which Graves expresses sadness and regret for how things worked out, not just with Montrell, but with Kierse as well. By mentioning the way in which the world has changed outside the window of his flat, the author organically ages Graves into the centuries-old being that he is, rather than falling into the pit authors typically fall into when crafting immortal beings (that is, when they have alleged immortal beings act like teenagers). By showing that Graves had been reflecting upon his past in a way he does not typically do, the author naturally emphasizes Kierse's effect on him in a really nice way. I mean it when I say I am genuinely impressed by Linde in this regard.
2. Just like with Graves, I was especially glad to see that Lorcan was given some much needed characterization as well. In Wren, Lorcan managed to be even flatter than Graves's roadkill personality, so I was glad that there was even a small, measurable amount of depth injected into Lorcan's character. He became more of the villain Linde wanted to show he was and worked well to subvert the trope of having the second, antagonistic MC be the true love interest. This was especially apparent on page 359, when we finally saw Lorcan as being something other than a random Irish gang leader. In this scene, his legs are slung over his throne while he mopes about both his life as the Oak King, and to some extent, his feeling for Kierse. They are such small details, but they do well to show his personality where before I thought he didn't have one. Would I still consider him an outstanding example of characterization? No, but this section is for improvements, not perfection.
3. More unique locations outside of meandering through NYC. One of the things I praised in Wren was the concept of having an underground monster city below NYC. I thought the way it was run/setup was a unique concept and was probably my favorite location in the entire first book. Because of this, I was glad to see even more locations throughout the book. Two particular favorites of mine in this book were the different Goblin Markets, as well a monster-run ball in Versailles. If Linde wishes to continue these improvements, then she should definitely include even more compelling locations like these in book 3.
Issues Galore (A.K.A The Even Worse)
While, to some extent, I might have enjoyed this entry more than the first, it was also pretty bad in general. A great majority of the issues it had were the same recycled issues of book 1 that the author (and her editor) clearly had no problem regurgitating. And the other percentage of issues were specific to this novel only, making me believe even less editing was put into this one than the first.
1. Same boring, uninspired writing style... but with a twist! This time, those dry lines attempting to emulate the most basic and recycled booktok books were even less edited than those in Wren! Oh yes, in this instalment, I had the absolute pleasure of reading sentences so repetitive, they can hardly be considered grammatically correct. Genuinely, I do not know how this aspect of the book could have possibly been worse. It was already bad the first time. Now? Feathers, I swear both the author and her editor were competing to produce an even worse output than before. I mean, how else can you explain the fact that Lorcan flicks his eyes to Kierse on page 358, IMMEDIATLY AFTER FLICKING HIS EYES TO HER. HE NEVER LOOKED AWAY. WHAT ARE WE DOING? *Croak, croak, croaaaaaaaak*... But I suppose you won't believe me unless I provide the following, shockingly real quotes from Robin:
a. "While Kierse left with the spear and fled to Dublin with Gen and the spear to get answers that didn't come with strings." (23)
b. "'Tonight, we are the terror of the night.'" (211)
c. "Kierse left them alone, grabbing a snack from the bar as she wandered deeper into the bar." (296)
d. "And she felt again like that small child again as this lock refused to open for her." (311)
And the absolutely, positively, unquestionably most egregious example of poor line editing (and general dispassion for clarity) within this entire book:
e. "The thing she had thought about when Jason had hit her was the same place that brought her out of the magical connection with Lorcan was the same thing that kept her mind clear of panic." (404)
2. The interludes are still a problem. Just as I mentioned in my first review, the additions of these random interludes throughout the book essentially spoil any important plot point for the audience, delivering need-to-know information in the most inorganic, heavy handed way, rather than allowing the audience to discover it alongside Kierse. Aside from the author not knowing how to naturally deliver characterization for random side characters, I still cannot see why she enjoys putting them into the book so much. They are just as common as they were in book one and still do not benefit the book in any real way.
