What do you think?
Rate this book
Angels of Destruction
Keith Donohue's first novel, "The Stolen Child," was a national bestseller hailed as "captivating" (USA Today), "luminous and thrilling" (Washington Post), and "wonderful...So spare and unsentimental that it's impossible not to be moved (Newsweek. His new novel, "Angels of Destruction," opens on a winter's night, when a young girl appears at the home of Mrs. Margaret Quinn, a widow who lives alone. A decade earlier, she had lost her only child, Erica, who fled with her high school sweetheart to join a radical student group known as the Angels of Destruction. Before Margaret answers the knock in the dark hours, she whispers a prayer and then makes her visitor welcome at the door.
The girl, who claims to be nine years old and an orphan with no place to go, beguiles Margaret, offering some solace, some compensation, for the woman's loss. Together, they hatch a plan to pass her off as her newly found granddaughter, Norah Quinn, and enlist Sean Fallon, a classmate and heartbroken boy, to guide her into the school and town.
Their conspiracy is vulnerable not only to those children and neighbors intrigued by Norah's mysterious and magical qualities but by a lone figure shadowing the girl who threatens to reveal the child's true identity and her purpose in Margaret's life. Who are these strangers really? And what is their connection to the past, the Angels, and the long-missing daughter?
Angels of Destruction is an unforgettable story of hope and fear, heartache and redemption. The saga of the Quinn family unfolds against an America wracked by change. As it delicately dances on the line between the real and the imagined, this mesmerizing new novel confirms Keith Donohue's standing as one of our most inspiring and inventive novelists.
The girl, who claims to be nine years old and an orphan with no place to go, beguiles Margaret, offering some solace, some compensation, for the woman's loss. Together, they hatch a plan to pass her off as her newly found granddaughter, Norah Quinn, and enlist Sean Fallon, a classmate and heartbroken boy, to guide her into the school and town.
Their conspiracy is vulnerable not only to those children and neighbors intrigued by Norah's mysterious and magical qualities but by a lone figure shadowing the girl who threatens to reveal the child's true identity and her purpose in Margaret's life. Who are these strangers really? And what is their connection to the past, the Angels, and the long-missing daughter?
Angels of Destruction is an unforgettable story of hope and fear, heartache and redemption. The saga of the Quinn family unfolds against an America wracked by change. As it delicately dances on the line between the real and the imagined, this mesmerizing new novel confirms Keith Donohue's standing as one of our most inspiring and inventive novelists.
347 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
42 people are currently reading
1606 people want to read
About the author
Keith Donohue
20 books380 followersKeith Donohue is an American novelist. Born and raised in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, he earned his B.A. and M.A. from Duquesne University and his Ph.D. in English from The Catholic University of America.
Currently he is Director of Communications for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission, the grant-making arm of the U. S. National Archives in Washington, DC. Until 1998 he worked at the National Endowment for the Arts and wrote speeches for chairmen John Frohnmayer and Jane Alexander, and has written articles for the New York Times, Washington Post, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and other newspapers.
Currently he is Director of Communications for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission, the grant-making arm of the U. S. National Archives in Washington, DC. Until 1998 he worked at the National Endowment for the Arts and wrote speeches for chairmen John Frohnmayer and Jane Alexander, and has written articles for the New York Times, Washington Post, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and other newspapers.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 261 reviews
September 1, 2015
When I first received this book to review, I read the synopsis and thought it was going to be about fantasy and magic, but what I got was so much more.
The story begins in 1985. One bitterly cold night, Margaret quinn, a widow, who lives alone and still mourns the loss of her child; a daughter, who ran away a decade earlier with the boy that she loved, opens the door to find Norah, a small bespectacled girl, frozen and shivering with a battered suitcase leaning against her legs. Margaret takes the girl in, but who is she and what is her purpose?
The second part of the book flashes back to 1975 and tells the story of Erica, Margaret's child, and Wiley, a boy who is obsessed with the Angels of Destruction, a group of radicals, and decides to join their revolution. It reveals how love is at times blind and how it can sweep you along with things you have no control over. Part three returns to 1985 and is about forgiveness and hope. The two parts preceding are now entwined and come together in conclusion.
This book is expertly written. There is fantasy and magic, but it's subtle and weaves its way through the story leading the reader to believe, without question. However, for me, the story was more about love and loss, grief and forgiveness. It is haunting and melancholy without sentimentality. The mystery behind Norah, Una and the man in the camel-haired coat is never really revealed, but the hint of angels influences us in who we believe them to be. The true essence of the story does have an ending, which is very moving.
This is not a quick read, but then I wouldn't want it to be. The story demands the pace to be slow to coincide with the sorrowful atmosphere.
I really enjoyed this book and highly recommend it.
The story begins in 1985. One bitterly cold night, Margaret quinn, a widow, who lives alone and still mourns the loss of her child; a daughter, who ran away a decade earlier with the boy that she loved, opens the door to find Norah, a small bespectacled girl, frozen and shivering with a battered suitcase leaning against her legs. Margaret takes the girl in, but who is she and what is her purpose?
The second part of the book flashes back to 1975 and tells the story of Erica, Margaret's child, and Wiley, a boy who is obsessed with the Angels of Destruction, a group of radicals, and decides to join their revolution. It reveals how love is at times blind and how it can sweep you along with things you have no control over. Part three returns to 1985 and is about forgiveness and hope. The two parts preceding are now entwined and come together in conclusion.
This book is expertly written. There is fantasy and magic, but it's subtle and weaves its way through the story leading the reader to believe, without question. However, for me, the story was more about love and loss, grief and forgiveness. It is haunting and melancholy without sentimentality. The mystery behind Norah, Una and the man in the camel-haired coat is never really revealed, but the hint of angels influences us in who we believe them to be. The true essence of the story does have an ending, which is very moving.
This is not a quick read, but then I wouldn't want it to be. The story demands the pace to be slow to coincide with the sorrowful atmosphere.
I really enjoyed this book and highly recommend it.
April 4, 2009
Keith Donohue’s first novel, The Stolen Child, was a national bestseller hailed as “captivating” (USA Today), “luminous and thrilling” (Washington Post), and “wonderful...So spare and unsentimental that it’s impossible not to be moved (Newsweek. His new novel, Angels of Destruction, opens on a winter’s night, when a young girl appears at the home of Mrs. Margaret Quinn, a widow who lives alone. A decade earlier, she had lost her only child, Erica, who fled with her high school sweetheart to join a radical student group known as the Angels of Destruction. Before Margaret answers the knock in the dark hours, she whispers a prayer and then makes her visitor welcome at the door. The girl, who claims to be nine years old and an orphan with no place to go, beguiles Margaret, offering some solace, some compensation, for the woman’s loss. Together, they hatch a plan to pass her off as her newly found granddaughter, Norah Quinn, and enlist Sean Fallon, a classmate and heartbroken boy, to guide her into the school and town. Their conspiracy is vulnerable not only to those children and neighbors intrigued by Norah’s mysterious and magical qualities but by a lone figure shadowing the girl who threatens to reveal the child’s true identity and her purpose in Margaret’s life. Who are these strangers really? And what is their connection to the past, the Angels, and the long-missing daughter? Angels of Destruction is an unforgettable story of hope and fear, heartache and redemption. The saga of the Quinn family unfolds against an America wracked by change. As it delicately dances on the linebetween the real and the imagined, this mesmerizing new novel confirms Keith Donohue’s standing as one of our most inspiring and inventive novelists.
*****Rate this book a 5/5. It held my interest from the very first sentence. I enjoyed this immensely. I will also read his other book The Stolen Child and have ordered it from my library. I love the combination of excellent story telling combined with fantasy and magic.
