Scan barcode
A review by shanaqui
What Feasts at Night by T. Kingfisher
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
T. Kingfisher's What Feasts At Night is a follow-up to her retelling of 'The Fall of the House of Usher', this one as far as I can tell an original story (though based on folklore, it's not as strongly tied to a specific story). It was nice to see more of Alex Easton, and to explore ka's experience as a soldier, along with the fallout of the events of What Moves The Dead (unsurprisingly, Easton is not even slightly a fan of fungi).
The book actually takes us to Gallacia, to the hunting lodge that Easton briefly mentioned in the previous book, in order for Miss Potter (also returning, hurrah!) to stay there and do some exploration for fungi. But when ka arrives, there's a curious heavy atmosphere, the man he used to pay to keep the place up is gone, and the villagers don't want to explain what happened.
I found it interesting that Easton points out at one stage that the events in What Moves The Dead are in fact all natural, not supernatural: freaky as heck, but it's driven by fungi, growing and surviving. In What Feasts at Night, the threat is definitely supernatural. Which probably explains why I found it rather less unsettling than What Moves The Dead: infection and contagion frighten me for legitimate reasons, while ghosts and spirits and "other families" are more solidly in the realm of fiction. I'm not immune to getting creeped out at random, of course, but this book just didn't play on my fears as well. I just enjoyed Alex's character, the world-building of the Ruritanian romance stuff, and the typically witty narration of a T. Kingfisher book.
In a way, I enjoyed it more than the first book, and certainly read it faster. I don't think that makes it better -- I think What Moves The Dead is quite possibly the better book.
The book actually takes us to Gallacia, to the hunting lodge that Easton briefly mentioned in the previous book, in order for Miss Potter (also returning, hurrah!) to stay there and do some exploration for fungi. But when ka arrives, there's a curious heavy atmosphere, the man he used to pay to keep the place up is gone, and the villagers don't want to explain what happened.
I found it interesting that Easton points out at one stage that the events in What Moves The Dead are in fact all natural, not supernatural: freaky as heck, but it's driven by fungi, growing and surviving. In What Feasts at Night, the threat is definitely supernatural. Which probably explains why I found it rather less unsettling than What Moves The Dead: infection and contagion frighten me for legitimate reasons, while ghosts and spirits and "other families" are more solidly in the realm of fiction. I'm not immune to getting creeped out at random, of course, but this book just didn't play on my fears as well. I just enjoyed Alex's character, the world-building of the Ruritanian romance stuff, and the typically witty narration of a T. Kingfisher book.
In a way, I enjoyed it more than the first book, and certainly read it faster. I don't think that makes it better -- I think What Moves The Dead is quite possibly the better book.