Every #Bookstagrammer and #BookToker worth their salt has thoughts about A Court Of Thorns And Roses, the quintessential romantasy novel of the social media age. I resisted reading it – for longer than most – but I eventually succumbed.

(When you buy something through one of the affiliate links on this page, you get to support these reviews without it costing you a single extra cent)
Straight off the bat, the opening chapters of A Court Of Thorns And Roses felt eerily similar to those of The Hunger Games. An eldest daughter (Feyre in the former, Katniss in the latter) keeps her impoverished family alive, with no help from the useless surviving parent, by illegally hunting wild game. She is swept away by representatives of the oppressive ruling class, leaving behind a hopeless love interest and sibling(s) who will almost surely starve without her. There’s even a petite bourgeoisie class of bootlickers who do nothing about the poverty and destitution they see around them. The protagonist is pulled into a world of opulent indulgence, though she refuses to be seduced by it, and forms unlikely alliances.
The story isn’t “bad” so much as it is just boringly familiar. I don’t mind the use of genre tropes, and I usually enjoy adaptations and retellings, but A Court Of Thorns And Roses isn’t positioned that way. It’s positioned as a story all its own, and in that sense, it’s poorly done. It doesn’t only echo The Hunger Games; it also draws heavily from Beauty And The Beast (which Maas, to her credit, cites as her inspiration for the novel), and the third act weirdly reminded me of Jabba The Hutt’s whole deal in the original Star Wars films.
In terms of pitch and tone, the protagonist is revealed to be 19 years old, and yet it would be completely believable – given her lack of sophistication and naivete – that she was even younger. I couldn’t shake the suspicion that Maas originally conceived her as 16 or thereabouts, but aged her up in order to properly capitalise on the “sex sells” maxim. That said, the age gap between her and her 510-year-old love interest is undoubtedly problematic, and a few years either way hardly makes a difference.
Speaking of spice: I don’t know what everyone’s so up in arms about, banning A Court Of Thorns And Roses on account of its supposed “indecent” material. I counted two whole sex scenes, and a couple of passionate make-out sessions. Maybe my gauge for what’s appropriate and what’s not is broken, but I didn’t raise a single eyebrow, let alone blush, at anything in this book. And yet, it’s tied for tenth in the American Library Association’s tally of the most banned and challenged books in the United States.
I took a couple more issues with it, too. The pacing is wildly uneven, and it’s often unclear just how much time is passing between scenes of heightened action. But that didn’t bother me as much as the villains, who are lazily drawn. Either they’re two-dimensional power-hungry sadists, or they’re actually good guys underneath – and it doesn’t take Sherlockian deductive reasoning to figure out which is which.
I’ve heard a lot of romantasy readers say that A Court Of Thorns And Roses is the worst book of the series, and it “gets so much better” from here, but I doubt I’ll find out for myself. While I guess it’s nice to know what everyone’s talking about (“Tamlin” and “Rhysand” and “Prythian” are no longer meaningless patterns of vowels and consonants for me), I’d have to be really, really hard up for reading material to dive into it any further.
Read A Court Of Thorns And Roses on audiobook via Libro.fm here.
My favourite Amazon reviews of A Court Of Thorns And Roses:
- “I’m seventy years old and I’m running out of time to spend reading shallow rewrites… Half a book should have been enough to engage but that’s when stupid took a steep dive into awful.” – Karen
- “Read fan fiction for something you like instead because the plots will be better And there will be better sex.” – Abbie
- “The protagonist kills a fae and as punishment has to live at the dead fae’s buddy’s house to live in the lap of luxury after nearly starving to death at her own home? Did a tween write this?” J.Nelson
- “The rising action is stupid. The protagonist accidentally kills a fairy that looks like a beast. This means she broke a law and committed murder. This would all be fine as a rising action if the punishment wasn’t stupid. So this big buff fairy man comes to her house and is like “hey you, you killed my friend. That’s illegal and you have to be punished. You have two choices: We can either kill you for your crimes because you’re a murderer, or kidnap you and raise you in our huge palace filled with luxuries and you never have to hunt again.” And the protagonist is all like “Id rather die than be with a fairy man–take my life!” and the fairy man is like “Nah, we taking you with us even though you broke a law.” LIKE MAAM BROKE THE LAW. SHE SHOULD BE PUNISHED.” – Luz Noceda









