This book could have been amazing. A lot of people think so. I don't. There were too many problems I had with this book.
For example: "In a far corner, wearing fringed shirts and leggings made from various combinations of lion, tiger, and leopard skin, armed with light throwing spears, sat the Saari, the people of the Vituain desert." HUGE cliche, right there. It's practically begging to be hit over the head with another book. All the species are just cookie cutouts, as are the people. Why all the great reviews then? I think it's because of how the author shows the personalities of the characters--by only suggesting what personalities should be there. Self insert characters are definitely my favorite sorts. *rolls eyes* It is interesting how Adams does it, though. You can see where she wants the characters to go, and it's kind of refreshing to see this. However, she tells us this, not shows it, and this makes things harder, especially since she doesn't actually tell you. It's hard to explain.
Another major flaw that bugged me was the dialogue. Dialogue, in my book, is the most important quality in a novel. Without it, you wouldn't be able to understand what was going on. Of course, there's the description, too. But Adams seems to have nailed description. Her descriptions, when there are some, are fluid, and help draw together the world. Until she throws some hapless cliche in your face. Then she tries to make it sound all 'old-timey', or like an accent which comes from Redwall. Which didn't work well with her smooth descriptions.
Amos' swears ... that was annoying. Especially when 'blithering barnacles' was clearly supposed to be a Tintin reference. BLISTERING BARNACLES. Please. I felt that Amos would have sounded better as a character if he used swears which sounded like they were swears. His did not sound like such.
The Underground was really messed up in it's political hierarchy, or whatever you might like to call it. I don't know how it worked, since it sounded like they were ALL a bunch of kids. Which is really weird. Think about it for a minute.
I couldn't figure out anything that had happened prior to the book, other than the blatantly obvious bits, which was sad. I felt that the middle of the book was rushed over, because Adams didn't know what she wanted to do there. All she knew was that she wanted to get from point A (the beginning of the book) to point B. (book 2) Which is understandable; I know because I know I've had that exact same problem myself with my books--but then we lose crucial details which the book needs.
The 'bad guys' in the book are very much cookie cutters. I felt no real sense of danger at all whenever they were talking. Or threatening people. Or killing them, for that matter. (view spoiler)
My favorite character was George. Except for the name. GANDALF, THE NAME. Not. For. A. Cat. No. Otherwise she nailed his cat-like personality. Still. That name really bothers me. And Birdie. I still can't decide if it's a good name or not. Another name that bothered me: Hawkness. Is it a title?
I did love the descriptions of the Song. felt that I could feel how it heard, both the light and the dark. I had lots of fun with that. I wasn't so drawn in that I could hear a melody, though, which is a pity.
I know I would have gladly ignored these glaring factors if I had been ... oh, anywhere from seven to five years younger than I am now. I would have loved this book and torn it to pieces in my love, roleplaying Birdie and Birdie-like characters whenever possible. Alas and alack, this book came too late for me!
Recommended for advanced seven year olds up to eleven, for the picky ones. If you don't care about this stuff, then that's great! Go read this book, regardless of your age. I might have just been expecting too much. :/
I'm in the minority here, so PLEASE DON'T KILL ME.
Follow me on Goodreads ~ Follow me on Bloglovin'
