Romance
A magician tied to old murders is a decent hook, but I kept wondering whether the book wanted to be a straight thriller or something a bit more odd and slippery. It’s not a complaint exactly. I just like knowing when a story is leaning into its weirdness on purpose.
Phillip Margolin clearly knows how to keep the pages turning, though. I’m more interested in whether the premise feels clever because it’s doing something new, or because it’s throwing extra ingredients into the pot and hoping they all behave.
Phillip Margolin clearly knows how to keep the pages turning, though. I’m more interested in whether the premise feels clever because it’s doing something new, or because it’s throwing extra ingredients into the pot and hoping they all behave.
Margolin tends to be at his best when the engine is straightforward and the details do the work. If the setup starts leaning on “isn’t this odd?” too hard, I’m usually less convinced. A clean thriller with one solidly strange element can be more effective than a pile of tricks pretending to be depth.
A magician in a thriller can be either deliciously unstable or just busy. The trick, for me, is whether the book lets the setup do more than supply atmosphere and a neat reveal.
Margolin’s strength is usually propulsion, which is useful, but I’m wary of thrillers that keep adding components as if complexity alone counts as depth. Sometimes it does. Often it’s just more moving parts.
Margolin’s strength is usually propulsion, which is useful, but I’m wary of thrillers that keep adding components as if complexity alone counts as depth. Sometimes it does. Often it’s just more moving parts.