Eh... i have to admit I'm a bit disappointed after reading this book.First of all, the style. Unlike the original Erin Hunter's style, the style that the author of this book used does not capture your attention very well. It feels more like the author is mimicking Erin Hunter.Second, the terms here are very confusing. Unlike Into the Wild, where the terms of the clans (such as "kittypet" and "monster") are clearly explained, it took my forever to make out the meaning of "sharpclaw" (which actually meant cat.)Third, the ending. It's very... very... abrupt. It ends with Lucky's pack yelling for help. And then The End. No cliffhangers or anything, just a blunt ending.But the story plot is interesting. I've read all of the five books, and it's basically dogs struggling to survive, and adapt to a harsh environment after an earthquake. A cliche plot, but still, it draws you in.Sadly, the language doesn't. One of the themes of this book is that Allies can be found in unlikely places. For example, Lucky at the beginning of the book is being chased by a pack of foxes for the food that Lucky has in his mouth. Just when it seems really bad for him, Bella and her group of dogs come around and save him. As a secondary example, Lucky, who has always been used to living on the street free, couldn't reconcile in his mind why he is attached to these dogs who are leashed and have no survival skills themselves, yet they are friends and the domesticated dogs continue to help him. Through the book, the author uses various ethereal personages symbolically.The author is saying through this theme that Allies may not be who you expect, and they may be found in strange places, but they are still your friends, even though (to you), they may appear to be strange.
Do You like book Survivors #1: The Empty City (2013)?
I loved this book!It was like Warriors. A wonderful twist to animals! It was great!
—nick2
I think this book is awesome and I'm going to start the second book.
—email0003
