What do you think?
Rate this book
Lost
Winifred Rudge travels to London to jump-start her new novel about a woman who is being haunted by the ghost of Jack the Ripper. Upon her arrival, she finds that her stepcousin and old friend John Comestor has disappeared, and a ghostly presence seems to have taken over his apartment in the nineteenth-century rowhouse once owned by Winnie's great-great-grandfather. Is it the spirit of this ancestor, who, family legend claims, was Charles Dickens's childhood inspiration for Ebenezer Scrooge? Could it be the ghostly remains of Jack the Ripper? Or a phantasm derived from a more arcane and insidious origin?
Winnie begins to investigate, but finds herself the unwilling audience for a drama of specters and shades, some from her family's peculiar history and some from her own unvanquished past. Lost presents a rich fictional world that will enrapture Gregory Maguire's eager audience.
Winnie begins to investigate, but finds herself the unwilling audience for a drama of specters and shades, some from her family's peculiar history and some from her own unvanquished past. Lost presents a rich fictional world that will enrapture Gregory Maguire's eager audience.
Audio
First published October 1, 2001
251 people are currently reading
12.2k people want to read
About the author
Gregory Maguire
107books8,705followersGregory Maguire is an American author, whose novels are revisionist retellings of children's stories (such as L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz into Wicked). He received his Ph.D. in English and American Literature from Tufts University, and his B.A. from the State University of New York at Albany. He was a professor and co-director at the Simmons College Center for the Study of Children's Literature from 1979-1985. In 1987 he co-founded Children's Literature New England (a non-profit educational charity).
Maguire has served as artist-in-residence at the Blue Mountain Center, the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, and the Hambidge Center. He lives in Concord, Massachusetts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,102 reviews
July 16, 2020
**UPDATE** this was a very old review (2009) that makes me laugh now. However, I still feel the same way many years later. I’ve updated my wording a bit but not too much. Still want it to make me giggle at my younger self trying to be so witty. Enjoy and laugh at me too.
I hated this book. I've all his other books and enjoyed them. They weren't amazing, couldn't put down reads but they were good. This one however was terrible. It makes you think it's going to be some kind of mash up of Scrooge and Jack the Ripper, as is his theme of retelling classic stories, this book however didn’t achieve. Boring, long, goes all over the place with no clear reason as to why or connection. (I stuck with it because at the time I would never DNF a book.) The end sucks and makes no sense. It's terrible, I'm glad I got it used so it was only 5 bucks but I could have gotten a Subway foot long instead! lol (this still in 2020 makes me sing the $5 foot long song.) It's a frustrating book that goes way out there and never comes back...waste.
I hated this book. I've all his other books and enjoyed them. They weren't amazing, couldn't put down reads but they were good. This one however was terrible. It makes you think it's going to be some kind of mash up of Scrooge and Jack the Ripper, as is his theme of retelling classic stories, this book however didn’t achieve. Boring, long, goes all over the place with no clear reason as to why or connection. (I stuck with it because at the time I would never DNF a book.) The end sucks and makes no sense. It's terrible, I'm glad I got it used so it was only 5 bucks but I could have gotten a Subway foot long instead! lol (this still in 2020 makes me sing the $5 foot long song.) It's a frustrating book that goes way out there and never comes back...waste.
January 19, 2008
I wrote this review a couple of years ago over at amazon.com. I was a little snarky back then (ha!), but I still feel the same way:
I couldn't put this book down. Found myself . . . "Lost" in it! There are lots of kinds of people in the world and from the reviews here it appears that they fall into two categories: those who would like the wheel to be reinvented consistently every time, and those who enjoy variety and evolution. If you wanted this book to be Wicked all over again, you're in luck, books are reusable. If you go back to the first page you can read it . . . again! I've read Wicked three times!
This author is on a journey. He has taken a stab at using is own story line in this book rather than relying on someone else's. I have to say that Wicked was one of the best books I've every read, and no, this is not Wicked, but it was a damned good read. It was very literally apparent that he took a lot of influence and ideas from A Christmas Carol, Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, etc. But there are some more literary influences at work here that he did not spell out. I was reminded of "The Yellow Wall Paper", "The Jilting of Granny Weatherall", "Pedro Paramo" and some other experimental styles of writing.
If you cannot tolerate constant stream of thought style literature this is not for you. If you need the structure of small chapters, punctuation, clear dialog, the distinction between voices, etc this book is not for you. Some people like to cozy up and read a good book, others enjoy the intellectual challenge of digesting literature. The thing about Maguire is that he demonstrated his ability to write and combine pulp fiction and literature when he wrote Wicked. All the pulp fiction, Wicked fans that jumped aboard the Maguire band wagon are disappointed because they don't want to have to think too hard, they just want to sit back and enjoy. I'm really not trying to pass judgment here; just figure out what you want out of your reading experience before you buy. The negative reviews you see here are largely from people who couldn't figure out how to re-read Wicked!
I couldn't put this book down. Found myself . . . "Lost" in it! There are lots of kinds of people in the world and from the reviews here it appears that they fall into two categories: those who would like the wheel to be reinvented consistently every time, and those who enjoy variety and evolution. If you wanted this book to be Wicked all over again, you're in luck, books are reusable. If you go back to the first page you can read it . . . again! I've read Wicked three times!
This author is on a journey. He has taken a stab at using is own story line in this book rather than relying on someone else's. I have to say that Wicked was one of the best books I've every read, and no, this is not Wicked, but it was a damned good read. It was very literally apparent that he took a lot of influence and ideas from A Christmas Carol, Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, etc. But there are some more literary influences at work here that he did not spell out. I was reminded of "The Yellow Wall Paper", "The Jilting of Granny Weatherall", "Pedro Paramo" and some other experimental styles of writing.
If you cannot tolerate constant stream of thought style literature this is not for you. If you need the structure of small chapters, punctuation, clear dialog, the distinction between voices, etc this book is not for you. Some people like to cozy up and read a good book, others enjoy the intellectual challenge of digesting literature. The thing about Maguire is that he demonstrated his ability to write and combine pulp fiction and literature when he wrote Wicked. All the pulp fiction, Wicked fans that jumped aboard the Maguire band wagon are disappointed because they don't want to have to think too hard, they just want to sit back and enjoy. I'm really not trying to pass judgment here; just figure out what you want out of your reading experience before you buy. The negative reviews you see here are largely from people who couldn't figure out how to re-read Wicked!
July 12, 2007
I truly felt lost while reading Lost by Gregory Maguire. This is the second book I've read by this author so I can say that I really don't care for his style of writing. Unfortunately, I have all his other books to read. Critics call his prose "rich" and maybe it is that but I find it confusing to point of sheer frustration sometimes.
