Bronwyn Knox

The Gone Way World was such a delight. It had everything I could ask for: action and character building, friendship and romance, mentors and villains. There were both surprises and things I saw coming, but which still happened in a compelling way. There was lots of humor but also emotionally moving bits.

There was something about it that was larger than life and not always fully believable but the story was so good and I was so invested that it didn't take away my enjoyment.

The promotion quote on the cover quote mentions Pratchett and Pynchon, Vonnegut and Heller.
I can see the Pratchett and Vonnegut comparison, but I admit I'm not knowledgeable enough on Pynchon and Heller. I'd throw a little Philip K. Dick in there myself. It's also got dystopian vibes similar to [b:Oryx and Crake|46756|Oryx and Crake (MaddAddam, #1)|Margaret Atwood|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1494109986l/46756.SY75.jpg|3143431] and Weird fiction elements like [b:Annihilation|17934530|Annihilation|Jeff VanderMeer|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1403941587l/17934530.SX50.jpg|24946895].

Wonderful horror classic that is scary, disturbing, and interesting.

There were a couple of different themes that I noted. The most talked about is the arrogance of tampering with nature and the cruel indifference to pain, demonstrated by the title character. It's never clear what Dr. Moreau's goals are, other than to simply prove he can do it. (Something also seen in The Invisible Man.) Even if you don't know this story, you can predict it. Dr. Moreau and company lose all control of the situation that they should never have been messing with to begin with.

The second theme is the idea of the beast or animal side found in mankind. The narrator, Pendrick who is portrayed as a “prude” and generally inexperienced with life, is exposed to this while on the island when he's forced to interact with the beast men.

When Pendrick goes back to civilization, he can no longer stand to be around people. Even though he is aware of the “higher” and “moral” nature of humans, when he looks at them he can't quite believe in it and only sees the animal in them. I'm not quite sure why he only focuses on the negative aspects of this as there are many wonderful things we inherit from our close genetic relationship with animals. But the character is portrayed as educated and intelligent but naïve and superficial in his thinking, so this is consistent.

This is one of those novels that is often remade, satirized, paid tribute to and so on. It's easy to see why; there's a lot to feed the storyteller's imagination.

“Mutants” or the Mighty Boosh's version of The Island of Dr. Moreau.

I chose to read this because of FOMO. It seems everyone I know has already read this, and here I am six years late to the party.

The first 90% of the book is compelling. There are three narrators, but mostly it's Rachel, the unreliable alcoholic storyteller. This creates many opportunities for red herrings as Rachel can't remember what she's done most of the time. Events are filtered through her crippling depression and anxiety. I was rooting for her to get it together and alternately wondering how bad things would get.

Once we get to the resolution though, (sigh) Hawkins lost me. This was a story about women, told by women with individual sets of mistakes and problems. As soon as we see who the murderer is, that's no longer the case. Hawkins downgrades all the women to victims of a male abuser. Rachel becomes a mere a gas-lit damsel-in-distress.. This is boring and something I've read too many times before.

The Girl on the Train is certainly nothing to take seriously, but the ending took the most predictable way out. It's too bad, because it had such a great set-up.

I might have missed something, but I believe this author is onto a topic that doesn't get written about much. Women can be criminals too. If you want equality, you have to take the good with the bad.

Erika Owen's theory is that Women sometimes got off lightly because they were considered a “fairer sex” and incapable of the crimes they are accused of and it would be blamed on a male partner. They were given a lot of breaks based on their looks. Or sometimes because no one wanted to believe mothers and caregivers and makers of apple pie could be killers, bootleggers, madams, and so on.

This book hits a sweet spot for me. I have a thing for reading about people doing bad things, doubly interesting to me if they're women.

This is an easy read, set up in short 1-2 page bios of women, divided into different categories of criminal. We've got pirates, gamblers, bootleggers, madams, serial killers, bandits, and fraudsters.

I suppose the madams and fraudsters are no surprise but stories like 1890's serial killer Jane Toppan, a nurse who experimented on patients with opium, were much scarier.

I also especially enjoyed the story of Caribbean pirate Jacquotte Delahay who ran her own crew with a female partner in the early 1600s.

Another favorite was Maggie Bailey, an old grandmotherly-type who sold booze out of her home. You'd come to her house for booze and a friendly chat. I guess a life of crime can occasionally be invigorating as she lived to be 101.