*****Rate this book a 5/5. It held my interest from the very first sentence. I enjoyed this immensely. I will also read his other book The Stolen Child and have ordered it from my library. I love the combination of excellent story telling combined with fantasy and magic.
March 25, 2017
I wanted to like this one more than I did. Really. Sometimes I found myself reading and subconsciously trying to talk myself into liking it. The premise was really intriguing, and I thought, what's not to like really? Angels, revolutionaries, cults, family secrets, shadowy figures...all of these are right up my alley. This book, however, was not. I do think that I can chalk up some of my disinterest up to personal preference, but mostly, I thought the writing was one big giant mess, and the more I think about it, the more puzzled I am. I am not familiar with Donohue's other work, so I have nothing to compare it to, but this book truly was all over the place. Plot holes galore, unbelievable dialogue, arbitrary language, flat characters, and so many other stylistic problems overwhelmed me that I couldn't feign interest any longer.
Without becoming too plot-centric in my review, I will say that the first third of the novel follows Margaret Quinn, a sixty-ish widow who lives alone, and a young girl who appears one winter's night out of nowhere on her doorstep. Margaret's seventeen year old daughter, Erica, ran away with her revolutionary boyfriend a decade before to join a freakish cult called The Angels of Destruction. Heartbroken over the loss, Margaret takes in the young girl, and passes her off as her long-lost granddaughter, Norah. The second third of the book follows Erica and her boyfriend, Wiley, right after they run away and covers that two month period of time from Erica's point of view as well as Margaret's. The last third comes back to Margaret and Norah to finish the story. Interspersed in the narrative are stories of angels helping the characters on their way, and while some of the writing was beautiful and descriptive, it was really hard to understand what was real and what wasn't. For most of the book, Donohue walks that tightrope between realism and magical realism and never really commits to either genre. What results is ambiguous and confusing jumbles of words that in the end didn't really make all that much sense to me. Did the angels actually exist, or were they hallucinations of characters whose heartbreak and depression put them in a mental state that wasn't quite reliable? Even if the point was that it could have been either, or both simultaneously, his intent was just muddled in with everything else.
I understand what Donohue was trying to do with the compositional setup of the book in thirds, but I'm not sure it worked. It almost read like two different novellas, and I'm not sure the stories transitioned well. I found myself a little lost and had to go back and forth to keep everything straight (and as I read this one on a kindle, my annoyance started to get the better of me). The perspectives also changed from chapter to chapter which was also annoying, and added to the overall jumble of the plotline.
But the shifting perspectives and the composition weren't what really bothered me. The writing style was so difficult to understand. Partly because Donohue wrote some really beautiful passages, bordering on poetic:
The lonesome, like the mad, know one another on sight. She recognized his broken heart before she knew its cause, and he knew that she knew.
and
Grief had become the handmaid of hope, and she whose life was also bound by heartache and desire understood all too well what must be done.
But then, other times, the writing was a disaster. I particularly hated his arbitrary use of complicated words inserted directly into the prose, which brought all action to a halt and which made me all the more frustrated. I couldn't stop picturing Mr. Donohue sitting at his desk with a typewriter and a really outdated thesaurus thinking that if he used big words that no one uses anymore it will somehow make him sound more clever. I swear I've never had to use the dictionary on my kindle more than I did reading this one, and belive me, I've read a lot of books which are way more intelligent than this one.
When the hour had come for Sean to go home, they had willed themselves back to equipoise, found a route to one another. Maybe I'm the dumb one here, but who has heard the word equipoise used in a sentence this week?
Or.... he could hear Norah crying, her books being thrown and scattered in the woods and the ugly rending of her clothes. You couldn't just say "the ugly ripping of her clothes" or "the tearing of her clothes" Mr. Donohue? It just had to be rending?
The plot isn't all that bad. It tells a great tale of loss and forgiveness, grace, love between mother and daughter, between sisters, between friends. The way the plotlines finally converge is pleasant, albeit predictable, and there is a beautiful story tucked away in here somewhere. The premise that angels are all around us, helping us find our destiny, or helping us patch relationships, or just looking out for us is interesting and could have really made for some awesome meaty portions if only it had been more cleanly executed. There are a lot of great things happening in this story, and I am disappointed that the writing prohibited me from enjoying it as much as I could have.
But finally, the characters. The rendering of each character bothered me most of all. Especially Norah and her little friend Sean. I have never read anything where children talk and act less like children. They are both 8 years old. 8 years old. At one point in the beginning, Sean can't sleep and is thinking about Norah so sometime between 2 and 3 am he goes downstairs, out the front door, and walks by himself to Norah's house in the dead of winter. Does anyone know an 8 year old who would behave this way? I thought 8 year olds were all afraid of the dark or boogeymen and stuff like that. And their dialogue most of the way through the book sounds like dialogue that the adults were speaking to one another. And it isn't just them. Every character rambles off some poetic monologues here and there equipped with simile and metaphor and everything sounds so beautiful and clever that you feel like you are watching a goddamn Lifetime Movie Network film of the week. The problem is, Mr. Donohue, people DON'T TALK LIKE THAT! KIDS DON'T TALK LIKE THAT! ADULTS DON'T TALK TO KIDS LIKE THAT! EVER! It was just too much to ignore, people.
And I can't even begin to discuss plot holes in this story because goodreads will cut me and my review off and even then I will not be able to cover them all. I think Donohue was trying to be a bit too clever and cared too much about the style of the writing rather than on how the plot would work itself out. And it didn't really work itself out. Not to me. Also, the ending was a bit too "Touched by an Angel", and I was hoping for something a little bit darker, and having a little bit more of a resolution.
The redeeming character for me was Erica Quinn. She was the only one I connected with and cared about. Donohue did a great job of getting into the head of a seventeen year old girl in love. And he really helped us understand the different motivations between Erica and her boyfriend Wiley, motivations that formed each of their respective destinies. What young woman hasn't felt this feeling before?
Love makes you crazy. For the one and only time, I lived in a kind of trance, always wanting him--not just for the sex, though that was insane--but for his presence nearby, which somehow softened all else. He could be in the next room, or just outside the door, and I would feel better knowing he was close at hand, Have you ever been in love this way? Where you feel just uncorked, your mind and body and spirit open and you want to give back that same sensation to him? But he didn't want me, not that way. And the worst part is they can hurt you with impunity, refuse your very soul, yet part of you goes on loving.
All in all, I wouldn't read this book again, but I would recommend it for someone who enjoys lighter fiction with a decent story who isn't overly critical of writing style. The style stopped me from enjoying this novel, but I hope that it could be enjoyed by others who maybe aren't so damn critical.
Without becoming too plot-centric in my review, I will say that the first third of the novel follows Margaret Quinn, a sixty-ish widow who lives alone, and a young girl who appears one winter's night out of nowhere on her doorstep. Margaret's seventeen year old daughter, Erica, ran away with her revolutionary boyfriend a decade before to join a freakish cult called The Angels of Destruction. Heartbroken over the loss, Margaret takes in the young girl, and passes her off as her long-lost granddaughter, Norah. The second third of the book follows Erica and her boyfriend, Wiley, right after they run away and covers that two month period of time from Erica's point of view as well as Margaret's. The last third comes back to Margaret and Norah to finish the story. Interspersed in the narrative are stories of angels helping the characters on their way, and while some of the writing was beautiful and descriptive, it was really hard to understand what was real and what wasn't. For most of the book, Donohue walks that tightrope between realism and magical realism and never really commits to either genre. What results is ambiguous and confusing jumbles of words that in the end didn't really make all that much sense to me. Did the angels actually exist, or were they hallucinations of characters whose heartbreak and depression put them in a mental state that wasn't quite reliable? Even if the point was that it could have been either, or both simultaneously, his intent was just muddled in with everything else.