There is a thoroughly unlikeable (to me anyway) "heroine" named Winifred Rudge. She writes children's books but would like to write one for adults with a heroine named Wendy Pritzke. She's become blocked and unable to write. She thinks if she goes to the old family homestead in Hampstead, Great Britain she'll be able to get a jump start. The family originally owned the whole house but it's since been turned into "flats" and sold off to other people. Only Winnie's cousin John still owns the top floor flat and she plans to stay with him.
This is good so far, I can understand it. The first mystery comes right in the beginning of the book when she attends a meeting for parents who want to adopt internationally. She says she is writing a book about that topic but later we learn she is lying. So why was she there? I like little mysteries like that. What I didn't like was the conversations between Winnie and the other characters. I felt like I was trying to follow a maze and that feeling continued throughout the book with her interactions with all the other characters.
When she arrives in England, she finds another mystery: her cousin has disappeared. Where did he go? Was he kidnapped, murdered? Is he in hiding? And what is that knocking noise behind the wall? There are repairmen there to do renovations in the flat but they are afraid of the knocking. Winnie takes it upon herself to go visiting all the neighbors to see if she can figure out if it's a ghost, a trapped cat or just what.
At first Winnie's behavior seems okay if a little odd. As she is running around offending the neighbors and trying to find her cousin or the ghost or the cat or whatever, she is imagining scenes in her mind from her adult book. Some of the questions begin to be answered about what is really going on. As they're answered, she's becoming weirder and weirder.
I was so ready for the book to end. I'm not even sure what really happened to Winnie during those last couple of chapters.
Reviewers say that the book is about loss and being lost. Yes, it is definitely that. If you like Gregory Maguire and you haven't read the book, go for it. Otherwise, it's not on my recommend-to-friends list.
There is a thoroughly unlikeable (to me anyway) "heroine" named Winifred Rudge. She writes children's books but would like to write one for adults with a heroine named Wendy Pritzke. She's become blocked and unable to write. She thinks if she goes to the old family homestead in Hampstead, Great Britain she'll be able to get a jump start. The family originally owned the whole house but it's since been turned into "flats" and sold off to other people. Only Winnie's cousin John still owns the top floor flat and she plans to stay with him.
This is good so far, I can understand it. The first mystery comes right in the beginning of the book when she attends a meeting for parents who want to adopt internationally. She says she is writing a book about that topic but later we learn she is lying. So why was she there? I like little mysteries like that. What I didn't like was the conversations between Winnie and the other characters. I felt like I was trying to follow a maze and that feeling continued throughout the book with her interactions with all the other characters.
When she arrives in England, she finds another mystery: her cousin has disappeared. Where did he go? Was he kidnapped, murdered? Is he in hiding? And what is that knocking noise behind the wall? There are repairmen there to do renovations in the flat but they are afraid of the knocking. Winnie takes it upon herself to go visiting all the neighbors to see if she can figure out if it's a ghost, a trapped cat or just what.
At first Winnie's behavior seems okay if a little odd. As she is running around offending the neighbors and trying to find her cousin or the ghost or the cat or whatever, she is imagining scenes in her mind from her adult book. Some of the questions begin to be answered about what is really going on. As they're answered, she's becoming weirder and weirder.
I was so ready for the book to end. I'm not even sure what really happened to Winnie during those last couple of chapters.
Reviewers say that the book is about loss and being lost. Yes, it is definitely that. If you like Gregory Maguire and you haven't read the book, go for it. Otherwise, it's not on my recommend-to-friends list.
April 21, 2020
I very rarely pout, but I am pouting right now in a downright grumpy mood. I love Mr. Maguire’s writing; his use of language and emotion is outstanding. But then there is this book, devoid of everything. I have nothing to grab onto...no likeable characters, no fast-paced adventure, not even a solid conclusion. The theme of this novel is the haunting toll of grief. I get it, there is no mistaking it’s glaring face in each chapter. But then Mr. Maguire introduces a web of mismatched threads of story and characters who do not fit anywhere. It feels like he had twenty ideas for fantastic novels and brainstormed them all into this collage. And in the end, nothing really happens, has happened, or is likely to happen to the characters here. Maybe that is the real “ghost story� to be found here, with everyone wandering aimlessly through life in a pseudo-purgatory brought on by grief. Ugh. So, don’t go into this book expecting anything about Dickens or A Christmas Carol, or Jack the Ripper, or even ghosts. Go into this expecting to be depressed and you might enjoy it more than I did. 🤷🏻♀️☔�
December 12, 2007
"Lost" differs from its "Wicked" "Stepsister" cousins in that it does not (as closely) follow a traditional fairytale turned on its head. Echoing back to "Christmas Carol" and "Alice in Wonderland," it is not a straight rendition of either, but its own tale.
Much of the book is spent wondering what really has occurred, as the line between reality and illusion are blurred. The ending, though, is satisfying. Worth the read.
Much of the book is spent wondering what really has occurred, as the line between reality and illusion are blurred. The ending, though, is satisfying. Worth the read.
April 25, 2012
A lot of people seem to have read Wicked, tried Lost and been terribly disappointed. I found the book actually MORE satisfying than Wicked. I hope that you will give me a chance to sell you on Lost because I think that you will enjoy it if you give it an honest chance. I read the book in the space of a two day business trip, and purposely begged off of social stuff and went to the airport four hours early so I could sit uninterrupted and read it.
I think one of the benefits of Wicked that made others prefer it, is that it takes place in a world we are all familiar with. We have a world already in our heads, a world that Maguire then manipulates and redraws in novel and jarring ways. In Lost, however, we are presented something much more rewarding, at least for me -- a ghost story of sorts in the present day. It is the real world, but viewed through a unique and interesting lens.
Maguire presents us with just as complex and ambivalent a heroine here as in Wicked. There are two narrative voices -- that of Winnie, and that of Winnie's character, Wendy, in the novel that Winnie is trying to write. As we all know, all characters in all works of fiction are in some way distillations of the author and friends and life. Plot points and locations are often taken from real life and manipulated to fit the story, and we learn most important information about Winnie's real life and real wounds through her attempt at a novel. It is a very simple but very effective technique, especially because Maguire's book is also a meditation on the way we construct narratives from our lives, both about ourselves and our place in the world, and about ghosts and the nature of haunting in our lives.
We journey with Winnie from contemplating the usual canned ideas of ghosts-- that ghosts with unfinished business are haunting the world, unable to move on to the next world, lost in this one. And we move to a much deeper understanding of ghosts, and of Winnie. In Lost, there is unfinished business, there is haunting. And not just by ghosts.
