Megan
It's just okay.
The author has a serious issue with repeating the same phrases, and even situations, quite a bit. When you compare all the books to each other, you realize there's a pretty specific formula to each. There's a serious lack of action, and we only later hear about some of the more interesting things, and descriptions of many parts of the story are also lacking. I'm not even going to get into the ick factor controversy, mainly because it was completely predictable.
I wanted so much more from this series unfortunately. I felt like I wanted to love the characters, and I found the world incredibly interesting. However, so much fell flat or wasn't given enough attention that I ultimately can't say I care. Also, Shaun is awful. George is a much more interesting character, especially when Shaun isn't part of the equation. Codependency isn't cute.
I'm so sad to say I think this may be my last adventure with the Lumberjanes. There's a noticeable difference in the story and characters with the departure of Noelle Stevenson, and I haven't been vibing with the new art style for a couple volumes. It's a major bummer, but I'm happy to say the first few volumes will easily remain among my favorite graphic novels of all time.
Beautiful prose and incredibly immersive. It's widely known that Capote embellished and made up conversations or situations, which will matter more or less depending on what you want from the book. Different people involved have differing opinions on just how much is true or not.
In Cold Blood is considered a non-fiction novel, meaning it's written like a novel (with character development, flow of events, and inner monologue) and not a textbook presenting facts. Ultimately I loved the writing so much that I found myself overlooking the embellishments. I just went along for the ride and loved every minute.
This is the most disgusting piece of mysogynistic trash I've ever read. I don't think Robert Kirkman has ever met a woman in real life, and he definitely doesn't view women as equals or quality individuals who can contribute positively to society.
Aside from that, there was horribly cheesy, awkwardly paced, and incredibly unrealistic and forced dialogue.
The worst (best?) example of telling and not showing I've ever read.
Typos, for real.
———-
Here are two reviews that say the things I want to say better than I can:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1558593435?book_show_action=true&from_review_page=1
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2570187542?book_show_action=false&from_review_page=1
———-
Here's an excerpt from an article as well:
My biggest problem with the comics is the general trend toward an essentialist view of gender roles. Kirkman seems to think that men and women are fundamentally different in ways that go beyond the physical/anatomical, and those differences include men being generally more action-oriented, better leaders, and more rational, while the women are more passive, emotional, and better at domestic tasks (cooking, laundry, sewing clothes, taking care of children). There are of course a few exceptions. Amy is a good shooter, while Tyreese can't shoot to save his life. But these are just that: exceptions.
The feeling I get from the books is that men are meant to be leaders while the women are meant to be in the kitchen. And the fact that Kirkman keeps saying “I'm only being realistic in terms of what I think would happen in a zombie apocalypse” suggests that this is what he sees as the natural order of things, rather than just social constructs. If you push the logic of the comics far enough, you could argue that all the social advances in women's rights are what's artificial - all it's gonna take is a cataclysmic event like a zombie apocalypse to return things to the way they were always meant to be.
http://irrelevantcomics.blogspot.com/2010/11/sexism-in-walking-dead-ongoing.html
This book is a thorough recollection of the police investigation and trial of John Wayne Gacy told from the point-of-view of the lead prosecutor Terry Sullivan. It's factual, to-the-point, and a very fast read with little to no literary flair. I found it quite interesting how Sullivan illustrates the importance of each police action, question, decision, etc. and how they built their case. At times, especially in the first half, it was a bit drawn out and reads like a police report, though I have to admit that it sort of mirrored how boring police surveillance work can be. The trial portion is very detailed, and while some people may also find it boring or too long, I thought it was fascinating to hear about the prosecution's strategies and thoughts over the course of the trial.
Sullivan doesn't delve into the psychology of JWG beyond what is covered in the trial, and there are passing statements about his childhood without any analysis. He does not attempt to answer why JWG did what he did, he simply shows how JWG was caught and convicted.
I believe it's hard to bring life to every victim when there are least 33 of them while keeping the book at a reasonable length for most people, however some true crime books accomplish this very well. Sullivan did his best to humanize some of the victims within the scope of the crimes committed against them and the effect their deaths had on their families.
Some people may find the gruesome detail that some of the crimes are described (particularly by the living victims) to be too much. I don't recommend it if you prefer true crime books that gloss over those details.
The update felt a bit all over the place.
