Saturday, July 3, 2021

Before We Disappear by Shaun David Hutchinson

Rating: WARTY!

From an advance review copy for which I thank the publisher.

Be warned that this is going to be a more rambling review than usual because there are several aspects of this story that I need to address. Anyone who's read any of my 'non-reviews' will know that I have little respect for book descriptions which are trite, uninventive, and always playing to the lowest common denominator. More on this anon. In short though, they're written for idiots, frequently by someone who evidently has never even read the novel they're 'describing'. The blurbs are often dishonest and as I point out regularly, they have certain key words and phrases that ought to warn you away from the book that's being described.

So I have only myself to blame for the fact that I ignored my own advice with this book and I consequently paid the price of wasting my time on a novel that I should have turned my back on the instant that I read the description. The thing is that I was intrigued by what seemed like it might be a good LGBTQIA story - and set at the turn of last century, no less. It sounded too good to be true and it was.

I need to preface this by detouring slightly into talking about audiobooks and how you can have your phone read you an ebook as though it's an audiobook. I can't speak for Android phones, but for iPhones there's a technology called 'voice over' which is an assisted-use system that reads your screen to you, indicating buttons and other stuff on the screen. In order to make this work, you need to open your ebook to the place you want to begin reading, and ask Siri to turn on Voice Over. For those who don't already know, I'd like to share with you that Siri is ADHD, so it may take more than one request to get her to start it, and more than two requests to get her to stop, but once voice over is in play, simply tap on the first sentence you want to be read, then slide two fingers lightly down the screen from there to the bottom of the screen, and Voice Over will read your ebook to you!

Note that this is far from perfect. The voice is unnatural which is why I call it Robot Reader, and it's subject to disruption if the text contains images or has gaps in it (as Kindle frequently does, which is yet one more reason to avoid all things Amazon like the plague. But overall, it works pretty good, and I get through a lot of books this way. It's also amusing listening Robot Reader's quirky pronunciations, so there is some entertainment value from that, too.

I honestly do not understand why the big ebook publishers do not employ this. Google has similar technology. They could adapt it easily to read your ebooks to you - or to your kids. Apple has it. Kobo books could quite readily get their hands on it, as could Barnes and Noble. B&N has had their ass kicked to the curb by the despicable Amazon, so why they aren't fighting tooth and nail to get every edge they can, I do not know. I guess their management is simply incompetent.

All this to explain why I was impressed by Net Galley's audiobook technology employed on this novel. While far from perfect, this was the best yet, and it really has great potential. It was a synthesized voice, but it sounded real - not at all like my adorable Robot Reader. There were flaws. The voice sounded quite flat; it was lacking inflection and 'life' for want of a better term, but it read quite competently and sounded reasonably normal.

My issues with it were that the voice was completely wrong for the novel, which was supposedly being told in first person by not one, but two people who were in their teens. The Net Galley synthesized voice didn't remotely sound like a teenage boy. Obviously if they can synthesize the voice, they can synthesize a sixteen-year-old voice. Why they didn't I don't know. This made the novel rather tedious to listen to at times, but that's not all on the synthesizing. I'd love to get my crazed, inventive hands on this technology, rest assured!

As usual, the biggest problem was the novel itself. It was not at all well-written, and it was slow-moving and uninspiring. Plus, listening to it as an audiobook while driving is not the best way to take in this book. When I'm driving, my attention is of course on the driving, where it should be. This is especially true if it's a problematic drive, so the book loses my attention even if it's an interesting one. This book wasn't.

I pay more attention to a story in the early morning when the roads are largely empty, than when I'm driving home during rush hour, so I missed portions of this, which isn't typically a problem, but in this case it lead to serious confusion because I didn't realize to begin with, that this was dual-first-person voice (DFPV). It is. And the switch between characters went undetected.

The thing is that when you do a DFPV, you have to identify at the start of the chapter who is speaking. The problem was exacerbated in this novel because the author pretentiously put the location and the date at the start of the chapter like it was some big important announcement. My eyes (or in this case, my ears) skate right over that crap because typically it's just annoying, irrfelevant, and so self-importantly pretentious in an already overly self-important first person story that it leaves me cold.

Normally, 1PoV is quite irritating enough, and it's exponentially worse when it's squared. DFPV is merely the author's cute way of admitting that they made a serious mistake in choosing first person voice to begin with. Typically, it's a grave mistake because it limits your story and your options; it makes the main character insufferably self-centered, and the voice is unnatural. No one but an imbecile narrates their own life as it's happening. No one but an eidetic can recall conversations and actions verbatim, and eidetics have their own raft of issues to deal with.

1PoV constantly tosses me right out of suspension of disbelief because it's so inauthentic and annoying: hey lookit me! This is what I'm doing now! Pay attention to meeee! Barf! It's worse when the author admits they screwed-up by having to add a second 1PoV or resort to third person for portions of the novel. It's laughable and I avoid these stories whenever I can. In this case I had no warning that it was first person or I would never have even started reading it. Such books should carry a warning like cigarette packs do. I actually did that on a parody novel I wrote!

So, let's look at the novel itself. The first warning ought to have been the title, which is a bit pretentious but not godawful. The next indication that this was to be fled from was the use of the words 'star-crossed' in the description. That's like a bio-hazard warning to me, and in this case, it's bullshit, but like an idiot, I ignored it. The second warning was that one of the main characters is called 'Jack' - the most tediously over-used go-to name in literary history for an action character. It shows a complete and utter lack of imagination on the part of the author, but like a dimwit, I ignored that because this wasn't an action adventure novel. More fool me!

The story is of two rival illusionists, one whom goes by the name of 'The Enchantress' for whom Jack Nevin works. He's a skilled thief, and he steals the secrets of other magicians and illusionists, which The Enchantress then incorporates into her own act. It's how she's stayed on top for so long. Her rival is Laszlo, who also has an assistant for whom Jack falls. That's the LGBTQIA part of the novel, but it played such a non-existent part in the story to the point where I could stand to hear no more of this (25% in) that the book may as well have been a cis novel.

Naturally you can't publish a novel in the USA unless it takes place in the US or at least has one important American in it. It's against the constitution, you know? Who cares about the rest of the world? As Donald Trump says, it's entirely unimportant. The US is the only nation worth considering or writing about. So despite starting out in Paris, the City of love, the novel quickly comes running home to mamma. Barf.

I honestly wish US authors had far more courage than they do. And were more inventive and original; especially YA authors. I would have loved for it to stay in Paris, but it ain't gonna happen. Not from an American author. At least not often. You can argue: well, they're only writing what people will buy, but is that really the truth? And is that really what should motivate us? Do authors have to bow down to the LCD that I mentioned earlier, tugging forelocks and kowtowing, or ought they instead to be leading their readership to greener, fresher pastures? If the readers are really such sheep, why not?!

So when things go south, The Enchantress and her crew head to Seattle. Why there, I have no idea, except that was an exposition going on, I guess so they thought they could score big there. Or is it just that this is where the author lives?! Anyway, that's when they run into Laszlo and his crew, and when Jack first gets to meet his love, who sadly isn't named Jill - or any masculine variant thereof! Jilhelm?

The thing about Lazslo is that his assistant, Wilhelm, really can do magic and Jack is at a loss to explain how it's done, thinking it's just another illusion. Wilhelm is a sort of BDSM slave to Lazslo, and not in any decent or fun way. He's outright abused. Frankly this part of the story turned me right off, and that, along with the tedium of the plodding pace, I lost all interest. I simply could not stand to listen to any more, so I DNF'd it. Life is far too short to spend it on stories that don't do it for ya. I can't commend this based on the portion I listened to, and for the reasons I've detailed above.

