danielkoru

This book left me really disappointed. The first was wonderful, but this one just seemed unnecessary. I think part of the problem is that for some reason, trilogies have become very popular. Because of this, many writers seem to feel like they HAVE to write a trilogy, and scrape together a sequel so that they can have one. A lot of these sequels are pretty unnecessary, either drawing out a sparse plot, reusing the original plot with just a few changes, or a mix of both. This one was drawing out a sparse plot. The whole book could have been condensed into five or so chapters, but she wrote a whole book. I understand she may have wanted to make the passage of time obvious, but she didn't have to spend 367 pages doing so. It just made the book drawn out and boring. Another problem I had with the book was the unnecessary drama surrounding the love triangle. I usually hate these with a passion; there are only a few instances when I think they're okay, or sometimes useful. When the author does a great job with it, making you love both love interests and completely torn between who you like better or want the main character to end up with, it is a great use of a love triangle. It's an okay use when the author uses it for one book and then has the character choose. However, what most authors do now-a-days is this: they create a love triangle with an OBVIOUS good guy and bad (or at least less appealing) guy. Usually the love triangle is either straight-up dragged out throughout the whole series, or the main character chooses after the first book and then (gasp!) has SECOND THOUGHTS. And it's this huge drama throughout the second and even third books. This is just plain ANNOYING. To me, it feels like the author has no better way to sell his/her book, so they figure, "let's throw in some love triangles!" It's the go-to answer for getting people interested in your book. And I hate it. So, this was a HUGE problem for me in "Crossed." Not only did she drag back the "second thoughts" plot line, she did it horribly. She advertised it as this huge "ohmygoshdidImakethewrongchoice?" problem, and Xander is in the book for a whole five or ten pages. Yet Cassia STILL spends a good amount of the book, while she is risking her life looking for Ky (and even after she has found him), wondering if she made the wrong choice. Because she'd be "safe" and relatively happy with Xander, and would live longer, but loves Ky and may not live as long, but would be really happy because, well, she loves him. I may be wrong, but if you love someone, why would you even wonder whether you're better off with someone else? She is risking her life, in the wilderness, to find this guy, yet she has DOUBTS? Why. Is. She. Bothering? The whole thing was very annoying, and I can't get all my anger out about it in one go; this review would be endless. While Ally Condie's writing (character voice, description, etc) remained good, the plot was weak, the book was dragged out to a ridiculous and annoying extent, even so much that it was unnecessary (it really could have been put into what is now going to be the third book, in my humble opinion), and the love triangle was annoying, stereotypical, and just plain silly. I still stand by Ally Condie as a great writer; the first book, "Matched", was just plain amazing, and I am still hoping for a lot from the third book in the series. It just annoys me to no end that most writers seem to believe that to succeed as an author, they must write a trilogy. Moral of the story: if you write a series, only write a trilogy if you need a trilogy, not because it is popular. If you need a stand alone book, those are great. If you need two, that's great too. I don't care how many books are in your series, as long as they are good!

2023-01-27 14:47