I liked the bit of added nuance to the Frankenstein story, and the stunning blue-greens and blacks color scheme(it added some genre-appropriate dreariness) but not much else. The continued dishonesty of almost all of the cast was nerve-wracking to read about, and besides that, the characters weren’t really memorable to me…? Especially with the acceptance of M’s identity towards the end, that felt rushed, and didn’t have as much emotional pull or depth as I was hoping it would.

There were some other visuals that I enjoyed, though, such as Maura’s wisps and overlap on the panels showing her influence. It took too long for

her friendship with M to form imo, especially with how she said her goodbye, but I thought some of the illustrations showing her change of heart (and conflicted feelings about her undeadness?) were sweet.

.

Although the story is marketed/written as queer because of its cast (Frances has a nonbinary partner, and the neighbors probably have the vibes of wives??), in my personal over-analysis opinion, I think the most queer part of it was M’s arc. While I know that Frances’s expectations she shoved onto M were because of her grief, sometimes it read like the cishetnormative expectations a parent has for their queer kid? I don’t say that to call the book problematic, I thought that was interesting and I wonder if that was a purposeful sort-of-allegory.

Visually this was cool and there were some parts that stuck with me, but even after reading this twice (back-to-back, I sped through it the first time), I still thought this wasn’t my kind of novel.