Friday, July 2, 2021

The Pink Bean by Harper Bliss

Rating: WARTY!

The title sounds like a euphemism for the clitoris and probably is. 'Harper Bliss' is not the author's real name which begs the question why choose such a lousy pen name? I've read a couple of other books of this nature, but none by this author, and I never will again after this one. The problem appears to be that with this genre, once you've read one, you've read them all. They really are that much like clones. I was sadly disappointed in how uninventive, unimaginative, narrow-minded, and unsubtle the story was. Maybe this is all the readers of this sort of a story need, but if that's true, it's a depressing bellwether for literature or at least for this genre of it.

The novel is set in Australia, a fact I frequently forgot because there's nothing really Australian about it apart from quirks of language here and there. I donlt know if the author is Australian, but she lives with her female partner in Belgium.

The story is about this divorcée, Micky, who is a mother of two, and who has been single for a year and finds she's attracted to women now. Obviously it's one of those raunchy, titillating, so-called romance stories which I normally avoid, but I thought one set in Australia and maybe by an Australian writer might be different. It ought certainly to be a change from endless cookie-cutter American-based novels thought I, but in the end, it wasn't! You can take the romance out of the country, but you can't take the dumb-assery out of the romance.

I've read a couple of other stories like this one: where every frigging character in the novel is lesbian. It's like there are no straight people out there at all, and not even any gay guys for that matter, or anything anywhere else on the spectrum. That's just abusive, and it's as unrealistic as a straight story that has no LGBTQIA characters, or a story featuring white main characters that harbors no PoCs to speak of. It kicks you out of suspension of disbelief - often.

Bad as that is, it's not even the worst thing about this story. The novel is written like this main character is an innocent, naïve, virginal ingénue, but she's in her forties, has a college education, two kids, and she's been best friends with this lesbian woman for two decades. How can she be so ignorant of lesbian life after that? It makes no sense. How come she's never had any sort of dalliance with this friend? It's unrealistic.

And while I'm at it(!): how has this woman been making a living for the last year? It's never discussed, but since this job she takes at a coffee shop is such a challenge, she's obviously living on her husband's hand-outs and she appears completely guiltless about that. She states that she's never worked a day in her whole life, but at a different point she mentions a job she had in college related to a degree she earned, but never used. Why is that? She's clearly sponged off her husband this whole time, and now she continues to do so even after they're divorced? Has she no self-respect? No drive? Nothing motivating her at all? Why would anyone care about someone so dull and bland?

At this point I had no respect for her at all. It makes her look like this dumb-ass gold-digger, which is not a good look for your main character. Yes, raising kids is a serious and full time job, but her kids are older teenagers who are no longer hanging on her apron strings. Does she had no urge for self-improvement? For stretching herself? How does she remotely imagine that she's going to be interesting to a potential partner?

But of course she doesn't have to worry about that because this story isn't about relationships or personality. It's about sex, pure and simple, and a goddess named Robin falls into her lap and is passionately attracted to her, without her making any effort whatsoever. This happens all the time of course.

Robin is a woman Micky's never seen before, despite both she and this woman frequenting this same coffee shop for some time. And her BFF Amber has no interest in this woman or in anything else other than pushing Micky into full-time lesbianism! That's her sole purpose in this 'friendship'! Naturally Robin treats Micky like dirt, and so is the one she has her affair with. Yawn.

The other woman is younger and obviously sexually active. It sounds like authorial wish-fulfillment to me, but the problem is that neither one of these two women has any questions for the other about sexual history before they leap into bed on the first date. That's how clueless this story is! Chlamydia is the most frequently-reported infectious disease in Australia with close to 100,000 men and women diagnosed yearly. Gonorrhea, hepatitis, and even syphilis are hardly rare, yet never once do either of these women concern themselves even momentarily with the fact that a sexually active and clearly promiscuous Robin could conceivably have something to pass on to Micky that isn't sexual experience?

I don't get how people can write this stuff. The author is a lesbian herself, so I have to wonder if she doesn't take any pride in who she is and in others who share her persuasions? Doesn't she want to present lesbianism in an realistic, interesting, and positive light?

I guess a sex romp is a sex romp regardless of what sexual affiliations it dallies with, but to me, the sad thing is that it's supposed to be titillating, yet it's really quite boring and it's so predictable. On the other hand, there's nothing else in Micky's life at all, so maybe that's understandable. Her children are supposedly important to her, but they barely figure in her life, and they seem not to have been raised very well, which is disturbing given that she was a full-time mom!

The athletic younger partner, Robin, is an American because god forbid you should try to sell a novel in the US and it not feature any Americans. How dare you! That's not the problem with Robin though. Robin is a white Aryan Amazon, yet she's supposed to be the diversity officer for the corporation for which she works, bringing the white savior mentality to encouraging diversity in countries where the modal skin tone is seriously darker than her own.

That felt so hypocritical to me. No, there's no reason, ideally, why a diversity officer couldn't be white. It would be racist to suggest otherwise, but in such a white story could we not have this partner be a woman of color for goodness sakes? Or make her some other sort of officer than diversity? Or is that taboo in Blissworld: that white Micky should be attracted to a darker-hued woman?

The only interesting things in this story had nothing to do with the story, but with language as used or not used in English speaking countries. As I mentioned earlier, at one point I'd forgotten I was reading a novel set in Australia because I read so many set in the US unfortunately! It's a lot harder than you'd think to find non-US novels in the US because we're so fucking provincial and insular here. Plus there's very little in this particular novel to really anchor it in Australia, which was disappointing to me. Anyway, one of the characters said "crikey" which is common in Australia and also said in Britain, but not really in the US. I became confused for a second until I remembered that this was not a US novel! LOL! That's how bad things are!

I also became curious about where 'crikey' came from, and apparently it's a euphemism employed in place of exclaiming 'Christ!" I came across 'sod' too, which is used in Britain as a dismissive mild insult, like "you silly sod!" It's apparently an abbreviation for 'sodomite', which I did not know. It's weird that such a pejorative term is used as a mild admonishment in Britain where the word 'bugger' is used similarly, as in, "you silly bugger!" It's almost an endearment. Weird, but true!

But I digress! The sex scenes! They were embarrassing. Can you believe that Micky was pulsing? Her "pussy lips pulsed wildly." Really? She was "reduced to one giant pulsing mess of extreme need." Seriously? I guess that's to be expected since her skin was "throbbing," but now I'm confused. Was she throbbing and pulsing at the same time? Did they alternate? Did one succeed the other?! Every ordinary thing in this encounter is presented as something wicked and sinful, and naughty and kinky, and over the top. But. It's. Just. Sex! And this book is obsessed with lesbian activity to the exclusion of all else: including reality. Neither Micky nor her friend Amber ever considered that her orientation might be bi or pan or any of the other options. No! It's lesbian all the way or nothing! I guess she just pulses that way. Or throbs.

During this same encounter, after her panties are pulled down I read, "As if by instinct, and as though this was all she'd ever done in life, Micky's knees fell wide..." What? Her husband never went down on her? I call bullshit on that. This is when you know an author is poor at their profession because she has such lesbian tunnel vision that she's ignoring the twenty years of physical intimacy between Micky and her husband - it's like Micky never had sex before and that's just dumb writing. Never once does Micky inadvertently make any sort of a comparison between making it with a her husband and making it with Robin, either. It's unrealistic. Either that or Micky is the dumbest cluck in the henhouse, and someone who has absolutely zero introspection.

