Rook is the third part of a trilogy, but manages to be read without the requirement of reading any of the others, containing little reference to them. This, I believe, is an important quality in this variety of book, and I would like to bring attention to the fact that you the book is understandable without having read the others.
The book is short, surprisingly at first, but managing an impactful piece of writing in short space is one of the keys to literary mastery. However, I must admit that there was glimpses to soap-operatic hysteria throughout, something which I personally don’t enjoy. The book manages to reference the ‘struggles of teenage life’ and compare them to the struggles of a bird, in specifically a Rook, in its fight for real survival.
Even so, I still get that feeling that you tend to receive from such short stories – well compressed and unrushed, but making you feel aware of something slightly … absent. It’s a strange sensation, like the characters are almost unimportant, discarded. I know I said about it making sense as the 3rd part of a trilogy, but this seems different, like there’s something missing, somewhere …
But never mind that. Rook touches on the fact that the end of the world isn’t always the worst issue. People’s personal problems are the worst for them, and that must be appreciated. The world revolves around everyone, in their perspective.
Also, it’s got Doctor Who in it.
- Sam A W Oxlade
Posted on: 19th April 2018 at 01:59 pm
more reviews by this group
more reviews for this title
BACK TO OUR GROUP PAGE