I genuinely don’t know what to say about this book, or even what I want to say. The setting, in principle, should have drawn me in – both the time period and the locations are among my favourites. I am also always up for Gothic literature. There are certainly atmospheric descriptions, although they are almost always overly long and tend to drift away from the actual subject.

The narrative also jumps between characters. At times, this is confusing, though it does become easier to follow as the story progresses and the different strands can be distinguished more clearly. What I find far more problematic, however, is the way scenes are cut off mid-way, only for the next chapter to present the reader with a fait accompli in two or three sentences. There are no explanations whatsoever; the reader remains entirely passive and is forced to rely on the protagonists’ conversations. With the exception of Helena, the characters all feel vague and difficult to grasp. Sam’s development is erratic and hardly comprehensible, largely because the reader is not taken along but instead left with the impression that key events have simply occurred offstage.

Although the book suggests that the society of supernatural adherents is an established institution, actual encounters with the supernatural are dealt with very briefly and are, above all, accepted by the main characters with little to no resistance. This feels inauthentic and also deprives the reader of the chance to reflect: Could this be real? Is it truly supernatural, or is there a rational explanation? This is precisely what kept me engaged, for instance, in The Essex Serpent – I kept wondering which direction the story would take.

The central case itself is only ever observed from a distance, and although many of the methods are meant to evoke Sherlock Holmes, there is a complete lack of transparency. It feels as though the characters know more than the reader, who is simply expected to accept this. On several occasions, I found myself wondering whether this really is the first book, as too much feels fragmentary and as though prior knowledge is being assumed.

It is a shame that the book – and especially its ending – failed to convince me. There are, without question, many intriguing ideas, and at times it feels refreshingly “new”. However, in my view, the editing has clearly fallen short. Who approved these abrupt transitions? I find it difficult to understand. I do not think I will be reading the second book, particularly as it has also received rather poor reviews and appears to continue the same issues with inconsistency.