You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
izilen 's review for:
Concrete Evidence
by Rachel Grant
I have very mixed feelings about this book but the thing is, it's a romance mystery with an archaeologist protagonist, so it's also basically candy for me. ??? WELP.
I really liked:
-The Archaeology! So obviously authentic.
-Erica, the protag, who is ethical to the point of risking Everything.
-The fact that both she and her love interest, Lee, are very competent people with good intentions.
-The fact that somehow Grant pulls off the three or four plots she'd been juggling from the start and ties them up more or less neatly? HOW.
I disliked:
-The fact that the whole romantic plot is to do with Erica and Lee lusting after and loving one another while being incapable or unwilling to trust each other. There was a HUGE chunk of the book that was just Erica and Lee thinking, back and forth, almost echoing, that they wanted to trust the other but they couldn't because they hadn't been trusted in return. AUGH. Would have been utterly unbearable if they hadn't been as bad as each other.
-The degree 0f sexual manipulation and coercion? Like, if not in reality, then in...themes? Intent? Erica and Lee obviously Want Each Other but they also try to convince themselves that they're doing it to acquire information.
-The over the top rape threat backstory? Combined with the above it's just a little Convoluted and kinda nasty.
I really disliked:
-Look, it sets it up that the Indian Reservation is a force for good and the Senator who came from that reservation is also Principled, but then kinda turns that around? In the end [SPOILERS!!!] the Native American Senator is neither actually Native American nor is he Principled. It doesn't feel like a FLAT portrayal (the webs of lies and motivations are much more complicated) but it's uncomfortable.
-Did we really have to with Mexican Drug Lords. DID WE REALLY.
And yet watch me read the next one. Ample Shrug.
I really liked:
-The Archaeology! So obviously authentic.
-Erica, the protag, who is ethical to the point of risking Everything.
-The fact that both she and her love interest, Lee, are very competent people with good intentions.
-The fact that somehow Grant pulls off the three or four plots she'd been juggling from the start and ties them up more or less neatly? HOW.
I disliked:
-The fact that the whole romantic plot is to do with Erica and Lee lusting after and loving one another while being incapable or unwilling to trust each other. There was a HUGE chunk of the book that was just Erica and Lee thinking, back and forth, almost echoing, that they wanted to trust the other but they couldn't because they hadn't been trusted in return. AUGH. Would have been utterly unbearable if they hadn't been as bad as each other.
-The degree 0f sexual manipulation and coercion? Like, if not in reality, then in...themes? Intent? Erica and Lee obviously Want Each Other but they also try to convince themselves that they're doing it to acquire information.
-The over the top rape threat backstory? Combined with the above it's just a little Convoluted and kinda nasty.
I really disliked:
-Look, it sets it up that the Indian Reservation is a force for good and the Senator who came from that reservation is also Principled, but then kinda turns that around? In the end [SPOILERS!!!] the Native American Senator is neither actually Native American nor is he Principled. It doesn't feel like a FLAT portrayal (the webs of lies and motivations are much more complicated) but it's uncomfortable.
-Did we really have to with Mexican Drug Lords. DID WE REALLY.
And yet watch me read the next one. Ample Shrug.