Willful and stubborn, the kind of girl who only sees what she wants to see and does what she wants to do no matter what anyone else says—that’s Angel. On the whole, I really liked her. Taylor portrays her in such a way that no matter which path Angel chooses, it perfectly suits her character. Her choices are amusing, even grandiose, yet they are perfectly natural for her.
Angel is a force of nature. She sees the world however she wants to see it and nothing or no one can alter her perceptions. Angel is Angel and there is no changing her. Yet the question stands, “Does she cause her own fall?” Given the changes that occur all around her, you could say yes. Yet if Angel answered this question, I don’t believe she would entirely agree with that assessment. I think at the most Angel would say that she was underappreciated. But would this kind of reasoning really be a bad thing? Taylor’s storytelling leaves the choice up to the reader. The book is in no way preachy, forcing the reader to prescribe to one particular viewpoint. I rather like this.
I absolutely love how the story ends. It is perfect—art imitating life. It perfectly fulfills Angel’s own romantic notions. But what really makes this special is Taylor’s visual writing. I thought it wonderful that Taylor allows the reader to visualize the “guilt” of that little culprit.... ;)
(If you’ve seen the film version, I think it is somewhat darker. Those ironic moments in the book are shifted into something more real. As well, the film depicts what is only hinted in the book...putting different storylines together for more cohesion—especially in regards to Esmé—and no....there is no comparison with that other Esme from Twilight
. In a way, the film begins to question, “What may happen if the mirror cracks?” Overall, though different, both stories are equally good.)