It's all euphemism - very nearly. Micky could "smell her intimate aroma on Robin's lips" and so on. There's nothing new here; just tired, repetitive, retreaded, rehashed, cheap, fluffy talk that's been written to death already. That was the real problem here. The novel is shallow, boring, unoriginal, and been done to a crisp many times before. That's why I condemn it.

Coconut Layer Cake Murder by Joanne Fluke

Rating: WARTY!

"Bakery owner Hannah Swensen must drop everything and return home to prove that her sister's boyfriend, Lonnie, isn't a killer." Why? What, are you stupid? It should be glaringly obvious to everyone that the very best person to solve a murder isn't the police, but the accused boyfriend's sister, who happens to be a baker? Well done! And of course it's not the case that a person is inncoent until proven guilty - it's exactly the other way aorund. Just the accusation means you're guilty and someone has to come running and prove you're innocent! Barf.

Teach Me the Ropes by Vanessa Vale

Rating: WARTY!

"Dirty-talking cowboy Sawyer Manning regrets taking part in a bachelor auction...until he's bought by preschool teacher Kelsey Benoit. Now he can finally explore their explosive chemistry - and claim the feisty newcomer for his own!" Because it's all about owning the woman. Barf.

Tesla Wizard by Mark J Seifer

Rating: WARTY!

From an advance review copy for which I thank the publisher.

From what little serious and accurate information I could gather online, Mark Seifer is an apparently self-promoting, ex-teacher of parapsychology. This immediately put me on my guard, because parapsychology is an out-and-out bullshit fringe field which has been exposed and debunked repeatedly. It has zero solid scientific evidence to support it, but this author brought in everyone, including the evidently deluded Andrija Puharich, and the laughable and discredited Uri Geller, and treated them all as though they were reality-based, instead of debunked and exposed as they are. That was when I quit reading this rambling, dissipated, haphazardly tangential, and misleading attempt at a biography.

The audiobook was read decently by actor Simon Vance who, but even he can't make up for the gullible and naïve material used here. This book is a joke; it's garbage. Do not waste your money.

Back to Earth by Nicole Stott

Rating: WARTY!

From an advance review copy for which I thank the publisher.

I'm always rather skeptical of conversion stories - someone did something and it opened their eyes to an issue or gave them a new perspective. There's something fundamentally wrong with a society that thinks someone's miraculous conversion somehow imbues them with an authoritative voice or a spiritual gift or something, whereas someone who has seen and been guided by this same revelatory light all their life, rarely gets any credit or any sort of spotlight on their equally valid and majorly contributing 'non-conversion'.

It's entirely wrong; even ass-backwards, but it's how we work on this planet unfortunately. I know authors typically don't write their own book descriptions, so this isn't on her, but the blurb here says "When Nicole Stott first saw Earth from space, she realized how interconnected we are." I'm sorry, but if you have to be shot 250 miles into space at 25,000 mph to realize this, then you've been sleepwalking through life, and you really don't deserve much credit for your epiphany.

I was interested in this book because it seemed to offer a scientific perspective on how we can help Earth, but by a third in I was already disillusioned with it because I'd learned nothing to that end. I'm not saying what I did read wasn't interesting at all; there were parts that were engaging and informative, but none of it had to do with helping fix the problems on Earth.

The story was very autobiographical, with the author calling everyone 'my friend' or 'my dear friend' if she knew them at all, and it carried a sense of desperation to it. It's irrelevant to the reader how close the author is to person A or person B and this constant repetition of that 'friend' mantra had an aura of pathos to it. Not that this is a critical disaster. It just struck me as rather odd in the same way it does when an author writes the more pretentious 'utilizing' instead of simply typing 'using'.

There were parts where the author seemed to start in on a topic and then just abandon it, or go off at a tangent. One example that comes immediately to mind was about painting in space. None of this of course helps save Earth, but I happened to find this particular piece quite fascinating, yet instead of talking about the actual painting she was doing, it seems like she lost interest once the paint was on the brush, and essentially abandoned that story!

In contrast, other tangential stories about life in space or astronaut training seemed like they went on forever or were repeated several times instead of letting the issue go like she did with the art. It made for a messy story overall. These things had nothing whatsoever to do with with applying what had been learned in space to solving Earth's problems, and if all of these extraneous parts had been excised, it would have made for a very thin book indeed. It's like she couldn't make up her mind whether to write an autobiography or an Earth-self-help book, and so we got a disjointed and somewhat repetitive mishmash of both.

The real disaster though, lay in other directions. In the first third of this book, the closest it came to discussing how technology can help Earth, was when discussing the water shortage and how many people are denied a basic human right: access to clean, fresh water. They have filtration units in the space program which take all water - even sweat and urine - and purify it so that it's cleaner than most water you can get on Earth, including that microplastic-infused bottled water that far too many people drink under the delusion that it's healthier than tap water. In some countries I'm sure it is, but that's rarely applicable in the USA. Nowhere in this discussion did the author say how this was applied to helping people on Earth. More on this anon.

The worst part of this section of the story though was that the author mentioned Guy Laliberté. This guy is a Canadian billionaire and gambler who founded Cirque du Soleil, but the latter enterprise, which is multinational (and in which Laliberté has now sold his interests, I understand), was all that got mentioned in the story - that and the fact that Laliberté paid thirty two million dollars to take a space tourist trip. The author talks like this was a deliberate trip to raise awareness of problems on Earth. It was a fail with me, because I never heard of this guy going into space so my awareness was not raised by his $32 million investment. I don't know how many people did hear about it because the author never discusses that.

But here's the thing: this guy paid $32 million!! How many of those problems he claimed he was highlighting could have been solved by putting that $32 million directly into solving them? The author never explored that, and this bothered me. The guy is a billionaire. He could have paid a hundred million to help solve the problems he was raising awareness about and he would never have missed that, yet he's presented in this book as some sort of hero for his work! I don't get that mentality at all.

To me it seems equally likely that he just wanted to take a trip into space and could afford it, which is fine, it's his own money, but then he turns around and tries to 'justify' the extravagance by saying it's an awareness-raising trip. Maybe it was, but who knows? I don't. I just know $32 million went into space and none of that particular amount contributed to bringing "one drop" of clean water to any child. Reading this, I confess I sometimes thought that maybe it's the author's awareness which needs raising?

I was enthralled with the space program when I was a kid, but lately I've wondered more about the PoV of those who ask: why is this money being sent into space when we need help on Earth. I was disappointed in the author's retort to that. It seemed outright facetious to me. She effectively side-stepped the question by redirecting it. She said the money doesn't go into space, it's all spent right here on Earth. That was hilarious, Nicole. Yeah, it's spent on Earth, and a small portion of it goes into setting up experiments in space that can help people on Earth. Thinking people get that. But NASA's space shuttle program cost almost $200 billion in total. Each flight cost $450 million.

So the question, Nicole, is not where the money was spent, but how much value for money we got for that $200 billion. Was it truly worth it? Yeah it was thrilling, but who did it really help? Yeah, there have been concrete returns from the spending, in terms of computer advances and medicine and so on, but where's the evidence that those advances could not have come about by directly investing the $200 billion in technology and medicine?

