Scan barcode
A review by a_chickletz
Rook by Sharon Cameron
3.0
Eh.
I love The Scarlet Pimpernel. When I heard this was gonna be a homage/book based on it, I waited patiently for it to come out so I could go to the store and get it. I read it all in two days and now that I'm done, and thinking back on it, it was sort of a mixed bag for me.
Because I knew about The Scarlet Pimpernel, I could see the character traits that certain characters had that the author gave hers. Sophia, Rene both were The Scarlet Pimpernel/Percy/Margurite. Chauvelin was LeBlanc; Armand was Sophia's brother Tom... Hammond was... idk. He was just there. All the other characters were new for this story or characteristics of certain people from the original.
This book takes place in France. Years in the future I should say, but for some reason technology and printing/media/books are no-no's (because they caused more harm than good), so they revert back to good ol 17th century mannerisms. So generations have gone by and life has been like this.
So now I get into why I rank it two stars down: The quasi-past-future France aspect of the story wasn't doing it for me. At all. I think if anything it hindered the story than actually make it interesting. It felt forced. I personally think that the story would have been cooler if it wasn't trying to go for the dystopian angle and the author would have done her own thing. :/
Also, there was this strange obsession with 'gods' that came out of left field which I didn't understand. This is given to the character LeBlanc... who was also like Two-Face from Batman, in the sense he based everything on a coin he would flip that would determine the 'fate' of an outcome.
The Scarlet Pimpernel was not just a stand-alone novel, it had about six other follow up stories. I think/feel this book would have been better if it was expanded on and everything was not condensed into one singular story.
I think nostalgia and love of the original novel was what had me hooked on this book.
I love The Scarlet Pimpernel. When I heard this was gonna be a homage/book based on it, I waited patiently for it to come out so I could go to the store and get it. I read it all in two days and now that I'm done, and thinking back on it, it was sort of a mixed bag for me.
Because I knew about The Scarlet Pimpernel, I could see the character traits that certain characters had that the author gave hers. Sophia, Rene both were The Scarlet Pimpernel/Percy/Margurite. Chauvelin was LeBlanc; Armand was Sophia's brother Tom... Hammond was... idk. He was just there. All the other characters were new for this story or characteristics of certain people from the original.
This book takes place in France. Years in the future I should say, but for some reason technology and printing/media/books are no-no's (because they caused more harm than good), so they revert back to good ol 17th century mannerisms. So generations have gone by and life has been like this.
So now I get into why I rank it two stars down: The quasi-past-future France aspect of the story wasn't doing it for me. At all. I think if anything it hindered the story than actually make it interesting. It felt forced. I personally think that the story would have been cooler if it wasn't trying to go for the dystopian angle and the author would have done her own thing. :/
Also, there was this strange obsession with 'gods' that came out of left field which I didn't understand. This is given to the character LeBlanc... who was also like Two-Face from Batman, in the sense he based everything on a coin he would flip that would determine the 'fate' of an outcome.
The Scarlet Pimpernel was not just a stand-alone novel, it had about six other follow up stories. I think/feel this book would have been better if it was expanded on and everything was not condensed into one singular story.
I think nostalgia and love of the original novel was what had me hooked on this book.