Scan barcode
A review by telerit
Seven-Year Witch by Angela M. Sanders
3.0
I did enjoy the mystery and the characters and the way the magic works in this scenario.
However, the timeline for the architectural and construction work doesn’t make sense in the real world, and that kept pulling me out of the story. I went to architecture school and my husband and sister-in-law are architects, so I have some familiarity with the process. Given that the motive hinged on this process, I was very confused.
The following is a long nit-picky discussion of architectural process, which contains a plot spoiler:
Early in the book, we have patrons in the dinner asking the architect, Lewis Cruikshank, when are they going break ground, and he answers, “soon.” Then immediately after he is asked about the design and he says he only has a few ideas jotted down. If he’s only gotten as far as a few sketches, then they are a long ways from breaking ground on the project.
The book mentioned that there were plans for "preparing the land" prior to the architectural design being completed. The architectural plans usually include whatever needs to be done to the land, so the specific building can be built. These also would include plans to deal with flood plain issues such as shoring up or rebuilding a levee. I could see that there might be a demolition crew in advance to remove the old buildings, but a lot of the site work is done after the design is completed.
Also, the contractor is usually hired after the architectural plans are done, so I was wondering why a contractor had been hired beforehand. And, whoever did the hiring didn’t do their due diligence in vetting the contractor.
And, in a way, they didn't do it with the architect, whom they hired sight unseen. Unless you are trying to make an Architectural Statement, you usually don't hire a big-name architect for a project such as this. You go with an architect whose work is similar to what you have in mind.
As to the plot point itself, if the county required that the levee be improved, there will be inspectors to ensure that any work on the levee would meet requirements. Just “spackling over” the problems wouldn’t pass inspection and any substandard work would have to be redone. So, while there are many ways for a contractor to siphon off money from a project, this particular plan didn’t make sense to me.
As the old commercial goes, "That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works." I just wish the author had done a bit more research on how design and construction of a complex project is done.
However, the timeline for the architectural and construction work doesn’t make sense in the real world, and that kept pulling me out of the story. I went to architecture school and my husband and sister-in-law are architects, so I have some familiarity with the process. Given that the motive hinged on this process, I was very confused.
The following is a long nit-picky discussion of architectural process, which contains a plot spoiler:
Spoiler
Early in the book, we have patrons in the dinner asking the architect, Lewis Cruikshank, when are they going break ground, and he answers, “soon.” Then immediately after he is asked about the design and he says he only has a few ideas jotted down. If he’s only gotten as far as a few sketches, then they are a long ways from breaking ground on the project.
The book mentioned that there were plans for "preparing the land" prior to the architectural design being completed. The architectural plans usually include whatever needs to be done to the land, so the specific building can be built. These also would include plans to deal with flood plain issues such as shoring up or rebuilding a levee. I could see that there might be a demolition crew in advance to remove the old buildings, but a lot of the site work is done after the design is completed.
Also, the contractor is usually hired after the architectural plans are done, so I was wondering why a contractor had been hired beforehand. And, whoever did the hiring didn’t do their due diligence in vetting the contractor.
And, in a way, they didn't do it with the architect, whom they hired sight unseen. Unless you are trying to make an Architectural Statement, you usually don't hire a big-name architect for a project such as this. You go with an architect whose work is similar to what you have in mind.
As to the plot point itself, if the county required that the levee be improved, there will be inspectors to ensure that any work on the levee would meet requirements. Just “spackling over” the problems wouldn’t pass inspection and any substandard work would have to be redone. So, while there are many ways for a contractor to siphon off money from a project, this particular plan didn’t make sense to me.
As the old commercial goes, "That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works." I just wish the author had done a bit more research on how design and construction of a complex project is done.