Ben Saufley
I almost DNF'ed this book around 30%. The opening half hour of the audiobook is like a parody of fantasy written by someone who hates fantasy. A mishmash of prologues, pull-quotes, time jumps, and "Part One" / "Book One" / "Chapter One" … I feel like there were more. At 30%, I still had no idea what was happening in this book or what characters I was even following. Some fans of the series advised me that the series gets better, and that Erikson didn't have an editor for this one (dunno if that's true, but it jibes for sure). The novel settles and develops a narrative arc eventually. After that, it's fine. I've read worse fantasy, and I've read much better. A number of characters, especially but not exclusively the Bridge Burners, blend together and I forgot anything unique about each of them. Now that it's over, I have a general idea of what happened in the book, but the specifics are … vague. I would probably give the second half of this book closer to a 3, 3.25, but the first third drags it down some, so 2.5.
I almost DNF'ed this book around 30%. The opening half hour of the audiobook is like a parody of fantasy written by someone who hates fantasy. A mishmash of prologues, pull-quotes, time jumps, and "Part One" / "Book One" / "Chapter One" … I feel like there were more. At 30%, I still had no idea what was happening in this book or what characters I was even following. Some fans of the series advised me that the series gets better, and that Erikson didn't have an editor for this one (dunno if that's true, but it jibes for sure). The novel settles and develops a narrative arc eventually. After that, it's fine. I've read worse fantasy, and I've read much better. A number of characters, especially but not exclusively the Bridge Burners, blend together and I forgot anything unique about each of them. Now that it's over, I have a general idea of what happened in the book, but the specifics are … vague. I would probably give the second half of this book closer to a 3, 3.25, but the first third drags it down some, so 2.5.
I almost DNF'ed this book around 30%. The opening half hour of the audiobook is like a parody of fantasy written by someone who hates fantasy. A mishmash of prologues, pull-quotes, time jumps, and "Part One" / "Book One" / "Chapter One" … I feel like there were more. At 30%, I still had no idea what was happening in this book or what characters I was even following. Some fans of the series advised me that the series gets better, and that Erikson didn't have an editor for this one (dunno if that's true, but it jibes for sure). The novel settles and develops a narrative arc eventually. After that, it's fine. I've read worse fantasy, and I've read much better. A number of characters, especially but not exclusively the Bridge Burners, blend together and I forgot anything unique about each of them. Now that it's over, I have a general idea of what happened in the book, but the specifics are … vague. I would probably give the second half of this book closer to a 3, 3.25, but the first third drags it down some, so 2.5.
I almost DNF'ed this book around 30%. The opening half hour of the audiobook is like a parody of fantasy written by someone who hates fantasy. A mishmash of prologues, pull-quotes, time jumps, and "Part One" / "Book One" / "Chapter One" … I feel like there were more. At 30%, I still had no idea what was happening in this book or what characters I was even following. Some fans of the series advised me that the series gets better, and that Erikson didn't have an editor for this one (dunno if that's true, but it jibes for sure). The novel settles and develops a narrative arc eventually. After that, it's fine. I've read worse fantasy, and I've read much better. A number of characters, especially but not exclusively the Bridge Burners, blend together and I forgot anything unique about each of them. Now that it's over, I have a general idea of what happened in the book, but the specifics are … vague. I would probably give the second half of this book closer to a 3, 3.25, but the first third drags it down some, so 2.5.
I was largely entertained by this book, and it generally kept me guessing, which is most of what I want out of a thriller. A good thriller has enough "a-ha, I thought so" moments without letting you guess the whole thing, and this did well enough on that front, for me. I'm deducting points for the woman lies about abuse for personal gain trope, and for the fact that it got a little cartoonish at points.
I was largely entertained by this book, and it generally kept me guessing, which is most of what I want out of a thriller. A good thriller has enough "a-ha, I thought so" moments without letting you guess the whole thing, and this did well enough on that front, for me. I'm deducting points for the woman lies about abuse for personal gain trope, and for the fact that it got a little cartoonish at points.
I really thought I'd like this more than I did. It was interesting, but it seemed to have a "point"… that it never really got to. Like there were undercurrents of a philosophical or ethical statement being made, and plenty of broader ideas were clear—the world is cruel to women; capitalism is a monster; the environment will change—and I generally agree, but it never added up to any more compelling thesis. Also the fixation on overpopulation was strange to read; it feels like a theme from a prior era, and dampened the anti-corporate argument. It all seemed to build toward something and then just kind of end. Which left me with just the impact of the vignettes it pieced together, which were interesting but a little disappointing as a whole.
