The Everlasting Rose

I think the main review on here is unfair. The author improved dramatically from book 1 to 2, especially regarding the pacing and the plot. She made the storyline and arc of the book much less obvious, characters were fleshed out more, it was easier to read because there wasn’t so much filler and pomp. I give her major kudos for the intriguing premise and then the massive literary improvement.

There is a sense of “oh no!” when I learn about another mystery or character at play— because instead of excitement or intrigue, I didn’t trust the author to reveal the answer within that book, or NOT reveal the answer too early, to keep a new character going (and interesting), drop previous storylines that didn’t pan out, or even make it non-obvious to readers. You want to be excited about twists and turns and layers to a story, not annoyed because you assume it won’t pan out.

It’s better than The Belles, but not something I could ever recommend in good conscience. Thankfully, the author cut down on the constant & unnecessary location descriptions, and focused more on the plot.

The main character is written terribly. She acts idiotically (and it’s clear the author is trying to force us to believe it’s because Camille has such a big heart/cares too much) and puts everyone she cares about in jeopardy, while simultaneously claiming she’s trying to save someone/others.

The best books are those written starring characters we aspire to be like, or who act (based upon their background) realistically. Clayton writes her main characters as idiots who would have zero chance of success and zero chance of being entrusted with the weight of saving a kingdom. They do not act reasonably, and while a few moments of unreasonableness can be excused, this book takes the cake.

I will NEVER read another book written by her. If I see her name attached to something,I will avoid it. I did not see any true writing talent in the novel. Quite basic and generic.