Lucy's Reviews > The Night Circus

Contains some minor spoilers.

I disliked this book, which means I ought to rate it one star, but it is not as awful as my one star shelf. One star books have to really repulse me to get that rating. The only redeeming thing about The Night Circus is that I didn't feel the one star compulsion to start a bonfire so I could properly dispose of it, hence two stars, but in this case it does not mean I enjoyed the book at all.

From the Goodreads summary: "But behind the scenes, a fierce competition is underway—a duel between two young magicians, Celia and Marco, who have been trained since childhood expressly for this purpose by their mercurial instructors. Unbeknownst to them, this is a game in which only one can be left standing, and the circus is but the stage for a remarkable battle of imagination and will. Despite themselves, however, Celia and Marco tumble headfirst into love—a deep, magical love that makes the lights flicker and the room grow warm whenever they so much as brush hands."

The above is a series of filthy, filthy lies intended to make you part with your money. Did the person who wrote the description read the same book I read? Or did he get so bored that he fell asleep and was forced to wing it for a deadline? If that's the case, I feel for the poor guy since I fell asleep reading this a few times, but I don't forgive the lies.

Lie Number One: "A Fierce Competition"
What Actually Happens: Instead of reading about a battle of wits, ingenuity, and talent taking place on a magical field you get two slugs racing against each other... over the course of sixteen or so years. Yeah, all those extra years might kill the intensity, but think of the emotional investment you make in those slugs. You can bring your new born baby to see them and go again every year as the fierce competition between the two of them goes on and on and on and on and on... (view spoiler)[and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on. (hide spoiler)] Your child will have a driver's license when the fierce competition is over.

Lie Number Two: "A Duel"
What Actually Happens: For a significant part of the story the two 'dueling' magicians are raised separately with no knowledge of one another. For ANOTHER significant part of the story only one magician is aware of who they are 'competing' against. By the time the magician who was unaware is finally brought up to date they have been collaborating on projects for years... Yes, you read that right. They never stand toe to toe in any sort of competitive sense. They build little attractions for the circus and sometimes they built them together, leaving gaps for the other to fill because they like each other's work. This is how they 'fiercely compete' during their 'duel.'

Lie Number Three: "Trained Since Childhood Expressly For This Purpose"
What Actually Happens: This sounds like a warrior toddler getting out of bed and doing push-ups (or the magical equivalent) every day for forever with the intent of search and destroy. In reality, they both have haphazard educations from sociopathic father figures* who never tell them a damn thing about the competition. They don't know what they're doing or how to play the game (and neither does the reader for most of the book). I believe this is because the author had no idea how to make them actually compete or what she was doing beyond establishing a lot of overly descriptive scene setting. The training is just education from two different schools of thought on the subject of magic. They're not given any idea of how to be the victor. It's an experiment, which is vastly different from training a warrior as this is made to sound.

*The father figures are equally psychotic, suggesting that both of their philosophies are fundamentally flawed because they're both batshit crazy. One slices his daughter's fingers open over and over again to teach her how to heal herself, even smashes her hand to break her bones for a lesson, and the other does not know his ward's name until he is nearly an adult. Neither of them ever face any consequences for the things they do to the children or the many experimental children before them.

Lie Number Four: "Only One Can Be Left Standing"
What Actually Happens: Aside from the obvious (view spoiler)[happily ever after (hide spoiler)] ending the author works in, there's no reason that one of them has to die. The previous "battle" before this one (I'm sneering at that) lasted thirty-seven fucking years and only ended because one of the magicians committed suicide. There's absolutely no sense of urgency in this book. It moves at the languid pace my grandmother's overweight poodle used to meander around at, like there was no where to go and nothing to do. The author tries to force some urgency and pacing in by having both characters willing to lose the game so the other can win... but why? If you're playing a game of Monopoly with a friend (Monopoly might be too exciting a comparison to use here but lets work with it) and someone's going to need to commit suicide at the end of it then you... don't stop playing. You don't even have to sit at the board all day every day. You can come back once a year and make a fucking move. No one in their right mind would jump up and yell 'I shall die for you my dearest!' especially if you know your friend will jump up and say the same thing louder.

I don't know what happens if no one commits suicide? Does someone self-implode from excess magic? We never find out anything substantial. We don't know how past competitions ended beyond that single one. The book is left open-ended so that the publishers can milk this monstrosity all over again if it sells well.

Lie Number Five: "Despite themselves, however, Celia and Marco tumble headfirst into love—a deep, magical love that makes the lights flicker and the room grow warm whenever they so much as brush hands."
What Actually Happens: After many, many years of not knowing who the other magician is, Marco reveals himself to Celia. The author tells you sparks fly. Sparks do not actually fly because these two 'characters' are about as flat as they come. There's no resisting falling in love. They just decide to do it in true Edward/Bella/Twilight fashion. There's no "deep, magical love". The love story is next to non-existent. On top of that, Marco continues to see someone else for years after... why? I don't fucking know. But it's a big god damn deal because she goes nuts and disrupts some of the magic of the circus and allows Bad Things to happen.

There's so many other things wrong with the book. There's intertwining timelines. We jump back and forth decades in time, vanish off into characters who are at first totally unrelated to the circus and then have minor roles later on. None of the core characters are well-developed and none of the relationships are even remotely worth reading about. I don't get why the book is set in the period it was set in. Social standards aren't kept up. Maybe it was more atmosphere? Maybe it was so that the author didn't have to deal with the people who would show up to debunk the magic of the circus.

On that note, the magic was so obviously magic that I got annoyed. I feel slightly insane for typing that out, but hear me out. It's all supposed to be real magic done with a wink and a nod so people won't realize it's real magic. Turn a jacket into a raven and then grin and wave so people believe you just performed the best slight of hand ever. Of course, the tricks were too fantastical to be believed. The wooden animals on the carousel breathe... and no amount of great mechanics could have made that happen 100 plus years ago. There's ice gardens and foggy mazes made of clouds, fires that never EVER go out, no one in the circus or relating to it ages (minus kids), and circus tents set up by invisible people. Everyone in the circus assumes the set up is done by assistants... what? assistants they never see? Where are the circus people when the set up and packing happens? Where do they think the crew goes after? Really, Book? Really?

All of this happened as a contest between two old men who do nothing but sacrifice the lives of children so they can have the satisfaction of being right about things that are never. fully. described. One prefers things more obvious and in your face, the other is quiet and prefers a more book based education. Seriously? This was the propelling point for the entire novel?!

The world building and magic rules also suck. Anything the author wants to have happen can happen with minor limits. The only reason to read this book is the lovely descriptions and abundant scene setting. I do not recommend it to people who like a good story, although if you're into abundant prose give it a whirl. It's kind of like reading a travel brochure while high as a kite.

Edit: To anyone who has not read the book and might be making their decision to read/not read based on this review, I wanted to say many people I respect found more redeeming qualities in the book than I did. Here is one such review. Based on my experience, I still recommend reading sample chapters online first or a library trip.