Serenity
I wanted to give this book five stars, but it's a shame I can't. Before explaining why, I want to say that I love this story. The beginning is strong and intriguing, and although I've heard someone say it gets boring midway, I couldn't disagree more. It will only be boring if you don't like the characters, and I loved them all.
Linus is a “fluffy” caseworker that has to go to an “orphanage” (it's more of a home) to investigate if this home should stay open or be closed. Arthur runs the home and cares for six magical children. Linus must stay for a month and give a professional recommendation regarding whether it's a suitable place for the children to live.
All of them are delightful, wonderful kids. By the end of his stay, Linus comes to realize his unintentional prejudice against magical creatures and starts to realize that “how things are” shouldn't in fact be that way. The whole story is about changing your perception of people you do not understand. The gist of the story is that we demonize beings who we do not understand, which brings me to why I could only rate this 3.5 stars.
One child in particular is six year old Lucifer, or “Lucy”, who is supposedly the “antichrist”. I will say this straight out: I do NOT believe that Lucy is the son of the devil. From the beginning, I always imagined that this was a name given to him because the people around him were frightened of him and demonized him. They saw a child that was so powerful that they had to name him after the antichrist out of fear and prejudice. It makes complete sense in my mind. Yet, even Arthur believes that he is the antichrist (page 121 and 392). I could never believe it though, and was disappointed that Arthur believed he was. Like, how?? Did Satan sign his parental rights away?! It's completely illogical that Arthur believes that. I can believe in gnomes and magical creatures, but I just couldn't accept that Lucy was the antichrist. It makes more sense that Lucy is merely misunderstood.
We saw this misunderstanding with another child, Chauncy. He's a magical creature that resembles a watery jellyfish. Before going to live with Arthur, people told Chauncy that he was “the monster under the bed”. Now, he's internalized this perception of himself from others and hides under beds. I feel that Lucy is the same way.
It wasn't until I read TJ Klune's notes that I accepted that Lucy was the antichrist. Klune said he purposefully made Lucy the antichrist because he wanted to explore “nature vs nurture”, but I just couldn't believe it as I read it. I was literally waiting for someone to defend Lucy and declare that he wasn't the antichrist, but it never came. Furthermore, the antichrist is not a “magical creature”, unless it was his intention to hint at that. I don't know. I'm just extremely disappointed that Klune kept the joke running. Lucy is no demon and no devil. He's an innocent little boy that's been traumatized and is scared about who and what he is. He needs therapy and love. And like Linus said, Arthur IS HIS FATHER (page 359), and later, so is Linus. That's how I wish it would have been- Linus and Arthur vehemently denying that Lucy is the antichrist and insisting that others are judging him based on appearance- but TJ Klune sticks to the joke. He could have still used the “he's the antichrist” joke, but the fact it was “real” in the story is extremely disappointing.
Despite my disagreement with the author on how he handled Lucy, I still feel that this is a lovely, wholesome story about two beautiful men falling in love, and adopting six hilarious children. It's become a favorite of mine, and I'll be re-reading it again in the future.
Edit: forgot to mention that I was disappointed that the book had a handful of instances that were distinctly anti-Christian and none showing the opposite. I fully acknowledge that there are aspects of Christianity that are wrong (because human beings are sinful), but I wish that Klune had included at least one moment demonstrating the goodness that exists in Christianity too. It's ironic that a book about prejudice seems to be prejudice itself against a religion. It would have been nice for at least one character to represent how a Christian should be. One particular character, Helen, could have worn a cross like her nephew to show that there are good people in the faith too. It was definitely a missed opportunity I would have appreciated. Maybe it was done on purpose, which is a shame.
Edit 2: I also forgot to mention that I didn't like the ending reunion. It confused me. I don't understand why all the children was so angry at Linus for leaving when they literally had a party for him because he was leaving. Linus had to do so much groveling when he begged them to forgive him for leaving to do his job, and I thought it was so unnecessary after he fought so hard for them to keep their home.
