The Woman Who Would Be Pharaoh by William Klein

Full disclosure – Egypt is not a period I have much interest in, so my knowledge of it is pretty sparse. I doubt I would never have looked into this book outside of the fact that one of my Amazon friends reviewed it and received a bit of a slap from the author who took umbrage with her thoughts on the amount of sex in the novel:

“William Klein says:
If Tara, from Utah, disliked my novel because of an excess of sexuality, I would urge her to avoid Norman Mailer’s “Ancient Evenings.” If she wants to be a custodian of public morals, intent on policing the world of novels for unseemly references to sexuality, that is her business, but it’s not the best way to flesh out the value of a novel.”

Hmmm, wonder what the significance is for Tarah being from Utah and what that has to do with her opinons (oh I get it). I for one appreciate a reviewer letting me know if the sexual content of a book is OTT or not – all the better to make an informed reading decision. Although I forgot all about it until lo and behold a *review* shows up on Goodreads that instead of reviewing the book attacks some unnamed reviewer:

 

“They really aren’t as bad as she makes them out to be and one wonders what her agenda is. I mean, she has taken a lot of time to write all of her one star reviews.”

Sooo, at this point in time I’m fired up enough to see for myself and since the library (fools they are) had purchased a few copies I placed my hold. Big mistake. Huge. I made it to page 110 and finally had to give up. Yes the sex was bad – frankly I was afraid there was a ménage à trois coming up with the monkey but thankfully that didn’t happen. Whew!

What “done me in” was the most unbelievably bad drivel I have ever come across. Words can’t describe the simplistic silly plot that doesn’t even make sense – there is just no story or character continuity whatsoever. If it weren’t for the sex I’d recommend this for a five year old. On second thought, perhaps not.

As far as I was able to gather, the story is about Princess Ankhesenpaaten who at fifteen is set to marry nine-year-old Pharaoh to be Tutankhamun. I believe eventually when she is widowed there is a big power struggle and lots of nasty deeds and family treachery. In the first pages, The Princess is more interested in men, sex and drinking at the local tavern. She escapes from the Royal Palace and meets up with the young set (I am not kidding) and heads for the local tavern and gets royally soused and does the hurdy gurdy in front of everyone (no, I am not kidding) and incites the men to mad lust. Then there’s some kind of attempt on her life and our intrepid hero saves her and voila (!) they end up at some lake or river and do the nasty and presto-chango they’re madly in love and our snotty child abusing heroine (more on that shortly) is the sweetest thing since honey on bread. And I’ll buy that bridge in Brooklyn…..

As if bad writing and storyline wasn’t enough to send the book flying the copulating dwarfs most certainly did – let alone what our Royal Princess did to young Tut (remember now he’s just nine) when she and her handmaidens attacked him in the bedroom and raised his night shirt (Pages 31 and 32),

‘Ankhesenpaaten pulled his covering hands apart, pointed to his little peeper and filled the room with her laughter. “It looks like a toad! A dead toad!”‘

Ankhesenpaaten took hold of his peeper. She held it between her thumb and forefinger as though it was something fished from the Nile. She gave it several quick jerks. “Little toady goes Peep! Peep! Peep!”‘

 

And this is our MC who we’re supposed to care about? You remember the author’s comment I quoted earlier about “unseemly references to sexuality”? Ye gods, if that’s not unseemly I don’t know what is. Fear not, it gets worse for we’re soon introduced to her Aunt’s (auntie she calls her) pet dwarfs Pere and Renehen (pages 81 and 82):

‘His fingernails were allowed to grow long and curved so that his hands resembled the claws of a bird of prey. His cock hung between his legs like a large dark desiccated gourd….. The dwarfs faced each other and gyrated slowly…. The object of interest was the dangling gourd between Pera’s legs…..Menkhara stared at Pera’s extraordinary organ…. The room shook with roars of approval as Renehen amused the guests with one of her favorite tricks called the Kingfisher. It consisted of a running leap onto Pera’s huge scimitar cock, a performance that if improperly executed, could main one or both of the participants.’

Had enough yet? I sure have. My only question is who are those six people giving it glowing five star reviews on Amazon? We’ll probably never know but five of the six have only written one review ever and the last has written three. Get it from the library if you must, I’m glad I did. I’ll now sign off so I can wash my brain out thoroughly with soap and water.

Read Full Post »

The Conqueror by Kris Kennedy

Judging by the cover, I knew it was a fluffy romance going in to it but I did see a good review on Dear Author so I decided to take the plunge. It started off well enough, set towards the end of England’s Civil War between Stephen and Maude, our heroine the daughter of a recently deceased Earl on the run from the Evil Baron who wants to force her into wedlock meets up with Tall Dark and Handsome Hero who saves her from the baddies in the nick of time and *sigh* true love begins. Pretty much your same old same old fluffy romance plot, some nice banter at first between them and despite some glaring discrepancies I thought I’d do OK with it all.

Then in the midst of the Dark and Stormy Night that went on and on and on as our heroine (hair flowing freely and unattended by any ladies whatsoever) escapes from the Evil Baron’s clutches by saddling a warhorse all by herself and slipping out of London undetected (!!) until she’s thrown from her horse in the middle of nowhere surrounded by the Evil Baron’s Evil Knights – but never fear Studly Hero to the rescue of our damsel in distress. Now remember all these events take place during a long October evening (I know the nights are longer that time of year but still!) – hero takes lady to some safe house and he rides to a castle to conspire against King Stephen.

