Helpful Score: 2
I am not really sure how I liked this book. I think it was summed up well in the last 50 - 75 pages, but somewhere along the line it felt like I missed something. I am not sure if I didn't register something I was reading - or if it was a subtle indication that I missed that was pivotal to the story, but for parts of the book, mostly the middle sction, I just felt something missing. Then it stayed with me right to the end of the book. Not having read this author before, added to the mix of confusion, by my not being familiar with her individual stype. There were more characters introduced towards the end, but I don't think that was it. Very hard to describe.
I was intrigued by the "house" and the time traveling. There were parts that were grisly, but overall I felt it was a well written book. You knew what the problem was, who the bad guy was, you just had to figure out how it would all come together. Then at the end - was it over? Or was it just beginning. A new time frame - or an old time frame - the start or the end?
I would have rated it a bit higher - had I not felt that nagging loss of something throughout the book.
I was intrigued by the "house" and the time traveling. There were parts that were grisly, but overall I felt it was a well written book. You knew what the problem was, who the bad guy was, you just had to figure out how it would all come together. Then at the end - was it over? Or was it just beginning. A new time frame - or an old time frame - the start or the end?
I would have rated it a bit higher - had I not felt that nagging loss of something throughout the book.
Helpful Score: 2
"There are only so many plots in the world. It's how they unfold that makes them interesting."
Elements of many stories can be found in this one, but in different combinations and arrangements than I've ever read before. A time-traveling serial killer is a new one, at least for me.
There are certain parallels between Kirby and Dan and Stieg Larsson's Lisbeth and Mikael, but they are much more realistic, less caricatured. The "shining girls" of the title are also realistically portrayed: amazing young women, but not unbelievably so. And Harper, a ruthless vagrant in 1930s Chicago, who discovers an abandoned house that inexplicably takes him into various point in the future, is cunning, but not infallible. He makes mistakes in both judgment and execution as he tries to fulfill the mission that he feels the house wants him to accomplish.
While the characters are realistic, the plot is not. There's no scientific explanation or instruction manual for this house. It just is. There's definitely some disbelief to suspend, but it's a hell of a ride if you're willing to take it.
As Harper hunts his "shining girls" throughout the 20th century, Kirby, the one girl who survived his attack tries to find him. The p.o.v. and time shift with each chapter, conveniently labeled with the character and date, a method that works very well to unveil the plot.
Semi-spoilers: My one complaint is that it was just too convenient that so many of the shining girls lived in the same time period. I realize that Beukes wanted to make it easier for Kirby to find Harper, but after the rest of the women were so scattered (Glow Girl in the 30s, Zora in the 40s, Willie and Alice in the 50s, Margot in the 70s), to have Kirby, Catherine, Jin-Sook & Mysha all so close together seemed inconsistent. Also, I wasn't crazy about the love interest between Dan & Kirby. It seemed a bit forced.
Elements of many stories can be found in this one, but in different combinations and arrangements than I've ever read before. A time-traveling serial killer is a new one, at least for me.
There are certain parallels between Kirby and Dan and Stieg Larsson's Lisbeth and Mikael, but they are much more realistic, less caricatured. The "shining girls" of the title are also realistically portrayed: amazing young women, but not unbelievably so. And Harper, a ruthless vagrant in 1930s Chicago, who discovers an abandoned house that inexplicably takes him into various point in the future, is cunning, but not infallible. He makes mistakes in both judgment and execution as he tries to fulfill the mission that he feels the house wants him to accomplish.
While the characters are realistic, the plot is not. There's no scientific explanation or instruction manual for this house. It just is. There's definitely some disbelief to suspend, but it's a hell of a ride if you're willing to take it.
As Harper hunts his "shining girls" throughout the 20th century, Kirby, the one girl who survived his attack tries to find him. The p.o.v. and time shift with each chapter, conveniently labeled with the character and date, a method that works very well to unveil the plot.
Semi-spoilers: My one complaint is that it was just too convenient that so many of the shining girls lived in the same time period. I realize that Beukes wanted to make it easier for Kirby to find Harper, but after the rest of the women were so scattered (Glow Girl in the 30s, Zora in the 40s, Willie and Alice in the 50s, Margot in the 70s), to have Kirby, Catherine, Jin-Sook & Mysha all so close together seemed inconsistent. Also, I wasn't crazy about the love interest between Dan & Kirby. It seemed a bit forced.