I think one of the benefits of Wicked that made others prefer it, is that it takes place in a world we are all familiar with. We have a world already in our heads, a world that Maguire then manipulates and redraws in novel and jarring ways. In Lost, however, we are presented something much more rewarding, at least for me -- a ghost story of sorts in the present day. It is the real world, but viewed through a unique and interesting lens.
Maguire presents us with just as complex and ambivalent a heroine here as in Wicked. There are two narrative voices -- that of Winnie, and that of Winnie's character, Wendy, in the novel that Winnie is trying to write. As we all know, all characters in all works of fiction are in some way distillations of the author and friends and life. Plot points and locations are often taken from real life and manipulated to fit the story, and we learn most important information about Winnie's real life and real wounds through her attempt at a novel. It is a very simple but very effective technique, especially because Maguire's book is also a meditation on the way we construct narratives from our lives, both about ourselves and our place in the world, and about ghosts and the nature of haunting in our lives.
We journey with Winnie from contemplating the usual canned ideas of ghosts-- that ghosts with unfinished business are haunting the world, unable to move on to the next world, lost in this one. And we move to a much deeper understanding of ghosts, and of Winnie. In Lost, there is unfinished business, there is haunting. And not just by ghosts.
April 14, 2023
featured vlog:
this was pretty dull but i still really liked the writing style. i think it was trying to do too much but there still was something intriguing about it.
|
this was pretty dull but i still really liked the writing style. i think it was trying to do too much but there still was something intriguing about it.
|
November 7, 2007
This is another of those books that I find very difficult to describe. I didn't hate it, but I'm not so sure that I liked it, either.
I found the protagonist to be very unlikeable. In fact, there was only one character in the book that I truly and unreservedly liked, and he only came in sort of near the end. Yes, there were reason that the protagonist had the personality she did, and those reasons came out very near the end.
I just don't even know what to say about it. It's sort of about a writer who's traveled back to visit her cousin in England, planning to stay with him in his flat on the top level of the family house. When she arrives, he's mysteriously vanished, and all her attempts to find out from his office, his friends, and his girlfriend are met with stone walls. There are two workmen there who seem to believe the place is haunted. She is very abrasive, brusque--definitely not someone I'd want to hang out with.
The book she's supposed to be writing isn't going all that well, either. And what's the deal with that, anyway? The protagonist in her book has traveled to London, and there's some bosh about her and the ghost of Jack the Ripper, and then they're in Romania----it's a little hard to follow.
Her ancestor was allegedly Charles Dickens' model for Ebenezer Scrooge. I never did figure out how that was supposed to work into the whole framework of the story, despite a letter that the cousin reads to her at the end of the book.
What Maguire was trying to do here I cannot fathom. It's not his best book.
I found the protagonist to be very unlikeable. In fact, there was only one character in the book that I truly and unreservedly liked, and he only came in sort of near the end. Yes, there were reason that the protagonist had the personality she did, and those reasons came out very near the end.
I just don't even know what to say about it. It's sort of about a writer who's traveled back to visit her cousin in England, planning to stay with him in his flat on the top level of the family house. When she arrives, he's mysteriously vanished, and all her attempts to find out from his office, his friends, and his girlfriend are met with stone walls. There are two workmen there who seem to believe the place is haunted. She is very abrasive, brusque--definitely not someone I'd want to hang out with.
The book she's supposed to be writing isn't going all that well, either. And what's the deal with that, anyway? The protagonist in her book has traveled to London, and there's some bosh about her and the ghost of Jack the Ripper, and then they're in Romania----it's a little hard to follow.
Her ancestor was allegedly Charles Dickens' model for Ebenezer Scrooge. I never did figure out how that was supposed to work into the whole framework of the story, despite a letter that the cousin reads to her at the end of the book.
What Maguire was trying to do here I cannot fathom. It's not his best book.
November 8, 2021
I love Gregory Maguire, so I went into this book with high expectations. I did know, as do all of his books, that it would take a while to “catch.� However, this book didn’t catch me up until around page 260. Out of 335. Then I couldn’t put it down.
I’m not sure what this book was about. A woman, a successful author, who struggles with past difficulties. A haunted house. Some quirky characters, whom I really did like. A mysterious past, slowly unfolding. Something like that.
It just spent too much time building up before the story really got intriguing. Loved the characters.
I’m not sure what this book was about. A woman, a successful author, who struggles with past difficulties. A haunted house. Some quirky characters, whom I really did like. A mysterious past, slowly unfolding. Something like that.
It just spent too much time building up before the story really got intriguing. Loved the characters.
May 25, 2016
Let me start this review by saying that I've read and reviewed Gregory Maguire's most famous and critically-acclaimed work entitled Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West, which was turned into a Broadway musical hit--and I didn't end up being as impressed about it as I hoped I would be. With that said, I already have extremely low expectations going into this book. It's also noteworthy to point out that I've read some reviews about it in ŷ, and they seemed to generally criticize the convoluted plot and subplots, as well as the lack of any clear pay-off in the end. Author Maguire himself has been known to write novels about well-known fictional characters created by other, much like with Wicked whose central figure if the supposed villain of the original Wizard of Oz books.
Lost is the very first time, I believe, that he wrote about an original character. There is a lot about this novel that was entertaining. I honestly enjoyed it..
The question, however, is if it remained as engaging as it was in its first 200 pages or so, and the short answer is that IT DIDN'T. I think I'm going to have to agree on the majority of the review in GR then by saying so, but I would also still like to commend its merits for anyone who is interested in picking this up.
Lost is a confounding piece of fiction, to start off. The narrative itself is a fractured examination of the lead character's psyche who is a novelist working on her own tale. Winifred Rudge is a storyteller, even when she's not sitting down with a pen and paper, or typing in a computer. She creates conversations in her head where fictional people would exchange dialogue as they pursue a plot that they want to unravel. The novel is filled with passages of Winifred writing this story of hers in her head, all the while having a crisis and struggle of her own outside of her imagination.
I find Winnie's 'drafts' of her novel inserted between the passages of the actual real-time story to be amusing. She was essentially writing a story about a woman named Wendy who is fixated on finding out who the real Jack the Ripper is. It's an investigative mystery novel then, which is more or less inspired by the weird series of events Winifred herself got caught up in. The premise of Lostis simple enough: an aspiring novelist writes a historical crime fiction while also undergoing a stressful amount of unusual incidents in her life outside her writing. Winifred struck me as the kind of woman so detached with her own person that she's been using her ability to tell stories to cope from daily grievances. Until she was confronted by seemingly supernatural forces that more or less haunt the apartment complex she shared with a distant cousin, Winnie was possibly more content with dwelling on her her inner life than forming any other kind of meaningful relationships outside her cousin John.