Of course our heroine can’t stay put and wet and bedraggled she gets herself a horse and rides out and ends up at the same castle our hero is at. She’s greeted by the owner, no wife or other woman in sight and is taken to a bedroom by the male owner – no woman of the household to escort this earl’s daughter. No indeedy. Of course our hero accidentally runs into her, they suck face and then escape and he takes her to an old Saxon stronghold (gad, there’s a lot of castles within horse-ride range, aren’t there?), where he meets up with his cronies working to support Henry’s bid to bump Stephen off the throne.

Whew, tired yet? Maybe they had horse freeways back then for speedy night travellers. Maybe it was the medieval ‘burbs’ and all those places were right around the corner from each other. Oh hell, it’s only a romance so I’m not supposed to nitpick and I determined to slog through it all until…

…..the prose turned the most awful shade of purple as the two lovers shared the bed starting at page #133,

“He slid a wicked hand under her waist and lifted her hips into his. Hot, sizzling spurts of fire burgeoned in her womb. More. She wanted more.”

Onto page #134,

“He slid his hands over her hips, down to her trembling thighs. Pushing them ever so slightly apart, he slid his fingers up her inner thigh, until he hovered against the pink folds dripping with slippery juices.”

Gag me. Onward,

“His confident fingers searched….”

Confident fingers. OK….

Page #263 and he’s backed her up against a wall in the castle, lifted her hips up and we have this,

“Leaning forward, he ran his tongue along the hot, wet seam of her womanhood……..Dizzy with victory he slid his hand up and glided gently along the hot, pink seam, plied back her folds and licked again…….She erupted in a howl of such pleasure he almost spilled himself……He spread her apart further with his fingers and nuzzled deeper into the hot slippery cave of pulsing pink flesh…..She flung her head back so hard it hit the wall, her fingers restlessly tugging in his hair, a whimpering-wet goddess of passion.”

“She flung her head back so hard it hit the wall”. Heh, once again we have a whole new definition of wall banger, which is what I hereby christen this book as I throw it across the room. If all you’re looking for in your historical romance is a prettified wall paper setting book and plenty of over the top sex then this book might suit, but if you want a bit more substance in your romance I’d search elsewhere.

Read Full Post »

Calling all book bloggers (and readers)!

Read a corker lately? Want to save the rest of us from experiencing the actual physical pain you felt whilst reading it?

Well now you can and without worry of an author or publisher burning down your house.

Simply write your review (be sure to include excerpts and specific examples!), email it to us (ShelfofShame@gmail.com) and we will post your review anonymously.

Don’t be afraid…..Cut loose and tell us what you really think!

Read Full Post »

Still looking for a good historical romance…

….and that’s because I did not find it here. I have to fess up, when I read Harriet’s review wherein she gave it five stars and called it a “profound historical romance” along with the comment “never slows as William feels like he has three (his natural hardened sword) and often four (his metallic sword) legs throughout much of the plot”, I just had to go and see for myself (I do love it when Harriet gets frisky and tries to slide something by the Ammy censors).

Siobhan Fraser (an Irish name for a Scottish lass, how odd) discovers that her father has been kidnapped by the evil Pierre de la Roche who covets the hidden treasure of the Knights Templar, including the Spear of Destiny – whoever controls the spear can rule the world (raising your eyebrows in disbelief yet?). Coming to her rescue is Templar Knight Sir William Keith as the two find the hidden map to the treasure and the adventure begins. *Yawn*

I really didn’t have high expectations going into this, but I certainly didn’t expect to find such a jumbled mess of cartoon cut-out characters, including an evil baddie in the mold of Snidely Whiplash – I kept waiting for him to twirl his mustache (sorry, I couldn’t resist).

Never fear, it gets worse. Our plucky heroine is able to travel anywhere and everywhere ALONE with our hero with nary an eyebrow raised by anyone, she gets a quick lesson in swordplay and she’s able to swing the broadsword like a man, leap tall buildings with a single bound…..

Actually that’s really our hero who just like Superman can outfight any evil baddie who crosses his path, including fighting his way through forty (yes 40) armed men with nary a scratch – let alone that scene where they’re both hanging by a thread above a spike filled dungeon. Did they have spike filled dungeons in the 14C?

But to top it all off is some of the most insipid dialog I’ve come across in a while,

“We are one.”

“I never imagined it could feel so good”

“I’ve never felt like this before”

Just the kind of talk I look for to liven up a sex scene. Not. Frankly the sex scenes were pretty crappy for your standard bodice ripper romance. No chemistry there. In the end, it’s just a big fluffy piece of preposterous nonsense – imagine the Saturday morning cartoons set to a book. But never fear – there’s more coming soon as this appears to be the first in a series. I don’t know about anyone else, but I’ll pass. Get it from the library if you must, I’m glad I did.

Read Full Post »

Queen of Love by Alan Savage

Queen of Love picks up where Eleanor of Aquitaine left off. Eleanor is now married to Henry II and Queen of England and she starts dropping children left and right – including the future Richard I and the infamous John Lackland, and continues as their now grown sons revolt against their father, Richard’s crusade and marriage to Berengeria, and into her old age and John’s rule and the murder of his nephew Arthur.

I found the first person narrative as an aging Eleanor reflects back her life really bogged this book down – there is just too much telling and not showing. Although when Savage does have Eleanor in the thick of things that *showing* is downright hilarious . From seducing her husband’s mistress Rosamund Clifford in the bath,

“…as she moved towards the steaming tub, pushing up her sleeve, added, “Not with your hand, girl. With your ass.'”

