Full review can be found here. 
 I'm not sure where I stand on this one. The plot was good but beyond Mac growing as a character and making new acquaintances, I'm not convinced how much the plot in this book advanced the overall plot of the series. Maybe the final battle in this one will have important implications in future books, but I'm not sure that it will in the same way that the final climax (pun intended) in the first book did. There are certain ideas that are obviously going to important such as the concept of eating Unseelie flesh, but that doesn't change the fact that it's more of a subplot. 
 That was my impression at any rate. It felt more like a subplot to the whole thing just to introduce one or two new concepts. Maybe I feel as though it was a bit anticlimactic because I saw the final showdown here as of the first couple of chapters. The only thing that made up for it was the character evolution that took place. I adore the relationship between Mac and Barrons, especially the conversations that don't take place! 
 I once read an interview with an author where the question of first or third person perspective preference was raised. The author said she doesn't even read books written in the first person perspective because she found that the book would be telling her that "I was sad" and all she could think was that no, in fact, the events hadn't made her feel sad. I've never had this problem before, but in Bloodfever a lot of the choices that Mac made were completely the opposite of what I would do in the same situation.