Through time-hops, through the eyes of multiple point of view characters, and in a variety of locations both in our reality and outside of it, we follow the life of Holly Sykes as she plays a pivotal role in the metaphysical war between the benevolent immortal Horologists and the greedy, soul-stealing Anchorites.
In 1984, Holly is fifteen and she runs away from home. A simple act of teenage rebellion, sparked from a fight with her mother and a bad breakup, sets into motion an unstoppable string of events that draw her into a psychic struggle between good and evil. In 1991, a Cambridge student named Hugo Lamb goes on vacation to a ski resort town, and meets Holly Sykes - a waitress at a bar, adrift and without a plan or purpose. In 2004, war journalist Ed Brubeck is bored at a family wedding, itchy to return to his dangerous work and guilty for wanting to abandon his young daughter, Aoife, and troubled wife. Holly. In 2015, has-been fiction writer Crispin Hershey is frustrated when he is upstaged at a book signing by a new, popular author Holly Sykes ,whose memoir about growing up with supernatural abilities made a big splash. In 2025, a Horologist named Marinus - an immortal warrior and scholar who regenerates in a new body and new life every time she dies - has to recruit a powerful human psychic, Holly, for one last big battle with the Anchorites, the Horologists' dark counterparts, who synthesize false immortality through gruesome sacrificial means, And in 2043, elderly Holly Sykes ekes out a living in a climate-change ravaged, post-apocalyptic Ireland.
In The Bone Clocks, David Mitchell has crafted a subtle and loving story of one woman's life, disguised as sci-fi epic. And if the reader is left with the sense that they wish they could have spent just a little more time with some of the characters, well, isn't that what it means to be human?
This sounds like a lovely, fascinating read! I'm familiar with David Mitchell, but I hadn't heard of this before, which is strange since it seems just as sweeping and intricate as some of his other well-known books. Your review covers the plot, but also leaves a lot of the mystery, enough to be quite intriguing! I also really like how concisely you were able to capture your feelings about the book in your final paragraph. Brevity is a challenge for me personally, so I always admire it when people are able to capture a lot by saying a little. The last line in particular, turning the slight criticism into a philosophical rhetorical question, is a really solid way to end this review.
ReplyDeleteHi Claire, your review is crafted so well! I also did mine over a novel with multiple timelines and characters, but I struggled with how much to explain. I think perhaps it’s because I didn’t enjoy my book very much. However, mine still sounds a little choppy, but yours sounds so smooth and intriguing. Thanks for sharing!
ReplyDeleteHi Claire!
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, you have a beautiful way of writing. Secondly, this book sounds amazing. My only critique would be the last paragraph. There is a lot of great information in it, but since the information is broken up between two sentences, I feel that these could have been combined into one to make a greater impact.
Fantastic review - your summary is the best I have seen on this book - the others I have read seemed so confusing but you did a great job summarizing a complex plot and have a great conclusion!
ReplyDelete