Did we have to go to space to get these advances? I've never seen a justification for that, and it wasn't discussed in this book. Australia built six seawater desalination plants for ten billion. How many of those would $200 billion buy? Seventy percent of Earth's surface is covered with saltwater and forty percent of the world's population lives within 60 miles of it. Desalination uses a huge amount of energy, but water is most scarce where it's hot, and it's hot because the sun is shining. Can you say solar power?! No alternatives were ever discussed.

I like the space program. Always have, but it needs to be justified, not blown-off with facetious comebacks. In the sixties, robotics, AIs, and computers were pathetic compared with what we have today, but now we do have robots very effectively working on Mars. So what exactly is the justification for sending people into space? I've seen some halfhearted justifications, but never anything that truly made me nod my head in agreement.

Now if everyone had a roof over their head, clothes on their back, food in their belly, clean water, sanitation, and an education in their brain, then by all means blow $200 billion on sending people into space. Until then, there needs to be serious justification for what we spend set against what we can realistically expect to get back from it in temrs of direct benefits to those who most need them. The author never offers any such cost analysis.

The justification needs to be spectacular. it needs to be something that's essential, that can only be done by humans, and that can only be done in space, otherwise it's simply not justifiable when people are starving and suffering, and homeless, and living in migrant camps and being recruited into under-age armies, and drinking disgusting water, and suffering diseases. Anyone with a functioning mind can see that with ever having to go into space.

It needs to be spectacular because, as the author explains, it costs dramatically more money to send a living thing into space than ever it does a robot. It costs more because humans have to be coddled as the author makes quite clear. They're not evolved to live in space, with little gravity tugging on them, and with the brutal cold, the radiation, and a complete vacuum. That's where a heck of a lot of the money goes: into coddling people who are out of their depth - or height in this case! The question that really needs to be asked is: can automation and even robots do the same work that's being done? This question isn't explored in this book either.

Don't tell me it can't be done. It used to be that to fight an air war you needed trained pilots in expensive aircraft - aircraft also designed to coddle humans. Now we have drones doing a lot of that work. I'm not saying it's great, or even justifiable, but it is being done. So you can't tell me that we couldn't achieve the same thing in space - not when we're already doing it, for example, on Mars right now.

But the thrust of this book is about how we can learn lessons from space that we can employ on Earth and the first of these seems to be that we can purify water, but the fact is that the Bill Gates foundation funds the development of waste processing facilities that can be deployed in countries with little infrastructure, and which will handle waste from 100,000 people, producing up to 86,000 liters of potable water a day and a net 250 kw of electricity. None of this came from space exploration. It came from human ingenuity and a challenge to solve a problem. Bill Gates has never been into space and neither - to my knowledge - have any of the people who developed this system. The investment was spent right here on Earth and is already solving problems.

So that brings us back to what this book has to offer in terms of learning lessons from space? The amusing book description has it that the author knows we can overcome differences to address global issues, because she saw this every day on the International Space Station, but this is such a simplistic view of things that it's laughable. The people who are selected to go into space have to pass a barrage of tests and psychological considerations. They're not regular people!

They're purposefully selected for tolerance and sociability and education level and so on! To pretend you can extrapolate from this highly-managed microcosm of Earth's population to the world at large is to show a disturbing level of ignorance about how people are in real life, especially people who are stressed, and deprived, and poorly educated, and poor, and tired, and sick, and hungry. You can't take the harmony of that micro environment and expect it to translate to a world where 74 million people willingly and freely voted for an asshole like Donald Trump. It doesn't work.

At one point I read, “I’m pleased that today we recognize the value of international partnership and cooperation and don’t focus so much on competition." Has the author met China? It's home home to almost a third of the human race which is having nothing to do with the ISS, and is going its own sweet way in space and on Earth. At another point I read, that Earth’s oceans will boil in a billion years, but it's not that simple.

Yes, in a Billion years our climate will change due to changes in solar output, but the oceans and not going to instantly boil away at that point! it will be a slow change, but slowly accelerating as the sun increases its brilliance and eventually, its size. But a billion years from now it won't matter because humans will either be extinct through our own willful scientific ignorance (Republicans I;m looking at you), or have moved off Earth onto other planets. So again, this seemed inapplicable.

So, in short, I cannot commend a book that so dissipated its resources, and so consistently failed to meet its own aims.

Thinking Better by Marcus Du Sautoy

Rating: WARTY!

From an advance review copy for which I thank the publisher.

Okay! On to some reviews of books, as opposed to idiotic book descriptions. Described as "The Art of the Shortcut in Math and Life" I have to say up front that I was disappointed in this book. Maybe it’s just me, but there really didn’t seem to be anything here that I could use in my life, and worse than that, I didn't see much benefit in modern everyday life to be derived from the shortcuts that were discussed here. Some of the math and how it was arrived at historically was interesting, but it also felt rather repetitive after a while, and it was largely historical.

I am not a big fan of book descriptions which can be misleading at best, so I was amused by the one for this, which claims that the book is "above all practical." The description also said, "Du Sautoy explores ... whether you must really practice for ten thousand hours to become a concert violinist, and why shortcuts give us an advantage over even the most powerful AI." With regard to the violin: the people who did that study were annoyed when people started claiming they had discovered that it takes 10,000 hours to become a virtuoso. They said it misrepresented what they reported. The bottom-line is that are no shortcuts to becoming a maestro or a maestra.

The fact is that you do need to practice long and hard, and there's no way around that. Not that I plan on taking up the violin (or the cello, which is what was discussed here), but I resented that the book description suggested otherwise about shortcuts. The only shortcuts offered here were of the lesser variety - in that you can play a note in more than one way on a stringed instrument, so adjusting fingering can enable you to play a difficult piece more easily - but in order to realize that you still have to learn to play the piece competently - which is what takes the time! So this was misleading at best.

The part about "why shortcuts give us an advantage over even the most powerful AI" is equally misleading. AIs are not as bad as this indicates. Yes, they can make mistakes, but they can also find shortcuts humans failed to see, and they're getting better all the time. Humans really aren’t!

Based on the fact that this book really failed to deliver on the implied promise - that we can make use of math to inform us of beneficial shortcuts in our lives, I felt it failed. The book delivered on stories of how shortcuts have been found using math in the past, and even led to great discoveries, but none of this really had a whole heck of a lot to do with your average person's everyday life, and the book failed to offer anything I could see that would benefit me in my life. So while the math was interesting in places and some of the historical paths to discovery were educational, I felt the book fell short of its implied promise and I cannot commend it.

Welcome to Piney Falls by Joann Keder

Rating: WARTY!

Well isn't this just cozy: "To inspire her creative writing, Lanie takes a trip to the seaside community of Piney Falls," Seriously? Piney Falls? "...where she discovers seriously quirky townspeople," That;s me out right there. Wquirjky is always bad news. "...a gorgeous bakery owner," Barf. "...and a mystery with roots reaching back to the previous century." Just like this plot. So we have the book angle (in her creative writing), we have the bakery angle, which conveniently incorporates her love interest, and we have a mystery to solve. Yawn. They way to creatively write is to sit down and write, not to swan-off around the country. I'm willing to bet that no actual writing is done by the protagonist in this entire novel. It's always the same story: the writer who doesn't actually write. The bookstore owner who doesn't actually read anything. And on. And on. Yawn.

To Catch a Thief by Kay Marie

Rating: WARTY!

"Action and intrigue combine with swoon-worthy romance when three best friends and aspiring bakers - Jolene, Addison, and McKenzie - meet their matches." Another half-baked cookie-cutter story. No thanks.