3. Incessant recapping. While I understand there is a necessity for a sequel to touch upon information relevant from the previous installment, the way in which it was done here was so mind-numbing in its formulaic manner that I could not help but smash my beak against the nearest branch each time I was forced to read through it. We are reintroduced to a character from Wren, an assortment of base line information is dumped in the least organic way possible (in a clunky paragraph no less), and a heavy-handed explanation for why we should care at all about them ties it all together. This, of course, applies to minor plot details as well, making for a slow, meandering flight through the rest of this literary marvel. It is especially annoying considering much of the information is so obvious (and, quite frankly, unnecessary) that if one cannot remember such simple details, they should put the book down and re-read the first one for clearly their eyes were closed the first time.
4. Horrible plot "twists". Just as the bolded words before these said, the plot twists in these books are awful. Not just because they are predictable, but because they... aren't. Yes, yes, I know that makes as much sense as Robin, so let me explain. One of the most satisfying elements of a plot twist is the buildup before the reveal. It is the small details a first-time reader might overlook, only to realize they were clues all along when the twist inevitably appears. The issue in this book is that the "twists" were never established to be options in the first place, or, if they were, they were so obvious the reader is left wondering why they should be surprised in the first place. For example, on page 68, we are introduced to the "shocking surprise" that Niamh, a character we literally just met a page before, was the robin, the spiritual opposite to Kierse, the wren. Now, this is framed as a huge reveal, and we are essentially told as such when Kierse goes on to info-dump about how close they are and the "kindred connection" she had with her. Obviously, the hurt Kierse and Gen feel—albeit briefly—rings hollow since we have literally never met this woman before. We do not care that she is Lorcan's robin. We do not care that she may have been spying on them while potentially pretending to care about them. WE HAVE LITERALLY NEVER MET HER BEFORE. She was not in any previous chapters. She was not in book 1. Nothing. So, to reiterate, this is a twist that is unexpected, because the reader didn't even know it was an option in the first place. And don't even get me croaking on page 386's twist that Gregory Amberdash (the shifty wraith that was always up to obviously dark dealings), was actually a bad guy all along, I will peck a hole through my keyboard again.
5. Endless telling instead of showing. This bit hardly needs much touching upon as it is present in every RT book I have reviewed. For word count, I will simply highlight a few specific examples, so please note there are many more I am leaving out.
a. Kierse's internal monologue going on and on about how much she wanted Graves and how she just cannot move on from him (11)
b. The top of the page being dominated by exposition about why Graves is so perfect and why they are so similar (34)
c. Being repeatedly knocked over the head about how much Kierse likes Niamh and how they have a "kindred connection" (yes, I know I just discussed this, but I felt it is still relevant here), despite us never meeting her before (70)
d. The reader being told that Kierse has an aversion to physical touch, despite us never being shown this. This bit is especially annoying considering how willing she was to have Graves, some mysterious warlock she should have been terrified of, touch her randomly in book 1. This information would have been important to know as soon as we met Kierse. (149)
e. The entire scene on page 162 in which Kierse and Ethan have a fight. The author tells us how upset Kierse is, but the reader is left wondering why, since, just as I mentioned in book 1, we still have no reason to believe Kierse, Gen, and Ethan are super close. Every interaction of theirs is surface level to all skies, and they are so bland they make dirt interesting.
6. The age gap issue. Look, I have read enough RT romantasies (and just romantasies in general), to know that large age gaps are commonplace, especially when the MMC love interest is immortal. And I was willing to look past that in this case too. Well, that was until we learn in Robin that Graves met Kierse as a literal 5-year-old child (118) and gave her a "warm look" (122). And yes, you may be thinking that isn't so bad: she was a child, he thought she was cute—adorable-cute, that's normal, right? Well, yes, and I would honestly have no problem with it if he didn't admit on page 129 that he knew her as a child. See, authors get away with age gaps since, most of the time, the two characters meet as adults, even if one is significantly older than the other. It would be a lot less weird if, at least, Graves didn't meet her (and remember it). But he did. And he admitted as much on page 129.