The Outlaws, Gunslingers, and Bandit section contained the women who had previously received the most press: Belle Starr, Ma Barker, and Bonnie Parker.

Owens nails it with this line from the intro to the section on Outlaws.
“If there's one thing I want you to remember from this section, it's that women can be just as intimidating, terrifying, and feared as men.”

A light and easy taste for fans of feminist history and true crime.

I picked this up after seeing reviews comparing it to A Confederacy of Dunces and other reviews describing it as one of the “funniest novels of the 20th-century.” This was a really excellent and entertaining read. I liked it as much as A Confederacy of Dunces but it was nowhere near as hilarious. [b:A Confederacy of Dunces 310612 A Confederacy of Dunces John Kennedy Toole https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1562554946l/310612.SY75.jpg 968084] revolved around characters who were odious and absurd and the plot was pretty outlandish. As good as it was, it wasn't really believable. Lucky Jim feels populated with people you might know in real life.The title character, Jim, is someone I could understand even if he's not especially nice or honorable. He's misanthropic and insecure to the point it had me cringing. It works well as these traits play into each other. He doesn't like people because somehow they hurt your feelings. He doesn't see in yourself how he might hurt other people's feelings. He drinks too much, schemes and lies to save face, and tries to avoid any real work. Yet somehow he is the most human compared to the other characters, most of whom are bullying, manipulating, or using him in some way. On top of the heap is Professor Welch, the clueless department head. He has the future of Jim's employment as lecturer at the university in his power. Jim is jumping through hoops trying to stay on his good side. Then there's Welch's son, Bertrand, artistic poseur, who takes an instant dislike to Jim. The feeling is mutual and Jim shows some nerve in openly challenging and defying Bertrand. Living with the Welch family is Margaret, who is recovering from a suicide attempt. Using guilt as a weapon, (he was supposed to come to see her the night she swallowed the pills) she manipulates Jim into taking care of her companionship and emotional needs, even though they don't actually like each other. Jim manages to squeak out a little romance out of his circumstances with Christine, though it's not much of a love story to root for since he begins it in order to piss off her boyfriend Bertrand. He does show more honesty and candor in dealing with Christine, however. He also finds a new ally in the form of her uncle. “Lucky Jim” is an apt title since throughout the book, Jim's questionable behavior seems sure to find him unemployed, alone, possibly physically assaulted by the various people he crosses. He's far from a heroic character, but I found it oddly satisfying that he got the better of the smug and myopic Welch family.

There were two things about this short novel that took me by surprise. First, I didn't realize how much humor there would be. Wells added a lot of slapstick and dry wit, revolving around the various citizens of a small town chasing and being terrorized by the title character. I always thought of Wells as deadly serious, so this book was more entertaining than I was expecting.

The second thing was my preconceived idea that this was going to be a book about a “misunderstood monster. I was thinking this would be an Incredible Hulk-type story where a scientist's experiments go horribly wrong and ruin his life. You felt bad for him because it was an accident and now he had to deal with the struggles of his humanity. He would travel from place to place and people would hate and fear him, while he tried desperately to restore himself to normal.

But instead of all that, this Invisible Man is a jerk. You can't feel bad for him. He made himself invisible on purpose, thinking how superior he would be to everyone else. He never considered the implications of his discovery for the future of science and certainly doesn't want to share it. He robs people without remorse and scares the hell out of them on purpose. He's also selfish, bad tempered, and violent.

His brilliance in figuring out how to render himself invisible is cancelled out by his lack of consideration of the consequences. His thoughts are, “great, I can rob people!” and “oh crap, I can't eat in restaurants.” Not to mention all the times he's nearly run down or crushed because people can't see him. It's not easy being invisible. Being a genius doesn't guarantee that you're very sharp.

The Invisible Man's obnoxious nature takes a more serious nature later on in the book, when he decides a “reign of terror” and revenge on his old friend are in the works. Then, the book gets less funny but more exciting. Fund and quick read for a rainy afternoon.

Falling Angel is a hard-boiled detective novel combined with a horror story about Satan worship, cults, voodoo and other supernatural stuff. Hjortsberg writes in a clear, easy-to-read style. It's a page-turner and a quick, entertaining read.

The only problem is, I watched the 1987 film a few months ago, Angel Heart. The only difference between the book and the movie is that the book keeps the story in New York and the film moves down to New Orleans, for a touch of atmosphere and extra sweat. If you watched the film, the book has nothing new to add, no additional depth of character, nothing you'd miss out on by not reading it.