I understand what Donohue was trying to do with the compositional setup of the book in thirds, but I'm not sure it worked. It almost read like two different novellas, and I'm not sure the stories transitioned well. I found myself a little lost and had to go back and forth to keep everything straight (and as I read this one on a kindle, my annoyance started to get the better of me). The perspectives also changed from chapter to chapter which was also annoying, and added to the overall jumble of the plotline.
But the shifting perspectives and the composition weren't what really bothered me. The writing style was so difficult to understand. Partly because Donohue wrote some really beautiful passages, bordering on poetic:
The lonesome, like the mad, know one another on sight. She recognized his broken heart before she knew its cause, and he knew that she knew.
and
Grief had become the handmaid of hope, and she whose life was also bound by heartache and desire understood all too well what must be done.
But then, other times, the writing was a disaster. I particularly hated his arbitrary use of complicated words inserted directly into the prose, which brought all action to a halt and which made me all the more frustrated. I couldn't stop picturing Mr. Donohue sitting at his desk with a typewriter and a really outdated thesaurus thinking that if he used big words that no one uses anymore it will somehow make him sound more clever. I swear I've never had to use the dictionary on my kindle more than I did reading this one, and belive me, I've read a lot of books which are way more intelligent than this one.
When the hour had come for Sean to go home, they had willed themselves back to equipoise, found a route to one another. Maybe I'm the dumb one here, but who has heard the word equipoise used in a sentence this week?
Or.... he could hear Norah crying, her books being thrown and scattered in the woods and the ugly rending of her clothes. You couldn't just say "the ugly ripping of her clothes" or "the tearing of her clothes" Mr. Donohue? It just had to be rending?
The plot isn't all that bad. It tells a great tale of loss and forgiveness, grace, love between mother and daughter, between sisters, between friends. The way the plotlines finally converge is pleasant, albeit predictable, and there is a beautiful story tucked away in here somewhere. The premise that angels are all around us, helping us find our destiny, or helping us patch relationships, or just looking out for us is interesting and could have really made for some awesome meaty portions if only it had been more cleanly executed. There are a lot of great things happening in this story, and I am disappointed that the writing prohibited me from enjoying it as much as I could have.
But finally, the characters. The rendering of each character bothered me most of all. Especially Norah and her little friend Sean. I have never read anything where children talk and act less like children. They are both 8 years old. 8 years old. At one point in the beginning, Sean can't sleep and is thinking about Norah so sometime between 2 and 3 am he goes downstairs, out the front door, and walks by himself to Norah's house in the dead of winter. Does anyone know an 8 year old who would behave this way? I thought 8 year olds were all afraid of the dark or boogeymen and stuff like that. And their dialogue most of the way through the book sounds like dialogue that the adults were speaking to one another. And it isn't just them. Every character rambles off some poetic monologues here and there equipped with simile and metaphor and everything sounds so beautiful and clever that you feel like you are watching a goddamn Lifetime Movie Network film of the week. The problem is, Mr. Donohue, people DON'T TALK LIKE THAT! KIDS DON'T TALK LIKE THAT! ADULTS DON'T TALK TO KIDS LIKE THAT! EVER! It was just too much to ignore, people.
And I can't even begin to discuss plot holes in this story because goodreads will cut me and my review off and even then I will not be able to cover them all. I think Donohue was trying to be a bit too clever and cared too much about the style of the writing rather than on how the plot would work itself out. And it didn't really work itself out. Not to me. Also, the ending was a bit too "Touched by an Angel", and I was hoping for something a little bit darker, and having a little bit more of a resolution.
The redeeming character for me was Erica Quinn. She was the only one I connected with and cared about. Donohue did a great job of getting into the head of a seventeen year old girl in love. And he really helped us understand the different motivations between Erica and her boyfriend Wiley, motivations that formed each of their respective destinies. What young woman hasn't felt this feeling before?
Love makes you crazy. For the one and only time, I lived in a kind of trance, always wanting him--not just for the sex, though that was insane--but for his presence nearby, which somehow softened all else. He could be in the next room, or just outside the door, and I would feel better knowing he was close at hand, Have you ever been in love this way? Where you feel just uncorked, your mind and body and spirit open and you want to give back that same sensation to him? But he didn't want me, not that way. And the worst part is they can hurt you with impunity, refuse your very soul, yet part of you goes on loving.
All in all, I wouldn't read this book again, but I would recommend it for someone who enjoys lighter fiction with a decent story who isn't overly critical of writing style. The style stopped me from enjoying this novel, but I hope that it could be enjoyed by others who maybe aren't so damn critical.
March 8, 2011
I had high hopes for this book since I adore Donohue's first novel, "The Stolen Child." At first, I found the book interesting and mysterious. Then as the chapters moved along, Donahue's writing became fragmented. This book is all over the place. It skips around in time periods, settings, point of view of characters. Several times, I found myself confused and starting to loose interest. The characters in the book are so flawed that they are unlikeable. I could care less about any of the characters because there is nothing redeeming about them, except for maybe Erica Quinn. They are boring. The questions that are brought up in the book addressing celestial beings is unanswered. There is an undercurrent of the dismal and loneliness, plus loss. Some characters get a happy ending while other characters fade into emptiness and dissatisfaction.
Another aspect of this book that I didn't like is that Donahue introduces a mysterious male character, but he doesn't followthrough with this character. As a reader, I didn't really know who he is and his relationship with the other characters. He just disappears toward the end of the book. Perhaps, he is death...it's unclear. This novel seems messy and depressing, left me feeling empty. One more aspect that bothered me about this novel is the language wasn't just poetic, it was over the top, melodramatic, and extremely flowery. If actors can over act to the point where he or she seems ridiculous, then Donahue has overwritten this novel to the point of absurdity.
Another aspect of this book that I didn't like is that Donahue introduces a mysterious male character, but he doesn't followthrough with this character. As a reader, I didn't really know who he is and his relationship with the other characters. He just disappears toward the end of the book. Perhaps, he is death...it's unclear. This novel seems messy and depressing, left me feeling empty. One more aspect that bothered me about this novel is the language wasn't just poetic, it was over the top, melodramatic, and extremely flowery. If actors can over act to the point where he or she seems ridiculous, then Donahue has overwritten this novel to the point of absurdity.
April 10, 2009
While I loved the first novel by this author, The Stolen Child, this story fell largely flat for me. The writing was still good, but the characters weren't as compelling. And I don't mind authors not answering every little question, leaving a little mystery, but this one answered too little.
March 23, 2010
I loved Keith Donohue’s first novel, The Stolen Child, and so I ordered this, his second, as soon as I knew it existed.
The premise is interesting. Margaret’s daughter ran away and then her beloved husband died, leaving her alone in the world. But then, on a cold winter’s night, she opens the door and finds a child. A little girl. Norah. She claims to belong to no one, and and acquiesces when Margaret takes her in and plans to pass her off as a long-lost grandchild.
It set up some interesting possibilities, But I was concerned that Margaret, a mother who had lost a child, gave not one minute’s thought to the possibility that there was somebody out there missing Norah. And I was concerned that the story wasn’t holding me tightly and that I was asking there was those sort of questions.
There was nothing blatantly wrong, but the story didn’t quite come alive. But I had faith in the author, and in the premise, so on I went.
Norah turned out to be not like other children. Who was she? Where did she come from? Who was the mysterious figure who followed her? What happened to Margaret’s daughter? And how would the answers to all of those questions fit together?
