Yes. I read this in two days, which actually should be a recommendation, but it really isn't. It just means tI have trouble properly reviewing this...
Yes. I read this in two days, which actually should be a recommendation, but it really isn't. It just means the mystery was pretty straightforward and the writing facile. It started out with something exclusively geared to shock, but nothing much at the back of it.
What I really loathed was this mannerism of ending every chapter (and by that I mean: every single one) with a cliffhanger. By the tenth chapter I was enervated, by the end of the story majorly pissed off. As manipulative as hell.
Another few things that got on my nerves:
Hunter always had abilities or knowledge which happened to be necessary to solve a part of the case. Deux ex machina in style. Not like e.g. Jack Reacher, who has a finite known number of abilities he adapts to solve his problems. Nor like Tony Hill, whose studies, academic knowledge and personality are a well-known entity right from the start. Nope - Hunter has them just fall in his lap whenever he needs them.
Garcia has a much repeated knack for happening onto clues.
The entire novel is blown up in size by the memories of Hunter. We get huge chunks of backstory and most of them are needless.
This attempts at modern psychologic Noir, but it is kid's play compared to what Jo Nesbo or Val McDermid write. By the way, including the shock moments, which McDermid does so much better.
At the end of the day, this is just a wannabe of a thriller. I'm astonished at the huge success this series has....more
Warnings in frontmatter: graphic torture, forced incest, rape
This is allegedly the apex of everything "dark romance/erotica". So horrib1.5* rounded up
Warnings in frontmatter: graphic torture, forced incest, rape
This is allegedly the apex of everything "dark romance/erotica". So horrible, that the daring reader will piss and puke from shock while reading the first chapter.
Welp.
[image]
(view spoiler)[Let me get this immediately out of the way. Anyone who watched Dexter or the Hannibal movies without problems, will find this book mildly amusing. Not titillating. Amusing. It's silly, and the entire torture stuff is so over the top and so clinically described, that there was zero eroticised pain or torture in it.
In consequence I didn't consider it dark. Not even dark grey. Of course, it then also didn't scratch the itch I read dark erotica for. Like the vast, vast majority of so-called "dark erotica", which commonly are just very inept splatter fests (at best) or inept physiology (at worst). Truly dark erotic stories I still can count off my own two hands. That's how rare they are.
Back to the book. It was a fast read, and the gimmick was genuinely amusing, even though it sort of was obvious 2 chapters in. It also was typically North American in background (European tales of the devil tend to be far darker), kind of a reverse dark Cinderfella story. I rounded up because I actually finished this (as opposed to the majority of dark erotica/romance I don't finish, because they bore me).
A dark erotic story this is not, though. (hide spoiler)]
And as an added warning: of course this also is no BDSM....more
If John Steinbeck (The Red Pony) had children with Leo Tolstoy (Kholstomer) the resulting generation of readers would be so traumatised as to never toIf John Steinbeck (The Red Pony) had children with Leo Tolstoy (Kholstomer) the resulting generation of readers would be so traumatised as to never touch a horse-themed book ever again.
And sorry, but this book is pointless and yucky. Yes, I got the allusions. No, I do not think it needs to be told in this manner....more
This book is what happens, when an author is not just a bit in love with herself, but thoroughly self-indulgent instead. Convoluted, repetitive [image]
This book is what happens, when an author is not just a bit in love with herself, but thoroughly self-indulgent instead. Convoluted, repetitive and horribly cluttered prose, a grimdark setting which turns G.R.R. Martin into a writer of candy-floss fluff. A book which wallows in the alleged grime and horror of 19th century London. I mean, even Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy write rip-roaring humour compared to this.
I need brain bleach now.
It took me less than five pages and I was terminally depressed. I needed a hearty shot of brandy to get out of that mood, while watching Doris Day...
Seriously, this is the sort of writing that I know a couple of my friends adore, but which I consider pointless and pretentious, disrespectful of the actual history, and - well, no way around this - utterly self-indulgent on the author's side. It's an emotional wankfest of angst and h/h.
First you need to read the review cited below to grasp just how many layers of wrong and error-filled this series is when compared to the actual count First you need to read the review cited below to grasp just how many layers of wrong and error-filled this series is when compared to the actual country and history of the era. As with so many similar books where US writers think they can abuse European settings and history, usually believing no one notices their ignorance, people are being offended and rightfully so:
My beef with this book is however a different one. This book is being celebrated as feminist YA with a "kickass", "badass" heroine who is/should be a feminist role model for girls. A heroine who "uses anger constructively".
[image]
None of this is even in the slightest "feminist". It's just bad-tempered, self-indulgent and spoiled gender role reversal, where a lot of negative behaviour and violence are mistaken for "strength".
Negative behaviour and negative emotions cannot be used "constructively". They are, by their very nature, destructive. The only constructive thing you can do with anger is ridding yourself of it.
And a role model?
