Mmm … dialogue, characters … oh yeah, plot. Margrit may be sceptical, but she's also very irrational (considering the mantra Murphy repeats throughout the book, however, this is probably intentional). Nevertheless, there's a certain sense of … knowing, a reservation in the way she deals with Tony, that I don't quite follow. In fact, she's downright hostile toward him during their first few encounters. To Murphy's credit, Margrit doesn't swoon and suddenly declare herself unreservedly trusting of Alban's attitude. Murphy deserves praise for that.Ĭreepy stalker points abound for Alban Korund though. It's difficult to both make characters seem like they have a relationship yet work their relationship into the main conflict as well, so C.E. The tension between Margrit and Tony as a result of their opposite views on the justice system is also both topical and germane to their characters. they want to try to make it work, but suddenly she's involved in his murder case and hanging out with the number one suspect.

I found Margrit's hesitant relationship with cop Tony the most interesting, perhaps because it's so flawed. Likewise, the relationships in this book don't plumb the depths. So even as cool as Margrit is as she makes deals with dragons, sometimes I couldn't enjoy her wordplay as much as I should. Her weapons are words, not swords or magic. In most books, this isn't a plus, but it's particularly problematic here, because the protagonist is a lawyer (hence 'Negotiator Trilogy'). For example, the dialogue is lacklustre and occasionally even groan-worthy. That works in its favour.Īs I began my post legentem dissection, I discovered that there's a lot about Heart of Stone that, taken alone, doesn't work. What's an urban fantasy book without magic and wizards? What do you get when you take vampires and add to them dragons, djinns, selkies, and gargoyles? Heart of Stone, while not exactly original, is different.

Heart of stone ce murphy