A review by macchi
The Neverland Wars by Audrey Greathouse
Did not finish book.
Gwen's just a normal girl doing her normal teenage thing and reluctantly growing up when Peter Pan kidnaps her younger sister. Suddenly, Gwen's world is turned upside down. Her sister returns the next night to say that she flew away with Peter and purportedly to keep an eye on her sister, Gwen flies away with them to Neverland. Oh, and there's a war going on between Neverland and reality because the real world's been taking the magic of Neverland and reverse engineering it, then presenting their findings as technological advancements.
I tried. I really really really tried. I wanted to like this book because it was recommended to me and the recommender had loved it. And because the idea of reverse engineering magic and calling it technology development had potential. But I unfortunately couldn't even finish this book, and not for any of the reasons I thought (I stopped at page 160 or so).
The Neverland Wars started off promisingly enough. Gwen's obviously a teenager who's struggling with the idea of growing up and its attendant responsibilities. There's definitely a part of her that wants to stay a kid, and which she tries to do so, under the guise of entertaining her younger sister. She clearly cares about her sister and her family, pretty normal.
Then everything started to go downhill. We follow her to high school, she comes home to find her sister's disappeared, her father reveals the secret of their technology, her sister comes back with Peter Pan in tow and Gwen decides to go to Neverland, to keep an eye on her sister and bring her back, she tells herself. Hijinks in Neverland ensue.
I honestly think this book would have benefited from a better editor. There was a lot of potential in it, but there were errors in the printed text, the writing could have been tightened significantly, and it felt like everything was just meandering along for no apparent reason.
From the start, I was struggling with the unnecessarily ornate language being used. It didn't seem appropriate for a story told from the POV of a teenager. Also, some of those words don't mean what you think they mean. Just saying.
I found myself regularly questioning why certain scenes were included. Did we need to see her telling a story to the Lost Children (maybe)? Did she need to eat a star (I think no)? Did we need to see the whole process of the kids sorting out what to do with the feast (Eh)? And not just the inclusion, but how long it took to go through everything in the scenes. I understand the need to show how normal Gwen's life is, with all her high school worries and concerns. But we didn't need to be walked through the vast majority of her day and the inane conversations with her friends about homecoming and dresses and so on. Those interactions, by the way, also came off as exceptionally cliche and OTT; I felt like I was trapped in a bad teen movie. I really don't need to know Gwen's philosophical musings on every little aspect of Neverland and children and why they do what they do or the exact and elaborate reasons why she's reacting the way she is. This book could have done with an awful lot more show and an awful lot less tell.
While we're at it, what was going on with randomly dropping into third person omniscient? We started in Gwen's head in the form of third person limited, the random lapses into omniscient to (pointlessly) tell us about one of the Lost Children and why they are the way they are, or the history of the relationship between Hollyhock and Bramble or the vices of the respective fairies... quite frankly, that may add depth for some people, but I was too discombobulated by the POV shift to care.
But the final straw from me was the usage of "redskins". Oh sure, the author tried to handwave it and say it wasn't relevant because the people they were talking about weren't actually native to America so why would you call them Native Americans, and anyway they call us "kids" so how is "redskins" any different. I'm not going to go into a rant about the inappropriateness of trying to compare those two terms. All I'll say is that one doesn't carry the history of derogatory usage that the other does. That may not mean anything to you, but it means a lot to the people who have been on the receiving end of it or who have grown up dealing with it and the legacy of that history. And it actually means a lot to people of any colour and race who have been on the receiving end of similar terms.
Even then, EVEN THEN, I might have overlooked it except that the author fell into what, quite frankly, was just laziness as far as I can tell. Because all the old and distasteful stereotypes were trotted out in describing these characters. From living in tipis (something specific to only some Native American tribes), to the way the chief spoke (seen the Disney movie? It's like that), and all the spaces in between. There was a lot the author could've done to make those characters more than what the original portrayal made them out to be, even if they were just minor characters. But she didn't, and I was done at that point.
Pretty disappointing, all up. It could've been so much more, and it really really wasn't.
I tried. I really really really tried. I wanted to like this book because it was recommended to me and the recommender had loved it. And because the idea of reverse engineering magic and calling it technology development had potential. But I unfortunately couldn't even finish this book, and not for any of the reasons I thought (I stopped at page 160 or so).
The Neverland Wars started off promisingly enough. Gwen's obviously a teenager who's struggling with the idea of growing up and its attendant responsibilities. There's definitely a part of her that wants to stay a kid, and which she tries to do so, under the guise of entertaining her younger sister. She clearly cares about her sister and her family, pretty normal.
Then everything started to go downhill. We follow her to high school, she comes home to find her sister's disappeared, her father reveals the secret of their technology, her sister comes back with Peter Pan in tow and Gwen decides to go to Neverland, to keep an eye on her sister and bring her back, she tells herself. Hijinks in Neverland ensue.
I honestly think this book would have benefited from a better editor. There was a lot of potential in it, but there were errors in the printed text, the writing could have been tightened significantly, and it felt like everything was just meandering along for no apparent reason.
From the start, I was struggling with the unnecessarily ornate language being used. It didn't seem appropriate for a story told from the POV of a teenager. Also, some of those words don't mean what you think they mean. Just saying.
I found myself regularly questioning why certain scenes were included. Did we need to see her telling a story to the Lost Children (maybe)? Did she need to eat a star (I think no)? Did we need to see the whole process of the kids sorting out what to do with the feast (Eh)? And not just the inclusion, but how long it took to go through everything in the scenes. I understand the need to show how normal Gwen's life is, with all her high school worries and concerns. But we didn't need to be walked through the vast majority of her day and the inane conversations with her friends about homecoming and dresses and so on. Those interactions, by the way, also came off as exceptionally cliche and OTT; I felt like I was trapped in a bad teen movie. I really don't need to know Gwen's philosophical musings on every little aspect of Neverland and children and why they do what they do or the exact and elaborate reasons why she's reacting the way she is. This book could have done with an awful lot more show and an awful lot less tell.
While we're at it, what was going on with randomly dropping into third person omniscient? We started in Gwen's head in the form of third person limited, the random lapses into omniscient to (pointlessly) tell us about one of the Lost Children and why they are the way they are, or the history of the relationship between Hollyhock and Bramble or the vices of the respective fairies... quite frankly, that may add depth for some people, but I was too discombobulated by the POV shift to care.
But the final straw from me was the usage of "redskins". Oh sure, the author tried to handwave it and say it wasn't relevant because the people they were talking about weren't actually native to America so why would you call them Native Americans, and anyway they call us "kids" so how is "redskins" any different. I'm not going to go into a rant about the inappropriateness of trying to compare those two terms. All I'll say is that one doesn't carry the history of derogatory usage that the other does. That may not mean anything to you, but it means a lot to the people who have been on the receiving end of it or who have grown up dealing with it and the legacy of that history. And it actually means a lot to people of any colour and race who have been on the receiving end of similar terms.
Even then, EVEN THEN, I might have overlooked it except that the author fell into what, quite frankly, was just laziness as far as I can tell. Because all the old and distasteful stereotypes were trotted out in describing these characters. From living in tipis (something specific to only some Native American tribes), to the way the chief spoke (seen the Disney movie? It's like that), and all the spaces in between. There was a lot the author could've done to make those characters more than what the original portrayal made them out to be, even if they were just minor characters. But she didn't, and I was done at that point.
Pretty disappointing, all up. It could've been so much more, and it really really wasn't.