The theme of "who owns a story" was interesting, and I enjoyed the parts that dealt with writing in general, as well as Jake's struggles as a writer. It's true that great works are often imitated, stories re-imagined and rewritten. An idea can't be owned. But is it ok to write someone else's story? What if you didn't know it was real? These are indeed interesting points that can be debated.
The author is a good writer who knows her literature, and I thought it was really creative how she threw in references to other works, in particular what she did with "Housekeeping." However, the "book within a book" didn't quite work for me, as I thought the book written by Jake was quite boring.
I truly disliked the villain (I won't mention who, in case spoilers aren't allowed.) I don't find it clever to create a character so evil--someone who can be so perfectly manipulative, never get caught, never feel remorse. So I really hated the ending. Thrillers aren't really my thing, so maybe that's the problem, but I felt like this could've been a much better book but was ruined by the one super unrealistic character and outrageous events.
The author is a good writer who knows her literature, and I thought it was really creative how she threw in references to other works, in particular what she did with "Housekeeping." However, the "book within a book" didn't quite work for me, as I thought the book written by Jake was quite boring.
I truly disliked the villain (I won't mention who, in case spoilers aren't allowed.) I don't find it clever to create a character so evil--someone who can be so perfectly manipulative, never get caught, never feel remorse. So I really hated the ending. Thrillers aren't really my thing, so maybe that's the problem, but I felt like this could've been a much better book but was ruined by the one super unrealistic character and outrageous events.