“My hand coursed up her thigh and over her left buttock, then moved up to her shoulder………I brought my hand out of her hair and back to her shoulder, then slid it in front, down to her breast, to cup it and hold it, and gently pinch the nipple.”

“…the fact that we had shared a bath, because after she had soaped me I had her in the tub on top of me, and as the water had flowed out our mutual desires had flowed in….”

To her relationship with a young William Marshal (oh my that wardrobe error),

“…and released the cord holding his hose. This promptly slipped about his ankles. Or certainly tried to do this. But it was impeded, and so, with dainty fingers, I helped it on its way…….. And I realised that the entire business would have to be in my hands. Well, it was, most literally.”

Then there’s her relationship with Blondel the lute player (I mean come on, she’s over 50 already and still getting it), although she did have to share him with her son Richard (well, maybe sharing is the wrong term – Richard picked up after mom was done).

But the hands down laugh out loud moment was Eleanor giving sex-ed lessons to her future daughter-in-law Berengeria. Knowing Richard’s taste for men, she was very very careful to give her a blow by blow of anything she could do to encourage him along the path to marital harmony, as well as any orifice that one might use to encourage his interest in one of the female persuasion. I’ll spare you those details -you don’t want to know, trust me. Although we do have Eleanor discussing the marriage with her long-time maid and friend,

“But this girl is our last hope, she must be to Richard what Richard wants and requires.”

“She doesn’t have a penis, your Grace.”

 

Priceless.

As in the first book, Eleanor does it with just about everyone but the Pope and Thomas Becket (although for a while I was afraid that was going to happen). But it’s not just Eleanor who gets to play around – her sons Richard and Geoffrey both get to diddle with the French King. Read these two books for the laughs only and not for the history.

Read Full Post »

Eleanor of Aquitaine by Alan Savage

Despite a cover that has all the appearances of a serious historical novel, well all I can say is don’t judge a book by it’s cover . This is the first of two books Savage has written on the life of Eleanor of Aquitaine, and is written in the first person as an older Eleanor reflects back on her life. Just a brief run down for those not familiar with her life – heiress to the Duchy of Aquitaine, she is married to the very pious King Louis of France (he was the second son and was intended for the church until the elder brother died), they go on a disastrous crusade and after bearing only two daughters Louis has the marriage annulled and she goes on to marry the future Henry II of England, where this book ends.

Although according to the book jacket this is part of a “colourful romantic series”, I’ve got to tell you – enter at your own risk. Eleanor does it with just about everybody except for the Pope, Abbe Suger, the eunuch and a monk or two, starting from the age of twelve (!!) when her governess leads her into the arts of pleasure:

“Albina had been appointed my governess following Mama’s death…….Albina had never married, but she was definitely experienced. She it was who now undertook to instruct me in the business of being a woman and the duties of a wife. Well, I can’t say I much cared for the second half of her schooling…….and proceeded to tell me the facts of life. Well! My first reaction was consternation, that anyone, and particularly any man, should be allowed – and apparently encouraged – to make as free with my body as Albina indicated and was demonstrating.”

“As to the ways of myself or my maidservants, I was not in the least curious. Albina had taught me that our desires were mutual – in fact they were happy to tell me theirs, and their various means of satisfying them, in hopes of pleasing me – but however often we romped together our conversation always returned to the same subject, that of male codpieces and what might lie beneath them and what use may be made of such a remarkable apprutenance. As may be imagined, those of my attendants who actually claimed to possess personal acquaintance with such entrancing objects were in great demand, even if I was always uncertain as to whether they should be whipped for lying or wantonness.”

And then there’s the escapade with a young page (mind you, she’s still 12/13 years old) that leaves a telling stain on her skirt and raises eyebrows in the laundry (think Monica Lewinski):

“I will let you put your hand beneath my gown if you will untie your codpiece.”…… “he slipped his hand up my calf, carressed my knee, and moved it higher to my thigh…….I allowed Alfred full freedom, even to reach the silky down he was seeking…….he was full to bursting……”

Oh but we’re not done yet, let’s not forget the female bath attendants at Constantinople:

“I would be lying were I to claim that I did not feel a pang, several pangs, of alarm, when these girls began soaping my breasts and buttocks, sending their hands between my legs to arouse the most intense emotions. But I recalled the old saying that when in Rome…and Constantinople was far grander than Rome.”

Her uncle Raymond (ya’ll remember Deep Throat?):

“…my uncle knelt on the bed beside my shoulders, threw his other leg across me, and kneeling astride my breasts, allowed his weapon, huge and poised, to caress my face”

I’ll spare you the rest. Whilst on crusade she encounters the twelve year old Saladin:

“Saladin had me on my knees like the veriest bitch. Indeed, had he commanded me, I would have barked. Perhaps I did.”

Woof woof. On to Geoffrey of Anjou (oh my).

“Soon enough he was banging away again. Fortunately twice in rapid succession was sufficient even for the Angevin, at least in the short run….”

Although the hands down laugh out loud moments were at the end where she takes up with Henry’s mother the formidable Empress Matilda. Priceless.

Outside of the OTT sex scenes the rest of the novel is rather dry and suffers badly from the use of the first person narrative. Eleanor comes across as quite vain and full of herself and an entirely unsympathetic character. Read this one for the laughs and not for the history. I do have a copy of the second book, Queen of Love and I am curious to see what Savage does with the rest of Eleanor’s life. Wonder what she does with the Lionheart? William Marshal? Rosamund Clifford? Stay tuned….

Read Full Post »

Storm Cycle by Iris Johansen and Roy Johansen

Unlikeable characters + Unbelievable circumstances + Insipid writing = Storm Cycle

Another Vine choice, this one seemed interesting as a high-tech thriller based in Egyptian mythology.