While this author writes very interesting and original stories, I just can't with the repetition. How many times do we need to be told a character dresses like Emma Frost, how scientists can be obsessive about their research, that it was so unlikely that two characters would become friends and did so against the odds, and pretty much every other character trait or thought? We get it, that one guy has a bad leg. And did you know that deep ocean depths can crush you? Well no need to worry if you don't, because the author hammers it into your head repeatedly over the course of an entire chapter. None of these repetitive points are included to further the plot, drive character development, or even investigate the point in more detail. No. They're just the same thing repeated again, as if the reader won't remember the fact on their own. If the repetitions were removed (which would seriously help the pacing and story overall), the book would probably have been a third shorter.
As for the good, there's a lot of diversity that is easily woven into the story without feeling contrived. The science talk was fun and most likely easy for most people to understand, if a bit fudged at times to make the story work. It felt a lot like Jurassic Park (the book, not the movie) with the cast of characters and multiple perspectives. It's an easy read and definitely a page turner with creepy and scary vibes at times. There is quite a bit of suspense and really interesting interactions with the mermaids. It's a fun twist on the mermaid myth, though the end was a bit boring. Kind of like Mira Grant wasn't sure how to finish everything once she wrote the “big reveal” (which wasn't big nor a reveal given all the repetition of a particular fact about the mermaids prior to that, and it was a huge stretch). She may as well have written “and then they found twenty dollars. The end.”
I keep holding out hope that one of Mira Grant's books will completely work for me. Three stars is fun! It's good, I enjoyed reading it and would recommend it to some people, but I don't want to waste time on an author that always underwhelms me when I'm so excited for the premise. The stories and characters have so much potential, but the writing itself feels like a drag. It's like she gets in the way of her own good ideas. I want her to have more faith in the reader to remember things she's told us already, and I want her to really push these fantastic ideas she has to the absolute limit.
I received an ARC of The Storm Crow in the December 2018 Fairyloot box, and honestly I thought I wasn't going like it at all. However, I'm happy to say this was a super fun YA fantasy. The beginning was a little boring for me and the end was predictable, but I enjoyed the characters, their relationships, and the back stories. I thought the crows seemed cheesy and poorly explained at first, but I came to really love everything about them in the second half. I also appreciated the ease of the representation and consistency of depression throughout the book from beginning to end. There are some very common YA fantasy tropes throughout the story and things happen a little too quickly/easily at times, but I still enjoyed the overall reading experience. I'll definitely pick up the next book in the series.
The Mistborn series was seriously hyped up for me. I was expecting it to be my new favorite book. It was very good, but it's not a new favorite. I found the magic system to be thoroughly explained, unique, and interesting, but the language used to describe it was repetitive and grated my nerves (particularly during fight scenes). I understand that's how the magic system works, but it could have been written better. I loved the diverse cast and overall story line. I found there to be an excellent balance of action and slower moments. I saw some of the “twists” coming, but not all. It was really enjoyable, and I'm looking forward to continuing the series once I get a long enough break from the words burned, flared, pushed, and pulled.
Contains spoilers
I think everyone's opinion of this book hinges on whether you like the paranormal element in it. I was super let down by that part. I was expecting some very obsessive stalker behavior that was intricately woven into the story, and I was interested in how it would all fit together. The scheming falls flat for me when the character is simply able to watch every conversation and know every little thing because Random Paranormal Element. Once it was revealed I thought, “Oh, yeah, that would do it. Guess she isn't a mastermind with a ton of skill.” I was instantly less impressed and a little bored. EDIT: As time has passed, my thoughts have gone from ‘well that's kind of dumb' to ‘ugh that book was so stupid' when someone mentions it.
Since everything else only happens because of the paranormal element, I wish it had a way better explanation than “lucid dreaming, but more” to make me believe it. I like there to be a more exploration of magical elements, and this book absolutely doesn't provide that at all. If the author doesn't give at least a sentence or two of explanation (even a vague explanation or just the characters being like “wtf”), I'm not convinced they fully understand their own world.
For me, the fun part about a thriller is guessing the twist, but not too soon and not feeling completely convinced I've actually figured it out, and feeling that super satisfied by the process. This book was just nonsense at the end and the final twist had basically no hints that could help you figure it out. It belongs with the lame ‘and it was all a dream' kind of reveal.
