Did certain parts of the book make you uncomfortable?

[Kristin Ransome]

I found the drowning of the puppies completely unnecessary and so cruel!

[Dragonsend]

I don't know, maybe I was a little insensitive but I thought it added to the boy's peril. It added to the idea that no matter where they turned someone was out to get them and these pets were extremely important to the boy's because they picked each other.

[LauraLeeWasHere]

I want to take a moment to thank all of you who took the time to answer my questions. In fact, I'm sure you'll be bumping into my questions all over this forum. I know they may seem a bit inconsequential and sometimes downright silly but there is a purpose to them.
I find people so fascinating and by sharing a singular experience (like reading a book) I can learn so much about what makes us tick.
So your opinions matter to me very much. Nothing is so amazing as the human soul. Thanks for sharing part of yours with me!

Sincerely, Laura-Lee

[KariD3]

I do agree that one of the things that did bother me the most was the harming of the wolf cubs. The game keeper in general was creepy as well, at least that I felt. There just didn't seem to be a point to his character for it just seemed like his only point to exist was to be cruel and other than that, it didn't add to the plot of the book at all. However it wasn't the only thing that I felt might be disturbing for younger readers. The fight with the Fate Sealers where the old man got repeatedly stabbed, or the scenes where Will can see drowned bodies floating beneath the lake was a bit bothering as well.

[Sam Ibeh]

There were so many cruel activities that went down in the book. That was uncomfortable for me.

[Monishka Sharma]

Emmy ending up in shadowpain and the puppies drowing are worse.

[joshfee77]

Any intentional harm to animals or humans is abhorrent. I personally found the drowning of the puppies the worst.

[TracySG98]

There were definitely parts that were unsettling to me. Like when the game keeper went out of his way to deliberately hurt Will and Wolfia. Also, the fact that there seemed to be no reason when the Fate Sealers decided to attack. The scene at the lake was just plain creepy, explaining the screaming faces of the dead bodies frozen in the lake felt like overkill. While I thoroughly enjoyed reading the book, there were more than enough uncomfortable parts to make me not want to recommend this book to younger readers.

[Erin Painter Baker]

I think what bothered me most about the harming of the wolf cubs, and the Game Keeper in general, was that there did not seem to be a point to his character. He was nothing but cruel, and his presence in the book did not add to the plot at all. He wasn't even made out to be a red herring. His continued job at the orphanage makes me not like the character of Dew Pellucid much either, because why would she tolerate that kind of sadistic behavior?

So the book's been noted for the similarities to the Harry Potter series right? This actually reminds me of an uncomfortable problem with this subgenre where the people in charge often keep employing rather cruel persons who are allowed near kids. The Game Keeper is rather reminiscent of Argus Filch in that way and it really bothers me how much he was willing to hurt Will's wolf.

There is definitely the issue in young adult novels where the adults, even the good adults, cannot be trusted completely, or see the "truth" as clearly as the kids see it. And I get this because as an adult, I often see things in a more nuanced way than a pre-teen or teenager. But the gamekeeper keeping his job really bothered me in this book because he was NEVER presented as any other way. The people in charge knew exactly what he was doing, and his feelings about wild pets and kept him on anyway. There was never a mitigating circumstance presented.

[Nisha Ward]

I think what bothered me most about the harming of the wolf cubs, and the Game Keeper in general, was that there did not seem to be a point to his character. He was nothing but cruel, and his presence in the book did not add to the plot at all. He wasn't even made out to be a red herring. His continued job at the orphanage makes me not like the character of Dew Pellucid much either, because why would she tolerate that kind of sadistic behavior?

So the book's been noted for the similarities to the Harry Potter series right? This actually reminds me of an uncomfortable problem with this subgenre where the people in charge often keep employing rather cruel persons who are allowed near kids. The Game Keeper is rather reminiscent of Argus Filch in that way and it really bothers me how much he was willing to hurt Will's wolf.

There is definitely the issue in young adult novels where the adults, even the good adults, cannot be trusted completely, or see the "truth" as clearly as the kids see it. And I get this because as an adult, I often see things in a more nuanced way than a pre-teen or teenager. But the gamekeeper keeping his job really bothered me in this book because he was NEVER presented as any other way. The people in charge knew exactly what he was doing, and his feelings about wild pets and kept him on anyway. There was never a mitigating circumstance presented.

Yeah. I think that might actually be part of one of the book's bigger flaws where it keeps introducing characters and just leaves them there. The author doesn't really do much with most of the cast.

[Erin Painter Baker]

@Nisha Ward - There is most definitely almost no character development outside of our main characters. Even Emmy and Valerie get very little. It is definitely a big part, in my mind, of why this book remains firmly aimed at middle-grade and the youngest young-adult readers. It will never become the sensation among adults that Harry Potter was because so much of it remains flat. And that's not really a huge deal in a middle-grade/young adult book. It just means that it is not one of those transcendent stories.
That said, I do stand by my comment in my review that I think it's enjoyable enough for the whole family to listen to the audio book on a road trip. I just don't think adults will seek it out on their own, nor would I recommend it to people who weren't considering it for reading with kids.

[Nisha Ward]

@Nisha Ward - There is most definitely almost no character development outside of our main characters. Even Emmy and Valerie get very little. It is definitely a big part, in my mind, of why this book remains firmly aimed at middle-grade and the youngest young-adult readers. It will never become the sensation among adults that Harry Potter was because so much of it remains flat. And that's not really a huge deal in a middle-grade/young adult book. It just means that it is not one of those transcendent stories.
That said, I do stand by my comment in my review that I think it's enjoyable enough for the whole family to listen to the audio book on a road trip. I just don't think adults will seek it out on their own, nor would I recommend it to people who weren't considering it for reading with kids.

Oh definitely! There's absolutely nothing wrong with that either. I don't believe everything has to be transcendent, and I will be fair to the author in that I think a sequel would work really well to build on everything in this one.

[BookishCoffeeBlog]

The definitely made me uncomfortable. I feel like it was unnecessary to the story as well. I don't think it pushed the plot along at all.

[HeatherEi]

The drowning of the puppies was so cruel! That was a part that really bothered me!

I don't like it when dogs get hurt in movies or books!

[Jennashby_87]

I have a really hard time but any harm done to animals in both books and on screen so that was definitely the worst part for me. It made the book a bit difficult for me to come back to after I read the section about the pups that’s for sure.