It's truly the Maguire's execution of the novel that set it apart from most linearly structured narratives. There is so much meta material in this novel that could baffle and excite readers from the get-go. I was really enthralled with Winnie's voice both as a character, and as a writer writing another fictional character's thoughts. Maguire applies enough humorous tones in a lot of the earlier scenes of this book that kept me chuckling. I was engrossed with the escalation of events which started off funny then creepy and then disarmingly disturbing. To describe Lost as a horror story with supernatural elements would not be sufficient since I don't think the novel's purpose was to incite fear and suspense. If it was, then Maguire certainly should have done better because any sense of danger and urgency was not sustained throughout the rest of the book.
In fact, the plot started meandering. The things that amused me and got me curious about it suddenly became the very things that annoyed me by it. It almost felt as if the more I learned about the mysteries surrounding the place of haunting, the less I became determined to solve the riddles which cluttered the exposition. Winifred also started getting under my nerves. I found her clever and funny in a lot of ways at first, but after a while--when she still insisted on being so closed off and reticent even to readers--her actions and private thoughts stopped being an immediate concern of mine. I started to feel just as detached as she was about her own life. She just started making less sense as the book went on.
The concept that one of Winifred's ancestors was actually Charles Dickens' inspiration for the character of Scrooge from A Christmas Carol was intriguing. The idea that Winifred created an obvious self-insert in her character Wendy who is searching for Jack the Ripper is just as compelling. However, Maguire was simply unable to weave these two concepts together in a way that's cohesive and interesting. After two hundred pages or so, my attention for the story started to dwindle until I could barely keep up with whatever stunning revelations were unfolding--and I don't even think there were.
Lost was just one of those books that seem to be a worthwhile reading at first until it proved to be a disappointment. It's always sad when you find a book you could hardly put down when you began reading it a hundred pages in, and then as you progress your first impression about it changes for the worst, until you'd find yourself wanting to put it down instead. That's how I would summarize my experience for this book. I could still recommend it, but it's probably the least Gregory Maguire book that one could immerse oneself in.
RECOMMENDED: 7/10
DO READ MY REVIEWS AT
Lost is the very first time, I believe, that he wrote about an original character. There is a lot about this novel that was entertaining. I honestly enjoyed it..
The question, however, is if it remained as engaging as it was in its first 200 pages or so, and the short answer is that IT DIDN'T. I think I'm going to have to agree on the majority of the review in GR then by saying so, but I would also still like to commend its merits for anyone who is interested in picking this up.
Lost is a confounding piece of fiction, to start off. The narrative itself is a fractured examination of the lead character's psyche who is a novelist working on her own tale. Winifred Rudge is a storyteller, even when she's not sitting down with a pen and paper, or typing in a computer. She creates conversations in her head where fictional people would exchange dialogue as they pursue a plot that they want to unravel. The novel is filled with passages of Winifred writing this story of hers in her head, all the while having a crisis and struggle of her own outside of her imagination.
I find Winnie's 'drafts' of her novel inserted between the passages of the actual real-time story to be amusing. She was essentially writing a story about a woman named Wendy who is fixated on finding out who the real Jack the Ripper is. It's an investigative mystery novel then, which is more or less inspired by the weird series of events Winifred herself got caught up in. The premise of Lostis simple enough: an aspiring novelist writes a historical crime fiction while also undergoing a stressful amount of unusual incidents in her life outside her writing. Winifred struck me as the kind of woman so detached with her own person that she's been using her ability to tell stories to cope from daily grievances. Until she was confronted by seemingly supernatural forces that more or less haunt the apartment complex she shared with a distant cousin, Winnie was possibly more content with dwelling on her her inner life than forming any other kind of meaningful relationships outside her cousin John.
" ...because what really is the job of the dead? It's not to hang around, but to disappear--to clear the air for the living. Once the living had discharged their duties to their dead relatives and companions, they could go back to living a full life. The goal of a ghost is to dismiss it and leave the living to have a full life without guilt or undue grief. "
It's truly the Maguire's execution of the novel that set it apart from most linearly structured narratives. There is so much meta material in this novel that could baffle and excite readers from the get-go. I was really enthralled with Winnie's voice both as a character, and as a writer writing another fictional character's thoughts. Maguire applies enough humorous tones in a lot of the earlier scenes of this book that kept me chuckling. I was engrossed with the escalation of events which started off funny then creepy and then disarmingly disturbing. To describe Lost as a horror story with supernatural elements would not be sufficient since I don't think the novel's purpose was to incite fear and suspense. If it was, then Maguire certainly should have done better because any sense of danger and urgency was not sustained throughout the rest of the book.
In fact, the plot started meandering. The things that amused me and got me curious about it suddenly became the very things that annoyed me by it. It almost felt as if the more I learned about the mysteries surrounding the place of haunting, the less I became determined to solve the riddles which cluttered the exposition. Winifred also started getting under my nerves. I found her clever and funny in a lot of ways at first, but after a while--when she still insisted on being so closed off and reticent even to readers--her actions and private thoughts stopped being an immediate concern of mine. I started to feel just as detached as she was about her own life. She just started making less sense as the book went on.
The concept that one of Winifred's ancestors was actually Charles Dickens' inspiration for the character of Scrooge from A Christmas Carol was intriguing. The idea that Winifred created an obvious self-insert in her character Wendy who is searching for Jack the Ripper is just as compelling. However, Maguire was simply unable to weave these two concepts together in a way that's cohesive and interesting. After two hundred pages or so, my attention for the story started to dwindle until I could barely keep up with whatever stunning revelations were unfolding--and I don't even think there were.
Lost was just one of those books that seem to be a worthwhile reading at first until it proved to be a disappointment. It's always sad when you find a book you could hardly put down when you began reading it a hundred pages in, and then as you progress your first impression about it changes for the worst, until you'd find yourself wanting to put it down instead. That's how I would summarize my experience for this book. I could still recommend it, but it's probably the least Gregory Maguire book that one could immerse oneself in.
