All in all, I liked this book. It’s beautifully written, and takes you into a world of dark academia that if interesting. It is, however, a slow burner. And what you’re left with at the end doesn’t tie all the ends together. Especially as none of the characters have what I’d consider a likeable development? 

The twists are interesting, and I think these are the best parts of the book. It is interesting to have a morally grey main character. But in a sea of morally grey main characters, it doesn’t make her too different. I suppose that is the point, but it’s not the most compelling when you’re trying to read it. 

It’s a book I’d consider aesthetic in its contents, and it’s perfect for the colder and spookier seasons (even though it’s set in summer). I just feel like there’s more need to really flesh this out. 

Loved the writing style & the history & art references throughout! I appreciated that it didn’t open with a murder, leaving me wondering who would die and who would do the deed. As a tarot-curious person, it was fun to read more about them and catch references! I’ll have to reread this in a few years when I have a better grasp on tarot, though the author does a superb job of explaining meanings as the story goes.

And the prologue? Damn. Gorgeously written, with a similar feeling to the final pages. Would recommend, I hope Hays writes more books! I would definitely read more.

This just didn’t hit for me. 

Strike one: The story was odd, as was the main character. Also, the narrative voice continually switched from conversational to more lofty prose, often from one sentence to the next and back again. Many of the more conversational ones were actually dependent clauses, which brought the immediate shift in tone from literary fiction-esque sentences to non-sentences into even sharper contrast. 

Strike two: The book touched on issues around those who grew up with money and those who didn’t, but didn’t delve deeply into them. This was fine, actually, as the MC idolized the old-money characters for most of it. However, her shift in opinion of those types of characters neglected to address topics like entitlement and never knowing financial struggle or hardship. She did, however, shift her thinking on theft from such people. So to see one side of her opinion about the “haves and have-nots” change, but not the other (at least not on the page), rang insincere. 

Strike three: The entire book was so predictable that when it met the tired tropes and twists without deviation, I was truly in disbelief — disbelief that anyone could be that unoriginal.