
The Never King
This book may quite possibly be the hardest one to grade in my career as a reviewer. Given the level of pure misogyny, the sex acts that I (me, myself and I) found very distasteful, and a screaming plot hole that kind of renders the whole book moot, The Never King should receive a flat F. However, I was… entertained? Plus I discovered a new book trope, so, educational!
Imagine, if you will, that instead of being simply the boy who never grew up, Peter Pan is a cruel king who kidnaps all of Wendy Darling’s descendants on the night of their eighteenth birthdays and spirits them off to Neverland where he breaks them so badly, they are returned mentally damaged? This is the hook of our story (no pun intended), a dark spin on Peter Pan and his Lost Boys.
Winnie “Whore” Darling has known her entire life what awaits her on her eighteenth birthday. Sort of. Her mother has tried to protect Winnie from what happened to her and all the Darling women for centuries past: Peter Pan kidnapped her, took her to Neverland, did something unspeakable, and returned her now suffering from what resembles schizophrenia. Winnie doesn’t believe this will actually happen because her mom’s always been short on the specifics; however, she lives very much an ‘I’m going to die soon’ life by banging all the members of the boys’ basketball, baseball and football teams. Sex is just what she does.
Sure enough, the night of her eighteenth birthday, Pan arrives in all his dark (and hot) glory and the next day, Winnie wakes up on a tropical island, chained to a bed. She’s not alone. A pair of hot twins, Kas and Bash, are charged with guarding her/keeping her from running away/fixing her food, and a very ominous (and hot) dude named Vane is on hand to scare the living crap out of her. Peter Pan is asleep in a tomb because he will die if he’s exposed to sunlight. No, he’s not a vampire.
It turns out someone stole Pan’s shadow and along with it, the magic he uses to keep Neverland flourishing. Not only is Pan on a downward trajectory, the island itself is dying. But apparently, Darling women have the ability to pass down memories to the next generation, so it could very well be that Winnie has the location of Pan’s missing shadow buried deep in her psyche. She is to undergo an invasive mind reading to suss out this information, a process that will most likely leave her brain a pile of gray mush – as it did to her mother and the women who came before her.
However, Winnie is not going to take all this lying down, at least not metaphorically. Her superpower is sex. It’s right in the nickname she’s earned, Winnie Whore. She determines her best hope for escape is to fuck anyone (and it turns out everyone) she has to. I’m not quite sure what she thinks this will accomplish but… just don’t think about it too much. Not that this is a fate worse than death because Winnie really likes sex. And Pan, Kas, Bash, and Vane are really, really hot.
So. This is where I learned about the Why Choose trope. As in, why choose just one hot guy from a pack of many when you can have them all. And Winnie does. Sometimes at the same time. If you don’t like group sex (I don’t) and dubious consent squicks you out (it makes me shudder), the sex scenes in this book are tough to get through. While no consent is ever sought or given overtly, making every sexual encounter a rape for all intents and purposes, Winnie LOVES smashing these guys, so no harm no foul, I guess. (Side note: my discovery of this long-existing reverse harem trope simply proves that I am far from cool and not a BookTok-er.)
There is not one positive female character in this book. Winnie’s mother is a hooker. Winnie herself is beyond sexually promiscuous (an issue I’ll get to next). The girls who hang around the Lost Boys are groupies who are mentally, emotionally, and sexually abused. The fae queen has evil motives. Tink(erbell) was a traitor. Even the woman who served as Winnie’s life coach was a prostitute. The open misogyny in this book is staggering.
And while Winnie’s love of sex is sold as some kind of boss ownership of her sexuality, she’s a very damaged young woman. Her mother was negligent at best, abusive in her crazy efforts to protect her daughter from abduction. Winnie is malnourished, and because of financial insecurity, they’ve moved from house to house, town to town. The girl has serious emotional damage and is not acting from a place of mindful choice but rather dysfunctional coping. In fact, author St. Crowe sends out a crazy mixed message in putting forth the premise that Winnie embodies the concept of Sex Positivity while at the same time using the term “whore” as both a nickname and a cruel taunt. So, which is it? Woman + lots of sex = Girl Power, or Woman + lots of sex = Whore?
Wherever you land on that equation, Winnie is The Special Girl that all the guys fall for and desire above all others, even though she’s pretty one-dimensional. Winnie likes sex. And she’s bone-thin. That’s it. That’s all there is. But the fellas love her.
Pan and his Lost Boys are sold as very scary, very dark, and very bad. They smoke (oooh) and look menacing, especially Vane. The one rule they have is “Don’t Fuck the Darling”, except they break this taboo pretty quickly with absolutely zero repercussions. And while they do come off as guys you don’t want to mess with, especially Vane, really there is nothing truly evil about them. We get a gratuitous fight-with-intent-to-murder scene to underscore the claim of badness, just in case.
I mentioned that there is a major plot hole that renders the whole premise moot – which is why any Darling woman who had undergone this horrible situation would ever go on to have children, possibly a daughter, who would suffer the same thing. This is never addressed.
In the end, on paper, I should have hated this book. And yet I didn’t. I loved the overall premise, even if it isn’t executed quite the way I would have liked (as in with much, much less pointless, abusive sex). I loved the concept of shadow magic and the worldbuilding of this dark, more adult Neverland. It was a very quick read – it took me less than three hours – and I do plan on reading the next installment because I’m intrigued enough to want to know what happens to this dysfunctional crew. So… yeah, I give it a wobbly, hesitant recommendation, but proceed at your own risk.
Please note that this book contains many potential triggers that I will not list here but which can be found on the author’s website: https://www.nikkistcrowe.com/content-warnings





Finally I see a Dark romance reviewed on this site, there are thousands of books like this with many fans, the more violent and questionable the better, they are very famous among booktokers and girls in their 20s like hunting adeline.