Rachel Kirby is desperately trying to find a cure for her ailing sister using a computer called Jonesy. But not only is someone–John Tavak–siphoning off some of the computer’s processing power but someone is out to kill her. Furthermore, John Tavak in Egypt needs her help. Together, they search the ancient history, hoping that Peseshet may give them the key to save Rachel’s sister’s life…and their own.

I Liked:

I enjoyed seeing a real life computer concept (combining the unused processing power of normal computers) in a fictional setting. I know that this is used by SETI (our home computer even ran the program for many years) and I think it is an incredibly neglected concept in the fictional realm.

Also, Egyptian history has always been intriguing. Whether it’s their ages old architecture still standing, their hieroglyphics or some other inexplicable draw, the Egyptians have always held an appeal.

I appreciated the affection for Rachel and her sister, Allie, which reminds me a lot of the relationship I have with my own sister.

Also, the very end was kinda exciting. Probably the most exciting in the book.

I Did Not Like:

I have not violently hated a book this passionately since probably Batman: Fear Itself or more likely, Deck the Halls. I wanted to throw this book so hard against the wall no less than half a dozen times…within the first 50 pages. Why? Let me expand…

1. Rachel Kirby. In the beginning, I liked her (despite her rather glowing physical description: petite, delicate, face “glowing with energy and life”). But then, she takes a one way nose dive into Mary Sue territory when she gets a PhD in Computer Science (a notoriously challenging degree) at the ripe age of 15 and a SECOND doctorate in Medicine when she is 20 (page 18). Yes, she somehow whipped through twelve years of elementary, middle, and high school and 12+ years of college in 15 years of her life. As if this in and of itself didn’t make her a Mary Sue, then the fact that every time anyone tries to cross her, she treats him or her extremely rudely (even the investigator who is trying to find her killer starting on page 11) and gets away with it (which I could understand maybe occasionally, but all the time and with each person?). Despite her poor behavior, she has flocks of fans, is highly respected even by her enemies, and pushes around the NSA like a doggie chew toy. Right. Mary Sue anyone?

2. John Tavak. He’s the Indiana Jones of the book and, proving that the authors think the readers are stupid, is spelled out as such on page 307. Supposedly, he is “mocking, unscrupulous, reckless, and completely self-absorbed…the confidence and intelligence that were present in his every move” (page 99) yet still he is able to charm everyone, including and especially Rachel! Tavak can steal, cheat, spy, invade privacy, kill, and more and it’s not bad, but when the “bad guys” do it, it is? What kind of shady morality is this? Not to mention, he is described as so smart that his IQ couldn’t be measured (page 75). Uh, hello, did no one take a brief jaunt to Wikipedia and look up the IQ test? Number one, there is no “maximum limit” for the IQ. Furthermore, since when did a high IQ mean that a person was intelligent? To prove he’s smart, he starts Harvard classes at 10! What is it with this authors and these super smart babies? Has no one heard of a normal childhood? Wouldn’t they be messed up from never being children? The last nail in the coffin of this Gary Stu is that, while he “was not a handsome man” (page 79), he is described as having “dark hair ruffled by the wind”, looking “younger than thirty-eight” with a “tall, (insert other descriptions like “deeply tanned” here) muscular body [that] possessed a sort of rough elegance”, having a “high impact” presence whose “(sometimes described as “electric”–man, it must suck, having an electrical current running through your eyes) blue eyes glitter[ing] with…vitality and intelligence…[that] was almost mesmerizing”. This flowery description is enough to make me gag the first time around (particularly since he’s not supposed to be attractive). But being constantly repeated?

3. Other characters are equally frustrating. Ben, Tavak’s friend, is insulted at every opportunity, down to the fact that Tavak let his drag along only to make Ben feel needed (aw, thanks guys!). Allie, Rachel’s sister, is supposedly so sick…but how does she get Russian customs to let her in? Hal Demanski, the casino owner that Rachel Kirby cheats in a boring theft of Ocean’s Eleven, would be great were it not for his over-the-top “Galahad” romance with Allie (lasting all of a few hours) and being described constantly as having “undeniable wit and intelligence” (which is jammed so far down our throats, we are gagging; see page 247 for yet another clunker mention). Nuri and the Russian are heavily stereotyped. Norton has the bite of a neutered dog. Sorens and Dawson I easily interchanged, not even sure who was saying what most of the time (not that I ultimately ended up caring). Emily is almost exactly like Rachel, only older and drunker. Simon and Val have no personalities other than to worship and lick Rachel’s feet (oh, and Val is also super hot too). The detectives are hideously stereotyped, particularly the computer nerd who would give his front teeth to see his goddess…yes, Rachel Kirby! I didn’t even bother to remember their names. The college kid who helps the detective is so hideously portrayed as a weed head, it makes me sick. And this is only a spattering! Where are the Tums?

4. The plot. Firstly, sending an email that is nearly the length of a novel to a woman on the other side of the world while stuck in the middle of a tomb with a man about to die (page 47)? Talk about taking a HUGE risk! Just the other day, my mother, who lives all of 17 miles away from me, sent me an email at 10am and I didn’t get until 12am! So, I hope that these guys have a better connection. Next, while I can believe much of the super-computer thing (using to find cures, searching for archaeological finds, and even decrypting to an extent) but using the computer to analyze data to find Peseshet’s tomb in the first place? This really smart of making Jonsey (dumb name anyway) a Dues ex Machina. Not to mention, that in an obvious attempt to be Indiana Jones, National Treasure, Ocean’s Eleven, CSI, the plot skips and belches all over the world, spending a page or two detailing the most important parts in each locale, e.g. finding the clues, forcing their information from their informants an,d gabbing about how Rachel and John feel about each other, and then whipping to the next location. I have never felt so jolted around in my life. It was as if the authors had ADD.

