Noting the publication dates, I see that Pillage came out a full year before Deathly Hallows and its revelation of Snape's deep and abiding love of Lily. Oh no! Rowling must have copied that from Pillage!

Except that of course she didn't. It's merely an established trope, much like the orphan hero. Peter Parker is/was an orphan raised by his aunt and uncle. Frodo was Bilbo's ward. Both went on to make good friends through circumstance, which of course people never do in reality.

I try to read both negative and positive reviews when deciding whether or not to add books to my reading wishlist. Unfortunately, it appears that you've got your HP goggles so firmly affixed that you are incapable of giving fair criticism. This is all the more offensive when done in a review for a children's novel.

One train ride does not a Hogwarts or Hogwarts Express make, especially if the story is set in the UK (which is unclear, although if he goes to a prep school it's much more likely). A boy's mother being killed in an accident does not a Lily Potter make (nor is it truthful to state it was his 'parents', plural). An eccentric uncle does not a Dursley make (especially if said Uncle isn't abusive... which seems to be the case judging by other reviews).

I will be adding this to my reading backlog. I've liked Skye's books in the past, and if the best the most negative review (this is the only 2-star) can come up with is a pack of oversimplified generalizations, it's probably pretty good.