Pages

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Darker Still


The Picture of Dorian Gray meets Pride and Prejudice, with a dash of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

New York City, 1882. Seventeen-year-old Natalie Stewart's latest obsession is a painting of the handsome British Lord Denbury. Something in his striking blue eyes calls to her. As his incredibly life-like gaze seems to follow her, Natalie gets the uneasy feeling that details of the painting keep changing...

Jonathan Denbury's soul is trapped in the gilded painting by dark magic while his possessed body commits unspeakable crimes in the city slums. He must lure Natalie into the painting, for only together can they reverse the curse and free his damaged soul. (from Goodreads)

So I had high expectations for this book. Great concept, cool cover, and I heard that at BEA, ARCs of this book went like hotcakes. But for me, it just seemed to fall flat. 

The first thing I had a problem with was the protagonist's name. Natalie. This is New York in 1882. Yes, this name might have been around then, but for me, it seemed too modern for the setting. Something that seems out of place is one of my biggest pet peeves in historical fiction. This was also written in diary format, which isn't done very often in YA. The only problem was, it was obvious that she hadn't died or anything, because she was writing the entries. 

But my main problem was with the romance and with Natalie's character. (For me, it always seems to be the romance.) In essence, Natalie falls in love with a painting. Yes, a painting. She decides that on page 69. It's so ridiculous it's not even funny. A painting of a man with black hair and blue eyes. (Cue the eye-roll.) I am so sick of the romantic interest having black hair and green/blue/gray eyes. What exactly is the number of males with black hair and blue/green/gray eyes on this planet? Not a lot, I bet. And if his eyes were described one more time, I would have put down the book and/or flung it across the room. I don't care how handsome he is. I don't care if his eyes make the stars look dull. I really don't. (ends rant) To me, it seemed like the only reason Natalie helped Denbury was because of how handsome he was. Ugh. Just ugh. She's in love with a painting (this was before she figured out about his soul being alive and trapped in a painting and all that). And, of course, after like three days of knowing him, she decides that she's in love with him. Ick. Even more ick. And it's all because of his good looks. He's really flat; the only thing we know about him is that he wants to be a doctor. If that's supposed to make us like him, it didn't work. 

My second major problem with this book: Natalie's character. She was far, far too prissy and unbalanced. I mean, really. She snuck out of the house, yet she cowered behind Denbury in her nightmares and left him to fight. To me, it seemed like she was brave at heart, but didn't want Denbury to see it. *shakes head* 

And then there were the historical inaccuracies. There were so many, it wasn't even funny. One or two little ones I can take. But there was major one that I couldn't believe. Natalie was allowed to work at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Back then, few women worked, and certainly not at the Met. Of course, her father ran the Met, but still. No one protested. 

About the plot. Sigh. The plot. To me, it felt as though Hieber hadn't really made up her mind about where the story was going. There were demons, art, hieroglyphics, murders, the names of saints, magic, clairvoyants, and Latin curses. I feel like Hieber's thinking processes went something like this: I need a reason only Natalie can enter the painting and a reason why Denbury's trapped there. Oh, I know! Let's throw the Egyptian parts of the soul in. I want to add some murders! I wonder how I could do that... and so on. Now, I know it's possible to write a book like this. It's harder, but it works. There just has to be a good explanation for everything. Imagine making cookies or something like that. If you don't want lumps in the cookies, you have to stir it well. Hieber didn't stir well enough, and so the plot was lumpy.

I also didn't understand two of the characters. I'm not really going to get into Crenfall because it's a bit of a spoiler. Maggie's also a bit of a spoiler. She, too, had a crush on Denbury. Only she didn't know that he was alive. She and Natalie get into a sort of fight over him, and that basically ends their friendship. Sigh. Over a painting. 

There was a mention of some society at the end, which I assume is what the sequel is going to be about. But the author brought it in too late.

Despite my 846-word review about the bad things this book has, there were some parts I enjoyed. Mrs. Northe was probably my favorite character; she was a motherly figure who, although she pushed the plot along in some parts, I never felt as though she held it back. I also liked the fact that it was up to Natalie to put the 'final battle/plan' into effect; Denbury was trapped in the painting, so he couldn't help. It made me like her just a tiny bit more. (Except, of course, when she thought of Denbury's 'love' for her, and so that was what made her work up the nerve.)


This book had promise, but as I said before, it fell flat. Very flat. Almost as flat as Denbury. It was obvious that the romance was the main part, and unless the book is a general fiction romance, I can't stand when this happens. 

Note: The ending. Oh, the ending. If the diary part had ended a chapter earlier, this book would have gotten a higher score. Maybe even a 4/5.

2 comments:

  1. I keep hearing all these great reviews and everyone going on and on about this book and other "popular" books. Thanks for putting it back into perspective - I think I'll save time by passing by scratching this one off the potential read list. :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey, no problem. :-)

    I write what I think.

    ReplyDelete