PDA

View Full Version : In the Forests of the Night by Amelia Atwater-Rhodes


Avery_Rayne
03-24-2009, 12:38 AM
My first book review! Here we go...

This review contains spoilers to the book!

I read this book a while back to determine the adequate publishing material for young authors these days, as I aspired and still aspire to be a published author myself. Let me be the first to tell you that it was not worth the time. While Amelia may have been a precocious thirteen-year-old, she was not quite ready to write and get out there her novel at such a young age – and it shows.


Basically the book is about a young girl named Rachael (Riska) whose brother has connections to a witch, and when he defies her, places Rachael in danger. A man clad in black is sent to their house by the witch, and Rachael is given a black rose, which incidentally pricks her finger and draws blood. Turns out later this drawn blood was her signing of the "Devil's Book". But anyway, Rachael wakes one night to find her brother in a debate with the witch in their back yard. They grapple, the witch and her minion overpower them, Rachael's brother is "stabbed", and Rachael is kidnapped and turned into a vampire. As she comes to terms with her new reality, Rachael realizes how she despises what she has become. So she sets out to become a moralistic vampire named Riska, and tries to forget of her past for the pain. This doesn't go over so well as problems arise between her and another vampire as she crosses into his territory...

The characters are the bland, cookie-cutter type. Their emotions were vague, and few and far between. Though Riska may have been mourning the death of her family – and her self – she was a completely unrealistic bit of imagery. Many of the scenes are nowhere near believable, either, such as the fight scenes, the flashbacks, etc. The characters reacted slowly, and like high-school students, rather than hundred-year-old vampires who should hold some sort of wisdom. Most of the dialogue seems a trifle forced.

One would have thought the author would take more care when planning out the plot; but – surprise! – she didn’t even plan any of it. She said she wrote it as she went along, let the words flow, which may work for some, but not others. There was no planning involved in any sense, and this shows as well through the massive holes riddled in the plot.

The ending was also a bit perplexing when taking into account that so many points in the storyline were left unresolved. It was as though she forgot a certain part and left it like it was, for the sake of getting it done quickly. Well, Amelia, we applaud you in your endeavors, but frown upon your inexperience.

My point: don’t buy this book. Not unless you want a mouthful of crap to flood your trachea and bring back up yesterday's lunch.

Shattered_Vision
03-24-2009, 07:47 PM
I read that book a long time ago, as an assignment for school. We were learning about something with children authors. But when I had to read it I thought it was okay. Not great, exactly, but okay. I managed to pull through it, which counts, right? I do agree that shouldn't have been published so young; it was nonsense for them to do that.

By the way, good first book review!

SapphireAngel15
07-21-2009, 05:57 AM
She is not the best writer of all time. In her vampire novels, there is almost always a strong-willed, independent human that becomes a vampire by the story's end and feel much better, as if they finally belong in the world. Also, the antagonists are often extremely violent, and also posess supernatural powers. They are usually politically powerful in some way. They also think highly of themselves and have "short fuses." A prime example of this would be Jeshickah from Midnight Predator.

Mumbling Sage
07-21-2009, 09:59 PM
One would have thought the author would take more care when planning out the plot; but – surprise! – she didn’t even plan any of it. She said she wrote it as she went along, let the words flow, which may work for some, but not others. There was no planning involved in any sense, and this shows as well through the massive holes riddled in the plot.
That method works, but generally with the assumption that the writer will then reread the resulting tripe (which it pretty much always is) and then edit it into a coherant story. Growl.