In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Mickey Rourke, Robert De Niro, and Lisa Bonet really breathed some life (not to mention sensuality) into this story. Not that Hjortsberg didn't give them personality, but the actors are able to give the characters so much more. This is a very rare case where I might actually prefer the film to the book.

Well-written and well-organized biography about one of my all time favorite entertainers. The Author goes from childhood and education of Henson to his first job on television and in the advertising world before going onto what he was most known for, and then covering his films and other post Muppet Show projects. He made some experimental films that I had not previously heard of.

The book points out the things that I liked best about him, such as the philosophy that, “When done right, it's possible to be silly and subversive at the same time.” He was also a strong believer that entertainment should work for adults and kids at the same time. (Something today's entertainers would do well to look into.) He was never didactic.

This bio doesn't pretend that Hensen was perfect. Certainly he was a massive workaholic (but blessed to love his work so much), not the greatest husband, and very stubborn. But overall this is a wonderful and informative celebration of an amazing man's life and career.

Dark urban fantasy version of Alice in Wonderland. Sounds great to me, right in my wheelhouse. Nice touch opening it in an insane asylum. If only it lived up to my expectations.

Other than the character names, this bears no resemblance to the source material. Characters have no personality, nothing even close to the original which is packed with weird, colorful characters. There is very little humor to be found, which is certainly one of things I loved best about the original.

But, let's say I forget about comparing it to the source material and think of it as a book on its own merits. Alice seems like an outline with dialogue, nothing is developed. The two main characters, Alice and Hatcher (who I assume is the Mad Hatter) have conveniently lost their memories, therefore the author doesn't have to develop character motivation. When convenient, suddenly they will remember part of their backstory to serve the plot. Hatcher and Alice know what to do based on dreams and visions instead of earning or learning anything. Dreams and visions are a weak device at the best of times and certainly shouldn't be used to replace character development. Not to mention that these people have no personality to speak of.

Mostly, Alice and Hatcher roam around the Old City (the crime-ridden part of a fantasy version of New York) and meet different evil and powerful denizens of this world. Except they're basically all the same. They look different and have different lairs, but can't tell you how they otherwise standout from each other. The Big Bad doesn't even get enough interaction to develop a personality.

The “dark fantasy” part revolves around the rape, torture, selling etc. of women and girls. No other crimes. All the baddies are men who want to consume women in some way or another. No other motivations from the villains, other than generic desire for “power.” Since this abuse of women isn't given any emotional resonance, it feels like a cheap trick.

I'm glad the book was short and fast moving. The ending itself though, was another problem. In the final conflict, Alice (who discovers at a convenient moment earlier that she is a magician) realizes she can just wish things to happen and uses this to dispatch with the person they've been chasing all this time. A bit anticlimactic, even though I wasn't that into the story, I expected a bit more to the final conflict after all the time spent on the setup.

Short and sharp sci-fi thriller. The main selling point is the subtly funny and misanthropic title character.

Sci-fi fans and Asimov Robot series fans should certainly get a kick out of this. It would make a good streaming show as well (if it's not already).

This is a great start to this book series, and I'm looking forward to learning more about the Murderbot.

I'm not in the YA age range this book was meant for, but I can't imagine giving this didactic book to my YA-aged daughter for entertainment or a challenge. The obvious freedom and individuality vs. comfort and safety argument that Lowry makes leaves you no room for complex thought.

I believe that 12-18 year olds can find something better. An older middle-schooler/high schooler is going to see right through this very quickly. In high school, our class read Brave New World, which has similar ideas and then some and is a much more interesting and entertaining book. In other words, kids can handle a lot more than The Giver has to offer.

The most interesting concept is the Giver himself, but this story doesn't strike me as being (as described) about memory. The Giver is a (not at all subtle) device to show the terrors and wonders that this society gave up for their secure life.

Certainly, it kept me reading because first, it's incredibly easy and didn't waste much of time and second, as the world was revealed, there is a compulsion to see how bad it really is. By the time the Giver's purpose is revealed and the main character makes some kind of choice for himself, the book is basically over. Just when it seems it should be getting started.

