well, given the co-reviewers florid descriptions, it set me wondering, because basically, this is a very mediocre book.
The Edinburgh setting 1818-1828 is... unconventional and nice. Quaint, yet scholarly . And while many of the descriptions of the town seem straight from textbooks about the "urbanizing" city, and nicely put if you know Edinborough, the plot itself falls flat.
Mostly due to the lacklustre hero, who we learn very little about - and what we learn is stolen straight from a Bernard Cornwell "Sharpe" Novel - of our Sergeant Quire. Who as the only "perspective character actually stumbles around Edinborough and surroundings, blindly, unaware and utterly unconvincing when it comes to his own survial, throughou the plot... A demonic dog attacked me ? Not my problem.
Any advancement of the story is being reliant on outside forces ("I just incidentally came by") , so we basically witness the "hero" being pushed about, but not at the whim of outside forces, but because he is disninclined to think. Any sidekicks or villains remain very... well, one-dimensional would be a compliment, really. Women are nefarious and enigmatic. Friends are... friends. Mentor's give boons. The villains.... do raise the dead because of ....SCIENCE !!! How utterly original, all of it. Especially since the author stealing a lot of material straight from Frankenstein.
But the plot's more interesting characters are certainly the enemy. There, at least is some mystery involved.
The plot itself, grave-robbing, spelunking and "rising from the dead", while unconventional for 19th century Greater Britain (or is it, after "Sense, Sensibility and Zombies ?"etc. ) , is lacklusterly done and follows the classic diagrams of story-telling.... Next Stop : Evil villains pounce from the right. Countermeasure. Helpful ally appears. Get's threatened.... etc etc etc... Nevermind that of course the evil villains are foreigners (!), nobility (!) and yawn.... ancient beings ! Again, how utterly un-original !
"Evil Undead North of Hadrian's Wall", "Hounds of Darkness walk the Streets", "Murder at the Masquerade !" ... well there could have been so much more to this, but the hero himself seems rather like an unthinking hound in pursuit rather than interested in the perplexities in the case "of the Walking Dead" itself.
And being deadly afraid for himself, his very-non-descipt love-life, but then at the next moment taking unbelievably stupid risks... Like walking out of the front door instead of taking one of a variety of rear entrances.
Yet in all the 400+ pages, we never get to realize why he even has this stubborn tendency, why he cares for anyone (even himself), after the devastations of the Napoleonic Wars for life in general, or where he even comes from, originally..... Why should we even sympathize with him ? Why does he care for his friends.. besides them being "friends" ?
Why do I find this unconvincing ? Nevermind a waste of time ?
Actually, if this wasn't Edinburgh, this would go straight to the trashcan. Ah yes..... we do get some fun moments meeting the gravedigggers and -robbers of Scotland. Saving graces, I guess.... But speaking for myself, I prefer my heroes slightly smarter.