RECOMMENDED: 7/10
DO READ MY REVIEWS AT
March 16, 2008
Definitely not one of Maguire's best. I had high expectations after reading his other books, and was absolutely let down. First of all, the story has too much of everything: a tormented writer, romance gone wrong, paranoia, ghosts, Jack the Ripper, 14th century history, Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, Scrooge, so on and so on. The story wanders all over the place and doesn't quite deliver much of anything after all the wandering. Second of all, I wanted to punch out the protagonist. She is a simpering AND caustic, whiny little ninny. She apparently tried to adopt a child and the child died before she could get there. And that is the big tragedy that torments and nearly destroys her. I have two children, and yes, it is a horrible tragedy when any child dies, but I don't get the connection here. The death of the child doesn't seem to me an appropriate reason for the emotional torture she puts herself through (it nearly kills her). She seems to be tormented because she likes being miserable.
Anyway, I would recommend that people skip this book, and read his other fabulous stories: Wicked, Son of a Witch, Mirror Mirror, The Ugly Stepsister. If you must read Lost, please read it after you read the other books. Lost is not a good representation of what Maguire can deliver to a reader.
Anyway, I would recommend that people skip this book, and read his other fabulous stories: Wicked, Son of a Witch, Mirror Mirror, The Ugly Stepsister. If you must read Lost, please read it after you read the other books. Lost is not a good representation of what Maguire can deliver to a reader.
September 14, 2011
LOST seems to be the runt in Maguire's litter of post-modern fantasy novels and it seems to be in part because it couldn't live up to the fanfare of WICKED and CONFESSIONS OF AN UGLY STEPSISTER, its immediate and deservedly lauded predecessors. Here, for the first time, Maguire tries to create a wholly original novel as opposed to one centered around re-interpreting a classic tale by another author. Though Dickens and Jack the Ripper echo in the text, along with some sly references to Stephen Sondhiem, the book is mostly about an aging single woman who desperately wants a child coming to terms with the fact that the man she loves doesn't love her back and that mother hood may be something she will only ever experience vicariously. When her tortured soul connects with a medieval ghost the book takes interesting twists and turns, presenting us with some wonderful characters and creepy moments. Wendy, the main character, is interesting enough to follow despite being a wet blanket and there is an unexpectedly subtle ending that leaves you feeling satisfied despite its vague ambiguity as to if Wendy will ever achieve her happy ending. Truly, an under-praised novel, worth reading by fans of Maguire and lovers of ghost stories in general.
January 7, 2012
This is the second book I've read by Gregory Maguire and I must say ---question mark--- because I just don't understand the point. His book Wicked must have been extraordinarily different, i.e. good. The one supposedly about Snow White and this one supposedly having something to do with Scrooge left me feeling cold. I never finished the one about Snow White and I leave this one regretting I did. I had to force my way through the bad turn of phrase and plodding plot only to find he would not even impart a satisfactory ending. It may as well have ended mid-phrase. Stay far, far away from this if you love good literature!
February 17, 2023
Good title for this as I found myself often wondering where the author intended to take this story. I fear that neither of us ever really reached our goal.
September 2, 2020
I just randomly remembered that this book exists. Read it years ago. All I can recall is that I hated it.
March 9, 2015
From what I knew, rewrote stories and fairy-tales into the "true story" for adults, which I enjoyed quite a bit with Wicked.
Lost, however, is a wholly new story that references A Christmas Carol, Jack the Ripper, Peter Pan, and Alice in Wonderland. This sounds like an interesting concept, I'm sure, but while G.M. is throwing the references in here and there, it's like he forgot about the main story line. Winnie/Wendy/Ophelia/Opal the main character comes to town, finds that her cousin (and former lover apparently, but you have to read that in the book, it isn't on the dust jacket or anything), John is missing. She stays in his house, harasses John's neighbors, employers, and girlfriend about his whereabouts (turns out he was just avoiding her). Contractors are fixing the house when she arrives, they bust down a wall and let out a ghost of some sort. The ghost possesses a cat and makes it eat other cats, then possesses an old lady and makes her eat cats, too. While this is going on, you don't know it's a possession, though, you believe that it was just the old lady being bonkers and eating her cats. You find out at the end of chapter 4. Winendophelal throws a temper tantrum at her cousin when he comes back into the picture, she runs away, she goes to see the old lady, and then she herself becomes possessed.
Honestly, if you want to skip the first two chapters all together, just read the back of the book.
The main character answers all questions with a snide remark or another question. Reading is like playing one of those three-dollar PC games where you have to investigate some strange happenings, no one gives you a straight answer, and at the end you find out the bad guy is the person that asked for help in the first place.
I read a lot of bad reviews about the book before I read it. I didn't hear the best things about before I read it either and I was pleasantly surprised, unfortunately didn't have the same effect on me.
If someone should happen to read it and decide that it is a great book, I would love to speak to this person and get their point of view. I'm almost hoping there was a deeper meaning in there somewhere that I just missed.
Though this was not the best book ever, I'll probably still continue to read books for the twisted fairy-tale fun.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 23, 2010
My review is specifically for the audiobook.
I have this book as a printed edition; it's even signed by the author. It's a lovely, amazing story, and like so many of Maguire's novels, not anything I would have expected.
Lost is the story of Winnifred Rudge, a children's novelist working a novel for adult readers. Something is clearly wrong with her; the novel opens with her attending an information meeting about international adoption--and she gets kicked out when the staff recognize her name and occupation. The next day, she leaves for London, where she plans to research her novel about Wendy Pritzke, a woman obsessed with Jack the Ripper. On arrival, Winnie learns that her host, her cousin John Connister, is strangely absent. He's having renovations done on his apartment, and the workers don't even know where he's gone.
Winnie is concerned--especially when all of John's friends refuse to answer her questions. The situation in the apartment is odd; the workers have removed part of the pantry wall, and now they can hear strange noises behind the wall . . .
The first half of the novel is a slow buildup of tension involving the wall and the noises. Winnie makes friends easily, but she constantly drives them away from her as well. She's somehow separated from her life, and she constantly asks herself "how would Wendy Pritzke respond to this?" While that may be a legitimate technique for an author, Winnie takes it too far. She has no connection to real world any longer. It's only as we read more scraps of her novel about Wendy Pritzke that things begin to come clear.
As with many Maguire novels, the supernatural bleeds slowly into the real world, requiring no suspension of disbelief as we gradually accept the individual events and growing sense of unease.
Jenny Sterlin does an excellent job reading the book. I'm not a huge fan of audiobooks, so I can't really compare her performance to that of other readers. I do think that this novel requires additional patience and attention than that given to most audiobooks. Before I listened to this book, I had read my printed copy. I knew the outcome, and I knew the format of the book. It contains a number of visual cues to explain just what you're reading, such as writing the Wendy Pritzke manuscript in another font (looks like Courier New). In the audiobook, the narrator changes her voice when reading the manuscript, but the change is subtle. Both the manuscript and novel are written in third person omniscient, and it can occasionally prove confusing as the book rapidly--and without transition--moves between the characters.