Instead of a really great fantasy story, with the undercurrent of the power dynamics between men and women and lots of food for thought, I read a book where the social commentary took precedence. This leads to a lot of sometimes dull, sometimes insufferable characters who exist mainly to fill their role, rather than engage my empathy and curiosity. Intellectually I was left cold as well. The central idea I pulled from this was that men are naturally violent abusers at worst and out of touch/out of control with their emotions at best. But when women are violent it''s because some man has pushed them into it, one way or another. There's some lip-service to women taking responsibility for their actions but that's not the overall vibe. I can't help but compare it to [b:The Stand 149267 The Stand Stephen King https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1213131305l/149267.SX50.jpg 1742269], which also featured a virus and a large cast of characters. That book was entertaining, filled with people who did incite emotions, negative or positive, and I was interested in learning about their fate. The end of The Stand didn't thrill me but at least I enjoyed the ride. The only interesting Sleeping Beauties' character was Dr. Flickinger, meth addict and plastic surgeon, who had very little to do with the story.Evie, the supernatural center of Sleeping Beauties, does not inspire the same level of fear/excitement as Randall Flagg. Somehow such a powerful being spends all her time locked in a cage. Where Flagg was free to roam, Evie's role is to manipulate in place. She wants two sides of men to fight over her body; there's Frank's group that wants to take her apart (for medical/scientific purposes), and Clint's group that wants to protect her. About half way through this incredibly long set-up to the finale, I was wishing it was over. The men are left to cope without their women, which they do to varying degrees. The ultimate outcome is left to the women, but the men can't do anything to affect it either way, so I'm not sure what the point was, especially as it turns out exactly the way you think it would. No new thoughts or surprises offered.

Severed covers an admittedly weird topic: the fascination and horror of severed human heads. Larsen talks about them from many points of view, including: shrunken heads of tribal ritual and their eventual economy, trophy heads of war, decapitation as a form of execution and the development of the guillotine, artwork featuring severed heads, heads of value for worship and healing, collecting of skulls for “science,” medical dissection, and frozen cryogenic heads.

There is a lot of interesting history, science, politics, culture, and psychology given on the topic, but it's not done as objectively as I would have expected. Many times Larsen mentions the power dynamics of removing or just collecting heads and Larsen's personal judgment of those who did so. There is an overall moralizing and emotional tone that doesn't fit. I believe it was already understood that decapitating someone is a violent, brutal thing to do and collecting heads seems rather gruesome to us today. (If you don't already know this is wrong, I don't think this book will be enough to help.)I would have expected a more detached (pardon the pun) viewpoint from a science and history book.

Supernatural thriller about a rock band pursued by a tormented marine veteran. There are cosmic struggles of good v. evil, dark vs. light, weak vs. strong, and the less cosmic conflict of art vs. commerce.

The story explores the trials of playing in a band and the desire to succeed as well as just share the joy and love for music. There's lots of deep character exploration, mixed with action sequences, and some tense moments. McCammon clearly loves music and made the details of the Five's life engaging and believable.

The only thing that made The Five less than perfectly enjoyable was the dialogue. Characters frequently offer emotional statements and analysis of themselves that don't sound like anything anyone would ever say.

I always look forward to a collection of Stephen King novellas, ever since Different Seasons, one of my all time favorite books. It seems to be a format in which King really shines.

This collection did not disappoint. My favorite was “The Life of Chuck” which had an unusual structure in terms of the order of events as well as being a bit like nesting dolls. It was not something I would expect from King. Very nicely done.

“The Life of Chuck” as well as “Rat” and “Mr. Harrigan's Phone” all had a bit of a Harlan Ellison feel to me, which is a good thing.

Of course, there's the Holly Gibney story. She's a fantastic fictional heroine and I was happy to read more about her in the title story.

Pleasant and fun to read with a likeable narrator (and her charismatic dog Bongo) and a touch of humor, but it seemed a little lightweight. The Twisted Ones is a spooky story that's very carefully bland.

Part of the horror of these types of stories should be carried within the main character. Their own mistakes, their own internal conflicts, and angst should be just as much a part of the darkness explored as is the “monster.” Other than learning about the existence of other-worldly stuff, the narrator is no different at the beginning of the story than she is at the end.

Maybe as a short story the animated effigies and creepy dolls would have felt like enough to make it chilling. As a full length novel, it was dragged out and all the characters just a little too nice or poorly-defined (except for Grandma of course, who we're told second hand was quite nasty.) No risks taken here.