Spirelli Paranormal Investigations by Kate Baray

Rating: WARTY!

"Business is booming for paranormal investigator Jack Spirelli, and he could use a partner - but is a dragon the right candidate for the job?" Kudos for the dragon idea, but the main protagonist is another jack - the tiresomely brain-dead automatic go-to name for an adventurer. For fuck's sake can we have a different name for once in one of these stories? If there's a main character named jack, that's an automatic 'WARTY' in my scoring system. Bye!

Arnica, the Duck Princess by Ervin Lázár

Rating: WARTY!

"Struck by a witch's spell, kindly princess Arnica and her fiancé, Johnny, are each cursed to live part-time as a duck - unless they can find the fairy who holds the cure!" Okay, the duck idea is amusing, but can you say "Ladyhawke" rip-off?

Tempted by Ruin by Mia West

Rating: WARTY!

The title alone is enough to make this a non-starter. Why not just call it 'Restless Knights'? Or 'Sheath Your Sword'? "While on an unexpected mission, Gawain, one of King Arthur's warriors, is joined by none other than Palahmed - the mercenary he has long desired." Can you say "Brokeback Mountain"? Or someone's mounting, anyway. And Palahmed? Is that some sort of a muscle relaxing medication?! Just no. If you're going to wrote a serious LGBTQIA sotry, then go for it, but this has to be a joke.

Mageborn by Jessica Thorne

Rating: WARTY!

"When her friend becomes yet another mageborn taken to the dungeons, orphan soldier Grace seeks help from the dangerous Prince Bastien." I think any novel with 'mage' or 'born' in the title is going to have to automatically go into my DNR (do not read) list. This has both. And Prince Bastien? Really? The only thing dangerous about him is that he doesn't know how to ride a luck dragon safely. I can see where this is going, and it's nowhere original. No thanks.

Noumenon Infinity by Marina J Lostetter

Rating: WARTY!

"In this enthralling read, a space convoy must discover the secrets behind a mysterious alien structure surrounding a star." This is a Kirkus starred review which is enough to turn me off it for life. But wait - a space adventure gets a starred review? Does a fantasy get a bard review? Did Stephen King's Firestarter get a charred review? Why must these secrets be discovered? What's the urgency? Never mind, I don't care.

Seating Arrangements by Maggie Shipstead

Rating: WARTY!

"Impossible to put down!" That's what happens when the book manufacturer puts too much glue on the cover.... Reject.

Miss Julia Speaks Her Mind by Ann B Ross

Rating: WARTY!

If Ann be Ross, who be Dooby Do? "When widow Miss Julia discovers her late husband had a son with another woman, her well-ordered life threatens to spiral out of control" she must be an extraordinarily weak woman if that's all it takes! Reject.

Falling for His Best Friend by Katee Robert

Rating: WARTY!

"Avery's biological clock starts ticking" I guess somebody must have wound her up.... "...and her annoyingly sexy best friend, Drew," See? Any time I read of someone who is 'annoyingly sexy' or 'infuruatungly handsome' I completely lose interest in readign any further. Book descriptionw riters: get a new shtick for fuck's sake. So Drew-not-a-blank "insists on being her donor. But when they decide to do things the old-fashioned way, their attraction quickly becomes too hot to handle." Seriously? What's with the clock starting? Did Avery just turn eleven? Does the author even know that Avery is the actual name of a watch manufacturer? He's her best friend and never once have these two numbnuts ever considered becoming a couple? Or just having sex? The truth is that this story is too laughable to handle! The clock is ticking on this tired bullshit.

The Bone Jar by SW Kane

Rating: WARTY!

"Two murders on the Thames...." Oh shit! The Thames! That's near London! How could I have missed it?! "...Lead detective Lew Kirby and his partner to an abandoned psychiatric hospital - and the possibility that a former patient may hold the key to their investigation." More murders on the Thames? I say old chap, that's just not cricket! Yawn.

The Bird House by Eric Deacon

Rating: WARTY!

"When a traumatized woman emerges from a river near London," A river near London? Well, let's see...The Seine is quite near London.... The River Annan is the most southerly river in Scotland - that's not so far away.... The Wye isn't far from London, either. That's in Wales.... "Her case appears to be connected to a mysterious series of disappearances. Police detective Helen Lake races to unravel the truth." She's just starting now? What's she been doing hitherto? Knitting? Wait a minute: Bird, Deacon, River, Lake? There's a secret code in there somewhere!

An American in Paris by Susan Kiernan-Lewis

Rating: WARTY!

"For widowed American expat Claire Baskerville, Paris is the perfect city to put her crime-solving skills to the test." Because god forbid there should be a novel without an American in it. And why is Paris the perfect city? Is it rife with murderers? Is the Paris gendarmerie utterly incompetent? Does her widowhood somehow magically qualify her to fight crime? Or is this just another interfering dipshit getting in the way?

The Victim Killer by Simon King

Rating: WARTY!

"The great-granddaughter of an infamous serial killer, Sam has had to learn to control her sadistic impulses." Yeah, because serial killing runs in the genome. What a festering pile of horseshit! And the title? The Victim Killer? That's the best you got? Barf squared.

Saturday, June 12, 2021

The Shaytan Bride by Sumaiya Matin

Rating: WORTHY!

From an advance review copy for which I thank the publisher.

This is a horrible story, but I mean that in a good way. To know that Muslim women are treated badly is one thing, but to have it slapped in your face repeatedly as this story does, is a shattering experience.

Sumaiya Matin moved with her family from Dhaka, Bangladesh, to Thunder Bay, Ontario as a young child, and effectively grew-up Candian, but still Muslim of course. Her family ties ran deep though, and when she returns on what she thinks is merely a visit, she has no idea that her family plans to marry her off while she's back in Bangladesh.

In Canada, she'd met and fallen in love with a Sikh guy, but this was not her family's plan for her, and neither she nor Bhav, the guy she fell for, knew how their relationship might work. They knew only that they wanted it to. Trapped in Bangladesh, cut-off from friends, denied access to a phone, Sumaiya had to struggle against everyone to ensure that it was she, not they, who determined what her future would be. She proved to be stronger than they, but strong as she is,mstill she could not make everything come out all right. The story was educational, uncomfortable but necessary to read, and in many ways depressing.

In a similar vein, it was not all plain sailing for me, as a reader. I am not religious, so my mind is often boggled at what believers believe and what they bring upon themselves. I was unaware of how deep the fantastical beliefs of some cultures still run, even now in the 21st century. The stories of the Shayṭān Bride and the deep-seated beliefs in jinn were disturbing. It turns out that two-thirds to three-quarters of Bangladeshis believe in these spirits and in possession by such spirits, and women tend to believe more than men.

The story of the woman possessed by one such spirit was disturbing. I don't believe she was. It was doubtlessly a medical condition, but the story was quite moving and unsettling. There are also female jinn named jiniri, which I can no doubt have fun with in some future story I write!

In conclusion, This is a heart-breaking story of female subjugation, cruelty, and strength, of love and loss, and of one woman determined to be the author of her own destiny, and for that, I commend it.

The Untethered by SW Southwick

Rating: WARTY!

This story was crap almost from the off, and in some ways it seemed more like authorial wish fulfillment than anything else. The story begins with Roble Santos whose only ambition, it seems, is to build a private jet that can fly supersonic speeds. The seemingly impossible and illegal task he has to face is that it's purportedly illegal to fly such a jet. In which case why not move to a country where it is legal and build it there? It was a completely false challenge and had zero resonance.

