some quick thoughts:
@ vincent: DUMP HIM and go to therapy
the devil works hard but vincent’s phone that died 78 times to drive the plot works harder
i never want to see the word “pingly” again
have i ever hated a main character as immediately as i hated wesley?
the only reason this isn’t a 1 star is vincent
content/trigger warnings; violence, murder, medical experimentation discussed, depression, anxiety, blood, starvation, homelessness, poverty, drugging, amatonormativity, explicit sexual content, self-harm recounted, suicidal ideation, death of a parent recounted, grief, queerphobia recounted,
rep; wesley (mc) is mexican, bisexual, and has anxiety. vincent (mc) is gay and has depression. kendall (sc) is black and lesbian.
i guess i can start with my hatred for wesley. i’m someone who has a hard time truly enjoying a book when i cannot stand the main character. it’s not about needing to like them as a person or them to be “good” or someone we’re “supposed to” like. it’s about being in the head of characters who are written in a very specific way just making me annoyed/angry and draining my enjoyment of and desire to read the book.
wesley is selfish, hypocritical, judgmental, manipulative, morally superior, doesn’t communicate, keeps horrible and big secrets, and has no accountability or self-awareness. he has some “chosen one” vibes (a trope that’s very rarely executed in a way that i like), in that he thinks taking down the evil company that killed his mother and covered it up rests solely on his shoulders and he gets to pick and choose who deserves to be sacrificed in order to do it. by the end, he hasn’t learned or grown at all, even after apologizing to vincent once he finds out the truth (accidentally, wesley doesn’t tell him) and offering to help vincent with his homelessness.
up next is the miscommunication. it’s less so miscommunication (where the character talk but get their wires crossed and take away completely different things from the conversation, with angst and/or humor ensuing) and more so making assumptions and walking away instead of actually communicating (with annoyance from the reader ensuing). when vincent stumbles upon the secret wesley has been keeping, he walks away and wesley doesn’t stop him, rather than talking about it to try to mitigate potential hurt. and later on, when the big action with the evil company has finished, wesley makes assumptions about what vincent wants/needs and just leaves, causing both of them to think the other would call when they’re ready and then angsting over the fact that the other doesn’t call. it’s just. annoying and not necessary. fucking talk to each other.
i don’t care for metaphorical writing, like, “dwelling on that fact felt like breaking apart piece by agonizing piece, his soul crumbling to the size of bullets that he might shoot straight through the hearts of those responsible for his mom’s death” and “he kissed like they were two objects destined to come together from the start of the universe, the earth finally plunging into the sun” do absolutely nothing for me, except make me roll my eyes.
wesley says “i’ll have you know that i’m happy to get my blood sucked by vampires of any gender. or all vampires, of all genders!” and vincent just assumes that means he’s bisexual, as if there aren’t any other options. we know wesley is bisexual, as it was mentioned previously (and is stated out of text). however, vincent does not. the issue is that bisexuality is not the only or the default sexuality for people attracted to multiple genders and not all bisexuals are attracted to all genders.
some amatonormativity in the phrases like “just friends” and “more than friends” and “friends with benefits,” as well as kendall saying “you’re literally giving him a piece of your body, he’s at least emotionally invested in sustaining your kink, and he’s agreed to continue this on a regular basis. pretty sure that’s dating.” completely platonic relationships can involve kink. and even if you remove the kink; you can be emotionally invested in a person’s wellbeing/satisfaction/comfort, even using your body to do so (non-sexual physical intimacy) without it being dating/romantic. please stop attributing inherent romance to certain behaviors or interactions. if a character wants to date someone but is afraid to say so because they don’t think the other person wants to, someone saying, “who cares if they never said anything or made a move, neither did you and here you are wanting to date them.” gets the same message across without the amatonormativity.
lastly, the author says the book isn’t “vampirism as a metaphor for disability,” but “vampirism literally is a disability” and honestly it reads as just a metaphor (other readers have taken it as a metaphor, too. i even saw one say it’s a metaphor for homelessness). i’m not criticizing the “vampirism is a disability” interpretation of vampirism, i just don’t think the author executed it here. all the bits in the book, like the sun and garlic being allergies that make them seriously ill; vampires struggling to find employment and housing; businesses not wanting to serve vampires; pride not being accessible because it’s held during the day; needing blood to survive being described simply as a different need all read to me as being metaphors for the realities of disabled people (and sometimes marginalized people in general). i don’t think using disability language to discuss what vampires experience is enough to claim you’ve written vampirism AS a disability. and i think it’s a stretch to say that humans being afraid of vampires because they feed on humans to survive and become violent/feral when they don’t is comparable to bigotry or is just them simply not wanting to accept people who are different and make accommodations for different needs. i don’t know. i’m conflicted on this. maybe if vampirism was actually referred to as a disability in some way in the book, it would’ve read as literal, instead of just a metaphor?