Hoo boy. Humans, eh? Can't live with ‘em, can't get them to reproduce an alien hybrid race with you. We're “intelligent but hierarchical” but also racist, sexist, classist, homophobic, wasteful, violent, frightened, and destructive. After a nuclear war, the Oankali come along and offer us a better life, free from illness and pain and ageing. There's also free shelter and food without waste, a way to live with other creatures in a peaceful, mutually beneficial way. But we just can't get over how ugly the aliens are.

So they want us to give up our ability to breed as humans and make “construct” babies without touching our human mates. Is that so much to ask? Many of the humans in this book seem to think so, preferring sterility and struggle to the parental control of the Oankali.

Interesting as this all is, I found myself losing patience by the middle of the second book. The Oankali are benevolent, well-adjusted, maybe a little condescending. The human characters come off as a bunch of ineffectual children who don't know what's good for ‘em. Even Lilith seems to have simply accepted her fate. There really is no contest between the two groups.

I can appreciate and respect this series but find I'm not that into it. There's a lack of real tension despite the high stakes (the future of the human race!) and I can't work up much interest in the characters.

Parts of this were very good. King excels at writing kids. Luke and his friends and the other kids at the Institute are believable and engaging. They're worthy heroes of this supernatural thriller, and probably the only truly scary thing about the book.

I also enjoyed Tim Jamison and the other residents of Dupray, South Carolina. King sets up the drifter character of Tim very cleverly; you're not sure at first whether or not he's trustworthy. The story of him proving himself, getting his backstory, and finding a new place for himself in Dupray is satisfying. Also, the scene where the citizens of Dupray rush to the rescue of the Sheriff's office, all of them packing heat to defend their town, is one of the best moments of the book.

Where The Institute lost me was with Mrs. Sigsby and her sadistic slacker employees. These characters aren't that menacing or even interesting. We spend a lot of time with them, especially when they're on the hunt for an escapee and we see every step of their process. I have a feeling that if we knew less about them, they would seem more powerful somehow.

The mismatch of the heroes and villains is a problem if you're trying to create any feelings of suspense and excitement about the conflict.

I was all set to love this. The haunted, lonely motel setting really appealed to me. I also enjoyed the concept of two people working on solving the same mystery, Viv back in the 1980s (my favorite decade), and her niece Carly picking up the trail in recent times. It started out great and then got boring as heck.

This is a trite story about a serial killer with predictable twists. The ghosts are loosely tied to the main story but otherwise they don't add much other than atmosphere. I would have liked a little more haunting in this haunted motel. There wasn't much to enjoy in terms of the one-note characters either. They displayed nothing more than a surface set of personality traits. (Alma: tough, Marnie: cynical, Viv: brave, Carly: curious. Put all four together and you've almost got a real person.)

There was a lot of unnecessary repetition of information: after Viv solves part of the mystery in the '80s, we then see Carly discovering it again, resulting in plot points being restated. There had to be a better way to convey that Carly had caught up with Viv's discoveries.

The author's take on the '80s didn't ring true for me. The writers version of the 80s didn't evoke the period at all. It was also distracting that multiple characters were incredulous about the notion of a female cop. Even in the pop culture of the late '70s (and probably earlier, this is just as far as my first-hand memories go) there were female cops. I know pop culture isn't reality but it frequently reflects it and sets up what we expect to see.

This story builds very slowly, which I liked because it did build into something completely worth the investment of time.

But even the parts before the monster reveal were enjoyable. Noemie is a likeable heroine, she is smart, quick, brave, but makes a lot of mistakes and has room for self doubt. The early book was about her coping with no longer being in a place where she's popular, loved and protected. She has to deal with the strict rules and humorless personalities of her mysterious hosts.

She also has to think of someone besides herself, her cousin who is ill, in a vulnerable position, and unable to get out of the trap of her marriage. You get the idea that Noemie has never had to take responsibility before and has previously only had to consider her own wants. Watching her struggle, fail, and work up the courage to try again, as well as figure out what is right from wrong was what the early bit of the story was all about. It could be a good YA book for the older end of that age group.

Once the monster part takes off it's wonderfully weird and creepy. That was a good surprise because I was starting to wonder if we were going to get out of the pattern of Noemie having weird dreams in between creepy encounters with her cousin's unpleasant and controlling in-laws.

Fun monster story with romance, thrills, and a good character arc.

Action-packed thriller that was just good enough to keep me invested in the final outcome.