None of these characters made sense, but the only other one I got any sort of an introduction to was Stock Brant who was an out and out criminal who I had zero interest in, and when, at 10% in, this third character, essentially threw herself at him, all the while convincing herself that she didn't want him - in essence, raping herself with him, I gave up on the book in complete disgust. It sucked, it was badly written, it was all over the place and it was trashier than a badly-written romance. I condemn it and I sure as hell wasn't about to read 600-plus pages of this shit.

The Making of Riley Paige by Blake Pierce

Rating: WARTY!

This book is in three volumes, and I believe I got the first one as a freebie - the intention being to lure you into to buying the other two, but that ain't gonna happen, not given how poorly-written this first volume ("Watching") was. This marks the third Blake Pierce I've read and they've all been bad.

The story is of a serial killer on a college campus, and this girl who is not named Riley Paige, but Riley Sweeney, is having insights into the killer's mind. There is another series by the same author about this same character, but later in her life, so I'm guessing this is a prequel, and in the later series, Riley apparently married this guy she met in college, whose last name is Paige. But as I said, the problem with the book is that it's badly-written. At one point in the story, Riley is talking with her roommate who is named Trudy, about a girl named Rhea, who was murdered in the dorm, but a couple of times in that conversation, the author mistakenly calls Trudy 'Rhea' - like Riley is talking with the dead girl! There are several other such gaffes, such as where the author says "a voice for the grave" rather than 'a voice from the grave'. The quality of the editing is non-existent. I know as authors we all screw uo now and then, but this one seems like they're not even trying.

The real problem with it is that it feels so amateur in how it's written, and in order to tell the story, the author is having Riley do stuff that makes her look like a dumb-ass at times. For example, there's a killer on the loose, preying on female students. He evidently has the gift of the gab, and is suave enough for them to feel safe inviting him back to their room, but at a party, Riley invites this one guy she barely knows to her room without even thinking for a minute he might be the killer. He isn't as it turns out, but that was a stupid thing for her to do. The guy tries to rape her, but since she recently learned some self-defense moves, she magically overpowers him despite him also being trained in self-defense - he was in her class - and being bigger and stronger than her! It's badly-written.

It gets worse though! She finds this pocket knife in the guy's pants, and she doesn't think for a second about taking it out and handling it, and when she hands it to the police, they have no problem handling it either! There's no concern at all about wearing gloves, or about fingerprints or contamination, or evidence bags or chain of custody! It's amateur!

Riley takes this guy Ryan to bed with her on their first date when she barely knows him, and there's no mention of sexual history or condom use let alone any concern on her part that he might be the killer. Yes, we know she's going to marry him because this is a prequel, but she doesn't know that! More on this ridiculous relationship later.

After her own roommate is murdered, Riley is taken by this FBI guy who is now on the case down to the police station to watch an interrogation of a suspect, so she can share her insights with the FBI about whether she thinks he did it! After that, despite her being in shock earlier, and despite it being her roommate who was murdered, and despite her having no place to go since her room is a crime scene, no one offers to drive her anywhere or asks her if she'll be okay. They just let her walk out without taking a statement from her or anything! The author obviously did this so this guy Ryan could come pick her up, but it's stupid, and very poorly written.

From the start, and since we know it wasn't Ryan, it looked to me like the killer is one of two college professors. I suspected this from early on, but it makes absolutely no sense. At one point Riley has this insight that the killer was hanging out outside the bar where Rhea was partying the night she was killed, Riley felt that this guy started talking to her and Rhea invited him back to her dorm room! If it had been a fellow student, no one would have given it a second thought, but to claim that no one noticed an older man - a college professor who would have been recognized - hanging outside the bar where students gather, and walking and talking with Rhea or going back to her dorm? It made zero sense!

When Riley finally, belatedly, gets onto the idea that it was a college professor (so much for her brilliant insights), she goes to the library to check on something she read in a book that one of these two professors had written about the criminal mind, and she sees one of her professors at a computer terminal in the library. He greets her not as Riley Sweeney but as "Riley Paige!"! LOL! Badly written. After consulting this book, she decides she should call that same professor she just saw, and talk to him about her thoughts. Never once does she think to check the computer terminal where she'd just seen him! It's like she forgot she'd seen him only minutes before, and she immediately goes to a payphone to call him where she finds him in his office! Again, badly-written.

The weird thing is that when she's seeking him out, she asks herself, "But who else did she have to talk to about this?" - well duhh! The FBI agent who's all but recruited you! Again, badly written. What I suspect happened here is that the professor she saw in the library was actually the other professor, and not the one she phones and later meets, who happens to be the murderer. Again it was a writing screw up.

The saddest thing about the purported genius Riley-with-the-magical-insights is that she continually and persistently gets it wrong who the murder is! We, the readers, have known virtually from the start because the story is so badly-written, but Riley doesn't learn until she's trapped in a locked room with him. Even then she's still on the wrong track and the professor has to declare hismelf as the killer! That's how bad she is - and she has to be rescued by the FBI agent who conveniently has been tailing her all day hoping she will lead him to the killer! What?! Because that's with the FBI does - follow a flaky girl around, hoping desperately for a break in the case instead of going steadily through the evidence and eliminating or adding suspects until they finally nail the right one. Yup!

Finally: how do we know Riley has been having unprotected sex with Ryan? Well, he gets her pregnant. Yet more evidence of how profoundly stupid this woman is. But what evidence is there that there's anything else to do in this to do in this town, but party? Riley almost never goes to any classes during this story. She never studies. She has no job. She has no hobbies or pursuits. She's a senior, and she does nothing but party and agonize over who the killer is.

Oh and finding out she's pregnant long before it would show - because she has nausea. Not because she has some feminine insight, but nausea. Yeah. This novel is nauseatingly bad. So when Ryan shows up out of the blue at her graduation - where she's still wearing a neck brace because this novel is mind bogglingly telescoped - and he essentially proposes marriage, she's all on board even though she barely knows him, and the last time she was with him, things went badly and they broke up. This novel is shit. Honestly. Garbage. I condemn it. I have no interest in reading any more about Riley Sweeney-Paige or anything else from this author. Three strikes and you're out Blake Pierce!

Thursday, June 10, 2021

On the Road to Tara by Aljean Harmetz

Rating: WARTY!

This is a large format print book replete with photographs from all stages of the production and all aspects of it. But it's not just a picture book. It has a lot of text describing aspects of the production from the acquisition of the rights to the novel, to the filming itself. If you're a big aficionado of the book or the movie, or are deeply interested in film-making, then this is a worthy read, but overall I have to say it wasn't worth my time. I found it interesting in parts, but it was too big, too full of fluff, and far too repetitive to be of great value.

If there's one thing that runs through this book, it's the constant and monotonous drumbeat of producer David Selnick's obsessive-compulsive micromanagement and meddling. It's really more of a book about him than it is about the movie, come to think of it and frankly, it's tedious to read this much of that topic. Yes, his behavior was an important part of how the movie got made, and yes, once in a while it's interesting to hear about how interfering and uncontrollable he was, but to hear it in every other paragraph is truly irritating and belabors the point long past its sell-by date.

I felt the book seriously overdid that at the expense of other things it could have related, but apart from where it talks about Selznick's behavior, the book seems superficial, skimming over other important and interesting stuff until it gets to the next Selznick-o-thon. I can't commend it as a worthy read for this reason.

The Conscience of an Agnostic by Robert K Cooper

Rating: WARTY!

