I didn’t not not love it. There were bits of compelling action between reams of philosophy lecture delivered in plenty bantery conversation (strong point in the series), and these flashy action bits promised perhaps a looming plot, but alas, suspected plot never settled on the page. I get it, plot was secondary (tertiary?) to the core of this work: existentialist philosophical jabberings. First year philosophy students (in our current year: 2024, that means specifically those born 2005-2007) will find this riveting, eye-opening, Galaxy bursting stuff. (Third years will coolly roll their reddened eyes and return to Sartre and Nietzsche and Voltaire.)
Overall, it’s a not entirely unpretentious novel-ish sort of work with a not un-slim plethora of double (triple?) negatives fattening the not not already pretentious word count. For sure. 
Am I glad I read all three? Maybe. No. Yes. Well, is it Thursday? I have gained everything and nothing in this endeavour, and I cannot highly enough not recommend it to anyone and everyone. Or no one just the same.