Roses are Blood Red- A book review

 

I don’t think I expected to the book to take the turn it did. HA. Who am I kidding, I never could ever have predicted the way this book shaped up to be? Also, what genre would I classify this book as. Romance? eh…….

Thriller? But….

Is 'weird' a classification?

This book review is on Roses are Blood Red by Novoneel Chakraborty. I was recently given this book as a gift by a friend. After I read a couple of chapters I asked her what the fruck did she give me to read, and that was my mood for the rest of the book.

When I first read the book, I found the male protagonist tacky with his cheesy and often overbearing lines about true love. Then he punched the girl. Then he ‘cheated’ !? on her. Then he said that he loved only her and that she was the reason for his existence. It was very confusing. As the story proceeded, the 1^st part of the book left us with more questions than answers. I thought that maybe when his past is revealed I might see him in a favorable light. But no, I started seeing more and more of Snape from Harry Potter in him. I do not like Snape and neither of them have any character development.

I didn’t realize there was a huge age difference between the characters right off the bat, only when this book ended, and I did some maths, did I realize this problematic coupling. But then that was the point of this book, I guess.

The theme of this book basically  revolves around a few questions.

Can you love someone to the point of obsession and not call it obsession? Will everything be all right if you call it devotion? This book raises the view point of unrequited love, and I guess you could love anyone as long as you don’t expect that person to love you back. After all, your feelings are no one else’s business. But is that love still justified if you manipulate a person to be a tailor-made version of the someone you loved? Where do you draw the line? At what point do you stop?  

As I read the book, I realized it is terrifying if you think about it from the girl’s perspective. The author glossed over this. After everything came to light there was a one-page epilogue showing the girl’s reaction. But then this was a book about the male protagonist, even though it does not seem like it in the first glance.

I don’t think being broken gives anyone a right to make someone else an emotional project.

Then came the plot holes. What was the requirement of this bad incident exactly? I see no logical explanation for it. I mean she was already in love with him. There was no reason for him to induce amnesia, other than the fact that he wanted to write things in her diary. It’s a plot point, but not properly executed. Without amnesia she might never have considered that her diary entries were not her writings, but I cannot understand what he was thinking when he did all this. Let us be logical, she loved him, he loved her (if that’s love), there was no parental pressure, no societal barrier, no resistance anywhere for him to take the steps he did to induce amnesia. It could have all happened organically and she might never even have questioned him. Its like Voldemort being paranoid and dying at 71, when he could have lived for nearly 200 years had he done nothing. What is this convoluted, twisted mentality?

I did not hate the book, despite this rant like review. I didn’t love it either. It was a weird book. It left me unsettled. Perhaps, that is what the author was trying to do with this book, stretching the limits of love, sanity and the line between right and wrong. If that is the case, then kudos to the author.

Would I recommend this book? I don’t know, do you like being unsettled? If so, then definitely try this book out.

AnYWays.

Happy Reading

P.S. Someone please tell me the proper genre of this book.

P.P.S. Is the police department that incompetent, that they could not find the killer of 8 murders? Or am I naïve in thinking that murderers are always caught? Have I watched too many cop propaganda shows and movies?

Toodles