The first problem of this is that Lada is not actually strong. She just behaves as violently and destructively as men do. That's not strong, that's being toxic and unhinged, and most assuredly not being civilised and strong.
This projected idea of women being strong if they behave the same violent, angry and overbearing way men behave in the US society is harmful instead, because it is a bad role model for ALL youths. Instead boys and men should be taught to reflect more and moderate themselves. The shoe is entirely on the other foot.
And what to me is one of the worst things about this book, there already exists a female contemporary of Vlad Dracul, who is world famous for killing as ruthlessly and occupying a genuine position of power, too. A slight spot of genuine research could have reveiled her: Elizabeth Báthory. This Wikipedia article about her is not too bad.
Of course, this would have necessitated dealing with and contemplating the effect of unchecked violence on those affected by it. Báthory - like Vlad Dracul by the way - was no role model and most assuredly not a nice, wholesome person. However, I contend that recounting the life of a real powerful woman of that era would have proven far more insightful to women today than a Hollywood-style gender reversal story.
As an outsider looking in, for I am contemplating this from across the pond, the toxic masculinity and the extremeties of violence in the American culture are quite outstanding, and not in a positive manner. The toxic gendering emanating these days from the US culture washes across the planet in an unhealthy way and this book epitomises the entire problem.
Negative gendering cannot be remedied by claiming equal rights to negative behaviour. My rejection of toxic masculinity is addressed not just at women and girls, who should be or become wise enough not to engage in such behaviour. It is as emphatically addressed at men and boys, who should be discouraged from exhibiting it either, and learn instead how to better emotionally express themselves, how to solve problems without violence and how to resolve anger in a non-violent manner.
A guy nailing their turbans to the heads of ambassadors with finger long nails just to make a point sure as hell should not be raised on any pedestal, certainly not an allegedly feminist one.
"Women as dynamic characters" is a long, long way from pushing violence, torture, murder and anger at girls as something worth striving for. It shouldn't be pushed at boys either, just to clarify. It is nothing anyone should strive for if we want to achieve some modicum of civilisation as a species at all.
Lastly, and this affords me some quiet amusement, it is very gendered thinking to have "books for girls" and "books for boys". It is equally gendered thinking to gender-swap villains of the past to serve as "role models for girls". You directly buy into gendering by doing the above. To abolish gendering you have to cease thinking in these kinds of categories. And - of course - that doesn't just apply to readers. This just as much applies to writers who need to write genuine female heroines (and of course equally genuine male heroes) whose strengths are not based on our current toxic ideas of what is gender appropriate. Which means doing away with both concepts of gendered behaviour, male and female.
Herein lies the crux of the matter for me. Books like this aren't improving things. They make them worse. ...more
First you need to read the review cited below to grasp just how many layers of wrong and error-filled this series is when compared to the actual countFirst you need to read the review cited below to grasp just how many layers of wrong and error-filled this series is when compared to the actual country and history of the era. As with so many similar books where US writers think they can abuse European settings and history, usually believing no one notices their ignorance, people are being offended and rightfully so:
My beef with this book is however a different one. This book is being celebrated as feminist YA with a "kickass", "badass" heroine who is/should be a feminist role model for girls. A heroine who "uses anger constructively".
[image]
None of this is even in the slightest "feminist". It's just bad-tempered, self-indulgent and spoiled gender role reversal, where a lot of negative behaviour and violence are mistaken for "strength".
Negative behaviour and negative emotions cannot be used "constructively". They are, by their very nature, destructive. The only constructive thing you can do with anger is ridding yourself of it.
And a role model?
The first problem of this is that Lada is not actually strong. She just behaves as violently and destructively as men do. That's not strong, that's being toxic and unhinged, and most assuredly not being civilised and strong.
This projected idea of women being strong if they behave the same violent, angry and overbearing way men behave in the US society is harmful instead, because it is a bad role model for ALL youths. Instead boys and men should be taught to reflect more and moderate themselves. The shoe is entirely on the other foot.
And what to me is one of the worst things about this book, there already exists a female contemporary of Vlad Dracul, who is world famous for killing as ruthlessly and occupying a genuine position of power, too. A slight spot of genuine research could have reveiled her: Elizabeth Báthory. This Wikipedia article about her is not too bad.
Of course, this would have necessitated dealing with and contemplating the effect of unchecked violence on those affected by it. Báthory - like Vlad Dracul by the way - was no role model and most assuredly not a nice, wholesome person. However, I contend that recounting the life of a real powerful woman of that era would have proven far more insightful to women today than a Hollywood-style gender reversal story.
As an outsider looking in, for I am contemplating this from across the pond, the toxic masculinity and the extremeties of violence in the American culture are quite outstanding, and not in a positive manner. The toxic gendering emanating these days from the US culture washes across the planet in an unhealthy way and this book epitomises the entire problem.
