Well, I can say I've finished a trilogy that I started reading five years ago. Some of what happened was satisfying, but there was a lot of over-explanations, irrevelance and distasteful stuff going on here. It's really too bad, because the whole idea of government's overcontrolling its citizens and the invasion of privacy, preserving freedom, dystopic societies and everything else this book talks about is very interesting. The book didn't feel as dark to me as the first or the second, although it was less so too. I wasn't as interested in what happened to the characters and feel like the romance-ish thing between Maya and Gabriel was described in a very generic and unrealistic way. It felt like I was reading a book written for someone who just doesn't get it, can't think for themselves, needs to be talked down to. And I realize that the Evergreen Foundation had to make citizens afraid of a free and unchecked society, afraid enough to allow themselves to be controlled and tracked. But where in the heck did kidnapping and killing children come in? Yes, New Colony was decimated in Book One, but not for the purpose of killing children. Maybe that's why it felt so sinister then. After reading the first two novels, it didn't fit well. I mean, maybe Hawks did it for shock factor, and yes, I know, the kids didn't die. But it was overkill, for me. Really, there are so many options to control people through fear, and I just thought that was a cheap and easy shot. Yeah, dead kids --real original and thought-provoking. Also, I didn't appreciate the way every little detail had to be explained. If you're reading this book, you've probably read the first two, so why all the on and on?? And I didn't care for the whole "my daughter died, feel sorry for me and my terrible nature" turn that happened with Boone. If we have been hating him since book one, no sob story is going to change it. I liked the story enough, and I'm glad that I read it and closed out the series. It wasn't totally satisfying and I feel like it could have been so much better. I gave THE TRAVELER 5 stars, THE DARK RIVER 4 and now 2 (maybe 2.5) to this. Not a good sign. For all of the buildup created in the first two novels about Gabriel and Michael and their dad, the actual meeting and conversations just weren't that revelatory. If there was a time in the novel to delve deep, that would have been it. If he writes another book, I would probably read it. But I am taking him off my favorite authors lists, which makes me a little bit sad.