Wolves, the first book of a series about Loki from Norse mythology and a female vet student from Chicago, sets up a series of personal and cosmic disasters for them. However, the second half of the book, while keeping the fast pace, didn't keep my attention. What went wrong?

The book is divided between Loki's backstory and events on Earth with Amy and Loki. That clearly means that Loki is getting twice as much time in front of the reader. Is this justified? Now, I don't love Norse mythology. I find ultra-powerful characters who never change stabbing each other in the back to be uninteresting. On top of that, the story is written from Loki's point of view in the scenes focused on his backstory. The author has Loki never understanding the problems caused by his actions, which could make sense, since he never changes. However, Loki becomes a Gary Stu: no one recognizes that he is right about all these important things, no one sees how great he is with the amazing things he can do.

At first, I found only Loki's interaction with Amy to be interesting. By the second half, I struggled to find any of it compelling, even though the setting is cleverly developed and the plot seems like it should be exciting.

Looking back, I think the problem is that Amy hasn't been really developed as a character, has no storyline of her own, and has no reason why she should do anything but go back to her normal life. Loki, with his robust backstory full of interesting hooks, loses his motivation by three-quarters of the way through. He eventually comes up with something else, just like Amy is handed some motivation at the end. However, this makes the ending feel like what it is: the setup for a cliffhanger rather than the conclusion of the book. In some ways, Conspirata, which I recently finished, ended with a bit of a cliffhanger, in that the main characters are going off to face danger. However, the ending ties up the story that we were just told, as well as leading into the next book. With Wolves, the story peters out, a new plot hook is tossed in, a new plotline and character are introduced in Loki's past, and then the book ends with three new plot hooks. It feels like the author was scraping out the plot bucket to make sure that every last bit got put in this story, even if it didn't fit.

Despite these issues, I think this writer has a lot of skill. She clearly knows how to write a compelling plot hook, plus the setting is a very interesting take on magic, science, politics, and stagnation in societies with immortality. In my opinion, she needed to choose two plotlines and stick to those. It isn't that any of the many plot hooks introduced in this story aren't interesting. It is just that most of them aren't explored in this book. Combined with the cliffhanger ending, this is like the author standing up with a sign that says, "This is a series! I don't need to make this a complete book!". I believe that you should hook a reader with an awesome book that shows off all your skills, including your ability to write an amazing ending, rather than hoping that unfulfilled promises and curiosity will drag the reader into the next book.

This book might be fun for readers who really like Loki and are looking for an innovative take on magic. I, however, will not be reading the next one.