The answers emerge slowly as past and present stories are told and eventually come together.
The story was well constructed and strong enough to keep the pages turning. There were some lovely moments, but there were also a few that just didn’t ring true.
It never did really come alive. The characters, the dialogue, they were all just a little flat – and this was a story, I think, that needed a few quirks, a few twists.
I wasn’t heartbroken, but I was disappointed..
The premise is interesting. Margaret’s daughter ran away and then her beloved husband died, leaving her alone in the world. But then, on a cold winter’s night, she opens the door and finds a child. A little girl. Norah. She claims to belong to no one, and and acquiesces when Margaret takes her in and plans to pass her off as a long-lost grandchild.
It set up some interesting possibilities, But I was concerned that Margaret, a mother who had lost a child, gave not one minute’s thought to the possibility that there was somebody out there missing Norah. And I was concerned that the story wasn’t holding me tightly and that I was asking there was those sort of questions.
There was nothing blatantly wrong, but the story didn’t quite come alive. But I had faith in the author, and in the premise, so on I went.
Norah turned out to be not like other children. Who was she? Where did she come from? Who was the mysterious figure who followed her? What happened to Margaret’s daughter? And how would the answers to all of those questions fit together?
The answers emerge slowly as past and present stories are told and eventually come together.
The story was well constructed and strong enough to keep the pages turning. There were some lovely moments, but there were also a few that just didn’t ring true.
It never did really come alive. The characters, the dialogue, they were all just a little flat – and this was a story, I think, that needed a few quirks, a few twists.
I wasn’t heartbroken, but I was disappointed..
June 11, 2009
I think that after this book, I might be satisfied with knowing that Keith Donohue is not an author for me. Like his first book, The Stolen Child A Novel, Angels of Destruction left me cold. It's technically well-written, but it didn't really do anything for me. I wasn't compelled to pick it up when I had some free time, and I was only too glad to put it down to go to bed. It went exactly where I expected it to go - nothing was surprising or touching, and I didn't feel anything for any of the characters. It wasn't bad by any means, which is why it gets three stars instead of two, but I don't think I will be revisiting the author.
June 29, 2009
Margaret: "My daughter ran away 10 years ago, I still miss her."
Norah: "I look like an 11-year old girl but I'm really an angel (probably). Can I stay here?"
Margaret: "OK."
Norah: "Diane, go to New Mexico and get your niece back."
Diane: "OK."
Diane: "Erica, come back home, your mother still misses you."
Erica: "OK."
Erica: "Mom, where is Norah?"
Margaret: "She wasn't needed here any more so she left. She was an angel(probably)."
Erica: "Oh."
Norah: "I look like an 11-year old girl but I'm really an angel (probably). Can I stay here?"
Margaret: "OK."
Norah: "Diane, go to New Mexico and get your niece back."
Diane: "OK."
Diane: "Erica, come back home, your mother still misses you."
Erica: "OK."
Erica: "Mom, where is Norah?"
Margaret: "She wasn't needed here any more so she left. She was an angel(probably)."
Erica: "Oh."
January 8, 2011
What I loved about Keith Donohue's debut novel, The Stolen Child, was the magic that seemed to drip from every page. It was a welcome change from a lot of the other things I had been reading, so I expected much the same with Angels of Destruction.
Some things are similar - Donohue has an interesting way with words; very similar in a lot of ways to a personal favorite, Stewart O'Nan. Some passages may be very bleak but written beautifully enough that it's hard to be anything but entranced while reading. Both books also deal heavily with slightly off-kilter situations - in the first, a changeling of sorts, and in Angels an... well... angel who suddenly appears on a widow's doorstep.
The widow is Margaret Quinn whose teenage daughter, Erica, disappeared in the mid-Seventies. Now it's the mid-Eighties and Margaret is alone, having lost her husband four years after Erica's disappearance. On her doorstep appears nine-year-old Norah who Margaret takes in and embraces, deciding - in her desperation and depression - to pass Norah off as her granddaughter. Norah befriends a neighbor boy, Sean, whose eyes are opened by Norah's actions in the short time they know each other.
The story jumps between Norah's first appearance in Margaret's life to Erica's perspective years earlier when she left home. We're taking from western Pennsylvania to New Mexico, the characters changing with the scenery and passing of time.
It's a sweet story overall, but at times felt entirely too overwritten for my tastes. Instead of magic dripping from these sentences, a lot of time the only drippage that occurred was pure saccharine. Still, the chapters are short and often interesting enough to keep me hooked. The western PA descriptions are familiar to me which also helped keep me interested - references to the Steelers, Duquesne, steel mills and the houses mill workers live(d) in, Friendship Elementary School, etc. Nice to see some of those things in print, and it would probably be neat to see in a movie, if one ever gets made.
In the meantime, for a little hometown images, there's always local rap star, Wiz Khalifa, to represent Pittsburgh. You know what it is.
Some things are similar - Donohue has an interesting way with words; very similar in a lot of ways to a personal favorite, Stewart O'Nan. Some passages may be very bleak but written beautifully enough that it's hard to be anything but entranced while reading. Both books also deal heavily with slightly off-kilter situations - in the first, a changeling of sorts, and in Angels an... well... angel who suddenly appears on a widow's doorstep.
The widow is Margaret Quinn whose teenage daughter, Erica, disappeared in the mid-Seventies. Now it's the mid-Eighties and Margaret is alone, having lost her husband four years after Erica's disappearance. On her doorstep appears nine-year-old Norah who Margaret takes in and embraces, deciding - in her desperation and depression - to pass Norah off as her granddaughter. Norah befriends a neighbor boy, Sean, whose eyes are opened by Norah's actions in the short time they know each other.
The story jumps between Norah's first appearance in Margaret's life to Erica's perspective years earlier when she left home. We're taking from western Pennsylvania to New Mexico, the characters changing with the scenery and passing of time.
It's a sweet story overall, but at times felt entirely too overwritten for my tastes. Instead of magic dripping from these sentences, a lot of time the only drippage that occurred was pure saccharine. Still, the chapters are short and often interesting enough to keep me hooked. The western PA descriptions are familiar to me which also helped keep me interested - references to the Steelers, Duquesne, steel mills and the houses mill workers live(d) in, Friendship Elementary School, etc. Nice to see some of those things in print, and it would probably be neat to see in a movie, if one ever gets made.
In the meantime, for a little hometown images, there's always local rap star, Wiz Khalifa, to represent Pittsburgh. You know what it is.
October 16, 2013
Quando Margaret achava que não iria conseguir engravidar, Erica foi uma bênção na sua vida e na do marido. Por esse motivo, este sempre a protegeu demasiado. Erica foge na primeira oportunidade e a mãe nunca consegue ultrapassar o desgosto. Já lá vão dez anos que perdeu a filha.
Quando numa noite gelada lhe aparece à porta uma menina, Norah, ela acolhe-a e, mesmo sabendo que não o deveria fazer, dá-lhe guarida e diz a todos na aldeia que é a sua neta. Ela própria parece por vezes querer acreditar nisso.
Ao mesmo tempo que acompanhamos a vida de Margaret com Norah, a autora vai introduzindo a história de Érica e o que lhe aconteceu na realidade.
Norah é uma menina (ou algo mais?) especial, repleta de surpresas e que impressiona os colegas da escola com os seus truques. Mas, quando começa a dizer que é um Anjo e a transmitir mensagens estranhas aos olhos dos outros, as pessoas começam a assustar-se.