5. The romance. John and Rachel’s romance is so forced, so over the top, I wanted to wretch. The authors force John Tavak down our throats, hoping we will forget that he has killed a man and committed arson, theft, breaking/entering, and is a rude, arrogant, self-centered thrill seeker (which is completely inconsistent with how he really acts) and will want to see him hook up with Rachel Kirby (who at least is consistent in her character!), with whom he has almost no chemistry. Then Allie and Hal’s romance is strange. She is 32, and he is late forties. That right there is strange (not many will abide an almost 20 year age difference). From his over the top gentlemanly speech about being her Galahad to his buying a piece of her artwork, this relationship made me want to throw the book through a closed window.

6. This scene: “She was suddenly acutely aware of everything about him. The smell of a spicy aftershave, his long fingers on the glass holding the drink, the strength of his shoulders, the tightness of his stomach and buttocks.” Uh, HELLO? “Buttocks”? EW! Too much information! “The desire to reach out and touch him…” Depeche Mode ought to try to sue for the use of these words. “…was dizzying in intensity. What was happening to her? Stupid, she knew what was happening. Sex.” WTF? Sex was happening to her? How does sex happen to a person? Is something happening in this scene that no one is telling me? I so do not understand that wild comment in the slightest.

7. Travel to other countries, many of which are hostile, is way too easy. And where does all this money come from? Company card? If so, tsk, tsk.

8. The villains are straight from a child’s book, stupid, dorky, and blurting their simplistic plans to any and all who are willing to listen. Also, a big red herring appears, which was annoying rather than clever.

9. Repetition. Need to describe someone? All else fails use the words “vitality”, “intelligence” or “energy” or some derivative of the above. In fact, those words (or their forms) occur so frequently in the book, it would make a hell of a drinking game. Also, at least once a chapter, Rachel has to mention how she doesn’t trust Tavak, yet still believes him (one example on page 99 and another on 275). I mean, come on, get over this already! Either trust the guy or don’t but don’t spend half the book waffling.

10. Why the hell is it okay to interrupt Emily’s important project but to interrupt Rachel’s important project is a sin? Come on, even if Rachel found a cure for her sister’s ailment, it would be years before it could be used!

11. The conclusion was a little too over the top in its optimism.

Dialogue/Sexual Situations/Violence:

Random spouting of profanities (h***, d***, b****, one instance of the F-bomb, etc.).
Rachel caves and sleeps with John. No details are shown other than Rachel cuddling with John after having sex (Gag!) and missing him when he disappears in the morning (Double gag!)

Someone attempts to kill Rachel Kirby and John Tavak several times. A man is found dead in the back of a vehicle. The end is particularly violent, as several men die brutally.

Overall:

A much better and shorter book would have been thus: The shooter is successful in killing Rachel Kirby. Harsh? Oh, yeah, but this book was harsh on the mind. It was like salt in a wound, like sand in your underwear, like eating rotten eggs. The torment that I went through just to read this book (and to finish!) was so great, I should get an award for it!

The characters are horrible and unbelievable, changing every two seconds to suit the authors’ purpose. The plot is stupid and jerky, hopping from one end of the globe to the other in an attempt to show a huge, epic, thriling adventure. Then the romance…Lord have mercy, if I ever have to read about firm buttocks again and sex “happening”, I think I will put myself out of my misery.

And thus a great concept is violently murdered. The pure atrocity of the book was so much, I could only read like 5 pages at a time, otherwise I would have thrown the book at the nearest wall and screamed in pain and agony. In fact, at the end, I could no longer contain myself (I was desperate to finish the dreck before I threw in the towel), I was literally yelling at the book. I wouldn’t wish this book on my worst enemy. If I could, I would go 0 stars, but alas, I can only do 1.

Read Full Post »

Tears of Pearl by Tasha Alexander

 

I found myself repeatedly sighing out loud and rolling my eyes at the ridiculous, unlikely, unbelievable and melodramatic events and dialogue throughout this mediocre murder mystery.

I know Tasha Alexander can do better. She created wonderful characters in Lady Emily and Colin Hargreaves in ‘And Only to Deceive’ and she continued to develop their relationship in ‘A Poisoned Season’. I thought both books were wonderful and I would recommend either of them to any one who enjoys good historical fiction or likes mysteries.

Unfortunately ‘Tears of Pearl’ has little or no character development, a poor mystery at it’s core, unrealistic dialogue and a completely unbelievable string of events. There is an overwhelming amount of trembling and tingling being described but sadly there wasn’t any chemistry between the characters. The constant double entendres exchanged between Emily and Colin seemed forced and far too contemporary.

The reader does learn some new things about Lady Emily’s youth but they feel as if they are facts given to fill in the blanks, some of which were repeated a bit too often for my tastes. Alexander also includes letters in the book that add nothing to the story. She did this with ‘Fatal Waltz’ as well.

The only thing I liked about this book was when Lady Emily recalled events that happened in the first two books.

I thought the mystery was lack-luster the events ridiculous and the author turned what had been very likable characters into caricatures. This, the double entendres and unbelievable dialogue has made me swear off any more Tasha Alexander novels until she returns to the quality of writing that she produced in her first two novels.

Ms. Alexander please stop resting on your laurels and get back to work writing something you can be proud of.

