A Bit About Book Reviews

I've recently read a bunch of comments on forums and groups about the content in book reviews. I write book reviews, and I also write books, so I understand what prompts concerns. The public reviewers that I find on the book-sale sites often offer glowing recommendations to the point of disbelief. When I see the same reviewers constantly giving five-stars, I wonder: 1) are they being paid? and 2) do they truly read the book? Or perhaps, they only want to give praise, and never post about books they didn't absolutely love.

As a writer, I grin when seeing five-star reviews on my works, but I also like to read the less flattering reviews—a chance to learn something I can fix in other things I write. But then, there are reviewers who are terse and rude. Not fun to read—neither on my book page nor someone else's.

I also review books, and I try to be objective when I do so. But writing a book review is like trying to review of a chef salad. You can take parts of it and make comments: the dressing was too tart, the mild cheeses—very good, the lettuces could have been more crisp and I wanted more radicchio. Then you sum it all up to a total of some kind. That total is a whim of the salad eater. Some people don’t like radicchio, and other like their cheeses more aged.

Here's what I look for in a salad—er—book. I grade on a five-point scale for 1) originality: is this a typical genre story or does it offer something new and different?; 2) character development: consistency for each character in voice, emotions and description with each character being distinctive; 3) pace and story flow: as in a salad, I like it when the tart is offset by the sweet, the crunch with the smooth, and when it's all relative to the whole; 4) edits and format: grammar, spelling and sentence structure must be correct and word-choice appropriate for the scenes; the layout (this especially in electronic editions) should allow the reader to progress through the book without a hitch.

I don't read a book, thinking critically about these elements. Usually the negatives sort of jump up and slap me (inaccurate spelling and grammar, rough transitions, head-hopping). Some readers can breeze right by these things that I consider imperfections, but I'm also and editor, so I see all this stuff. Parts of a book that I delight in, usually come to me after I've finished reading the whole piece. I sit back and I think, that was nicely done.

When I write the review, I give a thumbnail of the plot and avoid spoilers. I try to address each of the elements I think important, and if I criticize, I like to explain why. For review readers, particularly the authors, I hope they remember that what I write is a single opinion. Let's face it, if everyone liked the same thing the same way, reading books would be pretty boring.

Here are a related articles I posted a while back on my Get It Together blog: Writing a Book Review, and Criticism Can Sting
You can find a list of reviews I've posted on this blog by clicking "book reviews" in the labels (right side).

A Witness Above - Review

I bought the e-book version of A Witness Above after reading an interview on Kindle Author. The setting intrigued me, as well as the mystery, and I wasn't disappointed. I was engaged from page one and recommend it to any mystery fan.

From the promo blurbs: "Thirteen years ago, Frank Pavlicek left the NYPD under less than ideal circumstances. Now, the divorced father of a teenage daughter, he works as a private investigator in Charlottesville, Virginia, where he indulges his passion for falconry&emdash;and tries to live outside the shadow of his past.
"While hunting with his red-tailed hawk, Armistead, Frank finds the gruesome remains of a teenage boy’s body – barely concealed behind a pile of brush...But what Frank finds in the dead boy's wallet is even more disturbing—his daughter’s phone number, scribbled in ink on the edge of a bill. He pockets the evidence and flees. Days later, his daughter is in jail and his past is coming back to haunt him. His reputation--and life--are on the line…"

Andy Straka's protagonist, Frank Pavlicek, is a strong character, with emotional depth and realistic concerns. That Straka got all this out in a first-person presentation credits his writing ability. I often avoid first-person stories, because they're come off a bit vapid. Not here. Word choice and descriptions were vivid, and the action moved well. Although I knew who the perp was right at the beginning, I was interested in seeing how Pavlicek figured it out.

Details about falconry were nice; I always like to learn new things. Straka worked this into the story quite well, right from the title.

A Witness Above was a Best First Novel-Anthony, Shamus, and Agatha Award Nominee.

No Hero - Review

I received the publisher's e-ARC of Jonathan Wood's No Hero from netgalley.
Publication date: ~19 July 2011
Publisher: Night Shade Books

From the publisher: "What would Kurt Russell do?" Oxford police detective Arthur Wallace asks himself that question a lot. Because Arthur is no hero. He's a good cop, but prefers that action and heroics remain on the screen, safely performed by professionals. But then, secretive government agency MI12 [MI37] comes calling, hoping to recruit Arthur in their struggle against the tentacled horrors from another dimension known as the Progeny. But Arthur is NO HERO! Can an everyman stand against sanity-ripping cosmic horrors?"

I really liked the first-person non-hero, Arthur Wallace. Jonathan Wood has written this character with style and personality that grabs the reader from the opening page. The supporting cast are also well written, from the loquacious science guy to the steampunk cyber authority, and the "Let's stick to business" leader of MI37. No Hero is an action Sci Fi adventure akin to the movies Men in Black and, Arthur's favorite, Big Trouble in Little China. In No Hero the aliens are seeping through from another reality—an updated version of the usual "world is doomed" scenario. This is also a popular theme in SF right now, with true science speculating on different universe dimensions with different physical properties. The idea is that our universe has a membrane that secludes us from different entities and physics.

I especially like Wallace's continual shock that he is in a real "save the world" situation—sometimes he is exhilarated, but most often is aghast at his position in it all. His frustration at not really knowing what is happening is palpable. The whole idea of another dimension is as alien to him as the aliens.

But, there were story problems—or actually, elements in action adventures that usually gripe me. Jonathan Wood wrote from the accepted rules of the genre and did a fine job, but I am always bummed by the ineffective "good guys" who have limited skills, power, etc. while the "bad guys" (in this case the Progeny) seem invincible. I suppose this is to get the reader to cheer for the underdog. I could accept the underdog role of Wallace and his MI37 team, but the supposed Keepers of the Status Quo Between Realities (the Dreamers) were a bunch of duffs. And while Wallace was frustrated with inadequate information, the final action scenes left me frustrated with the continual deflection of any real answers or presentation of what was really happening. I still can't figure why the Dreamers were so ineffective. Nor could I figure out how people like The Sheilas (and a few others) came to be.

The potential for further books with Arthur Wallace and MI37 fighting anomalies of the universe is clearly set up, and for all that I don't often like some of the devices of this genre, I know I'll grab the next Wood books and enjoy the action and unique situations.