A irmã de Margaret fica intrigada quando vem visitá-la e encontra aquele pequeno ser tão curioso. Se sempre quis que a irmã procurasse a filha Érica, agora sente-se ainda mais compelida a fazê-lo. Principalmente porque Norah a incentiva a fazê-lo.
Há uma outra personagem que surge no livro que a autora não desenvolveu e que deixa o leitor sem resposta: um estranho, de chapéu, que aparece à procura do Norah, questionando junto dos habitantes o propósito da criança e as suas verdadeiras intenções.
O livro é ambíguo e não nos dá respostas. Leva-nos ao sabor da maré e fica ao critério de cada leitor considerar o que acha de Norah e o que lhe aconteceu... No entanto, o título do livro, para mim, é sugestivo!!
December 29, 2008
I received an uncorrected proof from the publisher and was looking forward to reading the sophomore effort from Keith Donohue, who brought us Stolen Child (which was great).
I'm not going to give a recap of the book, I'm sure there will be plenty of those for people who need it.
What if there are Angels everywhere, we just don't know what to look for when they come to us with guidence? Could that stranger you met at the coffee house be an angel? Can you past be forgiven, do we all need some sort of forgiveness? Do you need to see proof to believe or do can you take something on an act of faith? This book brings these questions to my mind...as well as have me continually guessing what the nature of the characters were? Was Norah an angel, if so why was she in Diane and Sean's lifes?
I did enjoy this book and got engrossed in the story and characters and if you liked Stolen Child this will be right up your alley...I didn't give it 5 stars due to the ending - I don't want to spoil anything but the way it ends with Sean's character (and a bit Norah's) just left a bad feeling in my mouth...with that said, I would still recommend this book to most people and did give it 4 stars.
I'm not going to give a recap of the book, I'm sure there will be plenty of those for people who need it.
What if there are Angels everywhere, we just don't know what to look for when they come to us with guidence? Could that stranger you met at the coffee house be an angel? Can you past be forgiven, do we all need some sort of forgiveness? Do you need to see proof to believe or do can you take something on an act of faith? This book brings these questions to my mind...as well as have me continually guessing what the nature of the characters were? Was Norah an angel, if so why was she in Diane and Sean's lifes?
I did enjoy this book and got engrossed in the story and characters and if you liked Stolen Child this will be right up your alley...I didn't give it 5 stars due to the ending - I don't want to spoil anything but the way it ends with Sean's character (and a bit Norah's) just left a bad feeling in my mouth...with that said, I would still recommend this book to most people and did give it 4 stars.
December 7, 2009
After thinking about Angels of Destruction for almost a week now I still don't know whether I liked it or not. The writing is technically good, but the ending left me underwhelmed. I can understand that Donohue perhaps did not want to spell everything out for the reader and make us think, but could he have been clearer on whether Norah was an angel or not? Personally, I think she was, and that she is the same girl that Erica met in Tennessee (Una) ten years earlier. Also, what happens to her? She just vanishes. Sometimes I felt like I understood the characters, but others, aprticularly in the last part of the book, I did not grasp what their motivations. I would recommend this, because of the premise, but would also caution people that the ending may be a bit of a let-down for them.
April 10, 2019
This is two different books mushed together into a kind of book sandwich. The "bread" segments are about a 60-something widow whose teenage daughter disappeared without a trace 20 years ago, and she's suffering in a sort of emotional limbo when a barely dressed 11-year-old girl shows up at her door in winter, looking for shelter. They decide to pass her off as the woman's granddaughter, but the girl occasionally shows powers that suggest she's an angel. Also, she starts freaking the local kids out by telling them she's an angel, and by doing weird little miracles, like revealing that her mouth is full of stars. Also, there's a menacing shadow-man following her around being threatening.
Meanwhile, the sandwich-filling section of the book shows what happened to her daughter, who ran off with a boy and got into trouble on the road to join a revolutionary cult in California. That story also involves angels, apparently, but their purpose and intentions are much less clear.
There are a lot of problems with all of this. One is that the bookend sections are kind of overwritten, in a whimsical poetic style that sometimes becomes overbearing. One is that it's never really clear in this book what angels want, what they can do, whether there are any rules governing them. There are hints that the girl, Norah, is breaking the rules by helping the older woman without being specifically requested, which is a terrific fantasy hook except for the part where the dark man also doesn't seem to have been requested, and the more he's in the story, the less sense his presence makes. The segment about the missing daughter, Erica, is much more blunt and direct stylistically, and that's the part of the book that completely captivated me, both because it solves one of the book's biggest mysteries and because the characters are so well-drawn, and the stakes for them, and for the people they love, are so clear.
It all seems to fall apart a bit when it circles back to the first set of characters, though, because suddenly the book shifts away from those well-drawn archetypes and into characters whose motivations have become muddy and whose behavior is increasingly unbelievable. The way the book eventually resolves Norah is particularly weird and unsatisfying, and the dark man seems to be completely forgotten. There's a lot going on here, but not enough of it fits together, and the parts that are breathlessly terrific just make the rest of it a bit more frustrating.
Meanwhile, the sandwich-filling section of the book shows what happened to her daughter, who ran off with a boy and got into trouble on the road to join a revolutionary cult in California. That story also involves angels, apparently, but their purpose and intentions are much less clear.
There are a lot of problems with all of this. One is that the bookend sections are kind of overwritten, in a whimsical poetic style that sometimes becomes overbearing. One is that it's never really clear in this book what angels want, what they can do, whether there are any rules governing them. There are hints that the girl, Norah, is breaking the rules by helping the older woman without being specifically requested, which is a terrific fantasy hook except for the part where the dark man also doesn't seem to have been requested, and the more he's in the story, the less sense his presence makes. The segment about the missing daughter, Erica, is much more blunt and direct stylistically, and that's the part of the book that completely captivated me, both because it solves one of the book's biggest mysteries and because the characters are so well-drawn, and the stakes for them, and for the people they love, are so clear.
It all seems to fall apart a bit when it circles back to the first set of characters, though, because suddenly the book shifts away from those well-drawn archetypes and into characters whose motivations have become muddy and whose behavior is increasingly unbelievable. The way the book eventually resolves Norah is particularly weird and unsatisfying, and the dark man seems to be completely forgotten. There's a lot going on here, but not enough of it fits together, and the parts that are breathlessly terrific just make the rest of it a bit more frustrating.
November 11, 2012
I am getting increasingly irked by underhand methods of selling and this edition has as part of its blurb comments from critics, which on closer examination prove to be about another book altogether.
That aside.....
There was a lot about this novel that I should have liked. I am a sucker for a bit of magical realism, I love the idea of angelic beings who arrive mysteriously, have a bit of a challenge with their own separation from human life, do their work, engage with fallible people on a weird level, then go off á la littlest Hobo! I am an unashamed sentimentalist, but - texts I value must have literary merit and depth, and/or move me.
Somehow this book did not work for me. It had all the bits, but they didn't sit well. For a start, there wasn't enough reason for the daughter to act as she did - not enough angst, not enough daft adolescence, not enough passion for the object of desire. Then there was not enough reason for angelic intervention. If it happened here, in this jigsaw of lives, then Blimey!, we should be inundated with angels and looking into throats full of stars on a daily basis, because the level of pain suffered by the main protagonists was simply not profound or complex enough.
The writing seemed self-conscious and more that that, it seemed conscious of the potential for a film adaptation. Some of the scenes would be engaging on film, but were egregious diversions in the text, seeming to have little purpose to the plot, to the mood, or to the character development and understanding. The characterisation was weak and I have rarely read children, less like children than the ones depicted here. The legion of angels could be identified by their archaic and idiosyncratic turns of phrase which clunked them into focus.
