Mediocre book, probably great as a play
591749
As a play, I can imagine this is fantastic. As a huge HP fan, I was not big on the story and it did not read too well, either.
2841180
Although it is certainly understandable that the author might borrow a premise from Shakespeare. Many have done so before, building their own unique stories out of a classic example. However, with 40% of this book read, I'm afraid that it mimics the bard a bit too closely. The sparring dialogue between the pair, the masquerade scene, the plans to unite the sparring pair that begins with a overheard conversation... I have been struggling through, trying not to compare it to Much Ado about Nothing but it was impossible not to. Sorry, the resemblance is just too much. Even the cadence of the banter seems designed to mimic Shakespeare. Although the author seems to be a skilled writer, she inevitably falls short when compared to Shakespeare.
4130346
The story of this book is interesting enough, and as alluded to in the acknowledgments, it might even make a good movie, but only if the screenplay is written by a more skilled writer. I read a lot of books aimed at this age group, including a fair share of fantasy novels similar to what this one aspires to be, but the way this book is written, it seems like a high-school creative writing project.

One of the most consistent problems with the style (which in itself is just one level of what's wrong) is that it's often written as if the story is being related third-hand, rather than the events being described by an omniscient narrator as they are the rest of the time. Many details are given rather than (easily) shown, and events that are supposed to be happening at that moment are suddenly described as if they've already happened. I wonder if the two authors wrote sections separately and just sewed them together poorly.

I don't think of this all as nitpicking, because it was inescapable no matter what I tried. I read books like this not as literature but rather as the reading equivalent of watching TV. This book just consistently threw me right out of the story, one way or another, and long before I was halfway finished I decided to push on solely to passively study what it was about the writing that was so repellent.

I have to wonder if sections of the book were left unfinished and had to be rushed, and loose ends had to be crudely tied together throughout all levels of the story.

So, to sum up, if I were you, I would read this book only 1) if you find the idea especially compelling and you have enough time on your hands that you won't greatly miss what you've spent reading a 500-page outline of what would be an only slightly longer story if properly written, or 2) if you want a rich treasure trove of counter-examples for How To Write a Novel. Somewhere in here, there lies a decent book for this age and genre, just waiting to be made by more talented hands.
256624
One of the later, weaker Dr. Gideon Fell novels.  The great detetcive is not much more than a shovel-hat and canes in the background.  The magic of the great novels is missing.  All we have here are the props of a mystery play.  The story for the most part takes place in a theatre with a bevy of actors and actresses running around and doing Romeo and Juliet.  I thought that the wrap-up in chapter 20 was pretty good even though the rest of the story was plodding.  The supernatural element that of course turns out to be false in Carr's mysteries is missing except for a "goblin" mask that is not very effective or frightening to anyone.  There is a ton of dialogue padding and some funny drunken bar scenes that are not really that funny.  All of Carr's elements are trotted out on to the stage, but the scenes are for the most part dull and forgettable.  An old Sherlock Holmes stage play starring Wiilliam Gillete plays a key role, so this one will be interesting to Holmes fans.  If you happen to be an expert on Sherlock Holmes, you might even guess the ending!
1640752
Imagine living theatre. I don't mean that you're in plays a lot, I mean living theatre. Well, that's the world of Beatrice Shakespeare Smith. She spends her days with Ophelia, the fairies from Midsummer Night's Dream, and Ariel--the wild spirit from The Tempest. Her bedroom is the stage, and her kingdom is the magical theatre.

Isn't that a wonderful concept? As a theatre person I found it absolutely enchanting. The concept get's five stars. Hands down.

However, the execution was not as fantastic.

Many of my criticisms are things that could have easily been changed in writing the book, but can't really be changed now, so I won't spend too much time on them. In short: the plot was a little disjointed. Plot points were focused on, and then forgotten. Characters made decisions that didn't really make much sense. And it took me about 100 pages to have ANY sort of clue as to what was going on, but it was still intriguing. Especially when the book would turn into script format. I found that very interesting. For all of that, the execution gets 3 stars.

And so, I average the scores and the book in total gets four stars. But, one plus is that it's appropriate for just about all ages.
4735649
Being written as a play made it less enjoyable.  The story line wasn't as appealing as the original Harry Potter Series.
235400
I really wanted to like this book a lot.  It has all the pieces I think go into a great novel, especially the 15th century setting in Florence.  However, I simply couldn't get into the narrative of events from the perspective of an 11-12 year old girl.  There were times when it seemed as if she was indeed a child and other times, a seductress in her thirties.  Neither characterization was completely believable.  What kept me reading until the end was the references to the monk Savonarola and the chaos he created in Florence.  I'm a huge fan of Showtime's "The Borgias" and was hoping this plot would enhance the story.  It did, but not enough to make my reading of this book anything more than mediocre.
898661
The play starts out with a great sense of humor. But soon the humor wears out. Rosemary's character is fairy strong but lacks depth. She is determined to have her way but I believe the culture prohibits a bolder course of action. Anthony is weak and weepy-  a total milquetoast. Tony is an insensitive curmudgeon. Unlike Doubt where the author takes up fairly heavy moral issues around the the abuse by authority, pedophile, submission/obedience of nuns to the church/priest, in this play the author relies on a single issue that may fail to evoke a read's empathy. Nonetheless in 65 pages you come away learning a lot about the plights of many in the Emerald Isles. My expectations were raised as the play is currently a rage in NYC and maybe that is due to author's reputation or Debra Messing's acting. I enjoyed reading it but it did not stir my heart.
2900106
Some plays read well, some are shown well, and others manage both. I believe this would be an amazing play to see, but as a read, it is supremely bad. The plot is thin and non engaging, the dialog poor. I could see the scenes trying to be set and imagine that they would be wonderful and enchanting in person. This just doesn't translate. Further, there is absolutely no time to connect to characters.
Lastly, I feel robbed buying this. 29,99 US for a script is ridiculous. If there was some effort put into this, I can stomach that. However, the script was published with a pretty cover, without any other thought or effort put in.. I think I'll just pretend I lost the money and hide this "book" away.
975111
This "book" only has value if, as a fan of the franchise, you just have to know what happens. Personally, as  long-time reader of the original series, I found this book to be rather disappointing. There is so much potential here, and the development just wasn't there. Obviously that is because it was written as a play and was not meant to be as comprehensive as the original books. Perhaps the play would be interesting to watch. However, as a book it feels rather contrived at times and largely missing the original magic of the series. The dialogue often felt, for lack of a better term, cheesy and the characters rather flat. It reads fast, due to a low word count, but frankly I wouldn't spend my money on it unless you feel compelled
4304088
Read the three and four star reviews for this book. The four star reviews are really mostly all three star reviews, but people frequently added a fourth star because this is Michael Chabon, it's baseball, the book is well intentioned, and it just "should have been better than it was and maybe it's my fault I didn't like it that much".