The idea of a somewhat dark and problematic romance attracts me but at the same time I need real love, care and affection in my books and monigamy which is why I have looked more at gothic romance. Honestly, I was curious for a while about what the ladies on this site would say about some popular dark romance books.
Check out comments by DiscoDollyDeb – she likes dark romance, mafia, motorcycle clubs, and such and often gives recommendations in the comments on those.
I do wonder about the appeal of these books. I mean that literally–why is this sort of romance so beloved by younger women?
I guess the flood of loving beta heroes, alpha males who are actually more gamma (alpha but with beta traits), and shy heroes who worry about asking for consent for a kiss aren’t all that appealing. At least I’ve read some comments about it.
I suppose that you come from a time when boddice riper were in fashion and many abusive attitudes were very normalized. Now, however, even a stolen kiss is controversial (what was previously considered romantic) then while some of us did consider certain things romantic (Julie lessman long ago the kisses stolen from the hero to the heroine) others want to see other things.
On the romance books reddit I’ve seen this question answered hundreds of times with every possible reason from “I read these books not as romance but as some kind of horror trailer” to “I don’t care about consent in fiction.”
I like them as straight out erotica. There, I do not need consent, the fantasy works best when it can be totally un-pc. But it actually needs to turn everyone on. Fairly soon, even if there is some initial force.
Good erotica for me still have a happy end, some sort of good place, but that place can be “she is a happy slave” or “he likes being the submissive naked housekeeper of a group”.
So I get that.
I do not like the meanness, the slavery or degradation outside the erotic bits, so motorcycle clubs or mafia is not possible as romance for me.
Obviously, we all like different things and it does not need to make sense.
I am an alpha hero kinda reader–Beta heroes and those paralyzed with anxiety are not my personal jam.
So, maybe the love of these sorts of romances is an “equal and opposite” reaction to all the beta heroes?
Seconding DDD, she knows what she’s talking about when it comes to romances that balance alpha antics with romance and sexual combustabilty.
This is very interesting because I truly do wonder what people find so appealing about books like this one. I’m not talking about the dark romance genre as a whole, but more where the MFC is actually degraded and loves it. I’m totally cool with aggressive heroes who go after what they want – I love me an unexpected kiss or an up-against-the-wall encounter, and I personally find the missishness over “not asking for consent” for even the smallest kiss to be PC-ism gone wrong. I love anti-heroes and I’m okay with an alpha as long as he’s not abusive. Truly, I get the appeal of someone just taking charge. And as long as the female partner is ultimately okay with it (consensual), I got no beef.
But in these books, at least, the heroine is openly degraded, and by four men at the same time. They say horrible things to her and she loves every single minute of it. I just don’t get that. And like Amy, I need genuine love and caring in my love stories, but these don’t seem in any way loving.
Truthfully, my review of the next book goes into this even more. IDK. I’m never going to judge someone for what they love to read and what trips their personal trigger, but I do admit it’s a struggle to put myself in that place. While I was reading this, I kept shaking my head and thinking, this isn’t sexy at all and it’s most definitely not romantic. YMMV?
Reviewer’s Note: After reading and reviewing this book, I went on to read the next in the series, The Dark One. The review is forthcoming. However, the terribleness of the next book made me seriously rethink the grade I gave this one, and I’d probably downgrade this to a D. This is because the problems in this book are multiplied exponentially in the next book, retroactively exacerbating everything I didn’t like in this book. I cannot, in good faith recommend reading this unless you are 100% looking for some really dark, gang bang porn and nothing else.
Man, now I’m wondering if the sequel is about her having a daughter fathered by one of these guys and… ewww.
I’m stuck on the fact that the surname of all these women is still Darling after all that time. Has every single woman since Wendy been having her children out of wedlock? Or is this part of the unaddressed plot hole?
Great question–and I’ll never read the book to find out. Jenna?
Never addressed. And it’s the least of the problems!
“Why choose” is now the term for what used to be called “reverse harem”. Same wine, new bottle.
Yes, I discovered this. Apparently, “reverse harem” is not PC because it is culturally insensitive, so why choose is the name of choice for this trope.
In theory, I should love this trope because hey, who wouldn’t want a bunch of hot guys lusting after you and not having to pick just one. But IDK, something about the openness in which they pass Winnie around was really, really gross. I guess I like a protective, mildly possessive hero, and these guys were not that.
Well, as someone who just toured a bunch of actual harems, I will say that there is nothing about that set up that doesn’t repel me. Harems are, historically, a place where women have no agency.
Which is what makes this whole book so disgusting. In theory, Winnie is the one with agency and her boys are the harem, so you should be able to console yourself with a “finally, a woman is boss”. Yet Winnie is used and abused at the whims of four different men. So instead of one man exerting agency over a group of women, this is a group of men exerting agency over one woman. It’s the worst of all options.
Apparently there are four books in the series, and now I’m a little curious about whether the series ends with an HEA where she continues to be a sex toy for the men.
I read the second book (again, review in the queue) and it was really bad. BUT – the weird thing is I do kind of want to read the other two books. There is something in them that compels me to keep going. Maybe it’s the cliffhanger of wanting to know what happens in the Neverland world. I don’t know if I will because they are truly bad, and if I do, I don’t know if I would review them. It’s like I’d be hate reading them and I don’t know if doing hate reviews is what people want to see.
Well, I’d be interested in reviews of the other books. But yeah, I doubt many people would enjoy these.
A good hate review is fun!
It doesn’t look as if she was really the one doing the “choosing.” Sigh.
Not going to touch this book with a ten-foot pole, but I look forward to reading your review of the sequel!