I wanted to give this book five stars, but it's a shame I can't. Before explaining why, I want to say that I love this story. The beginning is strong and intriguing, and although I've heard someone say it gets boring midway, I couldn't disagree more. It will only be boring if you don't like the characters, and I loved them all.
Linus is a “fluffy” caseworker that has to go to an “orphanage” (it's more of a home) to investigate if this home should stay open or be closed. Arthur runs the home and cares for six magical children. Linus must stay for a month and give a professional recommendation regarding whether it's a suitable place for the children to live.
All of them are delightful, wonderful kids. By the end of his stay, Linus comes to realize his unintentional prejudice against magical creatures and starts to realize that “how things are” shouldn't in fact be that way. The whole story is about changing your perception of people you do not understand. The gist of the story is that we demonize beings who we do not understand, which brings me to why I could only rate this 3.5 stars.
One child in particular is six year old Lucifer, or “Lucy”, who is supposedly the “antichrist”. I will say this straight out: I do NOT believe that Lucy is the son of the devil. From the beginning, I always imagined that this was a name given to him because the people around him were frightened of him and demonized him. They saw a child that was so powerful that they had to name him after the antichrist out of fear and prejudice. It makes complete sense in my mind. Yet, even Arthur believes that he is the antichrist (page 121 and 392). I could never believe it though, and was disappointed that Arthur believed he was. Like, how?? Did Satan sign his parental rights away?! It's completely illogical that Arthur believes that. I can believe in gnomes and magical creatures, but I just couldn't accept that Lucy was the antichrist. It makes more sense that Lucy is merely misunderstood.
We saw this misunderstanding with another child, Chauncy. He's a magical creature that resembles a watery jellyfish. Before going to live with Arthur, people told Chauncy that he was “the monster under the bed”. Now, he's internalized this perception of himself from others and hides under beds. I feel that Lucy is the same way.
It wasn't until I read TJ Klune's notes that I accepted that Lucy was the antichrist. Klune said he purposefully made Lucy the antichrist because he wanted to explore “nature vs nurture”, but I just couldn't believe it as I read it. I was literally waiting for someone to defend Lucy and declare that he wasn't the antichrist, but it never came. Furthermore, the antichrist is not a “magical creature”, unless it was his intention to hint at that. I don't know. I'm just extremely disappointed that Klune kept the joke running. Lucy is no demon and no devil. He's an innocent little boy that's been traumatized and is scared about who and what he is. He needs therapy and love. And like Linus said, Arthur IS HIS FATHER (page 359), and later, so is Linus. That's how I wish it would have been- Linus and Arthur vehemently denying that Lucy is the antichrist and insisting that others are judging him based on appearance- but TJ Klune sticks to the joke. He could have still used the “he's the antichrist” joke, but the fact it was “real” in the story is extremely disappointing.
Despite my disagreement with the author on how he handled Lucy, I still feel that this is a lovely, wholesome story about two beautiful men falling in love, and adopting six hilarious children. It's become a favorite of mine, and I'll be re-reading it again in the future.
Edit: forgot to mention that I was disappointed that the book had a handful of instances that were distinctly anti-Christian and none showing the opposite. I fully acknowledge that there are aspects of Christianity that are wrong (because human beings are sinful), but I wish that Klune had included at least one moment demonstrating the goodness that exists in Christianity too. It's ironic that a book about prejudice seems to be prejudice itself against a religion. It would have been nice for at least one character to represent how a Christian should be. One particular character, Helen, could have worn a cross like her nephew to show that there are good people in the faith too. It was definitely a missed opportunity I would have appreciated. Maybe it was done on purpose, which is a shame.
Edit 2: I also forgot to mention that I didn't like the ending reunion. It confused me. I don't understand why all the children was so angry at Linus for leaving when they literally had a party for him because he was leaving. Linus had to do so much groveling when he begged them to forgive him for leaving to do his job, and I thought it was so unnecessary after he fought so hard for them to keep their home.