A review by leelah
Captured Shadows by Richard Rider

4.0

London, 1888.;
the age of prevalent moral ideals and great technological progress;
rich and bored figured out some other uses for camera and discovered pornography;
and somewhere in West End two young men who are helping in photographer's shop fell in love.

*~*~*

There are some books you like for story.
Some you like for characters, so you read along to see where will they end up.
And then there are some you keep reading for phrasing and descriptions because these strings of words are just so damn beautiful. It's reward on itself. How are some people able to put these random words one after another in this particular order and transform ordinary statements into something that sounds so amazing? I have no idea, but it makes me read some passages twice and then sometimes aloud because it's not ok for them to stay voiced only in my head. I get like this over [b:Glitterland|17727137|Glitterland (Glitterland #1)|Alexis Hall|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1364942814s/17727137.jpg|24797122] or [b:An Instance of the Fingerpost|15888|An Instance of the Fingerpost|Iain Pears|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1388353701s/15888.jpg|950198] or...gah, nevermindshyembarrassed. It's a craft I admire greatly.

That was like reading [b:Captured Shadows|23395712|Captured Shadows|Richard Rider|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1413725797s/23395712.jpg|42952720] for me.
You see... plot of this novel is not new or terribly clever. I had these flashbacks of [b:Hot Head|10506237|Hot Head (Head, #1)|Damon Suede|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1307050057s/10506237.jpg|15412114] which surprised me because there couldn't be two books more different, and yet.. they are telling (arguably) the same story. So,I am just repeating what everyone else had to say in their reviews: this is one beautifully written book and it's my strongest impression of it.

*~*~*

Entire story is told from Jim's pov; but it's more his remembrance then straight up reconstruction of events. I am mentioning this because it occurred to me few times that he is not reliable narrator at all.He remembers things so selectively; his focus is entirely on Archie while everything else:, people, places,things, is fuzzy on edges. But Archie? He remembers every little thing about Archie, from peculiar coloring his hair gets on sun to face reactions and every muscle twitch.
It's one man's memory of a person who matters the most. :)
Characters were both lovely and frustrating together: they fell in love and do stupid things because they are in love; then they fight and do stupid things because they fought. I would be more annoyed by this and their utter lack of communication if not for the fact that Archie is only 19y old and Jim is couple of years older.
I chucked a star off because, while great tool to satisfy readers like me who appreciate lyrical prose, this complete awareness Jim had of Archie, ended up working against story. We are simply left wondering about some events, especially ones that preceded culmination. I wanted more on antagonist and general feel of setting. It actually occurred to me that it's 1888. and there is not a whiff, not a mention of Whitechapel murders and it's just strange, especially considering the fact they work with prostitutes so often. It's totally crazy and unrelated* but... one of examples I wondered just why is Jim's scope so narrow.

*I blame my brain. :|