OnlineBookClub.org

I honestly didn't feel like she was in that much danger. Dan did a few shady things but nobody particularly tried to kill her, the worst thing I saw that happened was that they got pulled over and she got searched. If that's an idea of danger I clearly missed it. I don't feel like she was in all that much danger with her job, either, and the only potential danger she hinted at was being weirded out for about a minute that Sky wanted to marry her. Cynthia wasn't even a protagonist, unfortunately. A protagonist grows and changes; I think Cynthia stayed exactly the same throughout the whole book, and didn't show a hint of backbone or anger. Even when she found out about Dan she was more confused than anything.

I don't appreciate when protagonists just fall from one danger to another without any linkage in the storyline. It made Cynthia very vulnerable here.

Renee_Prior1995 wrote: ↑03 Jun 2019, 23:49 Maybe the author wanted to make a smart character, but also wanted to make her vulnerable enough to be in so much danger

I agree

Cynthia was so dim witted that her constant state of danger did absolutely nothing for the book. Instead of an exhilarating scene, I was just aggravated at the number of obvious mistakes she was making, especially with what she did for a living.

Renee_Prior1995 wrote: ↑03 Jun 2019, 23:49 Maybe the author wanted to make a smart character, but also wanted to make her vulnerable enough to be in so much danger

At first I had no idea why Cynthia lacked common sense, but this actually makes sense.

ArriettyClock wrote: ↑03 Jun 2019, 05:50 I always find it frustrating when lead characters (of either gender) just fall from one danger to another without any linkage in the storyline. It makes for a very disjointed and annoying read. No one's life is like that, so it makes it unrealistic as well as confusing about why this character seems to have a death-wish.

I 100% agree. While I'm a huge fan of action plots, I find it unrealistic when characters are constantly facing danger and always make it out alive and/or largely unscathed, and then seem to find themselves facing yet another life-threatening danger right away. It becomes too "superhero" for me. It also makes me wonder whether the main character is just idiotic and can't do anything to keep themselves out of trouble. Makes me dislike them for causing trouble for everyone else.

While constant danger might be the motto for action movies, it's not the same for books. The producers for those kinds of films know their audience appreciates a lot of visual theatrics that exhilarates the mind, but books are a whole different medium. A lot of action doesn't always translate well into books. Even in movies, I find it irritating when the main character(s) somehow always find themselves in the worst trouble, like their blood attracts anything and everything dangerous. It gets annoying and repetitive real quick, as it did with this book.

Cynthia is a Mary Sue through and through. Authors describes them as people to be admired but their actions make the readers feel the complete opposite of it. And the danger whatchamalit , I bet the author wrote it for the sake of being the binding agent of his/her main couple

DD129 wrote: ↑28 Jul 2019, 20:42 While constant danger might be the motto for action movies, it's not the same for books. The producers for those kinds of films know their audience appreciates a lot of visual theatrics that exhilarates the mind, but books are a whole different medium. A lot of action doesn't always translate well into books. Even in movies, I find it irritating when the main character(s) somehow always find themselves in the worst trouble, like their blood attracts anything and everything dangerous. It gets annoying and repetitive real quick, as it did with this book.

You've read my mind , exactly like what I'm thinking

I didn't really get the danger aspect. The risks were stated but it's like the author wrote about them, then forgot to continue reminding the reader that there were risks involved. The dangers were completely lost to me after being presented.

I agree that she did not seem to be a strong female protagonist, and she put herself in danger as much as someone else causing her danger.

I hated Cynthia's character. She's how writers describe a character as "naive" which basically means the most gullible and stupid character in the book. She falls for anything so that a lot of the trouble she gets into was avoidable. It doesn't make the story more interesting it makes it more frustrating.

I have a big issue with female protagonists looking so clueless in books in general. I enjoyed reading all the comments in this thread about people agreeing with this ideea!

ArriettyClock wrote: ↑03 Jun 2019, 05:50 I always find it frustrating when lead characters (of either gender) just fall from one danger to another without any linkage in the storyline. It makes for a very disjointed and annoying read. No one's life is like that, so it makes it unrealistic as well as confusing about why this character seems to have a death-wish.

Yes, I agree with this. I was actually thinking, 'this would have been annoying even if she was a man'. I like to give writers the benefit of the doubt. Not all characters need to be sensible and make all the right choices because not all people in real life are sensible and make all the right choices.

But if you want me to believe something about a character, like this is a defining characteristic or trait about them, you can't keep making them do things that contradict that. Because then your character just ends up looking ridiculous, and the story loses its impact.

Ferdinand_otieno wrote: ↑01 Jun 2019, 09:04 Did you feel that a protagonist who seemed to be in ever present danger and just barely survived was good for the book? Did she make the story more thrilling?

I found Cynthia potrayed as an incapacitated and with no much power to defend herself. The character would have been better if she was well developed.