I never would have finished this if I hadn’t selected it through the Vine program and been obligated to review it. Had I paid for this book I would have been very angry to have wasted my money on this.

I would recommend some similar but very well done historical mysteries; Deanna Raybourn’s ‘Silent’ series and Kate Ross’ ‘Julian Kestral’ mysteries. And Ashley Gardner has a nice series set in a little bit earlier time period, the ‘Gabriel Lacy’ series.

*S*P*O*I*L*E*R*S
And I will now be specific about some of the things that had me rolling my eyes.

Emily and Colin listen to Sir Richard tell about how his daughter, Ceyden, was abducted as a child and how he has never stopped looking for her. Then *bam* there she is.

Ceyden was abducted at the age of three yet her father instantly recognizes her as a grown woman.

And in case the reader had any doubt about her father’s ability to identify her, the author has given Ceyden a unique tattoo so her identity can be confirmed.

Ceyden was abducted and later sold into the harem by some one other than her abductor, but she somehow still maintains her birth name.

Sir Richard has supposedly searched the world over to find his missing daughter yet she uses her birth name. Perhaps if he had just searched the world over looking for people named Ceyden we would have been spared this story.

There were some interesting ways that people died; a child burned to death playing with matches, a son commits suicide by cutting himself with scissors.

The anachronistic use of words like crash and stalking.

Emily suggest that Benjamin is having an affair with his sister, who is still called Ceyden. Perhaps he might have noticed the family resemblance AND her name before he fell in love with her?

Emily is being comforted in the mosque by complete strangers while her husband is a short walk away.

Emily cries at will in order to get the caretaker at Nuruosmaniye to leave.

Margaret “crashes” Emily and Colin’s honeymoon.

Colin catches Sir Richard as he falls at the reception at the British Embassy.

When Emily tells Roxelana that she has a plan to help her escape Roxelana falls to the floor with joyful prayers even though we know that someone is always listening and often watching the women. Perhaps they might have noticed Roxelana’s happiness and wondered what the cause was?

Emily tells Roxelana that she doesn’t believe that she has been completely honest with her but that she will help her escape the harem anyway.

Emily gives no thought to how Roxelana will survive in the world after she escapes.

The bad guy tells Emily where to meet him and only because she has read so extensively about the area does she know about the location.

Emily and Roxelana are trapped with the bad guy in the dark
Luckily Emily still has a candle and matches in her reticule.
Luckily the bad guy is afraid of the dark.
Luckily the door keeping them trapped with the bad guy has just the type of latch that Emily knows how to open from the inside.

Pleeeeze…

Okay, I think that might be more than enough.

Read Full Post »

Eleventh Hour, by Catherine Coulter

 

The only thing holding this together is the glue it’s bound with!

My lameness continues as I pick up yet another book from Dr. Shephard’s office bookshelf (why a book like this is on his office bookshelf I have no idea). After that, I saw all the bad reviews, but determined to plow ahead anyway. Maybe it would be different? *fingers crossed*

Plot:

Father Michael Joseph is shot in the head while in a confessional. His identical twin brother, FBI agent Dane Carver, travels to San Francisco to determine who killed him and why. His answers are partially hidden in the only witness, a young homeless woman who calls herself Nick Jones. As they discover that the mysteries surround a new television series, Dane discovers that Nick isn’t who she says she is.

Good:

I’ll admit that the first 60 or so pages had me tight. The crisp detailed writing drew me in as Father Michael Joseph was killed and his brother came to uncover the truth. And the action scene at the end (well, pretty much the only one in this snoozer)–that was pretty intense too.

Speaking of Father Michael Joseph, I really liked this guy, although you only see him for about 10 pages. I was really upset to see him die and half-heartedly wished that the author could have delved more into his point of view. Also, I can totally sympathize with Dane Carver’s predicament. I happen to be very fond of my sister in the same way he is with his brother. I can completely understand how upset and distraught he is when he discovers his brother is dead.

Lastly, I was amused and impressed when Savich interviewed Milton McGuffey. This was well-written and well played out by the characters.

Bad:

Oh, dear, where do I begin? There are about a million things wrong in this book but I will try to condense it from its original four page format.

The first major problem (at least 50%) is Nick Jones. The book was really good until she walks into the police station and faints at seeing Dane (“Is this a Harlequin romance or a thriller?”). Then when talking to Delion and Dane, she says, “He was holding a big, ugly gun in his hand” (“Huh? Is she a six year old?” I ask, as I wipe tears of laughter from my face). We discover that this is actually a highly educated medieval history professor who happens to be one of the most overdramatic women in the history of mankind (fainting, gagging, gasping, clutching her stomach, dropping hair dryers, crying her eyes out) and who says the stupidest things pretty much all the time (Is this woman a retard?).

And then there’s her attachment to Father Michael Joseph. She acts like she’s known him years, not weeks. I know that if I were Nick, I would most definitely be disturbed, but not nearly as freaked out and weepy as she is over his death. She isn’t his sister after all.

Next, little Ms. Mary Sue then proceeds to be involved in almost the entire investigation. I could understand some of her tagging along with the SFPD and FBI agents as she is an eye witness, but I can’t understand why they continually include her in on their discussions, drag her along to interviews with other suspects (which, I would think, would only heightens her chances of being killed), and allow her to aid in interviewing the suspects. This woman is a history major; let’s stop pretending that she is an investigator, please.

When Nick isn’t playing an investigator, she’s throwing a hissy-fit about people asking her questions. I mean, why should the FBI ask her something that she doesn’t want to answer? They should be sensitive of her feelings–even if she is the primary witness to a crime (and no one questions Nick’s story one bit). Not.