As with all short story collections, I really liked some, really hated some, and the rest were somewhere in between. My average rating for the book as a whole was 3 stars, but I decided to go with an “It's okay” rating of 2 stars because of the repetitive stories. There was not enough variety in the retellings, with 2 of the 18 being about finding Rumpelstiltskin's name, and 3 being about how Jack (of the Beanstalk variety) is a murderous piece of crap. Of those three stories, two were set in a court room. Beyond that, the seven dwarves and Hansel and Grethel show up A LOT. There should have been more thought given to the overall composition of the collection to avoid this. It became tiresome reading about the same set of characters in different ways. There are more than enough fairy tales out there to avoid any sort of overlap at all.
The stories I most enjoyed were How I Came to Marry a Herpetologist, Gilly the Goose Girl, and Baron Boscov's Bastard. I absolutely hated Wolf at the Door and The Emperor's New (and Improved) Clothes.
Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil is probably one of the most atmospheric books I've read in a while. I listened to the audiobook, and I highly recommend it. I'm not sure I would have rated it 4 stars without experiencing the story through Jeff Woodman's narration. My guess is it'd lie closer to 3 as some sections may have dragged a bit in the first half.
Before reading, everyone should be aware this is a nonfiction novel, reads like a novel, and the author uses artitistic license to accomplish that. He addresses it in his acknowledgements and had discussed it elsewhere as well. It's not straight nonfiction true crime that simply walks the reader the facts of the case. It creates a thorough and complete story that is very interesting. I remember reading that the book was extremely well-received by the people of Savannah.
The characters studies are interesting, and the language will be very accessible to most people (which is understandable given the author is a magazine writer). The way certain things are talked about or addressed is indicative of the time and place in which it was written, so keep that in mind.
I recommend this to anyone who likes true crime or general fiction.
I first read Ransom (and every other Lois Duncan book I could get my hands on) when I was in middle school, and I have been interested to reread it to see if I still liked it as much as I did back then. I know that's a huge gamble, given how many things we overlook as kids, but I'm so happy that I found it just as enjoyable this time around.
I love that so many of the characters, particularly the girls, have more layers and development than you typically see in most young adult novels. I found the depth that was accomplished for the characters to be fantastic considering this is quite a short book. It's not necessarily the scariest, creepiest, etc. book you'll ever read, and I remember liking other books by Lois Duncan better, but it's a solid book. I wouldn't recommend it for young kids.
The biggest flaw for me is that dialogue isn't always natural (high schoolers using “whom” instead of “who” in casual conversation...). Aside from that, a few of the situations are little bit less than believable, but they aren't distracting or so unbelievable that they border on absurd.
From what I understand, there's a new version of this book that added cell phones and other technology to make it “more relatable” to modern teens, but I'd recommend reading the 1966 version. Teenagers aren't stupid and can understand that cell phones didn't always exist.
Adult me rates it a 3 overall, but my inner middle schooler wants to give it a 5 for nostalgia and enjoyment. So I'm going with the average of those - 4 stars!
Was not a fan of the writing voice or jumping around. Just as I'd get invested in a part of the story or time line, the writing jumped to a different person and place in time. It was frustrating.
Cullen makes some leaps that I think are a bit overboard, such as detailing inner thoughts of the killers that he could not have known, or motivations behind actions that were never voiced or penned. It creates a fictionalized story that is aggressively sold as 100% true, as the most thorough and correct of all the books on the subject. Much of it is speculation and should be very clearly presented that way. Honestly, it's an excellent persuasive essay aimed to convince the audience of a specific view point. It's accomplishing that goal superbly.
The biggest issue I have is with how much blame Cullen shifts from Dylan to Eric. It's uncomfortable how much he favors Dylan and seems to almost defend him compared to Eric. Cullen left out or didn't explore some pretty terrible things Dylan did and said. He frequently brushes off some of the things Dylan wrote and said as parroting Eric, because of Eric, or even going as far as to say Dylan didn't really mean or believe it. There's just no way to know that, and it's confusing why he doesn't take Dylan's words seriously but claims Eric meant every word he said and wrote.
I absolutely agree that Eric could potentially be a psychopath, but we will never know for sure. However, it sure as hell doesn't mean Dylan wasn't just as sadistic and monstrous simply because he was also depressed and suicidal. Hell, Dylan talked about doing “NBK” with a female student months before Eric referenced NBK himself. Dylan referred to himself as god, talked about going on killing sprees, and laughed while killing students. Why Cullen didn't address these things or didn't feel they give us a real window into who Dylan is, I'll never understand. He went aggressively after Eric, and rightfully so. I can't fathom why he took almost the exact opposite stance on Dylan.