Sterlin did an excellent job with this book, but I have to say that I wouldn't necessarily recommend this audiobook to a novice listener unless he or she were familiar with the novel.
I have this book as a printed edition; it's even signed by the author. It's a lovely, amazing story, and like so many of Maguire's novels, not anything I would have expected.
Lost is the story of Winnifred Rudge, a children's novelist working a novel for adult readers. Something is clearly wrong with her; the novel opens with her attending an information meeting about international adoption--and she gets kicked out when the staff recognize her name and occupation. The next day, she leaves for London, where she plans to research her novel about Wendy Pritzke, a woman obsessed with Jack the Ripper. On arrival, Winnie learns that her host, her cousin John Connister, is strangely absent. He's having renovations done on his apartment, and the workers don't even know where he's gone.
Winnie is concerned--especially when all of John's friends refuse to answer her questions. The situation in the apartment is odd; the workers have removed part of the pantry wall, and now they can hear strange noises behind the wall . . .
The first half of the novel is a slow buildup of tension involving the wall and the noises. Winnie makes friends easily, but she constantly drives them away from her as well. She's somehow separated from her life, and she constantly asks herself "how would Wendy Pritzke respond to this?" While that may be a legitimate technique for an author, Winnie takes it too far. She has no connection to real world any longer. It's only as we read more scraps of her novel about Wendy Pritzke that things begin to come clear.
As with many Maguire novels, the supernatural bleeds slowly into the real world, requiring no suspension of disbelief as we gradually accept the individual events and growing sense of unease.
Jenny Sterlin does an excellent job reading the book. I'm not a huge fan of audiobooks, so I can't really compare her performance to that of other readers. I do think that this novel requires additional patience and attention than that given to most audiobooks. Before I listened to this book, I had read my printed copy. I knew the outcome, and I knew the format of the book. It contains a number of visual cues to explain just what you're reading, such as writing the Wendy Pritzke manuscript in another font (looks like Courier New). In the audiobook, the narrator changes her voice when reading the manuscript, but the change is subtle. Both the manuscript and novel are written in third person omniscient, and it can occasionally prove confusing as the book rapidly--and without transition--moves between the characters.
Sterlin did an excellent job with this book, but I have to say that I wouldn't necessarily recommend this audiobook to a novice listener unless he or she were familiar with the novel.
April 29, 2010
Lost Is Right!
I understand Maguire's rise to fame having read Wicked and Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister. I loved both and was excited to read Lost, even if it seemed like it wouldn't be sticking to our original assumptions of Maguire's twisting of stories we grew up with. Well, I was sorely disappointed throughout. I love the stories of the past, but often hated the writing. I could never really get in touch with the characters presented to me. Lost does that and so much worse.
The book itself seems to mix a Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, and Ebeneezer Scrooge cocktail that is as vile as an Irish Car Bomb that sat a few seconds too long. All the ingredients are there but the liquid went sour. I like the techniques he uses to weave a story and get you interested but it seems to just crumble at the seams. His characters are hardly likable what with their 'better than you' dialogue and their unrealistic quality. Perhaps that was intentional, though. Why do I say this? Our main character, Winifred, weaves stories as a novelist and seems to cuddle with fairytales that she and we grew up with. Those same fairytales have that unrealistic quality so I'm divided on that issue.
However, the story itself is an overlapping debacle that goes nowhere and everywhere at the same time. It's truly difficult to grasp onto anything that Winnie is doing or why. Eventually reasons are given but most don't make up for previous actions.
Gratefully it is an easy read and a quick one at that. I would also hazard to mention that Maguire's humor truly keeps the story going and the link-up's between characters of Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, and the delightful Scrooge was probably the most fascinating thing about this novel. I would not recommend it as a first Maguire read since it may put you off from reading the much better works he has put out. I can simply say that you should proceed with caution.
I understand Maguire's rise to fame having read Wicked and Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister. I loved both and was excited to read Lost, even if it seemed like it wouldn't be sticking to our original assumptions of Maguire's twisting of stories we grew up with. Well, I was sorely disappointed throughout. I love the stories of the past, but often hated the writing. I could never really get in touch with the characters presented to me. Lost does that and so much worse.
The book itself seems to mix a Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, and Ebeneezer Scrooge cocktail that is as vile as an Irish Car Bomb that sat a few seconds too long. All the ingredients are there but the liquid went sour. I like the techniques he uses to weave a story and get you interested but it seems to just crumble at the seams. His characters are hardly likable what with their 'better than you' dialogue and their unrealistic quality. Perhaps that was intentional, though. Why do I say this? Our main character, Winifred, weaves stories as a novelist and seems to cuddle with fairytales that she and we grew up with. Those same fairytales have that unrealistic quality so I'm divided on that issue.
However, the story itself is an overlapping debacle that goes nowhere and everywhere at the same time. It's truly difficult to grasp onto anything that Winnie is doing or why. Eventually reasons are given but most don't make up for previous actions.
Gratefully it is an easy read and a quick one at that. I would also hazard to mention that Maguire's humor truly keeps the story going and the link-up's between characters of Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, and the delightful Scrooge was probably the most fascinating thing about this novel. I would not recommend it as a first Maguire read since it may put you off from reading the much better works he has put out. I can simply say that you should proceed with caution.
February 27, 2008
I can't remember where, but somewhere along the line, I got the impression this was a retelling of Rip Van Winkle. It's not.
This was, unlike Maguire's other novels, not really a retelling of anything. It had elements of A Christmas Carol and liberal references to Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, and (interestingly) Jack the Ripper.
The story itself was really sort of a grown-up coming of age story -- only throw in ghostly possession, a bizarre intra-familial love triangle, and a secondary Roman a Clef (being drafted by the protagonist) within the primary novel.
It was fascinating and compelling - Maguire's intelligence and fluidity with words came through here more than in any of his retellings. There were a few issues that were never fully explained and while I found the secondary novel to be interesting insofar as the clues it provided to the protagonist's motivations, after a while (by the point at which I'd figured out the 'mystery') it began to detract from the real story.
This was, unlike Maguire's other novels, not really a retelling of anything. It had elements of A Christmas Carol and liberal references to Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, and (interestingly) Jack the Ripper.
The story itself was really sort of a grown-up coming of age story -- only throw in ghostly possession, a bizarre intra-familial love triangle, and a secondary Roman a Clef (being drafted by the protagonist) within the primary novel.
