Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.78 AVERAGE
3.78 AVERAGE
informative
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
The author missed the mark on her intentions. There is a lot of information presented here and it's not very cohesive. It's a deep dive that never happened and comes off as "I'm addicted to tried crime but not like the rest of you....".
So good it makes me want to write an essay about it
This was not quite what I expected.
Sometimes I think I am a bit harsher towards books than others, perhaps treating a popular culture book as more of a scholarly work, and therefore being more disappointed when it is not. This book's purported thesis is not being supported. The teacher in me is writing "see me" in red pen at the top of the paper.
Anyway, this book is a bit of a jumbled mess. The stories in themselves were interesting, but they could have been long-form, separate articles. I didn't feel that much tied them together other than the fact that the people involved were women and they had a true crime connection: Frances Glessner Lee, the woman who is considered the mother of forensic science; Alina Statman, the woman who became involved with Sharon Tate's sister, and by extension the rest of the Tate family (and there have been some conflicting stories about whether that relationship was predatory or not - this author seems to lean towards the former); Lorri Davis, the woman who became involved with, and later married, Damien Echols, one of the West Memphis Three; and Lindsay Souvannarath, who shared an obsession of the Columbine shooters with her online boyfriend, and who planned to shoot up a mall with him (which never even took place as Canadian police received a tip about what they were posting online and arrested her, while James escaped by taking himself out).
In between, the author talks about her own true crime obsessions over the years, but has an aura of "yes, but I'm not like THEM," which rubbed me the wrong way. Not all of us who are interested in true crime were posting "dreamy" pics of serial killers on our Tumblrs, ya know?
I just didn't feel like the stories hung together enough to be considered a full book. In addition, some of the snark seemed misplaced - judging women who went to CrimeCon . . . but the author was also there, so what does that make her?
Sometimes I think I am a bit harsher towards books than others, perhaps treating a popular culture book as more of a scholarly work, and therefore being more disappointed when it is not. This book's purported thesis is not being supported. The teacher in me is writing "see me" in red pen at the top of the paper.
Anyway, this book is a bit of a jumbled mess. The stories in themselves were interesting, but they could have been long-form, separate articles. I didn't feel that much tied them together other than the fact that the people involved were women and they had a true crime connection: Frances Glessner Lee, the woman who is considered the mother of forensic science; Alina Statman, the woman who became involved with Sharon Tate's sister, and by extension the rest of the Tate family (and there have been some conflicting stories about whether that relationship was predatory or not - this author seems to lean towards the former); Lorri Davis, the woman who became involved with, and later married, Damien Echols, one of the West Memphis Three; and Lindsay Souvannarath, who shared an obsession of the Columbine shooters with her online boyfriend, and who planned to shoot up a mall with him (which never even took place as Canadian police received a tip about what they were posting online and arrested her, while James escaped by taking himself out).
In between, the author talks about her own true crime obsessions over the years, but has an aura of "yes, but I'm not like THEM," which rubbed me the wrong way. Not all of us who are interested in true crime were posting "dreamy" pics of serial killers on our Tumblrs, ya know?
I just didn't feel like the stories hung together enough to be considered a full book. In addition, some of the snark seemed misplaced - judging women who went to CrimeCon . . . but the author was also there, so what does that make her?
Women use true crime to relate to different parts of their psyche, getting into the mindset of hero, victim or even criminal. 4 true stories of women who got (perhaps) too close to crime.
DNF at 40%
I can't make it through this book, it's so terrible dry and doesn't even catch me with its writing style.
And even the bland informations feel strangely uncoordinated...
Did not like this one, will not force myself through it.
I can't make it through this book, it's so terrible dry and doesn't even catch me with its writing style.
And even the bland informations feel strangely uncoordinated...
Did not like this one, will not force myself through it.
challenging
dark
informative
medium-paced
dark
informative
reflective
tense
medium-paced
I like the idea of this book. The execution of the four stories that illustrate the main thesis is really good.
What I can’t stand is the final chapter. The book spends so much time building empathy for the women who obsess over true crime just to throw it away to remind you that the author is better than all of them.
The content has a lot too say but Monroe just wants you to know that she's not like the other girls.
What I can’t stand is the final chapter. The book spends so much time building empathy for the women who obsess over true crime just to throw it away to remind you that the author is better than all of them.
The content has a lot too say but Monroe just wants you to know that she's not like the other girls.