I really thought I'd like this more than I did. It was interesting, but it seemed to have a "point"… that it never really got to. Like there were undercurrents of a philosophical or ethical statement being made, and plenty of broader ideas were clear—the world is cruel to women; capitalism is a monster; the environment will change—and I generally agree, but it never added up to any more compelling thesis. Also the fixation on overpopulation was strange to read; it feels like a theme from a prior era, and dampened the anti-corporate argument. It all seemed to build toward something and then just kind of end. Which left me with just the impact of the vignettes it pieced together, which were interesting but a little disappointing as a whole.
It took me a little while to get into this one. I had forgotten where the last left off, and a decent way into the book it still rang very few bells. But it got going, I got back into the swing of the characters, and I enjoyed the third act. I'm really curious how the trilogy resolves, because while Carew is intent on ensuring "gray-ness" in his characters, Bellamus is hardly a villain, and if Roper's plans are essentially genocide, then like… that's bad, unequivocally. I'll definitely read the conclusion soon.
It took me a little while to get into this one. I had forgotten where the last left off, and a decent way into the book it still rang very few bells. But it got going, I got back into the swing of the characters, and I enjoyed the third act. I'm really curious how the trilogy resolves, because while Carew is intent on ensuring "gray-ness" in his characters, Bellamus is hardly a villain, and if Roper's plans are essentially genocide, then like… that's bad, unequivocally. I'll definitely read the conclusion soon.
I have mixed feelings about this book. For one: it hooked me right away; it's the first book I've read cover-to-cover in a written format in years—I'm working on a few other, longer books, but mostly I'm listening to audiobooks. And I was entertained the whole way through. So for that: four stars. But also, it's kind of silly. For me that was actually probably a good thing; I'm not a big horror reader and I don't like the feeling of being terrified. So the silliness reduced the initial creepiness to a tolerable level. But now that I'm done, I can't really shake that silliness.
Within the first few chapters, Uketsu and Kurihara have apparently figured out the absurd scenario at the center of this all, with basically no mistakes. The scenario is silly and far-fetched, and there are so many other ways to read these house plans—sinister ways, even—that the fact that they supposedly got it just right is bothersome.
I'll say this, though: if it was the author's intent to leave people theorizing, they've certainly got me there. But the most satisfying theory I can come up with just feels a bit too far from any possible author's intent, or at least any well-written plot: that the whole thing presented by the two women was a fabrication, simply to satisfy the curiosity of these people who were investigating, by engaging the theories they had published in the newspaper; sending them in the wrong direction, and wrapping it up with a bow. In that way, they engaged these silly, paranoid delusions, and threw them off the scent of any number of much simpler criminal conspiracies. We never meet either of the children supposedly at the center of this plot, nor even their mother. They're conveniently in hiding by the end of it all. The loose end this leaves is the neighbor, but I suppose that could just be one more person sent to shore up the story.
All of this is why I have to give this book a decent rating: despite the many flaws that can be pointed out, in the end, I was engaged and it's kept me thinking about it since.
I have mixed feelings about this book. For one: it hooked me right away; it's the first book I've read cover-to-cover in a written format in years—I'm working on a few other, longer books, but mostly I'm listening to audiobooks. And I was entertained the whole way through. So for that: four stars. But also, it's kind of silly. For me that was actually probably a good thing; I'm not a big horror reader and I don't like the feeling of being terrified. So the silliness reduced the initial creepiness to a tolerable level. But now that I'm done, I can't really shake that silliness.
Within the first few chapters, Uketsu and Kurihara have apparently figured out the absurd scenario at the center of this all, with basically no mistakes. The scenario is silly and far-fetched, and there are so many other ways to read these house plans—sinister ways, even—that the fact that they supposedly got it just right is bothersome.
I'll say this, though: if it was the author's intent to leave people theorizing, they've certainly got me there. But the most satisfying theory I can come up with just feels a bit too far from any possible author's intent, or at least any well-written plot: that the whole thing presented by the two women was a fabrication, simply to satisfy the curiosity of these people who were investigating, by engaging the theories they had published in the newspaper; sending them in the wrong direction, and wrapping it up with a bow. In that way, they engaged these silly, paranoid delusions, and threw them off the scent of any number of much simpler criminal conspiracies. We never meet either of the children supposedly at the center of this plot, nor even their mother. They're conveniently in hiding by the end of it all. The loose end this leaves is the neighbor, but I suppose that could just be one more person sent to shore up the story.