At this point, it becomes clear that Nick Jones’s purpose is not to make sense but to fall in love with Dane Carver, a man whose pocketbook is definitely larger than his brain as he has no qualms about continually shelling out money for clothes, makeup and beauty supplies for Ms Jones, who has tried to run away no less than twice and has lied more times than she has strands of hair. I mean, that is exactly what I would do. Give my entire life’s savings to a woman who is always running away. Not.

And these two lovebirds have the chemistry of rotting leaves. Coulter cops out of developing real chemistry by throwing two people together in the same hotel, shoveling crappy dialogue in their mouths, writing them making love in the middle of an expository scene, and having them giggling about getting married after knowing each other all of one week. It’s amazing how Nick quickly gets over her fiancé (whom she has know for three years–it’s crazy how easily she blames him with wanting to kill her) with almost no regrets.
The next highest portion of problems (~30%) is just plain poor writing. After reading this book, I wondered how this woman ever got published. She uses absolutely no transitions, so you have no idea if time is passing or if it isn’t, if a character has entered the room, or if the scene has changed. Need examples? Here are a few (these are only a small sampling):

* Page 92: Paragraph 1: Dane is leaving a viewing of a TV episode because he couldn’t bear it anymore; paragraph 2, Delion suddenly pops out and brings him up to date.

* Pages 118 – 119: Watch how Sherlock and Delion suddenly appear after Savich downs the man who shoots Nick. The only clue that they follow after Dane and co.? They start spouting dialogue.

* Pages 170 – 175: In the hotel room, Dane and Nick leave to eat, and she picks up her coat but not one word is spent on how they walk to the car. Suddenly (page 174), they enter the Grand Am that must have appeared in the hotel room.

How hard would it have been to write “a few minutes passed”? How difficult was it to describe two people walking to a car or to say “Sherlock rushed towards Savich, Delion close behind”?

The prose is not the only lacking component. Coulter cannot write conceivable dialogue. Some of the things characters talk about (primarily during interviews): how expensive Delion’s shoes are (page 54), how great Savich is at tackling a man who tried to kill Nick (page 119), Sherlock’s irrelevant comments about pictures of her son (page 230), Nick’s fabulous “big, ugly gun” comment (page 41), getting laid (pages 147 – 152), or how “in love” Dane and Nick are (page 300). Then, the investigators never ask the important questions (choosing instead to ask subjects “Do you want to see pictures of my son?”) and jump to conveniently correct conclusions without a shred of evidence (something that no real-world professional would be able to justify). In fact, most of the dialogue (especially Sherlock’s) comes off as sounding about as intelligent as a seven year old. Although she’s only a medieval history professor, Nick sometimes asks the best questions (no wonder these Keystone cops have her tag along!).

Lastly, Coulter throws character viewpoints higgledy piggledy throughout the book with no chapter or section break, making it difficult to tell who is thinking what.

The last major component (~20%) is devoted to bad characters/plot. As for characters, they don’t get much better than Nick–they are, at best, one dimensional and defined by one or maybe two words. Sherlock doesn’t want anything more than to show pictures of her child. Savich wants to get laid with his wife. Flynn loves basketball, and everything he does revolves around this \. Belinda’s body is so gorgeous the men–including the married ones–ogle her. Dane is moody over his brother’s death. A bodyguard is described as not ever talking yet talks in the very next sentence (page 101). And the description of a serial killer–laughable.

The plot, a very important aspect to a normal thriller, is just a blended concoction of random events. I can just hear Coulter’s thought process: Oh, I gotta find a place for this motorcycle attack–let’s put it after Nick’s second attempt at running away. How are my readers going to find out about Nick’s past? Oh, here’s a good empty spot for a sudden flashback. There’s not enough romance between Dane and Nick–let’s make Nick concerned about Dane now that he is injured. Already did that? Oh, let’s have them make love! Who cares if it makes no sense in the story, it’ll be cool. There is little action, little suspense here, just a bunch of talking. And the ending–strange. I won’t go too far (in case you read this junk), but I thought the main story was about the Father’s death–so why does that mystery end 40 pages before the book is over? The only thing holding this together is the glue that it was bound with.

Dialogue/Sexual Situations/Violence:

S***, d***, h***, ba****d and a spattering of our favorite F-word are not uncommon. Sexual situations include mentioning how sexually active some of the suspects are, a woman wearing a bikini that turns men on, an uncomfortable Dane and Nick lovemaking scene, and recounting Savich and Sherlock’s sex life. Violence includes a man being garroted, Father Michael Joseph’s death, an almost hit-and-run, an agent being shot, a suicide, a serial killer, and some struggles between unarmed combatants (yep, you guessed it: Nick and Dane).

Overall:

This book made me so aggravated, I wanted to write more. However, if I did, my review would be longer than Coulter’s book. How does this woman get published? She writes worse than my sister, who is just now in her first college writing class.
One reader said the problem was Coulter tried to make this a mystery and a romance. I agree. Coulter tries both in here and comes up with a rancid mix of no thrills (Why is this called “Eleventh Hour” if there is no race to find anything?) and a romance consisting of a couple who make Anakin and Padme in Star Wars – Episode II, Attack of the Clones (Widescreen Edition) look like they were the next Romeo and Juliet.
I sincerely doubt that I will ever read another Catherine Coulter or if I do, it will be a very long time from now. Skinny Dip may have been obscene, but at least it had my attention the entire time. This book is going directly to the used bookstore (guess I’ll be more careful before I pick something off Dr. Jack Shephard’s bookshelf).