From an advance review copy for which I thank the publisher.

This is a very short book, and frankly after reading it, I wasn't sure exactly what it was trying to do, but for me it failed if judged by what the book description declares is its aim.

The premise is supposedly that "it is simply impossible to determine, with any degree of confidence, as to whether there is a transcendent, creative being which is responsible for the existence of the universe. The conclusion that inevitably flows from this realization is that agnosticism is the most intellectually honest position to espouse" but the author seems like he's on a crusade to debunk the theistic arguments (which frankly isn't a difficult thing to do) without paying any attention to the atheistic ones, and so he fails to establish the very premise that he claims is the only rational position.

To the best of my knowledge, the atheist position doesn't declare there are no gods, but instead declares that there's no convincing evidence for any gods. As Richard Dawkins and others have put it, most people have no belief in most gods. Atheists just believe in fewer gods than do believers. But if the author's aim is to establish that agnosticism is the only intellectually honest position, then he doesn't make that case here. A quick glance at the chapter headers is enough to make that argument:

  • What is Agnosticism?
  • What is Religious Faith?
  • Common Objections to the Bible
  • The Random Cruelty of Life: Murderous Dictators
  • The Random Cruelty of Life: 20th Century Disasters
  • The Random Cruelty of Life: The Deadliest Natural Disasters
  • The Random Cruelty of Life: Mass Shootings

You rather get the idea from this that the book is largely US-centric and targets almost exclusively the Christian faith - otherwise why have a chapter devoted to the Bible, but none devoted to the Koran, or the Vedas, or the Tri-piṭaka and so on? So while you can argue (if you like!) that it addresses the Christian faith, it fails to make any case at all for agnosticism with regard to other faiths. The assumption, also, is that the creator god we’re supposed to be agnostic about, is a loving one, and seeks - from the abundance of chapters on the topic - to dispel this notion by having almost half the book devoted to the random cruelty of life, but what if this creator god merely sets things in motion and doesn't have any interest in beneficence or otherwise? The book fails to engage that.

The book also completely fails to address the scientific perspective, with regard, for example, to how the universe came to be and the fact that there may be multiple universes. It fails to address the four billion years of life on the planet which existed nearly all of that time without any living thing (at least on Earth!) wondering if there were any gods. What was that all about, if there's supposed to be a benign creator? It also fails to address any of the philosophical arguments for or against gods.

The last couple of chapters are "Assorted Quotes and Humorous tidbits" and "Quotes from Yours Truly: More Humorous tidbits" neither of which make any argument for anything and seemed more like filler. Quoting someone saying something about a god isn't evidence for or against any position, and listing celebrities who are agnostics makes no more of an argument for agnosticism than does listing holocaust deniers make an argument that there was no holocaust.

I didn't get the point of this approach at all, and especially not the employment of so much space which fails to take on the premise of the book in any meaningful or useful way, and neither do I see the point of those last two frivolous chapters when the point of the book still has not been made. For me the book had no real focus or thrust; it seemed half-hearted and rambling, and I cannot commend it as a worthy read.

Rock 'n' Roll Heretic: The Life and Times of Rory Tharpe by Sikivu Hutchinson

Rating: WARTY!

From an advance review copy for which I thank the publisher.

This author is a feminist writer who has several non-fiction books out there. I have not read any of those. This one appears to be her first foray into fiction, and I have to say right up front that I was not at all impressed by it. For me it was a mess. It was hard to follow, choppily-written, jumping back and forth in time with little warning, flooded with characters that were not well-defined and therefore largely interchangeable, it was tedious at times, and did nothing whatsoever to draw me in, to enable me to empathize with the main character, or to engage or entertain me. I DNF'd it at 25% (and some skimming of the other 75%) because I was bored to tears with it and thoroughly disappointed at such a wasted opportunity.

The story is supposedly an homage to Rosetta Tharpe, but it feels more like an insult. The real-life Tharpe was truly a revolutionary who rose to popularity in the 1930s and 1940s, was an innovative musician and a huge influence on Blues, and helped bring Gospel into the mainstream, but this book doesn't seem to have any focus at all, and is music-light. By that I mean that, while an ebook (as opposed to an audio-book, for example) doesn't exactly lend itself to musical interludes, you can talk about music with passion and give it some character and life. Music was supposed to be a character in this novel in a very real sense, judged from the book description, but it was a complete no-show in that first 25%.

There was a lot of talk around music, but no talk, experience, or any sort of feel at all for music. So the book that was supposed to be about a musician turned her into a rather stereotypical shell - an echo of a musician rather then a working musician who purportedly was talented. Yes, we're told she was on the down-slide, and was a much imitated musician, but we were given no sort of sense of why she was imitated or what she had been before she hit the slope - not in the portion I read anyway.

To me, the novel felt like a fraud, like this was a band trying to break into the big time rather than a respected musician who'd had a series of bad breaks. Worse than that, it was all over the place and it lost me repeatedly as I tried to follow it and engage with it. I have to say it was also racist in some ways, in a warped mirror sort of way, which is the same distorted reflection that lets black comedians, for example tell racist white jokes on stage, but condemns white comedians who do the same about people of color.

You can't have it both ways. If racism is bad - and it is - you can't allow it for people of one color while denying it for others. It needs to be anathema for all, and this book didn't seem to get that. On the one hand it rightly sought to condemn racism, but it did it in such a back-handed and hamfisted manner that it became more like a parody than a paradigm. It became an exemplar of the very thing it was supposed to be deriding. For these reasons, I can't commend it based on what I read of it.

Saturday, June 5, 2021

Liars and Losers Like Us by Ami Allen-Vath

Rating: WARTY!

"As prom night looms on the horizon, 17-year-old Bree must navigate tragedy, secrets, and a difficult love triangle." Why? Why the love triangle? Shit or get off the pot, Bree. Another unoriginal plot starring a ditz who doesn't even have convictions, let alone the courage of them.

A Lady's Guide to Etiquette and Murder by Dianne Freeman

Rating: WARTY!

"In this sparkling mystery, wealthy American widow Frances Wynn arrives in Victorian London - but soon becomes a suspect in her late husband's murder." Because if there isn't an American in it, it's a waste of time reading it, right? Non-starter.

Murder Once Removed by SC Perkins

Rating: WARTY!

"When Texas genealogist Lucy Lancaster discovers a journal proving that billionaire Gus Halloran's great-great-grandfather was murdered in the 1840s - possibly by the ancestor of US Senator Daniel Applewhite - the ensuing accusation thrusts her into a dangerous web of small-town secrets!" Why would it? Who the fuck cares what happened almost 200 years ago? This is a definite non-starter for me.

The Lake House by Christie Barlow

Rating: WARTY!

"After moving to a new town, bistro waitress Ella catches a ride across the lake every day with Roman, the village water taxi driver. As she settles in and gets to know her charming neighbors, will Heartcross offer a second chance at life - and love?" The answer is yes. Why is it even a question anymore? And 'Roman'? Really? I find the story more appealing if the tax-driver's name was Visigoth or Vandal and the town's name was Starcross.

The Bookshop of Yesterdays by Amy Meyerson

Rating: WARTY!

Another book about a bookshop. Yawn. I'd turn this down just from the title, but the plot is a definite killer of interest: "When schoolteacher Miranda inherits her late uncle's run-down bookshop, she learns he's hidden a series of clues within the store - and begins unraveling a tragic family mystery." Why does her chickenshit uncle hide the clues instead of coming out with it? So the perp can get away with whatever it was they did?