Negative gendering cannot be remedied by claiming equal rights to negative behaviour. My rejection of toxic masculinity is addressed not just at women and girls, who should be or become wise enough not to engage in such behaviour. It is as emphatically addressed at men and boys, who should be discouraged from exhibiting it either, and learn instead how to better emotionally express themselves, how to solve problems without violence and how to resolve anger in a non-violent manner.
A guy nailing their turbans to the heads of ambassadors with finger long nails just to make a point sure as hell should not be raised on any pedestal, certainly not an allegedly feminist one.
"Women as dynamic characters" is a long, long way from pushing violence, torture, murder and anger at girls as something worth striving for. It shouldn't be pushed at boys either, just to clarify. It is nothing anyone should strive for if we want to achieve some modicum of civilisation as a species at all.
Lastly, and this affords me some quiet amusement, it is very gendered thinking to have "books for girls" and "books for boys". It is equally gendered thinking to gender-swap villains of the past to serve as "role models for girls". You directly buy into gendering by doing the above. To abolish gendering you have to cease thinking in these kinds of categories. And - of course - that doesn't just apply to readers. This just as much applies to writers who need to write genuine female heroines (and of course equally genuine male heroes) whose strengths are not based on our current toxic ideas of what is gender appropriate. Which means doing away with both concepts of gendered behaviour, male and female.
Herein lies the crux of the matter for me. Books like this aren't improving things. They make them worse....more
First you need to read the review cited below to grasp just how many layers of wrong and error-filled this series is when compared to the actual count First you need to read the review cited below to grasp just how many layers of wrong and error-filled this series is when compared to the actual country and history of the era. As with so many similar books where US writers think they can abuse European settings and history, usually believing no one notices their ignorance, people are being offended and rightfully so:
My beef with this book is however a different one. This book is being celebrated as feminist YA with a "kickass", "badass" heroine who is/should be a feminist role model for girls. A heroine who "uses anger constructively".
[image]
None of this is even in the slightest "feminist". It's just bad-tempered, self-indulgent and spoiled gender role reversal, where a lot of negative behaviour and violence are mistaken for "strength".
Negative behaviour and negative emotions cannot be used "constructively". They are, by their very nature, destructive. The only constructive thing you can do with anger is ridding yourself of it.
And a role model?
The first problem of this is that Lada is not actually strong. She just behaves as violently and destructively as men do. That's not strong, that's being toxic and unhinged, and most assuredly not being civilised and strong.
This projected idea of women being strong if they behave the same violent, angry and overbearing way men behave in the US society is harmful instead, because it is a bad role model for ALL youths. Instead boys and men should be taught to reflect more and moderate themselves. The shoe is entirely on the other foot.
And what to me is one of the worst things about this book, there already exists a female contemporary of Vlad Dracul, who is world famous for killing as ruthlessly and occupying a genuine position of power, too. A slight spot of genuine research could have reveiled her: Elizabeth Báthory. This Wikipedia article about her is not too bad.
Of course, this would have necessitated dealing with and contemplating the effect of unchecked violence on those affected by it. Báthory - like Vlad Dracul by the way - was no role model and most assuredly not a nice, wholesome person. However, I contend that recounting the life of a real powerful woman of that era would have proven far more insightful to women today than a Hollywood-style gender reversal story.
As an outsider looking in, for I am contemplating this from across the pond, the toxic masculinity and the extremeties of violence in the American culture are quite outstanding, and not in a positive manner. The toxic gendering emanating these days from the US culture washes across the planet in an unhealthy way and this book epitomises the entire problem.
Negative gendering cannot be remedied by claiming equal rights to negative behaviour. My rejection of toxic masculinity is addressed not just at women and girls, who should be or become wise enough not to engage in such behaviour. It is as emphatically addressed at men and boys, who should be discouraged from exhibiting it either, and learn instead how to better emotionally express themselves, how to solve problems without violence and how to resolve anger in a non-violent manner.
A guy nailing their turbans to the heads of ambassadors with finger long nails just to make a point sure as hell should not be raised on any pedestal, certainly not an allegedly feminist one.
"Women as dynamic characters" is a long, long way from pushing violence, torture, murder and anger at girls as something worth striving for. It shouldn't be pushed at boys either, just to clarify. It is nothing anyone should strive for if we want to achieve some modicum of civilisation as a species at all.
Lastly, and this affords me some quiet amusement, it is very gendered thinking to have "books for girls" and "books for boys". It is equally gendered thinking to gender-swap villains of the past to serve as "role models for girls". You directly buy into gendering by doing the above. To abolish gendering you have to cease thinking in these kinds of categories. And - of course - that doesn't just apply to readers. This just as much applies to writers who need to write genuine female heroines (and of course equally genuine male heroes) whose strengths are not based on our current toxic ideas of what is gender appropriate. Which means doing away with both concepts of gendered behaviour, male and female.
Herein lies the crux of the matter for me. Books like this aren't improving things. They make them worse. ...more
Steelwhisper
>
Books:
amputation-mutilation
(115)
Loading...