I got my hands on the new epilogue, written years after the book was originally published, and Cullen directly addresses his bias without calling it that. He says, “I realized later that I was grieving for Dylan, too. What a sweet, loving kid. Most of his life. That shocked me, but I didn't grasp how it tormented me. Lost boy, we could have saved him. I see now that I always felt that way, even when I hated him—I just didn't know.” He wrote his book while grieving for Dylan. It's almost like he views who Dylan became as something Dylan didn't choose for himself, but something Eric did. It clearly affects how he interpreted the worst of Dylan's writings and actions.
Cullen also takes issue with people who still push the bullying theory. I understand his frustration. People want to say Eric and Dylan specifically targeted bullies, that Columbine only happened as retaliation against people who relentlessly tormented Eric and Dylan. We know it's highly unlikely to be the only or primary contributing factor. It's pretty well known that they were bullied, but the extent is not well understood by anyone, including Cullen. Both mention retaliating against people who treated them badly (in their minds), and I think that's all we have to go on, since survivor recollections conflict. What is clear is that they hated everyone in the end. Understanding how their life experiences shaped that hatred is just as important as understanding their mental health issues. They work in conjunction with one another, and they always will. We need that to be the focus of the conversation, not the argument over if they were bullied/how much/did they even care. Cullen stamps on that argument and goes full speed to the other end of the spectrum. As with most things, my guess is the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
I found the most interesting part of this book to be how the entire massacre and subsequent years affected Cullen. I wish he had written from a first person perspective the whole time, not just in the epilogue, and included his own thoughts and journey in chronological order as he learned the facts. It would have been extremely interesting.
I don't know how to rate this book. It's interesting, heart-wrenching, and thorough. It's an easy read in the sense that Cullen uses very simple sentences and language. Your average reader will find it very accessible. However, I feel so uncomfortable with the things I mentioned and didn't enjoy the writing voice (half due to the audiobook narrator, half due to Cullen's word choice) or frequent jumping around. I don't recommend this book to anyone who won't read it with a critical eye for bias. For now, I'm leaving it unrated.
While the pacing could use a little work, I very much appreciate the straightforward portrayal of anxiety, PTSD, grief, etc. in this book. Some adult readers may feel the things Peter manages to do are way beyond what a pre-teen is capable of, but I think the target audience will love his journey and find it more believable. There's a tiny hint of magical realism that I feel makes all the more unbelievable things fit into the atmosphere of the story. I liked the end, but I wish there had been just a little more, perhaps one more perspective change.
Ol' Pirate Cove (a book that takes place on the sea) read for the Quest for the Bookie Grail in The Book Junkie Trials 2019. Magi for the win!
This was okay enough, I guess, but definitely not for those who regularly read fantasy or maybe even books in general. The reveal on the 3rd to last page was spoiled for me when someone decided to give me a two sentence synopsis that I didn't ask for, so that may have contributed to my mindset while reading. Pacing was off, dialogue felt unnatural and inauthentic to the time period, and the characters were all caricatures. Some people may enjoy all the nods to famous literature, but most of it felt lazy to me. There was potential for this to be really fast paced, exciting, and funny. It did not live up to that potential at all.
That being said, there was one quote that I loved enough to tab (which could possibly be reworded/borrowed from another author and I'm just too uncultured to realize it):
“When all that we have within is exposed, and we may no longer blame our inadequacies for our failure, but must instead depend on out strengths to succeed... that is when the measure of a man is taken, my boy.”
Contains spoilers
I was so down for the whole tuatara subplot and that a whole bunch of teenagers now know what a tuatara is.
The friendship between Aza and Daisy is so realistic and nice to see in a YA book. I found Daisy to be such a consistent and detailed character that I felt like I actually knew her. Aza could have used some more distinguishing characteristics that weren't about her dad, car, or mental health.
The OCD representation is perfect. It's perfect. The ending was so good, and I'm very happy John Green didn't try to wrap up everything and make Aza seem like she was suddenly so much better. It really sends home the message that you aren't able to easily overcome intrusive thoughts with OCD.
The general plot involving the dad fell short for me. I think it's unlikely that the guy would've stayed in a tunnel while freezing to death, given he wasn't homeless and had a crap load of money. However, I completely disagree with people who give the book poor ratings because of this plot (and its lack of development). This the the side plot that gets our characters in certain situations, but the main plot is about Aza's journey with her mental health. That plot doesn't have a uber satisfyingly happy ending because that isn't a reality for people with OCD.
