Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jefrye t1_iu39aqx wrote

Morgenstern has a really atmospheric and visually beautiful writing style, which I loved. The novel just felt magical.

Her big weakness, imo, is characterization. I didn't care that much about the lack of explanation about the framework of the plot and the "magic system," but the characters felt just slightly off, almost like watching bad acting. They're one-note, lack complexity, and alternate between being too straightforward and too mercurial to be believable.

I really like the novel, but I'm not sure I'll reread it again.

15

Hammunition t1_iu7f8yx wrote

Agreed. This is why I enjoyed the Starless Sea much more. Like she is aware of her strengths and weaknesses and just went all in on descriptions and exploration and had only enough characterization and plot to keep thing moving. Like just building the skeleton because there needs to be some reason to be here and then to go somewhere else, and so on. It is a novel after all. But one with very clear priorities, which I appreciated.

Also really liked your description of the Night Circus feeling like you were watching bad acting. I had a very similar reaction. I think it might have just been the dialogue, but it's been a while since I read it, and unfortunately I can't really expand on why I have that feeling. Or maybe that I'm used to more internal monologue and motivation, and that was pretty absent in the book. Like the characters do horrible things to each other and then are forgiven without much of an explanation or conversation. Sometimes no explanation at all, just a time jump. I really didn't like that approach.

3