Once in a while, I find a trilogy in which the third book is nearly as good as the first. True, there are some writers who improve with each book they write, and as their craft improves and the characters develop, the narrative tension continually escalates. What I have found more common however, is that the first book, or in some cases, the first part of the first book is far better than anything that comes afterward.
I once heard that rock bands spent ten years making their first album, broke out and made it big, then had to do it again in one year. As often as not, second albums are bland, less raw, and full of disappointment. Just saying.
I gave Wool a five-star review and Shift a four-star. Would Dust slide to three-stars? I crossed my fingers and hoped for the best, because time is really all we have and I didn’t want to waste mine.
Good news, dear fellow reader, Dust turned up the dramatic tension and the characters did their thing. The final novel in the Silo trilogy was different from the previous two. It seems the story was evolving as Hugh Howey wrote it.
By the end of Dust, I felt all the set-up and story development was worth it. As usual, Howey’s writing was excellent. I liked how it ended. I need just enough resolution from a novel that I can continue to daydream. Dust did a good job in this regard.
Every book, movie, and product needs a review. Right?