<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: If I could, I'd rate this book Star-null
Review: I hate giving bad reviews. Some people enjoy trashing things; I'd rather rave about an excellent book I would recommend to others. Usually, if I don't like a book, I just go on to the next one. Unfortunately, this one is so bad it deserves a warning label. I only managed to make it to the end because I never abandon a book.This is the worst novel I have ever read. I am amazed that it was even accepted by an agent, much less a publisher. If this publisher had bothered to put it before an editor, it probably would have died there. It has potential, but is so flawed that even a good editor would probably be unable to salvage it. Unfortunately, there wasn't even a _copy_ editor for this book: the protagonist, Gideon, managed to "rack" [sic] his brain--not once, but twice. He also drinks expresso [sic], and even the facts in the book change (first we are told one of the main characters went to UCLA, then later on it was Berkeley; first Gideon had never been to New York, but later on he somehow knows that LaGuardia would have been closer than JFK). It is sad to say that the most entertaining part of this book was a direct result of it not being copy-edited: "The sky ... was a livid blue...." A professional copy-editor (like me, for instance), would have corrected this to "limpid blue", which actually makes sense. But the junior-high grammar and spelling wasn't the worst part of this book; a good plot and characters can overshadow such trivial things. There is much lacking in this department as well, but I'll just break it into a few bullet points: - Almost every person in the story gets shot. All of them die, too--except for Gideon, conveniently enough. And hardly a page goes by that we're not reminded that the protagonist was shot at the beginning of the book, and for an exceptionally stupid reason at that. - The protagonist is a thoroughly confused person. It is an impressive achievement to have him be so muddled, yet maintain such a high degree of one-dimensionality at the same time. - The good-guy-who's-actually-the-bad-guy is obvious the first time he's introduced. However, we're supposed to be surprised when this is revealed 300 pages or so later. - The protagonist gets kidnapped. What's so strange about that? Nothing, except that it happens TWICE: once by the good guys, who treat him worse than he will be treated when he's kidnapped by the bad guys--who happen to get him when he's being released from the first incident. - There is no clear struggle or impetus for the protagonist, and this is the critical element upon which all fiction is based. Ostensibly, he is on a search for answers as to why his brother was killed. Instead, he simply bumbles his way from one loosely-connected event to the next. In spite of him being a lowly robbery detective with low self-esteem, he somehow has the instincts of John Clark. (This is, by the way, the only time I'll ever mention Clancy in relation to this book. The marketing drivel above about Clancy, Coonts, and Cussler is just that: drivel.) I feel bad to have to write a review such as this, especially when the author is a fellow Clevelander and attended the same university I did. Nevertheless, I hope it will spare someone from wasting a few dollars and hours on this book. Swann is more in his element with science fiction; you would do well to pass on this book and look at his books in that genre instead. I did learn an important lesson, however: never buy a book with NO blurbs on its cover. The presence of good blurbs doesn't guarantee a good book, but when a publisher can't find anyone to say something good about it, that's a very bad sign.
<< 1 >>
| 