All of this is why I have to give this book a decent rating: despite the many flaws that can be pointed out, in the end, I was engaged and it's kept me thinking about it since.
I think this book has a lot of interesting things to say, some interesting insights about trying to be a person, and a leader, without losing your soul. A lot of it isn't actually specific to the younger generations, except insofar as older generations were not, I guess, raised with the idea or expectation that their job, and their selves at their job, should be some kind of reflection of their own values and priorities. There are certainly parts of the book that feel a little cold, stereotypically capitalist—arguably still hanging onto an older way of doing things—but I think a lot of that is at least a valid perspective to be considered, even if I sometimes felt that I wanted to push back, and the intent behind even those sections was one of trying to survive or thrive in a the world that we all live in.
I think this book has a lot of interesting things to say, some interesting insights about trying to be a person, and a leader, without losing your soul. A lot of it isn't actually specific to the younger generations, except insofar as older generations were not, I guess, raised with the idea or expectation that their job, and their selves at their job, should be some kind of reflection of their own values and priorities. There are certainly parts of the book that feel a little cold, stereotypically capitalist—arguably still hanging onto an older way of doing things—but I think a lot of that is at least a valid perspective to be considered, even if I sometimes felt that I wanted to push back, and the intent behind even those sections was one of trying to survive or thrive in a the world that we all live in.
Added to listOwnedwith 87 books.
This was … not good. A good 60% of the book had no plot movement, no tension except for a mild will they/won't they. The writing was extremely corny. I enjoyed Jeneva Rose's "Perfect" books for what they were, but this – written, I think, before those? – was not even that. I'm not entirely sure why I don't rate this lower, but I suppose a few points for the mildly interesting "twist" that came about five minutes after anything resembling plot started taking place and ten before the end of the book. But even then, from the beginning, it did seem pretty likely that they were actually both the bad guy – if there was even going to be a bad guy, which was not clear for most of the book. Both, or neither! But yep, both.
This was … not good. A good 60% of the book had no plot movement, no tension except for a mild will they/won't they. The writing was extremely corny. I enjoyed Jeneva Rose's "Perfect" books for what they were, but this – written, I think, before those? – was not even that. I'm not entirely sure why I don't rate this lower, but I suppose a few points for the mildly interesting "twist" that came about five minutes after anything resembling plot started taking place and ten before the end of the book. But even then, from the beginning, it did seem pretty likely that they were actually both the bad guy – if there was even going to be a bad guy, which was not clear for most of the book. Both, or neither! But yep, both.
I had less fun reading this book than others I've read by Anders. Which is not to say it's a bad book, because it's not. It's just a different kind of book. There's a lot of pain in this one, a lot of reckoning with a world full of hate and bigotry. Not every book needs to be an escape, but I'm not sure I prepared myself for how tough some of this book would be. Still definitely recommend it, as with basically everything else in the CJA catalog.
I had less fun reading this book than others I've read by Anders. Which is not to say it's a bad book, because it's not. It's just a different kind of book. There's a lot of pain in this one, a lot of reckoning with a world full of hate and bigotry. Not every book needs to be an escape, but I'm not sure I prepared myself for how tough some of this book would be. Still definitely recommend it, as with basically everything else in the CJA catalog.
This one was a lot of fun. I think I went in expecting, I don't know what to call it, a "domestic thriller?" And maybe it's a spoiler, though the first "twist" happens quite early—it's more of a heist or crime thriller. So I think for a bit I was kind of disoriented, my mind still trying to turn it into a different kind of book. But once I adjusted my frame of view, it was a fun ride. Lots of twists, many of which I didn't anticipate. I'll definitely pick up Elston's next.
This one was a lot of fun. I think I went in expecting, I don't know what to call it, a "domestic thriller?" And maybe it's a spoiler, though the first "twist" happens quite early—it's more of a heist or crime thriller. So I think for a bit I was kind of disoriented, my mind still trying to turn it into a different kind of book. But once I adjusted my frame of view, it was a fun ride. Lots of twists, many of which I didn't anticipate. I'll definitely pick up Elston's next.