However, the 60's radical vs. Yuppie 80's materialist felt dated to me, at least the way it was written here. Also, McCammon, who I've come to know and love, dragged out the path to the final showdown more than necessary.

I just didn't have enough interest in Mary or Laura to enjoy so many action sequences. I do appreciate that all the fighting and running around involved female characters. You didn't see that quite as often around the time this was written.

Mary Terror was an interesting concept but not believable or inspiring of fear or empathy. Some of that time spent on dragged out action scenes could have been better spent developing these characters. Also, Laura's “sisterhood” with Didi didn't feel earned.

I know it's just a thriller with no serious thought required, but McCammon set my expectations high with books like Gone South and this didn't work as well for me.

Entertaining and fast read with many disturbing, chilling and creepy moments. There were some good aspects and bad aspects of this book but it actually got better as it went along.

It was also surprisingly funny with quirky bits of dialogue:

“I am not sure what the appropriate gesture is to make toward the family of the woman who bit off your ear, but if you felt absolutely compelled, I certainly wouldn't take food.”

The title to me implied that a book club would be working together to fight vampires. That's not what happened. Instead, most of the book is about gaslighting Patricia. Patricia is a character to empathize with and root for in her struggle to free her family and town of their evil neighbor. Her fellow book-clubbers unfortunately put their fears of their husbands, fears for their personal security, and fear of public opinion in front of protecting the children of their town. Things went bad for Patricia, but it kept me reading, hoping she was going to be vindicated.

Now the not so good things.

The Messages about the wrongs of Racism, Sexism, and Classism from the book were far from subtle. Hendrix doesn't trust the reader to be smart enough to come to any conclusions on their own. There is evil in putting your own financial and social standing above all else, while allowing disadvantaged people to be exploited and destroyed. Unfortunately, it's not left for the reader to think about these evils in the character's actions. Instead, it is overtly said, words stating the obvious put right into the characters mouths:

“Then again, I moved here because you people are all so stupid,” he said. “You'll take anyone at face value as long as he's white and has money.”

I also thought the stupidity and egotism of the Husbands Who Don't Listen was weak. The worst of them cheat and abuse their wives either physically or emotionally and the best of them are shallow and clueless. Not one book club member is in a good marriage, and to me it feels like a device used to make the men jackasses in order to elevate the women. Hendrix is yet another writer who doesn't trust that a female character can be written as resourceful, brave, and layered without also diminishing the men.

This book was fun and exciting but could have been so much more if Hendrix had faith in the intelligence of his audience.

Thriller with wonderful character development and relationships. It's packed with tense and scary moments, and a touch of paranormal/supernatural spooky stuff. And that's just superficially.

Going deeper, the story explores themes of father and son relationships, handling grief, and questions of self-worth and how parents affect your sense of self worth. These concerns touch all the major characters throughout the book. These themes are very heavily hit though, right on the surface and are not left subtle for the reader to discover through deeper thoughts.

Some of the plot elements wrapped up in a too-perfect way, and were too easily resolved for my taste, especially considering the overall dark tone of the book.

After my American Lit class in high school, I mainly thought of Poe as an influential horror and mystery writer. (Not to mention the source of those great Corman/Vincent Price movies.) I was happily surprised to discover in this collection Poe's sense of humor.

Here's a few that caught me off guard because their entertaining absurdity:

In “Loss of Breath” the narrator loses his breath and is mistaken for dead, resulting in many misadventures.

In “Never Bet the Devil Your Head” the narrator's friend, Dammit (Yup, that's his name), keeps using the expression “I bet the devil my head....” Dammit bets he can jump a bridge. The devil shows up and you can imagine where this goes...

In “Angel of the Odd” the titular angel torments a man with improbable accidents.

In “The System of Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether” the narrator visits a mental institution to visit and finds that the lunatics literally took over the asylum.

“X-ing a Paragrab” is a tale of two newspapermen having a “war” in print with lots of wordplay using x's and o's.

I loved the stories I knew, like “The Tell-tale Heart,” “The Black Cat,” and “The Fall of the House of Usher,” etc. But it was nice to be surprised by some of the odd stories that I didn't know before reading this collection.

This is certainly an exciting story. I love Holly so it was great to see her again.

I did feel that this is all ground that King has covered before, specifically with Desperation, The Dark Half, and the Bill Hodges book.

With as many wonderful books as King has written, I can't expect it to be unique every single time, but it did distract me with this particular book, how much it reminded me of others.