A particularly vexatious problem (this time for book 2!)
In my review for Wren, the "vexatious problem" I had was the use of a sex trafficking victim (Torra) as a plot point to further Kierse's storyline. I said it was cheap, unnecessary, and horribly written, and I still stand by that claim. I also described how this could be fixed. That is, if the author actually made Torra a real character and allowed her to work through her trauma in the sequel. Unfortunately, this never happened. In fact, Torra never appeared on page at all, further proving my claim that she was nothing more than a plot device used to shock the reader.
But that is not what I wanted to touch upon in this section. Rather, I wanted to discuss Kierse's trauma with men, and the way it is consistently contradicted in Robin. Now, for whatever reason, the author suddenly became inspired to give Kierse a discomfort being touched, and with discomfort around men in general. Ignoring for the moment that this is another example of a RT book having a FMC with an unnecessary SA backstory, there are large issues in general with how this is handed. As we already know, Kierse was severely mistreated by her former mentor Jason, so yes, it is admittedly understandable that she would be weary of men. The issue? We were never shown this in book 1. Was she weary of Gregory Amberdash? Sure. But that was because he was a shady businessman, not because he was a man. When she first met Graves, was there an ounce of fear? Of course! But that was because she knew her cover was blown from her heist. Not only that, but he was the most powerful monster in NYC, it would have made no difference if he was a woman, nonbinary, or any other gender for that matter. Her fear, as far as we were shown, had nothing to do with him being a man. To make matters worse, she found him attractive and was immediately willing to work with him for a heist. Never once, in all the times he randomly touched her without asking, did she tense up, or have bad memories of being taken advantage by men.
Though, randomly, magically, in book 2, she is super uncomfortable around men (including the ones she knows) and hates physical touch to the point where the author inorganically states it in the text. Now, don't misunderstand me, I have no issue with a character having these traits. In fact, it can give them a lot of depth. But what I do have an issue with is authors retroactively adding details without ever actually showing them on page.
But you know what really gets me? It's page 308, when we get a wild scene in which Graves is doing oral on Kierse while she is sleeping. Not only was such a thing never communicated between them before (so Kierse never gave consent to it, even if went on to enjoy it), but Kierse had not a single negative reaction to it. She didn't subconsciously tense up. She didn't pull away from Graves in fear. She didn't even slightly panic that someone was literally licking an intimate part of her body while she was sleeping and vulnerable. Nothing. Where was that fear Jason gave her of nonconsensual touch the author was harping on about on page 149 now, huh? Not only was this rape, but it just further proves the author never wants to commit to realistically writing SA trauma for a FC and only adds it to the story to shock the reader as needed. Nothing else. This scene was disgusting.
Red Tower repetitiveness checklist (those that appeared in bold):
*Ambiguously tan love interest
*Small FMC
*Overpowered FMC
*Edgy love interest that is at home in the darkness
*Heavy-handed messaging
*Oral scene before missionary scene
*MMC that is considered hot for the bare minimum, i.e., basic feminist takes/actions
*Harassment against FMC by a man that is thwarted by MMC
*Repetitive descriptions about how large the love interest is (in all meanings of the word)
*The best sex to have ever sexed
*FMC uses/loves strictly daggers/knives to defend herself
*Inorganically injected tropes
*MMC with muscles on top of muscles
*Supposedly. Impactful. Phrases. Interrupted. With. Periods
*Female character with unnecessary SA-related backstory
*Misunderstanding trope after "going all the way"
Total score on the Red Tower repetitiveness scale: 13/16
Even more uses for the physical copies of this series since RT thinks books aren't for reading (continued from my Wren review):
*Footrest
*Booster seat
*Beak wipe
*Upside-down display piece [still basic]
*Non-waterproof umbrella
*Croak* I don't feel too good... what was in that bottle? Skies, I think I'm going to—
-V.W.