Thursday, July 14, 2011


By Cat Patrick
Little, Brown, 2011. 288 pgs. Teen fiction

London Lane can't remember the past; every morning at 4:33 a.m., her memory of the past is erased. However, she does have "memories" or glimpses of things to come in the future. Using these glimpses, along with notes that she records for herself, she gets by. However, when a new boy, Luke, shows up and London doesn't see him the future, she's concerned--she's drawn to him and they start dating, but each day, she has to "remind" herself that he even exists. At the same time, she gets a dark glimpse of a funeral in the future and is trying to figure out what is going to happen, why she can't "see" Luke in the future, and if the two things are related--and what secrets her mother is keeping from her.

This book started out really well; I was immediately drawn in by the premise of the story. The plot was intriguing and I really liked the budding relationship between Luke and London. However, inconsistencies in the book started to frustrate me, and in the end, I felt like the consistencies kept the story from even making sense. For example, why can't London see Luke? Even if she can't see Luke in the distant future, why wouldn't she be able to see him the following day? She mentions that she gets through school, knowing where to sit and where her locker is, etc., by "remembering" the following, why can't she remember Luke from the next day, if they date for over 6 months? That doesn't make sense to me.

(Side tangent: Luke and London don't sleep together but do discuss how they will in the future...and that's weird to me; if a girl can't remember the guy, shouldn't he be hesitant to sleep with her? Even if he wants to, ethically, isn't there something wrong with sleeping with someone who doesn't even know you?)

Anyway, the inconsistencies kinda took the wind of my sails so to speak. I think this could have been a great book if the inconsistencies were smoothed out and clearer answers given to how London's break works and why.

3.5 stars.

No comments:

Post a Comment