This was a childhood favorite of mine that I really wanted to reread, mainly because I couldn't remember anything other than how much I loved it. After finishing it, I totally know why I loved Amber Brown more than any other character in the other books I had read. Not only did I identify with her on a ton of different levels, but this book also explored emotions that I had many times growing up in a military family. The feeling of loss when people move is a difficult thing for a grade-schooler to understand and cope with. I definitely didn't realize that as a kid, but I can very much appreciate the accessibility and openness of this book with dealing with those emotions. It felt very real.
Contains spoilers
I really wanted to like this book, and everything about the premise should have been a win for me. I find well-developed unreliable and unlikable characters extremely interesting. Reading from the POV of a killer or stalker (e.g., You by Caroline Kepnes) can be wonderfully disturbing and morbid. I like reading crime novels and true crime, and I find the psychology of serial killers fascinating. Unfortunately, I was severely disappointed in this whole book.
First let's talk about characters. Dexter is wildly inconsistent. He doesn't have emotions, but he has emotions. He doesn't have human desires, but he does. He's a sociopath, but he's not. He “isn't human” and doesn't care, yet somehow he cares about kids and has a moral code. It felt like the author didn't really know who the character was, or what serial killers and sociopaths are like. It may have been an attempt to create dimension to the character, but I don't think it worked and just left me confused.
That being said, I found Dexter's stress about his lost time compelling. It ultimately added to him feeling inconsistent, but the emotion itself was better described than in other books. Where it falls flat is on the follow-through. I wish his emotions had been more explored instead of him just thinking, “Woah I am feeling an emotion. That's weird. I don't have emotions.” Then he'd do something that was extremely emotionless. I'm pretty sure I have whiplash from all the back and forth.
Moving on, the female characters were awful, and it was apparent from the second chapter how bad it was going to be throughout the whole book. Dexter's sister was worthless, argumentative, and wanted him to do her job for her yet never believed him. Somehow she felt she deserved a promotion, though it was clear she'd make a terrible detective and couldn't do her own job without Dexter spoonfeeding her. His boss was a useless detective who was described as “outwardly feminine” but definitely couldn't have slept her way to her position, oh no, because she has a “masculine” personality. Somehow she's a stupid person who falls for a lot of bullshit, yet she's the only one to think about tailing Dexter. They were all useless characters and were so one-dimensional that they became caricatures. Across the board, the character development was lacking.
I started highlighting every instance that women were described as stupid, irrational, or in that ridiculous way male writers tend to describe female appearance, but I stopped after 41 highlights (many of which included whole paragraphs). I don't know why male writers can't write real women. I'm not saying every woman has to be smart and likeable, but write them in a realistic way. Maybe we were only seeing women as Dexter sees them, but if that's true then he also isn't consistent in that. He both thought sex workers didn't deserve to die but also thought they were “just prostitutes” so it didn't matter if they died. In the end, I don't believe these were simply Dexter's views of women because of how characteristic the descriptions were of male writers in general.
As for the plot, I always find dreams to be a weak plot-moving device. I also don't find lost time very interesting at all, in any book. It always feels like a cheap way to create suspense. I wasn't aware this book had that, otherwise I would've skipped it altogether (definitely my bad, given the title). It was obvious Dexter wasn't actually the murderer, and we had to go through most of the book waiting to find out who it really was, but not in a suspenseful way. It was more boring and dragged out than anything. The reveal was nothing short of lackluster.
I can't get on board with one traumatic event making two brothers (who were raised separately) serial killers. Nature vs nurture is incredibly complex, and they not only have different genetics but majorly different upbringings outside of one awful event. We're supposed to believe they're basically the same and the only difference between the two of them is that one kills with a moral code. It's a stretch.
The humor was okay sometimes, occasionally making me chuckle, but severely tone deaf other times. I don't personally find sex worker or race jokes funny, but they may hit the mark more with other people.
The alliterations and Dexter's inner voice grated my nerves. It was okay at first, kind of like personality quirks you find endearing in a new partner that you start to hate after the honeymoon phase is over. It became cheesy and annoying very quickly. It's definitely a personal preference, so your miles may vary.
I think because I read so much true crime, this book never stood a chance. It was so interesting at the start and had a ton of potential. The author could have delved so much deeper into the mind of a serial killer, but ultimately it felt really surface level and boring.