In the end it all seemed to be to little end. I am aware of sounding harsh, but I feel it could have been so much more and I was disappointed.
That aside.....
There was a lot about this novel that I should have liked. I am a sucker for a bit of magical realism, I love the idea of angelic beings who arrive mysteriously, have a bit of a challenge with their own separation from human life, do their work, engage with fallible people on a weird level, then go off á la littlest Hobo! I am an unashamed sentimentalist, but - texts I value must have literary merit and depth, and/or move me.
Somehow this book did not work for me. It had all the bits, but they didn't sit well. For a start, there wasn't enough reason for the daughter to act as she did - not enough angst, not enough daft adolescence, not enough passion for the object of desire. Then there was not enough reason for angelic intervention. If it happened here, in this jigsaw of lives, then Blimey!, we should be inundated with angels and looking into throats full of stars on a daily basis, because the level of pain suffered by the main protagonists was simply not profound or complex enough.
The writing seemed self-conscious and more that that, it seemed conscious of the potential for a film adaptation. Some of the scenes would be engaging on film, but were egregious diversions in the text, seeming to have little purpose to the plot, to the mood, or to the character development and understanding. The characterisation was weak and I have rarely read children, less like children than the ones depicted here. The legion of angels could be identified by their archaic and idiosyncratic turns of phrase which clunked them into focus.
In the end it all seemed to be to little end. I am aware of sounding harsh, but I feel it could have been so much more and I was disappointed.
October 11, 2010
As with Keith Donohue's first novel, The Stolen Child, the most intriguing aspect of this novel is his remarkable ability to blend supernatural elements into his stories without ever making the reader feel as though they are reading fantasy fiction. In The Stolen Child, he tackled goblins (or changlings) and here he introduces the reader to Norah, a peculiar kind of angel that feels original and genuine. Donohue knows how to highlight subtleties in order to create a larger portrait. His magical moments are not grande, and they are all the more beautiful and effective for it.
At it's core, this is a story about redemption, both personal and familial. The angel acts as a catalyst to bring estranged mother and daughter together after years of separation. However, I found the more interesting story to be that of Norah as an angel trying to fit in with her fellow third graders. Her struggles and her friendship with a boy named Sean are the most touching and emotional scenes in the book. On the other hand, the adult relationships in the book didn't resonate with me. They felt more surface level and contrived.
There's also an odd choice in the narrative structure in the book. Divided into three parts, the middle section is essentially a separate, connecting novel stuck between the two halves of another superior novel. It was surprising simply because Donohue's previous book did such a fantastic job of telling two stories in alternating chapters that made the book impossible to put down. I can certainly understand not wanting to construct the same type of narrative in your next book, but honestly I think Angels of Destruction would have benefitted from it.
At it's core, this is a story about redemption, both personal and familial. The angel acts as a catalyst to bring estranged mother and daughter together after years of separation. However, I found the more interesting story to be that of Norah as an angel trying to fit in with her fellow third graders. Her struggles and her friendship with a boy named Sean are the most touching and emotional scenes in the book. On the other hand, the adult relationships in the book didn't resonate with me. They felt more surface level and contrived.
There's also an odd choice in the narrative structure in the book. Divided into three parts, the middle section is essentially a separate, connecting novel stuck between the two halves of another superior novel. It was surprising simply because Donohue's previous book did such a fantastic job of telling two stories in alternating chapters that made the book impossible to put down. I can certainly understand not wanting to construct the same type of narrative in your next book, but honestly I think Angels of Destruction would have benefitted from it.
November 18, 2009
Amateur writing at best. The dialogue was stiff and unconvincing. In fact, the characters were, for the most part, unbelievable: Example: A child shows up on your doorstep in the middle of the night in the dead of winter and you invite her in, just like that? No alarm bells go off in your head? You just tell her to come in and promise her, "we'll talk it about in the morning?" That was the first mistake. Then the child herself is so unreal as to be laughable. A cute child with glasses, but she knows too much for the adults not to take notice right away; they assume she is just strange.
But you have a ten year old precocious child who always has the right and the most serious, profound answers and you don't question it? The story was too glib, entirely forgettable and not that unique. It's based upon a wish-filled fabrication of angels that has nowhere to go. And too much back story, history crammed in on top of it all makes for an unfocused narrative. The writing is not good, the story is not good, but the 360 some pages of typing earn at least three stars for effort.
But you have a ten year old precocious child who always has the right and the most serious, profound answers and you don't question it? The story was too glib, entirely forgettable and not that unique. It's based upon a wish-filled fabrication of angels that has nowhere to go. And too much back story, history crammed in on top of it all makes for an unfocused narrative. The writing is not good, the story is not good, but the 360 some pages of typing earn at least three stars for effort.
December 27, 2009
This novel reads and feels quite a lot like its main character, Norah: mysterious, slightly ethereal, and filled with an air of sadness and loneliness......however still shot through with hope.....The writing, is all of those things also; even apart from the story telling, Donohue somehow manages to fill the words themselves with a sense of loneliness and longing..... At the end, I am not sure that I have entirely wrapped my head around the message and moral of the story, and there are some issues of plotting that I had problems with, but the writing itself was powerful; mesmerizing and haunting enough that after I finished I had to do some thing mindless to ground my self again...So went to the grocery store....
It’s an interesting story, and gorgeously written, but not exactly an easy or fun read.....I think it will probably be enjoyed the most by readers of literary fiction who do not mind a fair bit of magical realism and a number of ambiguous story elements....
It’s an interesting story, and gorgeously written, but not exactly an easy or fun read.....I think it will probably be enjoyed the most by readers of literary fiction who do not mind a fair bit of magical realism and a number of ambiguous story elements....
October 6, 2010
I liked this book, it had a similar loose magical feel as the other book by this author I have read. The Stolen Child. However, the Stolen Child had a deep current of the human struggle running through it that this book tried for, but didn't really achieve for me. I think this is because I didn't know who/what Norah was for a long time; it was hinted at, but there wasn't enough to really understand the magic that was working in the forces of the characters' lives. I wanted it to be an experience like Stolen Child, an it fell a bit short. It might not be fair to give this book 3 out of 5, it's probably better than that when not compared to it's sibling, but that also speaks to the quality of Stolen Child. The artist is as much a part of the art as the piece itself, and on this one I expected more.
June 26, 2013
I didn't love this as much as Stolen Child, but it was still a really intelligently written story that really makes you think.
I found it hard to get started. Like Stolen Child, it jumps around a bit in place and time. But by the time I got to the second (and especially third) part I found myself wanting to read it more and more.
I only just liked it because I feel like there were some things that were left up to the reader to decide that could have been revealed in the end...but I can imagine the author probably did that on purpose.
Overall, I love Donohue's writing and both books I've read I've imagined in a very "movie" like way.
I found it hard to get started. Like Stolen Child, it jumps around a bit in place and time. But by the time I got to the second (and especially third) part I found myself wanting to read it more and more.
I only just liked it because I feel like there were some things that were left up to the reader to decide that could have been revealed in the end...but I can imagine the author probably did that on purpose.
Overall, I love Donohue's writing and both books I've read I've imagined in a very "movie" like way.
September 30, 2011
On a cold winter night in 1985 a young girl appeared at the door of Mrs. Margaret Quinn. Margaret, still feeling the loss of her missing daughter Erica, welcomes the stranger, claiming to be an orphan with no prior address, into her home. A few nights, turned into Margaret making up a story that the little girl was the daughter of her missing daughter and sends her to school with a new identity, Nora Quinn. But Nora Quinn is no ordinary little girl and soon will change the lives of people around her, especially Margaret Quinn.
