Reviewed by SilverThistle on
This was first published in 1982 and it feels a bit dated now. Not because of the writing style and definitely not because of the subject, but by association. Because other - more recent- novels in this genre are edgy and fashionable with urban settings and situations and they use language that you'll come across every day in life, Darkangel just seems to miss the mark if you're more used to the modern vampire romance.
It was republished in 2007, no doubt to soak up some of the popularity that vampire fiction had generated in recent years, and there's nothing wrong with that. Especially since Darkangel was actually a forerunner of all those other urban vamps. But it does tread a fine line. It's counting on the purchasers of Twilight and The Vampire Diaries and House of Night books to also show interest in this one and there's every chance they will, but I want to add a word of caution...
It's not what we've come to expect from vamp literature. It's not worse though....it's just different. Go into it expecting a fairytale and enjoy the weirdness of it all and it's a good story. From what I hear it gets better in the next two books in the trilogy, but I can't comment on that because I haven't read those. Read it for what it is, a cutting edge (at the time) dark fairytale. Like all good fairytales it has a bit of spook in it and there's a couple of bits where it gets scary and you'll hope it turns out well but it's not 'edge of your seat' type stuff and neither is it a 'will they, won't they' romance, it's just not that kind of book. I don't have a mad hunger to find out what happens next, if I'm honest, so I'm still not sure if I'll try the follow on books but if you're in the mood for a nice traditional fairytale with a nice un-traditonal vampire then this might be the book for you.
Reading updates
- Started reading
- 8 October, 2009: Finished reading
- 8 October, 2009: Reviewed