Rated 4/5
Neverwhere used to be one of my favourite books, and I still enjoyed it this time, but... I don't know. I borrowed my girlfriend's copy after travelling through London, but I think maybe even the London Neil was writing about has gone to London Below, now. It seemed a bit quaint, somehow -- no, a better word is "dated". Besides, since the last time I read it other friends have read it and, while on the whole I disagreed with them, sometimes they pulled out criticisms that gave me pause. Like, why is Jessica such a horrible stereotype? She barely seems human. Just that horrible man-eating sort of woman, that Richard is better free of -- wouldn't it have made a better story if she was more realistic?
I can understand people not getting along with the characters, in general, because you don't see inside them much. Even though there are glimpses of Door, mostly you see her from Richard's eyes, and he's not the most appealing character in many ways. I like what Gaiman does with him, giving him a hero's journey in classic Bilbo Baggins style -- "useless meek character finds some backbone and heart and in the end a lot depends on him" sort of thing. Though, thinking about that way, that's not exactly all that fresh a trope.
Maybe Neverwhere is best not thought about too much in those terms. If I focus on all I want to know about London Below, then that's where the magic lies: does a king hang on a cross, is there a saint guarding the Eurostar, what ghosts might haunt the Tower of London...?