"Angels of Destruction" is a beautifully written story about pain, heartache, fear and faith. I loved it from start to finish.
"Angels of Destruction" is a beautifully written story about pain, heartache, fear and faith. I loved it from start to finish.
October 20, 2009
The biggest problem with this book is that it is so drastically different from Donohue's first book, "The Stolen Child." AoD is not bad, not by any means. Donohue can still weave a more gorgeous sentence into every paragraph than most writers can in an entire book. However, slipping from first-person narration (The Stolen Child) to omniscient narration is a big step, and one that takes a bit to get used to. I still enjoyed this book and would recommend it to fans of the first, just know that the difference in perspective gives a much different feel.
January 28, 2010
Overall I enjoyed Angels of Destruction. I appreciate that much of the book can be interpreted in different ways, depending on your own beliefs about the supernatural and how it does/does not interact with this world. As with many of the women in my book group, I did not so much appreciate the ending. I felt that Donohue could not quite decide how to conclude so he just stopped writing. I was impressed with Donohue's ability to give an authentic voice to such a variety of female characters, that is not always easy for a male author.
May 8, 2013
I think that Keith Donohue's second book is wonderful! It shares the same magical flair as his first book, The Stolen Child. This book ends, leaving you wanting more - more of this story, more of his beautiful words, anything! The way Donohue strings words together is simply artful. He uses the chronology and a sense of a more traditional mystery to keep the pages turning quickly. It is completely engrossing. I am already looking forward to his next book.
Read
July 6, 2010I have finally done it. I stopped reading a book that I wasn't enjoying. I can not muddle my way through the rest of this book. With that being the case I didn't think I should "rate" the book, but I would guess it would end up with one star from me. I might read Keith Donohue's first novl The Stolen Child at some other time because I did enjoy his writting style, but this book was just so boring.
August 9, 2010
I read Stolen Child, the author's first book which I thought was outstanding. Angels fell a bit short for me. I do give it high marks for readability(hard to put down at times), character development and language. Beautifully written but I wanted more, especially after Stolen Child. It was kind of a letdown at the end. I would probably give it a 3.5.
December 21, 2008
Read the uncorrected proof. Excellent and easy to read. I think if you liked Stolen Child you won't be dissappointed. Donohue returns to some of the SC themes and there are some similarities.
I'll say more after the book comes out in March.
I'll say more after the book comes out in March.
April 27, 2009
I try not to compare novels by the same author, but couldn't help myself with Donohue. I so enjoyed The Stolen Child, but Angels of Destruction (hate the title!!) fell flat for me. It was very read-able, but the characters weren't as compelling. The end left a few too many questions unanswered.
May 25, 2013
Summary / Review:
Hmmmm… rich and warm language – to explore angels, if they exist, how they exist, how lives are enhanced – to explore humanity, and choices, and the people who influence us – to explore childhood, and pain, and hope, and confusion -
Setting: small town in Pennsylvania – woods, 2 story home, Friendship elementary school; stops (diners, motels, etc) across country; Madrid, New Mexico – for drop outs, people hiding, artists
Theme: angels; hope; loneliness; desperation; redemption; belief;
Characters:
Norah Quinn / NOR / Una?: an angel? Or deluded child?
She is charming, she knows things, she can do magical things (but she did bite Sean when he angered her); in school, she knows the question to ask so that the class grasps the concept – the whole class is doing better; and she touches Margaret – both physically and emotionally, filling in the hole left by her daughter leaving; she tells Sean, your father didn’t leave you – he just lost himself; hmmmm. A child that looks just like her meets Erica 10 years earlier at one of their runaway stopovers – again, insightful, charming, helpful.
Sean Fallon: the character I most fell for, and the one most unresolved at the end. His father left, and his mother is too tired – he is depressed and lonely; and as Norah befriends him, and chides him that he has to believe, he does believe, and is getting his feet firmly set on the ground… and is lost again when she leaves. In the end, he is still alone, and tracing Norah and the people she touched… and he leaves his teacup for Erica’s daughter.
Margaret Quinn: in her youth she did not follow her heart to run off with her passion; she seems to love her husband, but is unable in influence him in regards to their daughter; her sister characterizes her as someone who avoids conflict; she deeply misses her daughter, still almost expecting her to return home, and feels herself becoming invisible; when Norah shows up, she easily slips into the fiction of her being Norah’s daughter, and her granddaughter; she begins living a bit with Norah’s presence;
Diane: Margaret’s sister; loves her; more proactive in trying to determine who Norah is, and she is the one to track Erica down;
Paul Quinn: doctor; in WWII sent to assist with victims of atomic bomb in Japan, and performed assisted suicide for 7 girls who were suffering terribly, with no hope of recovery; he kept (and forgot) a letter received from a friend with whom he had confided – which his teen angsty daughter read, and got very self righteous with him over it; he never got to reconcile with the daughter he loved, but did not understand.
Erica Quinn: in love with a boy – with his body, with his ideals – and follows him to join the Angels of Destruction – a rebel group; along the way she becomes disillusioned, and she is touched by a few women they come across – waitresses, a maid, a child – who try to move her in the right direction; she becomes a bit disillusioned with Wiley as he steals cars, flirts with a girl, robs places – for not enough money to make it worth it; one of the robberies ends up with him shooting the guy in the leg, and Erica overreacting and shooting him in the face with buckshot – they are sure they killed him, and she is afraid of being arrested; when she is pregnant, Wiley leaves with a month’s worth of money; the baby is lost (probably abortion, but not specified), and she works a bit, stays under the radar, and settles in Madrid, becoming an artist; she is afraid to go home, afraid to be arrested; she does send one letter to her mom to tell her she is okay; after reconnecting with her aunt and mom – and a gentle conversation with Norah – and learning no one was looking for her, and she didn’t kill a man – she finds peace and brings her mom to Madrid (mom dies within a year of cancer), marries and has 2 children.
Wiley Renick: made fun of as a boy; audience for older brother who is passionate about politics; bolstered by Erica who worships him, he succumbs to the rhetoric of the Angels of Destruction, and decides they should join this anarchist group… he feels justified in stealing, he ends up being less than nice to Erica when under stress, and he leaves her when he cannot envision an infant in their revolution; he ends up dead in a bombing that goes bad.
Mrs. Patterson & Principal: just don’t know what to do with a child who claims to be an angel, who gives a fire and brimstone speech, who mesmerizes the students with some magical doings (catching a boy, who may or may not have been suspended in space for a moment, who fell from the monkey bars;
Memorable scenes:
Norah gives Sean a child’s teacup (same / similar? Teacup Una found in a sandbox?) and tells him to say a prayer and to fill it with wishes.
Is this book fiction or nonfiction?
Fiction
What is the genre of this book (romance, thriller, historical fiction, etc.)?
Realistic fiction – with some mysticism
What are the subjects of this book (sexism, hackers, financial scandals, etc.)?
Angels, parent/child relationship, teen rebellion/finding oneself, friendship,
What is the pace of this book?
Somewhat slow - detailed
What is the tone of this book (bleak, romantic, upbeat, violent, etc.)?
Somewhat dark – somewhat hopeful
What is the writing style of this book (such as journalistic, narrative, descriptive, scholarly, accessible, expository, persuasive, etc.)?
Descriptive - narrative
What is the perspective of the narration? 3rd person ("he was born into nobility...")
3rd person
Is this book told in the past, present, or future tense?
Present
Do you think there is a strong female character in this book?
yes
Do you think there is a strong male character in this book?
no
Does this book follow a few characters or many?
Few characters
What literary devices are used in this book (flashback, footnotes, logical fallacy, epistolary, etc.)?