It was fascinating and compelling - Maguire's intelligence and fluidity with words came through here more than in any of his retellings. There were a few issues that were never fully explained and while I found the secondary novel to be interesting insofar as the clues it provided to the protagonist's motivations, after a while (by the point at which I'd figured out the 'mystery') it began to detract from the real story.
March 1, 2008
I was really excited to read this book - I enjoyed Gregory Maguire's WICKED. And this promised to be some kind of supernatural historical thriller.
The historical stuff barely panned out, and when I realized halfway through the book that one of three plots was a lie, and that the characters involved were stupider than I thought, I lost 95% of my interest. I did push through and discover why the characters would lie to each other like that, but at that point I really didn't care.
When the plot finally turned into a real ghost story, I was just pushing through because I had nothing else to read.
I am so glad I didn't pay for this book.
The historical stuff barely panned out, and when I realized halfway through the book that one of three plots was a lie, and that the characters involved were stupider than I thought, I lost 95% of my interest. I did push through and discover why the characters would lie to each other like that, but at that point I really didn't care.
When the plot finally turned into a real ghost story, I was just pushing through because I had nothing else to read.
I am so glad I didn't pay for this book.
December 31, 2019
I found much of this book confusing, and not in an "artistic ambiguity". It felt as though the author, if in fact he knew what was actually happening in his own story, was deliberately leaving out vital information and including a lot of irrelevant information in order for us to question what was real and what wasn't. I don't mean this in a snarky way, but all I was left wondering was why I should care. Left and right things didn't seem to add up, and rather than feel like there was a mystery to be solved, it merely felt like a waste of time. Sad to say, I didn't enjoy reading this book and wouldn't recommend it.
June 3, 2018
I don’t remember when I read this one, but it was unfortunately my first of his books. I took it back to the store. It was so boring. I don’t usually, well, I don’t ever say that.
Later though, I finally picked up another of his and didn’t leave the store until it had intrigued me. Now I’m a huge fan of his—except for this book.
Not this one. No. No.
Stay away from this one.
Later though, I finally picked up another of his and didn’t leave the store until it had intrigued me. Now I’m a huge fan of his—except for this book.
Not this one. No. No.
Stay away from this one.
April 10, 2010
I can't remember when I quit reading a book when I was halfway through, but I quit this one! I just didn't like it. I couldn't understand where the author was taking me - unless he was trying to portray one of the most pitiful characters in all of fiction - that of Winifred Rudge.
November 3, 2017
It’s very rare that I dislike a book this much. Slow, boring, and annoying. I kept debating on whether to finish it or not and I struggled my way to the end because it surely had to get better. Well, it didn’t. I’ve really liked so many of his books so I was really surprised to read this clunker.
May 6, 2016
every time i thought i was getting into a good part, it got too wordy and i lost interest. the fact that i actually finished this book is a miracle.
February 7, 2018
I first picked up LOST when I was 19 or so (I'm now 30). I had just finished reading Wicked and thought this would be another fun, dark fairy-tale-turned-upside-down page turner. About 2/3 of the way through the book, I gave up. The plot began to fizzle as the main character, Winnie, literally wanders in circles in London and I gave up any interest in seeing if her story would ever resolve.
A few weeks ago, I thought I'd try again.
What I think Maguire does really well: I LOVE his narrative voice. Just a few pages in, you get a picture-perfect sense of who the main character is, how she talks, how she perceives the world, and what her world looks and feels like. I remember feeling this way with Wicked, too, that Maquire just has a magical way with words and really can describe an old store front for paragraphs at a time with such detail and a strong sense of style....... if only that wasn't all that seemed to ever happen in LOST.
I remember with Wicked, too, getting to the middle of the book and feeling like Maquire was just spinning his wheels, having built up such an intricate plot and then needing to wander through Oz and Munchkinland and everywhere else before the story could pick up steam again and race to the conclusion. LOST has the same problem... but it lasts much longer. There's about 100 pages or so in the middle of the book in which nothing significant seems to ever happen. It's beautifully written, and I found it to be the perfect book for reading on the bus to and from work to pass the time, especially considering the story's atmosphere (London, in winter) was the perfect dreary counterpart to my own dreary Chicago this time of year. But unending descriptions of drizzly historic urban cities does not a FULL novel make, in my humble opinion.
That being said, I'm glad I finished the book this time. The story was not what I thought it would be, and once I got through to the end I can see how most of the book was necessary to resolving Winnie's story.
The book makes reference to Christmas Carole, Jack the Ripper, Alice in Wonderland... and several other stories of olde. In this particular context, though, it all felt a bit stretched and jumbled. Like so many other reviewers, I felt LOST myself as I worked my way through the story. Even at its close, I feel like maybe I missed something, or that now that I've finished it I need to start over from the beginning to put the pieces back together now that I've seen the bigger picture.
But I don't think I will.
A few weeks ago, I thought I'd try again.
What I think Maguire does really well: I LOVE his narrative voice. Just a few pages in, you get a picture-perfect sense of who the main character is, how she talks, how she perceives the world, and what her world looks and feels like. I remember feeling this way with Wicked, too, that Maquire just has a magical way with words and really can describe an old store front for paragraphs at a time with such detail and a strong sense of style....... if only that wasn't all that seemed to ever happen in LOST.
I remember with Wicked, too, getting to the middle of the book and feeling like Maquire was just spinning his wheels, having built up such an intricate plot and then needing to wander through Oz and Munchkinland and everywhere else before the story could pick up steam again and race to the conclusion. LOST has the same problem... but it lasts much longer. There's about 100 pages or so in the middle of the book in which nothing significant seems to ever happen. It's beautifully written, and I found it to be the perfect book for reading on the bus to and from work to pass the time, especially considering the story's atmosphere (London, in winter) was the perfect dreary counterpart to my own dreary Chicago this time of year. But unending descriptions of drizzly historic urban cities does not a FULL novel make, in my humble opinion.
That being said, I'm glad I finished the book this time. The story was not what I thought it would be, and once I got through to the end I can see how most of the book was necessary to resolving Winnie's story.
The book makes reference to Christmas Carole, Jack the Ripper, Alice in Wonderland... and several other stories of olde. In this particular context, though, it all felt a bit stretched and jumbled. Like so many other reviewers, I felt LOST myself as I worked my way through the story. Even at its close, I feel like maybe I missed something, or that now that I've finished it I need to start over from the beginning to put the pieces back together now that I've seen the bigger picture.
But I don't think I will.