Bennett's Bastards Bundle by Jennie Kew

Rating: WARTY!

"For these couples, no-strings-attached passion leads to unexpected..." diseases? Just a wild-ass guess.

Desecration by JF Penn

Rating: WARTY!

"DS Jamie Brooke enlists the help of clairvoyant Blake Daniel to follow a macabre trail of murder, grave robbery, and genetic modification..." and finds out she's a lying-ass fraud? Just a suggestion. Have you noticed the psychics in these stories (books and movies) never offer a damned thing that really helps - only the vaguest of clues so the author can spin the story on and on. It would be more of a challenge if the psychic nailed the perp down to name and address and the author still managed to find a good story. Why don't I do that? Maybe I will.

But no psychic ever solved a murder. Ever. Period. Cops do that. Not psychics. Not bakers. Not librarians. Not café owners. Not cupcake shop owners. Not ladies' knitting circles. Not bookshop owners. Cops. Hard-working cops. That's it.

Once an Eagle by Anton Myrer

Rating: WARTY!

This novel "follows an American soldier across decades and continents - from the Pacific jungles during World War II to Cold War-era Vietnam." Yawn. Another American war story. How original. Get a plot. I may be wrong, but I honestly don't think there's any nation on Earth as obsessed with its military history as is the USA. Why is that?

The Girl Who Came Back by Kerry Wilkinson

Rating: WARTY!

The author is described by The Sun newspaper as a "crime-writing colossus." He's so big I've never heard of him. The story is that "Six-year-old Olivia Adams vanished from her own back garden. Thirteen years later, she returns. But is this the real missing child… or an impostor?" Check her DNA. There. I solved it. You're welcome. Yawn.

Dragon's Code by Gigi McCaffrey

Rating: WARTY!

"A fresh reboot...of the Dragonriders of Pern series from Anne McCaffrey's daughter!" Seriously? In what world is a reboot fresh? Ride coat-tails much Gigi? Couldn't come up with an original idea? Barf.

Double Fudge Brownie Murder by Joanne Fluke

Rating: WARTY!

"As a baker, Hannah knows her craft inside out… But when she becomes a murder suspect, can she find the recipe for proving her innocence?" Innocence doesn't have to be proved. Guilt does. But this story is just a fluke so don't sweat it.

That’s Not a Thing by Jacqueline Friedland

Rating: WARTY!

In yet another plot that's been done to death: "Set to marry another man, Meredith finds herself at a crossroads when fate throws her back together with Wesley — the ex-fiancé she never forgot." Why is there a problem? If she's hooked on her ex why hasn't she pursued it? If she's not, why is it a problem? Shit or get off the pot, Meredith. Any other behavior just makes you a bitch. This is another big no.

Winner Take All by Laurie Devore

Rating: WARTY!

"At Cedar Woods Prep Academy, ambitious Nell and privileged Jackson are drawn into a fierce rivalry that gives way to a whirlwind romance" Why wouldn't it? Inevitably rivalries end in marriage. It's just that this exact story has been told a billion times already, yet here we have yet another author chomping at the bit to ram it down our throats again. No. No! NO!

Annalynn the Canadian Spy by Shawn PB Robinson

Rating: WARTY!

"After she’s visited by a curious band of thieves, 10-year-old Annalynn is recruited as a spy for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service." Way to insult the Candian intelligence services! This is a non-starter.

Beachside Beginnings by Sheila Roberts

Rating: WARTY!

"After fleeing her abusive past, can Moira find a fresh start in Moonlight Harbor — without getting her heart broken?" My guess is yes, as another female author creates another weak and chickenshit female character. Why do women abuse women in this consistent and repugnant manner?

Layover by Becca Jameson

Rating: WARTY!

"After a red-hot night of passion, flight attendant Libby skips out on former soldier Jason — even though his dominance gives her the ultimate pleasure. But when he moves to her hometown, the temptation is too great to resist!" Why? She skipped out on it without a seocnd thought before. Which begs the question why? What's changed? Her underwear? His condom? Did she have a venereal disease and was too chickenshit to tell him? If not, don't worry - she'll soon get one with her behavior. No. Just no.

Knight Life by Peter David

Rating: WARTY!

Publisher's Weekly calls this reimagining of King Arthur’s story a “hilarious romp." I guess that tells me all I kneed to know about Publisher's Weekly, going forward. The story sounds stupid to me, and completely senseless. The idea is that "After disappearing from Avalon, King Arthur returns - and is running for mayor of New York City! Reuniting with his friends and trusty advisor Merlin, Arthur prepares to stand his ground as familiar dark forces threaten his campaign"

Why? Why New York and in what world would New Yorkers elect an Englishman as mayor? It's just stupid from the very concept onward, and since Merlin and Arthur were not actually contemporary (except in later fiction, the idea of them working together is nonsensical. Set in the USA, and written by an American writer, look for this to bear zero relationship whatsoever to any legend of Arthur.

The Particular Charm of Miss Jane Austen by Ada Bright, Cass Grafton

Rating: WARTY!

In another unoriginal, coat-tail riding episode, "Rose has dedicated her life to celebrating the legacy of her favorite author, Jane Austen. But when Rose’s mysterious new neighbor is revealed to be the time traveling novelist herself, the two women must work together to help Jane get back home… before it’s too late." Seriously? Barf.

Can we not let her rest in peace? Do we have to have yet another rip-off after all the endless derivations and rip-offs we've already had? And if we do have to have a rip-off, can it be something along a path not traveled - something that contributes rather than rips-off? I gues snot. But no for me.

Beyond Dead by Jordaina Sydney Robinson

Rating: WARTY!

The blurb spouts mindlessly, "New to the afterlife, Bridget ends up in hot water when a dead ghost is found in her locker." A dead ghost? Seriously? What, the afterlife has an afterlife? Where do ghosts go when they die? How do they even die if they're dead already? There might even have been a story there, but this sure as hell ain't it! This strikes me as one of those dumbass ideas that is worthy of a Saturday morning cartoon - where the story has a patina of difference to it, but really it's the same old thing and the patina is the only "difference." Yeah, we're all ghosts, but otherwise everything is exactly the same as if we were alive - so what's the fucking point, honestly?

The blurb claims that this is an "inventive supernatural mystery that's first in a series!" of course it is, because why do the work of writing a host of original nvoels when youc an retread the friost one into a series of sameness? I'll pass. No thanks. No more dumb-ass series.

This Way Home by Wes Moore with Shawn Goodman

Rating: WARTY!

What is that - when you're 'with' another author? Is that a cute way of saying it's ghost-written? If that's not it, then what exactly does it mean? I think it means author 'A' didn't do shit.

The blurb begins: "If you were moved by The Hate U Give...." I was - I was moved to avoid a novel with a title like that, like the plague. I never read it; I never saw the movie, so I doubt I will be "sure to be swept up by this," especially if Kirkus reviews reports that it's a "taut, haunting tragedy”.

KR coulldn't distinguish a taut, haunting tragedy from a taunting haughty travesty if it came out of its ass sideways, and even if they could, they'd still rate both of them highly because they never don't. If all your reviews are positive and gushing, then your voice is worthless.

I make it a point to avoid novels that are compared to other novels, especially if the comparison is in the form of "X" meets "Y" where X and Y are two novels that your novel is being likened to - as a mashup, otherwise known as a rip-off. I would be equally repelled if an author were listed as the new "Z" where Z is an established author. It's insulting to authors. This is a deifnitelt no.