Strong imagery – hawk – storm – teacup
Hmmmm… rich and warm language – to explore angels, if they exist, how they exist, how lives are enhanced – to explore humanity, and choices, and the people who influence us – to explore childhood, and pain, and hope, and confusion -
Setting: small town in Pennsylvania – woods, 2 story home, Friendship elementary school; stops (diners, motels, etc) across country; Madrid, New Mexico – for drop outs, people hiding, artists
Theme: angels; hope; loneliness; desperation; redemption; belief;
Characters:
Norah Quinn / NOR / Una?: an angel? Or deluded child?
She is charming, she knows things, she can do magical things (but she did bite Sean when he angered her); in school, she knows the question to ask so that the class grasps the concept – the whole class is doing better; and she touches Margaret – both physically and emotionally, filling in the hole left by her daughter leaving; she tells Sean, your father didn’t leave you – he just lost himself; hmmmm. A child that looks just like her meets Erica 10 years earlier at one of their runaway stopovers – again, insightful, charming, helpful.
Sean Fallon: the character I most fell for, and the one most unresolved at the end. His father left, and his mother is too tired – he is depressed and lonely; and as Norah befriends him, and chides him that he has to believe, he does believe, and is getting his feet firmly set on the ground… and is lost again when she leaves. In the end, he is still alone, and tracing Norah and the people she touched… and he leaves his teacup for Erica’s daughter.
Margaret Quinn: in her youth she did not follow her heart to run off with her passion; she seems to love her husband, but is unable in influence him in regards to their daughter; her sister characterizes her as someone who avoids conflict; she deeply misses her daughter, still almost expecting her to return home, and feels herself becoming invisible; when Norah shows up, she easily slips into the fiction of her being Norah’s daughter, and her granddaughter; she begins living a bit with Norah’s presence;
Diane: Margaret’s sister; loves her; more proactive in trying to determine who Norah is, and she is the one to track Erica down;
Paul Quinn: doctor; in WWII sent to assist with victims of atomic bomb in Japan, and performed assisted suicide for 7 girls who were suffering terribly, with no hope of recovery; he kept (and forgot) a letter received from a friend with whom he had confided – which his teen angsty daughter read, and got very self righteous with him over it; he never got to reconcile with the daughter he loved, but did not understand.
Erica Quinn: in love with a boy – with his body, with his ideals – and follows him to join the Angels of Destruction – a rebel group; along the way she becomes disillusioned, and she is touched by a few women they come across – waitresses, a maid, a child – who try to move her in the right direction; she becomes a bit disillusioned with Wiley as he steals cars, flirts with a girl, robs places – for not enough money to make it worth it; one of the robberies ends up with him shooting the guy in the leg, and Erica overreacting and shooting him in the face with buckshot – they are sure they killed him, and she is afraid of being arrested; when she is pregnant, Wiley leaves with a month’s worth of money; the baby is lost (probably abortion, but not specified), and she works a bit, stays under the radar, and settles in Madrid, becoming an artist; she is afraid to go home, afraid to be arrested; she does send one letter to her mom to tell her she is okay; after reconnecting with her aunt and mom – and a gentle conversation with Norah – and learning no one was looking for her, and she didn’t kill a man – she finds peace and brings her mom to Madrid (mom dies within a year of cancer), marries and has 2 children.
Wiley Renick: made fun of as a boy; audience for older brother who is passionate about politics; bolstered by Erica who worships him, he succumbs to the rhetoric of the Angels of Destruction, and decides they should join this anarchist group… he feels justified in stealing, he ends up being less than nice to Erica when under stress, and he leaves her when he cannot envision an infant in their revolution; he ends up dead in a bombing that goes bad.
Mrs. Patterson & Principal: just don’t know what to do with a child who claims to be an angel, who gives a fire and brimstone speech, who mesmerizes the students with some magical doings (catching a boy, who may or may not have been suspended in space for a moment, who fell from the monkey bars;
Memorable scenes:
Norah gives Sean a child’s teacup (same / similar? Teacup Una found in a sandbox?) and tells him to say a prayer and to fill it with wishes.
Is this book fiction or nonfiction?
Fiction
What is the genre of this book (romance, thriller, historical fiction, etc.)?
Realistic fiction – with some mysticism
What are the subjects of this book (sexism, hackers, financial scandals, etc.)?
Angels, parent/child relationship, teen rebellion/finding oneself, friendship,
What is the pace of this book?
Somewhat slow - detailed
What is the tone of this book (bleak, romantic, upbeat, violent, etc.)?
Somewhat dark – somewhat hopeful
What is the writing style of this book (such as journalistic, narrative, descriptive, scholarly, accessible, expository, persuasive, etc.)?
Descriptive - narrative
What is the perspective of the narration? 3rd person ("he was born into nobility...")
3rd person
Is this book told in the past, present, or future tense?
Present
Do you think there is a strong female character in this book?
yes
Do you think there is a strong male character in this book?
no
Does this book follow a few characters or many?
Few characters
What literary devices are used in this book (flashback, footnotes, logical fallacy, epistolary, etc.)?
Strong imagery – hawk – storm – teacup
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 17, 2022
More like 2.5 stars.
This book is split into three parts. The beginning of part one was intriguing and mysterious, setting up what I thought was going to be an impactful story. But it just went on for too long. Too many chapters of Margaret, Norah, and Sean just doing their day to day, and it got dull. The mysterious shadowy figure that was menacing various characters around town didn't really develop into anything relevant. He just...disappeared and nothing he did actually affected anything. Who was he even supposed to be?
Second part was more interesting because it filled in the backstory that was kept frustratingly vague in the first part, and gave us insight into who Erica was and why she made the choices she did. I almost listened to that whole section in one sitting because I was actually engaged in what was happening.
Then part three goes back to Margaret and Norah, which is where everything goes off the rails. Part three is a muddled, confusing mess that leads to a preachy and lackluster ending, and I didn't even care what happened to the characters anymore.
This book is split into three parts. The beginning of part one was intriguing and mysterious, setting up what I thought was going to be an impactful story. But it just went on for too long. Too many chapters of Margaret, Norah, and Sean just doing their day to day, and it got dull. The mysterious shadowy figure that was menacing various characters around town didn't really develop into anything relevant. He just...disappeared and nothing he did actually affected anything. Who was he even supposed to be?
Second part was more interesting because it filled in the backstory that was kept frustratingly vague in the first part, and gave us insight into who Erica was and why she made the choices she did. I almost listened to that whole section in one sitting because I was actually engaged in what was happening.
Then part three goes back to Margaret and Norah, which is where everything goes off the rails. Part three is a muddled, confusing mess that leads to a preachy and lackluster ending, and I didn't even care what happened to the characters anymore.
May 28, 2022
In the middle of a bitterly cold winter, beautifully described, a nine-year-old girl appears to a widow. Is the girl really the old lady's grand-daughter, or is she a runaway, a con artist or a lunatic, or is she actually an angel? And how will her arrival change what happened ten years ago, when the widow's daughter ran away with a boyfriend to join a terrorist group called the Angels of Destruction?
There are parallels are motifs running through this clever story. It flits around the margins of otherworldiness, so you never see the monsters full on (when they can start looking silly), and there are always questions left in your mind.
The book is told in three parts, the middle taking us back ten years, with a present-day epilogue, in the past tense, from a multi-character PoV.
There are parallels are motifs running through this clever story. It flits around the margins of otherworldiness, so you never see the monsters full on (when they can start looking silly), and there are always questions left in your mind.
The book is told in three parts, the middle taking us back ten years, with a present-day epilogue, in the past tense, from a multi-character PoV.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 261 reviews