Here's the thing. The ferishers, who are supposed to be the whimsical, funny glue that holds the book together, aren't half as funny or fun as the practically identical Nac Mac Feegle wee men of Terry Pratchett's Tiffany Aching series. The three young heroes aren't nearly as personable, compelling or engaging as those found in the Potter books or even a dozen other contemporary fantasies. The Norse mythology isn't as good as Neil Gaiman's or Catherine Fisher's. The baseball isn't anywhere near the baseball in real baseball books, ("The Natural", "Bang the Drum Slowly", etc.).

This book consists of a lot of sly, accomplished, literary and literate name dropping and alluding, without very much heart. The book could have been twice as long or half as long without that making any difference, because at heart the book is so predictable and by the numbers that you just don't care as you slog along. As I read it I thought along the lines of this being a noble failure sort of thing. By the end and on further reflection I'm beginning to lean more towards the theory that this was a pretty mechanical and manipulative exercise. Doesn't matter though, because either way the book just isn't worth the effort.
3554207
Since this is a play script, the book lacks emotions and detailed descriptions. Hopefully, the full version of the book will be much more vivid and captivating!
2211640
This is a below average book. The dialogue is amatuerish. The characters are one dimensional. As a result, the characters' actions further plot development, but are frequently unbelievable.  For instance, the evil conspirators initially let the heroine live in peace in London simply because she appears to have renounced her Harlequin roots and become a member of the general public.  Huh?  Why would a ruthless organization without moral scruples decide not to kill their sworn enemy simply because she took a day job?  Obviously, if they are smart enough to rule the world, they could figure out that she might change her mind--particularly if they brutally kill her father.  Why not simply crush her when they could quite easily, to ensure no future problems or little Harlequins.  There are numerous other plot holes.  Having said that, the book is a quick, easy read, and the story is mildly entertaining.  If you are interested in the theme, and are not annoyed by very mediocre writing, stock characters, or the author's pseudo-mysterious hoopla, you will probably like the book.  If not, wait for the movie.
4383010
I'm all for a good fantasy book, especially one with a strong female character who fights her way through difficult circumstances to accomplish the unexpected.  Unfortunately, this one is merely mediocre.

The author does a decent job with developing characters that encourage the reader to care about who they are and what they are doing (even if all they seem to do is travel endlessly through rough terrain), but the history and political machinations of the world she creates are too complex to keep track of, much less maintain a reader's interest.  "The Speech" that lets Bards speak to animals seems taken almost entirely from the "So you want to be a wizard?" books, right down to the fact that it's called "The Speech."  Maedrad gets her period so inexplicably often that I am surprised to find that the author is female.  Aside from a handful of sword handling and reading lessons, Maedrad appears to receive little to no instruction in skills that could be helpful for a Bard, yet she automatically knows exactly what to do when she needs to change her appearance or expand her hearing.  If her powers are so far beyond what people are expecting of a Bard, why isn't anyone bothering to teach her to control it?

I am glad to see more fantasy books out there, especially with strong female characters, but would recommend that if you are looking for something like this one, you read Tamora Pierce instead.
4715051
This is a comedy of manners in Depression-era England, dressed up as a murder mystery. It is skillfully done, but it is satirizing things unfamiliar to most modern readers, and it relies heavily on social constraints nearly incomprehensible today. It's definitely part of the British Golden Age detective stories, but most of those skip over the years between the Jazz Age and WWII. So while it pokes clever fun at other authors, they are not the authors or works familiar today.

By design it is an unsatisfactory--even subversive--murder mystery. It's too slow and meandering to be thrilling. The point is a large array of stylized characters from other books who appear on the pages, demonstrate their eccentricities in everyday events or mull over story events, then disappear from the author's attention. Every time the plot gets a little momentum, it stalls for a while, then drifts off in another direction.

I recommend it only as a curiosity for readers familiar with early 1930s British mysteries. With a lighter touch it could have been deliciously funny, with more of a point it could have been incisive satire. Instead it's well written, but I suspect the author had more fun writing it than the reader will reading it.
2619694
I did enjoy reading the story as a play.  However, I am an avid fan of the Harry Potter series; I found this to be of lesser interest to me.
4072897
This reads very much like the script for the narration of a History Channel program (and that is not a compliment). It is not very deep, tends to make a lot of generalizations, and uses anecdotes without analysis. The writing is inconsistent in quality, at times very good, but too often simplistic, as though talking to a TV audience. He tries too hard to be funny or clever at times. It's adequate as an outline, but Bishop doesn't tie the pieces together to show how they were interwoven.