User blog comment:Angelwings21/Did you like book series 1 or 2 better?/@comment-4594870-20150524080257

I like the second book series better because, as you said, the first had some really awkward content. Frankie liking a dude for dressing up like her grandfather and dreaming of making out with him like that? Eh...no. My big problem with the second book series, though, is that all characters but the main trio + associates are completely spineless and brainless. In the first book series, though the characters are different, they at least all fit into the story given. In the second book series, most of the cast is fodder.

I like the portrayal of Venus and Rochelle. Rochelle's very clearly autistic in the books and I think that's a good interpretation for her. By making Venus an older sister and contrasting her "parental" ideas of right with Rochelle's "rulebook" ideas, the two characters shine in a way that's rather intriguing. Robecca gets the short end of the stick, though. She's a pain to read, though her relationship with Cy is one of the better of the franchise. Patient and gentle.

Of course, Daneshvari suffers a lot from "filler writing" - times that she fills pages with stories that have absolutely nothing to do with the plot in a way you can't justify as world-building. It's very jarring. And the less said about the vampire twins, the better.

I have mixed feelings twoards the first book series. I find its unique take interesting, but I just don't like it all very much. Then again, the fandom at large is way more negative to it than is justified and I don't like that much either.