If anyone has decided to read
In the Woods because I went and said it had an engaging premise, get up and throw that book out the window right now. Spoilers: THERE ARE NO SPOILERS. Because she doesn't solve the old mystery of the lost children and the blood in the shoes, because
she doesn't even know herself, it just sounded good and she figured she would work it out. And then didn't. It just ends. And I skulked all over for spoilers of the next books in the series and interviews with the author, and no, seriously, it doesn't get solved. It ends with hints and shrugs,
Did it even happen? Is he crazy? Was it supernatural? OH WELL, NO WAY TO KNOW.
Also, when writing a mystery novel, if someone in the beginning says the weapon was wood and rounded like a broom handle, and then someone almost immediately yells, "hey who stole my spade!?" it is only going to piss readers off for 300 pages until the detective has his epiphany that it MIGHT HAVE BEEN A SPADE.
So annoyed. Still going to read the next one, though, because sometimes you just really want to make sure you don't like something.
I never could understand why Tana French is so popular. If you finished In the Woods you did better that I was able to do. Best of luck with the next one.
ReplyDeleteYeah, the prologue had this lovely Irish magical realism that the rest of the book failed to live up to or recapture. Obvious clues and diversion tactics and assholery passed off as endearing character flaws. I like Sherlock because the moment you spot a clue, he's already spotted it and we can move onward. None of this feigned innocence as the detectives overlook the obvious and come back to it later like it's a big breakthrough. Ugh. Chucking the second book back in my work bag.
ReplyDeleteBook recommendations?
Ooh, I just remembered that I haven't gotten through all the suggestions from the last time I asked for books to read - I bet they're sitting in my google drive. *lunging for kindle*
ReplyDeleteKate Adkinson for good character studies and mysteries. Georgette Heyer for fun and frivolity. Kate Wilhelm for mysteries and courtroom drama. Huh. They are all women. Wonder if that means something? Ok John Sandford for mysteries and police procedurals. And now everything but the Heyers is a mystery of one sort or another.
ReplyDeleteReally, if you aren't familiar with Georgette Heyer, give her a try. The queen of the Regency romances. Jane Austin with real male characters. And understated hilarity. She does mysteries, too, but the romances are much better.
Thanks! I'm filling my request queue. I need a new series that'll stick right in my heart like a fork.
ReplyDelete