Read Full Post »

Deck the Halls by Mary Higgins Clark and Carol Higgins Clark

   

The real mystery is: Who wrote this book?

I have enjoyed Mary Higgins Clark’s other books and with Christmas just around the corner, this seemed to be a good pick.

Plot:

Regan Reilly, a private investigator in California, is the daughter of funeral director, Luke Reilly, and famous mystery writer, Nora Reilly. Alvirah Meehan, an amateur detective, was a former cleaning lady and a winner of the lottery. When someone looking for 1 million dollars decides to kidnap Luke and his chauffeur, Rosita, these two women must brace the impending windstorm and rescue them–before the boat they are kept on sinks.

Good:

Lacking in more quantities than I have hair follicles (and people are always complementing me on my thick hair), this book is none-the-less fast-paced and funny (although most of the times inadvertently). The last 100 pages of this slim read whip by–and that isn’t just because the writing is about as challenging as a Boxcar children book. There is a lot of action and intense sequences. And while most of the humor made my eyes roll instead of my belly laugh, sometimes a clever joke would crop up and smile creep across my face.

Bad:

I can not believe that someone of Mary Higgins Clark’s caliper wrote this! This is so disgusting that I wanted to “Deck” someone’s Halls!

1. WRITING STYLE:
* Number 1 bad thing missing from this “mystery” is: subtlety. It was Mary Higgins Clark’s trademark in previous books. Instead, the audience is whacked vehemently over the head with a Christmas tree (or a bell or a Christmas tree ornament) whenever a point is to be made. C.B. is a bad guy…he acts strange around his uncle’s body. Whack! Jack is going to be Regan’s woman…Nora gushes about how much her husband would love her future son-in-law. Whack! Fred is a great guy…and doesn’t mind watching the children of a woman he has dated all of two times. Whack! Rosita likes Fred–she’s always calling herself “Cinderella”. Whack! The bad guys relate their entire scheme–who, what, when, where, and why–to their kidnapees. Whack! Whack! Whack! I just wished that I had a wall to hit into. Or a quarter for every time I rolled my eyes. I’d never have to work again!
* Characters are introduced in the same way each time: with a paragraph or ten describing every aspect of the character. I mean, here’s the first paragraph of Jack Reilly’s introduction: “Jack Reilly had sandy hair that tended to curl, hazel eyes more green than brown even features with a strong jaw and a broad-shouldered, six-foot-two body. Keenly intelligent, quick-witted, and with a sharp sense of humor honed by growing up in a large family, he had undeniable charisma. Both at social gatherings and at work, his laid-back presence somehow filled the room…” This was good–when I was ten and reading The Babysitters’ Club. But mature writers know the real secret to good novels: show your audience *Fill in the blank*, don’t tell.

2. CHARACTERS: I should say actually “Caricatures”. Not one character in this book could be described with more than one (okay, maybe two words). I’ll prove it.

Regan: attractive, smart
Nora: helpless
Luke: brave
Rosita: mom
Jack: cop
Fred: prince
Alvirah: annoying (okay, “detective”)
Petey: stupid
C.B.: criminal “mastermind”

Let’s start at the top. Regan has about as much personality as a cheese slice wrapper. For someone supposedly smart and a private investigator, she doesn’t do a whole lot of smart things or even investigating. She’d rather think about romancing the man she met ten seconds ago and leave the investigating to someone else. Nora shouldn’t have even been included–her little “Luke would like my future son-in-law” bit was inappropriate and stupid. Luke is flatter than pancakes. Rosita calls herself “Cinderella” to a man she barely knows? Yeah, right. Jack is said to be oh, so many things (charismatic)–but I never saw him act that way. Fred has no problem staying with two kids he barely knows–he only dated their mother twice!–over going to a party. Yeah, right. And what kids would be okay with a guy they probably have met all of one time? Not me! Alvirah is like an annoying, know-it-all, irritating version of Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys, and every other child’s mystery story hero. She pops in and starts bragging about all the cases she’s solved and acting like she owns the world. I don’t see how anyone could stand her–she drove me nuts from her cheesy back story to her stupid “sunburst pin” cassette tape (that must be one heck of a small cassette–or one heck of a big pin!). And the bad guys are complete doofuses, which leads me to…
3. PLOT: The audience knows from the moment they are introduced to The Bad Guys (which is on page 10) that there is no way in hell that Luke and Rosita will not make it out in time for Christmas. These guys are so dumb. Petey talks like a child. C.B. is so smart…all his ideas came out of the latest Sue Grafton or James Patterson novel! Whoopee! Not to mention that there really isn’t any mystery. We meet The Bad Guys 10 pages into the book and are robbed of the only other means of asserting a mystery in this horrific holiday hoax–if The Bad Guys get away. However, all the “Will *fill-in-the-blank* be home for Christmas?” remarks are a dead give-away that the end will be another “happily, ever after”. Lastly, the romantic element is cheesy, corny, and stupid. Fred wants to stick around Rosita after two dates and taking care of her kids for two days? Regan falls for Jack after two days during which her dad is kidnapped? I mean, come on.

Dialogue/Sexual Situations/Violence:

Mild. Sparse usage of da** and other foul language. Hugh Hefner is brought up. Men hold guns.

Overall:

I cannot believe I would not like a Mary Higgins Clark book. Throughout the entire time I read this, I felt like I had read better books when I was 10. If you get this for Christmas, give whoever sent it to you a bag of coal, even if they do get the better end of the deal.

Read Full Post »