June 22, 2007
I was attracted to this book because I absolutely loved the conceit of Wicked-- take a well-known, despised, yet intriguing character and explain her point of view. Kind of like "The Real Story of the Three Little Pigs," which was told by the wolf, and is one of my favorite picture books.
The jacket left me feeling woozy with the thought that I could again feel the thrill of gaining new insight into a previously underappretiated character: Scrooge. Dickens being like complicated, intricate candy to me, I was hooked. Additionally, as I am considering venturing into writing myself, I loved the questions Macguire raised, like What is the true identity of a novelist? Do they have a true personality, or are they just an amalgamation of their characters? Unfortunately, I didn't get what I expected. I found Maguire brought in too many disparate themes, including poltergeists, possessions, Jack the Ripper, and Scrooge, without bringing substantial depth or increased understanding of the main character, novelist Winifred (Winnie) Rudge.
Still, Maguire does several things right. First, his vocabulary is impressive. As one of those totally dorky readers who writes down and later looks up new vocab words, I can attest that I went through nearly a full book of post-its. Second, the plot structure is interesting. As the main character reveals more and more about her past, her characters (in her head? or do they actually live in our world?) are creating a future for themselves. Ultimately, however, I wasn't invested enough in the characters to give this book more than two stars.
The jacket left me feeling woozy with the thought that I could again feel the thrill of gaining new insight into a previously underappretiated character: Scrooge. Dickens being like complicated, intricate candy to me, I was hooked. Additionally, as I am considering venturing into writing myself, I loved the questions Macguire raised, like What is the true identity of a novelist? Do they have a true personality, or are they just an amalgamation of their characters? Unfortunately, I didn't get what I expected. I found Maguire brought in too many disparate themes, including poltergeists, possessions, Jack the Ripper, and Scrooge, without bringing substantial depth or increased understanding of the main character, novelist Winifred (Winnie) Rudge.
Still, Maguire does several things right. First, his vocabulary is impressive. As one of those totally dorky readers who writes down and later looks up new vocab words, I can attest that I went through nearly a full book of post-its. Second, the plot structure is interesting. As the main character reveals more and more about her past, her characters (in her head? or do they actually live in our world?) are creating a future for themselves. Ultimately, however, I wasn't invested enough in the characters to give this book more than two stars.
March 30, 2011
On the surface, Lost is a novel about an eccentric middle-aged writer, Winifred Rudge, who travels to London to research a novel she's writing about a woman supposedly haunted by the ghost of Jack the Ripper. So far so good.
Winifred is the sole point-of-view character. For about three quarters of the book the story feels confused and repetitive. None of the characters engaged me. I set Lost aside several times to read other books, and had to force myself to finish it. I am an admirer of Gregory Maguire's work, especially Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister and Wicked, and I have read all his other novels. What went wrong with Lost?
It's partly that single point of view (third person, with excerpts from the novel Winifred is writing, which may or may not be autobiographical.)We discover late in the book that Winifred is an 'unreliable narrator' and at this point, if the reader hasn't already given up, the story is turned on its head. There were parts near the end that engaged my interest and made me care, slightly, about what happened to the deeply unlikeable central character. But overall it was a disappointing reading experience. Perhaps Maguire was setting himself a technical challenge with this book, but it falls down badly on storytelling.
For those of you who haven't read anything by Gregory Maguire, try Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister as your introduction to his work. He is a brilliant writer. You just wouldn't know it from this novel.
Winifred is the sole point-of-view character. For about three quarters of the book the story feels confused and repetitive. None of the characters engaged me. I set Lost aside several times to read other books, and had to force myself to finish it. I am an admirer of Gregory Maguire's work, especially Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister and Wicked, and I have read all his other novels. What went wrong with Lost?
It's partly that single point of view (third person, with excerpts from the novel Winifred is writing, which may or may not be autobiographical.)We discover late in the book that Winifred is an 'unreliable narrator' and at this point, if the reader hasn't already given up, the story is turned on its head. There were parts near the end that engaged my interest and made me care, slightly, about what happened to the deeply unlikeable central character. But overall it was a disappointing reading experience. Perhaps Maguire was setting himself a technical challenge with this book, but it falls down badly on storytelling.
For those of you who haven't read anything by Gregory Maguire, try Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister as your introduction to his work. He is a brilliant writer. You just wouldn't know it from this novel.
February 28, 2023
Ok, so I've let a few day to pass because I was unsure how i feel after finishing this book and I was hoping my thoughts will be clearer by now but they are not. I have found myself lost (pun intended) in what i read. And i believe the author also got lost in what he wanted of this book. Or perhaps I have turned into somewhat shallow reader and cannot find some deeper meaning behind all of this? The book had a promising suspense at start, then it turned into (I apologize for what I will say) - words vomit. Then at about 80 pages from the end it did turn more interesting but the ending still wasn't exactly fulfilling. What happened to Irv? What about John? Did the main character heal herself really? And speaking of her, honestly I cannot say I managed to like her.
So to summarize, main character wasn't likeable for me, the structure of the book and in many places the syntax was more confusing (though it can be partially me not being a native English speaker), didn't find the purpose of about 150 pages and this book was absolutely not for me. That's it
So to summarize, main character wasn't likeable for me, the structure of the book and in many places the syntax was more confusing (though it can be partially me not being a native English speaker), didn't find the purpose of about 150 pages and this book was absolutely not for me. That's it
December 20, 2014
This book, in theory, should have been a good one. Ghosts, Dickens, Jack the Ripper - what a combo! But sadly, it did not turn out to be a good read.
Before I started it, I read a few reviews on this site and was quite startled to find that it got such bad feedback from readers. Still, I was not put off and started reading.
At first, I liked the book but as the story progressed, I began to really dislike the protagonist and I started to wonder where the plot was going.
By the time I got to the last two chapters, I was seriously struggling to finish it. It was only through sheer stubbornness that I managed to get to the end.
The whole story seemed pointless and the Dickens and Jack the Ripper elements felt like red herrings. There were some elements of wry humour, but not enough to make this book entertaining.
I am sorry I wasted my time on this book. Avoid!
Before I started it, I read a few reviews on this site and was quite startled to find that it got such bad feedback from readers. Still, I was not put off and started reading.
At first, I liked the book but as the story progressed, I began to really dislike the protagonist and I started to wonder where the plot was going.
By the time I got to the last two chapters, I was seriously struggling to finish it. It was only through sheer stubbornness that I managed to get to the end.
The whole story seemed pointless and the Dickens and Jack the Ripper elements felt like red herrings. There were some elements of wry humour, but not enough to make this book entertaining.
I am sorry I wasted my time on this book. Avoid!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,102 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.