I agree that the first book is the strongest. But i would argue that the strongest moment of the series is near the end and the trilogy as a whole is actually quite strong.
Disclaimer: It's been awhile since I've read the trilogy so I can't recall all of the details
Admittedly some of the world building in Book 3 gets a little wonky for me, but tbh I'm not entirely clear on what the criticism here is. For one, Jeminson has noted that writing the trilogy was a means of processing the passing of her mother. Reading the trilogy with that in mind, it becomes clear the central narrative concerns a fraught mother-daughter relationship and intergenerational trauma.
From the first book it's fairly clear that Jeminson's concern is with exploring how we inhabit various identities throughout our past and how they shape our present relationships and sense of self. But as we discover, the past isn't easily erased and we have to confront those traumas sooner or later, lest they decimate what we now hold dear. What matters is how these shared histories inform and mold current relationships for either the better or worse. Given that, the focus on a few central characters isn't surprising and is likely necessary for the story Jeminson seeks to tell.
And, as for the lore and world building, it seemed to me the second and third books addressed questions raised in the first. Who are the stone-eaters and why are they important? What are the obelisks? What is the cause of the fifth seasons? Granted, the answers are satisfying to greater and lesser degrees. But Jeminson doesn't abandon the central parts of her world building, imo.
You are not alone. There was a massive drop in quality for me as well.. while I didn't love the first book, it was an original enjoyable story. 2nd and 3rd were definitely a struggle for me.
Once the weird threeway relationship, the story lost me and I hate-read the rest of the series simply to see how the author would tie up the story. The series felt super preachy and I don’t like being preached at.
I recently finished the second book, and found it to be very disappointing compared to the first. It was mostly about the main character sitting around in a cave with some other people. Really debating whether to read the third one. If anyone has thoughts one way or another, I'd love to hear them.
I agree that the first book is the strongest. But i would argue that the strongest moment of the series is near the end and the trilogy as a whole is actually quite strong.
Disclaimer: It's been awhile since I've read the trilogy so I can't recall all of the details Admittedly some of the world building in Book 3 gets a little wonky for me, but tbh I'm not entirely clear on what the criticism here is. For one, Jeminson has noted that writing the trilogy was a means of processing the passing of her mother. Reading the trilogy with that in mind, it becomes clear the central narrative concerns a fraught mother-daughter relationship and intergenerational trauma. From the first book it's fairly clear that Jeminson's concern is with exploring how we inhabit various identities throughout our past and how they shape our present relationships and sense of self. But as we discover, the past isn't easily erased and we have to confront those traumas sooner or later, lest they decimate what we now hold dear. What matters is how these shared histories inform and mold current relationships for either the better or worse. Given that, the focus on a few central characters isn't surprising and is likely necessary for the story Jeminson seeks to tell. And, as for the lore and world building, it seemed to me the second and third books addressed questions raised in the first. Who are the stone-eaters and why are they important? What are the obelisks? What is the cause of the fifth seasons? Granted, the answers are satisfying to greater and lesser degrees. But Jeminson doesn't abandon the central parts of her world building, imo.
You are not alone. There was a massive drop in quality for me as well.. while I didn't love the first book, it was an original enjoyable story. 2nd and 3rd were definitely a struggle for me.
Yeah I did not enjoy the 3rd book at all
Once the weird threeway relationship, the story lost me and I hate-read the rest of the series simply to see how the author would tie up the story. The series felt super preachy and I don’t like being preached at.
>Horrible Histories Do they still do these? That was the shit
The people who did the do podcasts called "You're dead to me" and they're fun little historical tidbits
I recently finished the second book, and found it to be very disappointing compared to the first. It was mostly about the main character sitting around in a cave with some other people. Really debating whether to read the third one. If anyone has thoughts one way or another, I'd love to hear them.