Scan barcode
antitypically's review against another edition
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
0.25
Very flat underdeveloped characters, book suffered a lot from poor structure and major plot inconsistencies. This book reads like it had an editor that chose to make it as difficult to read as possible while still being saleable. The chapters are too short to give the reader a good sense of sequence of events, like the worst attempt ever to build tension. It actually has the opposite effect.
The way the book was written really leaves me wondering if the views of the author are in agreement with the truly disturbing views of the characters. I don't listen to the podcast she hosts, so I don't know what her ideologies are but both the protagonists and the antagonist express explicit opinions very related to eugenics, and there are some truly problematic examples, such as:
-straight at the beginning, within the first 5 pages, the incredibly unlikeable narrator (in the third person) goes on at length about the importance of skull shape (startling to see phrenology being promoted even if it is by a villain) and how some people are just congenitally inferior prey. These views are written in 3rd person but not written in such a way as to say he thinks these things or feels they are true- it just states them, which is an odd and not good choice.
-the policeman and the protagonist agreeing that the murder victims were "hotel art humans" (page 59) and unremarkable, despite previously expressed a commitment to identifying the "Jane Does" really shocked me. There is some superficial sentiment occasionally sprinkled throughout the prose where the protagonist expressed a willingness to find out what happened to the victims, but largely her focus is based on a morbid obsession with imagining their final moments.
I have some other gripes about this text:
-repetitive vocabulary (lividity, anyone?)
-lack of good setting/descriptions
-basing parts of character communication on events or situations that are not part of the text which the reader has no reference for, such as the repeated references to their exhaustion from being overworked but no evidence of this in any other form
-contradicting information, such as when they are in the crime scene and find the business card, they talk about all the other victims but there was only one victim we the reader know anything specific about and then make conclusions without giving the reader any details whatsoever to back those claims "the scene in front of them is the product of careful research, planning, and complex abstract thought" but they had in just the page before said "the killer saw how simple this dump could be if he played it cool"
-wren says the last victim was refrigerated when in fact the last victim was behind the bar and it was the victim in the swamp who had been refrigerated
-very shallow characters, very one dimensional and generic
-complete and utter lack of any diversity whatsoever
-she rage quits a trait reading which had been super generic
-she told her friends she had to go to work but immediately went to a bar nearby to where she left them
-the really unprofessional and tv drama behavior of law enforcement
-the really I'll structured plot twist that felt like it was tacked onto the plot
CW/TW- death, bodies
-super clinical impersonal descriptions of dead people, the terms are sometimes used in a way that sound like a lecture as though in the beginning the author wanted to inform the reader but the dialogue of what the characters were saying did not sound like a normal human conversation... By the end of the book she was describing the smell of a rotting corpse by comparing it to a variety of food related smells.
There is just so so so much about this book that could have been better. It feels hurriedly or chaotically put together but not properly fleshed out.
It's like a bread that was put in the oven at too high a temp to get done faster but what happened was it burned on the outside but was undercooked on the inside. Inedible
The ending felt like it was purposely there to keep the door open for a sequel and I must say if that does happen I am not reading it.
text
The way the book was written really leaves me wondering if the views of the author are in agreement with the truly disturbing views of the characters. I don't listen to the podcast she hosts, so I don't know what her ideologies are but both the protagonists and the antagonist express explicit opinions very related to eugenics, and there are some truly problematic examples, such as:
-straight at the beginning, within the first 5 pages, the incredibly unlikeable narrator (in the third person) goes on at length about the importance of skull shape (startling to see phrenology being promoted even if it is by a villain) and how some people are just congenitally inferior prey. These views are written in 3rd person but not written in such a way as to say he thinks these things or feels they are true- it just states them, which is an odd and not good choice.
-the policeman and the protagonist agreeing that the murder victims were "hotel art humans" (page 59) and unremarkable, despite previously expressed a commitment to identifying the "Jane Does" really shocked me. There is some superficial sentiment occasionally sprinkled throughout the prose where the protagonist expressed a willingness to find out what happened to the victims, but largely her focus is based on a morbid obsession with imagining their final moments.
I have some other gripes about this text:
-repetitive vocabulary (lividity, anyone?)
-lack of good setting/descriptions
-basing parts of character communication on events or situations that are not part of the text which the reader has no reference for, such as the repeated references to their exhaustion from being overworked but no evidence of this in any other form
-contradicting information, such as when they are in the crime scene and find the business card, they talk about all the other victims but there was only one victim we the reader know anything specific about and then make conclusions without giving the reader any details whatsoever to back those claims "the scene in front of them is the product of careful research, planning, and complex abstract thought" but they had in just the page before said "the killer saw how simple this dump could be if he played it cool"
-wren says the last victim was refrigerated when in fact the last victim was behind the bar and it was the victim in the swamp who had been refrigerated
-very shallow characters, very one dimensional and generic
-complete and utter lack of any diversity whatsoever
-she rage quits a trait reading which had been super generic
-she told her friends she had to go to work but immediately went to a bar nearby to where she left them
-the really unprofessional and tv drama behavior of law enforcement
-the really I'll structured plot twist that felt like it was tacked onto the plot
CW/TW- death, bodies
-super clinical impersonal descriptions of dead people, the terms are sometimes used in a way that sound like a lecture as though in the beginning the author wanted to inform the reader but the dialogue of what the characters were saying did not sound like a normal human conversation... By the end of the book she was describing the smell of a rotting corpse by comparing it to a variety of food related smells.
There is just so so so much about this book that could have been better. It feels hurriedly or chaotically put together but not properly fleshed out.
It's like a bread that was put in the oven at too high a temp to get done faster but what happened was it burned on the outside but was undercooked on the inside. Inedible
The ending felt like it was purposely there to keep the door open for a sequel and I must say if that does happen I am not reading it.
text
Content Warnings
Graphic: Kidnapping, Torture, Violence, Injury/Injury detail, and Murder
Moderate: Injury/Injury detail, Physical abuse, Mental illness, Stalking, Blood, Kidnapping, Body shaming, Confinement, Death of parent, Emotional abuse, Gore, Panic attacks/disorders, Grief, Gun violence, Infidelity, Murder, Torture, and Vomit
Minor: Vomit, Mental illness, Sexism, Panic attacks/disorders, Animal cruelty, and Animal death
gellyreads's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder, Kidnapping, Toxic friendship, Stalking, Torture, Gaslighting, Vomit, Toxic relationship, Sexism, and Death
nrogers_1030's review against another edition
dark
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.25
Too many holes, not enough character buildup. Fast and easy read though.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Gore, Injury/Injury detail, Alcohol, Torture, Murder, Misogyny, Animal cruelty, Violence, Stalking, Sexism, Kidnapping, and Animal death
More...