Lolly's Library's Reviews > The Women in the Walls
The Women in the Walls
by
by
Lolly's Library's review
bookshelves: contemporary-fiction, amazon-vine, horror, young-adult, paranormal-young-adult
Sep 29, 2016
bookshelves: contemporary-fiction, amazon-vine, horror, young-adult, paranormal-young-adult
This is my first experience of Lukavics, who's apparently gotten high praise for her first novel, Daughters Unto Devils. Judging by her second novel, either the first was a fluke or her writing is highly overrated because my reaction upon finishing The Women in the Walls was: Meh. Seriously, I have no idea what Lukavics was trying to express with her story: the physical manifestation of psychological trauma? Genuine paranormal experiences? Neither angle succeeded.
Lucy, the protagonist, through whose first person P.O.V. we watch the story unfold, is a cipher, a bland bowl of oatmeal whom engenders no sympathy from the reader and no interest in her fate. She cuts herself to deal with stress... Ooh, she's damaged goods! We are given no deeper meaning to her behavior, no actual psychological depth as to why she cuts herself beyond the facile and shallow glossy-woman's-magazine-article explanation. As someone who used to cut herself, I was offended reading "Lucy's" thoughts and processes concerning the issue.
A big problem with the novel was the determination to not mention any specific time period. We're given to understand it's set sometime in our current time, but that's the problem: the modern setting doesn't suit the mood Lukavics was trying to set up. I knew exactly what she was trying to mimic, the atmosphere of Roman Polanski, of Rosemary's Baby, the sense of a timeless "now," but by using such anachronistic (and frankly ridiculous) phrases like "watching sitcoms" and asking about "search engines" (things no one, certainly not teenagers today, say) simply highlights the bizarre aspect. Had Lukavics been brave enough to set her story back in, say, 1952, the timeless nature she was trying to achieve would've actually come across.
Even worse, once we get past the endless dinner parties which are meant to be sinister and are the grand setup for the climax, the actual ending is baffling and deflating. The wet rag Lucy, who'd finally developed some courage, reverts back to her earlier, spineless self and it's just so... pointless. Nothing in the first parts of the book explain why the ending is necessary, even after the (what I consider ironic) praise the villain heaps upon Lucy, telling her Lucy's been chosen for her strength. Which I thought was just the biggest hoot considering all Lucy does throughout the book is whine, whimper, hide, look bewildered, and generally act in the opposite manner of a strong person.
In the end, I found the book to be disjointed, poorly plotted, and 100% not scary at all. This is one case where I can say I could write a better horror tale and I suck at writing horror.
Lucy, the protagonist, through whose first person P.O.V. we watch the story unfold, is a cipher, a bland bowl of oatmeal whom engenders no sympathy from the reader and no interest in her fate. She cuts herself to deal with stress... Ooh, she's damaged goods! We are given no deeper meaning to her behavior, no actual psychological depth as to why she cuts herself beyond the facile and shallow glossy-woman's-magazine-article explanation. As someone who used to cut herself, I was offended reading "Lucy's" thoughts and processes concerning the issue.
A big problem with the novel was the determination to not mention any specific time period. We're given to understand it's set sometime in our current time, but that's the problem: the modern setting doesn't suit the mood Lukavics was trying to set up. I knew exactly what she was trying to mimic, the atmosphere of Roman Polanski, of Rosemary's Baby, the sense of a timeless "now," but by using such anachronistic (and frankly ridiculous) phrases like "watching sitcoms" and asking about "search engines" (things no one, certainly not teenagers today, say) simply highlights the bizarre aspect. Had Lukavics been brave enough to set her story back in, say, 1952, the timeless nature she was trying to achieve would've actually come across.
Even worse, once we get past the endless dinner parties which are meant to be sinister and are the grand setup for the climax, the actual ending is baffling and deflating. The wet rag Lucy, who'd finally developed some courage, reverts back to her earlier, spineless self and it's just so... pointless. Nothing in the first parts of the book explain why the ending is necessary, even after the (what I consider ironic) praise the villain heaps upon Lucy, telling her Lucy's been chosen for her strength. Which I thought was just the biggest hoot considering all Lucy does throughout the book is whine, whimper, hide, look bewildered, and generally act in the opposite manner of a strong person.
In the end, I found the book to be disjointed, poorly plotted, and 100% not scary at all. This is one case where I can say I could write a better horror tale and I suck at writing horror.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Women in the Walls.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
August 29, 2016
– Shelved
August 29, 2016
– Shelved as:
to-read
September 9, 2016
–
Started Reading
September 10, 2016
–
Finished Reading
September 29, 2016
– Shelved as:
contemporary-fiction
September 29, 2016
– Shelved as:
amazon-vine
September 29, 2016
– Shelved as:
horror
September 29, 2016
– Shelved as:
young-adult
September 29, 2016
– Shelved as:
paranormal-young-adult
Comments Showing 1-3 of 3 (3 new)
date
newest »
Yes, that was way back when I was a teenager, when I didn't know any better as far as how to handle my depression.
Hoo, boy, I see what you mean. Okay, I think I'm striking this author off my TBR list. Stephen King and Thomas Harris, she ain't.
Hoo, boy, I see what you mean. Okay, I think I'm striking this author off my TBR list. Stephen King and Thomas Harris, she ain't.
From the looks of this review (https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...), the first doesn't sound any better. I don't mind if the MC is weak or insipid if there's something redeemable about the book, but it doesn't sound like that's the case with either. Now I think I'll pass on both books. :/