2.3/5
Mr. Adcock was gracious enough to exchange this for an honest review.
There's a lot to like about Complete Darkness, and a lot to dislike as well. I don't think it's bad so much as it's unrefined in various aspects. I'm personally indifferent to the religious undertones, but I do like how they come together with the main plotline and the main antagonist's goals. There are elements of body horror that conjure imagery reminiscent of H.R. Giger or Cronenberg scattered thinly throughout the novel's pages that I liked. Especially the uh... the 'recycling' bit. I believe my actual, audible response was "What in the goddamn?"
It's not every day a book makes me "WTF" aloud. Normally I'll just chug along from page 1 to the final word. Maybe I'll raise an eyebrow. But the recycling measure was morbidly intriguing, and as far as I know it's entirely original, so I tip my hat. My hat has been tipped on this day.
First, the good: the concept and the world are both unique. It's an undeniable fact that a lot of thought went into every little detail. I can appreciate when a brave new world has been created in a variety of layers. The plot, involving a scientific breakthrough involving hormonal aggression, and the coming 'Day of Carnage,' is intriguing. Cleric20, what little we know about him, has the potential to be a great protagonist in this whole affair and in the sequels to come.
Now, the bad: I feel like this novel has the same problem as Zack Snyder's Batman v. Superman--there's a good story there, but it's buried beneath a confusing mishmash of unnecessary fluff and jumbled around in a confusing narrative. I said before that I can appreciate a well-rounded world, but the way it is conveyed to its audience can make or break a story. I think Adcock gets far too bogged-down into a huge plethora of things that have very little to do with the story presently being told, like the history of an organization, the history of a person, technological advancements, the history of a movement or an event that has occurred decades prior to the novel's current events. For a while, it reads like a seemingly endless barrage of unnecessarily long footnotes and additional pages of information about other aspects of the thing the footnotes already touched upon. The footnotes interrupt the flow of an already jumbled story. In my personal opinion, I think the novel would benefit from a separate section in the back dedicated to additional notes, rather than having them inorganically included in the story itself. As it is, it's overwhelming, informational overload that can require a bit of patience to absorb.
Yes, this first novel suffers from a lack of focus. There is a lot of page space dedicated to Captain Addams, a character who isn't all that amusing and does nothing except ramble about his past exploits, all of which are unimportant in the grander scheme of things. The only characters who really did anything of importance were Cleric20, President Razour, and Commander Riichardson, and they were by far the most interesting out of a fairly large cast of characters and celebrities. Instead, they sometimes take a back seat to the on-the-nose pop culture references and attempts at satire, or the aforementioned over-abundance of world building. A lot of great stuff loses its intended effect from its unfocused narrative.
On the technical aspects, footnotes aside, I found the constant head-hopping and the shifting tenses from past to present to future distracting. The dialogue reads a bit amateurish and unnatural at times. And for a novel that focuses a lot of attention on a variety of things, I felt the climax that the novel has been teasing and building up to since page 1 came and went a little too abruptly.
All in all, despite its flaws, Complete Darkness is a decent start to a promising series. I'll be there when the comic adaptation and the sequel(s) drop, because despite my moderate aversion to the execution of the ideas touched upon in this debut, the ideas themselves show potential, and I would like to see where Adcock takes things from here.