I agree with Dana. I still liked the second one, because it does more world-building and introduces some new characters, but the third one kind of lost me. At some point, I may reread it, but as I recall being utterly confused by the plot and exhausted by dodging Pullman's thematic anvils.
If every vampire who said he was at the crucifixion was actually there, it would have been like Woodstock.
Spike ,'Same Time, Same Place'
Literary Buffistas 3: Don't Parse the Blurb, Dear.
There's more to life than watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer! No. Really, there is! Honestly! Here's a place for Buffistas to come and discuss what it is they're reading, their favorite authors and poets. "Geez. Crack a book sometime."
Consuela - Jan 26, 2008 10:23:18 am PST #4900 of 28343
We are Buffistas. This isn't our first apocalypse. -- Pix
lisah - Jan 26, 2008 10:35:16 am PST #4901 of 28343
Punishingly Intricate
At some point, I may reread it, but as I recall being utterly confused by the plot and exhausted by dodging Pullman's thematic anvils.
I reread them all recently and, while I think I actually ended up liking the 2nd book better than the rest, the 3rd still left me disappointed for the reasons everyone has said.
Glamcookie - Jan 26, 2008 10:39:19 am PST #4902 of 28343
I know my own heart and understand my fellow man. But I am made unlike anyone I have ever met. I dare to say I am like no one in the whole world. - Anne Lister
Book 2 was great and book 3 was great up until the ending, which was disappointing. Still worth reading the whole thing, though.
brenda m - Jan 26, 2008 10:57:18 am PST #4903 of 28343
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
Some of the character development in the second book drove me batty, so I haven't picked up the third one. I did love the first book.
Gris - Jan 26, 2008 1:53:30 pm PST #4904 of 28343
Hey. New board.
Read the whole series. I kinda like the third book in a lot of ways, though I understand everybody's discussion. The second book, I loved.
Kate P. - Jan 26, 2008 3:35:30 pm PST #4905 of 28343
That's the pain / That cuts a straight line down through the heart / We call it love
I love all three books!
§ ita § - Jan 26, 2008 3:39:53 pm PST #4906 of 28343
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Kate's on crack.
No offense, but my opinion is the only right one.
Me, I disliked the third enough that it tarnished the second and almost the first. But before I read #3 I really liked the first two.
Strega - Jan 26, 2008 8:34:05 pm PST #4907 of 28343
I love the third book. I probably wouldn't have read the first two if I hadn't read a review of the third, though; I was in it for the polemic.
Maysa - Jan 26, 2008 9:42:54 pm PST #4908 of 28343
The third's my favorite, but I also really love William Blake and as soon as I read the epigraph from "America" I was sort of into the whole wacky thing Pullman had going on (although it probably was too symbolic and anvil-ly). It was confusing in some parts, but I thought the last few chapters were simple and beautiful.
Polter-Cow - Jan 26, 2008 10:04:57 pm PST #4909 of 28343
What else besides ramen can you scoop? YOU CAN SCOOP THIS WORLD FROM DARKNESS!
I still liked the second one, because it does more world-building and introduces some new characters, but the third one kind of lost me.
Consuela is me. I would definitely recommend reading them all, of course, for completism. And the third book does have an awesome plot for a favorite character of mine who's introduced in the second book.
I'll just say that it was disappointing because the first two books give you the impression Pullman had it All Planned Out, and the third book suggests otherwise.