About this book I felt rather ambivalent. I'm not sure why. I bought THE ARCHIVIST based solely on the cover (rad) and the price (dirt cheap). Halfway through first chapter, however, I was ready to set the book down and back away. It was boring, I thought. I didn't care much for the characters, and it reminded me of an inferior version of Possession--all literary and scholarly, but without the pretty writing or interesting plot.
So I did that age-old test to determine whether or not I should keep reading: I put the book down and asked myself a little while later if I was hooked--did I think about the book? Did I want to know what happened?
I did. So I went back to THE ARCHIVIST and read the whole damn thing.
And reluctantly, I was sucked in. I cannot explain it, but I ended up plowing through the book in a day or two, trying to figure out the entire time what it was about the book that kept me coming back.
I never did put my finger on it.
Did I like it? I don't know. Would I recommend it to you? I'm really not sure. Was it any good at all? I think so, but I don't know why. And while all this sounds like the criteria for a rating of 2, something keeps nagging me to give it a 3. But why? Pfff.