Wow. That was an excellent book. A really good read. I was reading along last night, and really enjoying it, then decided it was probably time to turn in. I woke up at about 2:30 and decided I really needed to read just another couple of chapters because I couldn't stop thinking about it. I did manage to save the last two chapters so I'd have something to read while walking to work this morning.
This is the first novel by Barry Eisler featuring his protagonist, John Rain.
The plot is good, no complaints, moves right along, good closure. I admit here that I started with the third book, Hard Rain (I'll comment more on this below). Based on that, I can see there's also an overarching plot across the series which is always nice, and makes for more compelling reading. It may be going too far to say there's foreshadowing stretching across three books, but certainly Mr. Eisler sets up events and circumstances anticipating the future books.
The characters are excellent. The protagonist, John Rain is good, and if perhaps a little on the invincible side of things, well, that's partly why I enjoy these sorts of books. The supporting characters are extremely well drawn in my view. Even the characters who are entirely offstage for most of the books are given little details and points of their personality so the reader can get a strong sense for who these people are, and care about what's happening to them. Ultimately I think that's one of the keys for me. Plots I often find forgettable, but I remember the books where I have an interest in the characters, and can imagine their reactions in various scenarios.
The setting is good. I've never been to Tokyo, and concede I sort of skimmed over some of the Japanese names for neighbourhoods and subway lines, but in relatively few strokes, Mr. Eisler conveyed several distinct areas of Tokyo and conveyed a comfort, enjoyment and knowledge of the city. I can see myself interested in revisiting this novel if I do make my way to Tokyo at some point.
The book also has a few interesting concepts to think about. I'd like to do a separate post on that, so I won't comment further here, other than to say that one of the things I love about a book is if it can present some ideas for me to mull over after the fact, consider and discuss with friends. Rain Fall has that characteristic as well.
I mentioned above that I had read Hard Rain by Barry Eisler. I read it about a month ago. It was okay, I enjoyed the plot, really liked the secondary characters, but wasn't gripped by John Rain. Now, having read Rain Fall, I have a much greater understanding of John Rain, as a character he makes a lot more sense to me, and I really want to go back and read Hard Rain again with my renewed understanding.
I haven't discussed much in the way of plot, as with suspense or mystery novels, that can be a large part of the joy of reading. I won't break that habit now by revealing "spoilers", but with a novel like Rain Fall, it's a pleasure to read for so many reasons in addition to the plot, that I'm looking forward to re-reading it some day. I am, however, really excited by the idea of talking about this novel. I know I said Robin Cook would be next, but I think I'm going to have to pre-empt him for Rain Storm by Barry Eisler.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
Heart Shaped Box by Joe Hill
I'd read Joe Hill again, and would probably actively look for his next book. That being said, 10 years from now, if he's written a dozen books, I doubt this will be in my top five by him.
The plot's good, it moves along, has some neat scenes, but for whatever reason, I didn't find it particularly compelling. I had no difficulty putting it down after a chapter, or in the middle of a chapter and then picking it up again. Hard to say exactly why, except that somehow there didn't seem to be enough of an engine driving the plot. And some of the scenes that should have been engaging, exciting and tension filled, seemed to go a little bit flat. Part of that is the plot choice to involve the use of hypnosis combined with a first person perspective, so it necessarily seems a little remote. The other part of it was that the protagonist seemed a little too well protected. Although I got a sense of danger to other characters, I was never really in fear for the protagonist.
But I think in the end, that those aren't significant complaints. It was well written, I enjoyed reading it and I'd pick up another by him.
I do want to comment briefly on his pedigree as Stephen King's son. I really admire him for not using the Stephen King name to sell himself as an author. However (and I recognize this is unfair because I knew of the relationship before starting his books), I think even without being told I would have guessed this book was either by Stephen King under a pseudonym, or by a really big Stephen King fan writing some sort of pastiche.
The plot moves in a similar way, it's resolved in a similar way, Stephen King's favourite indicia of bad guys are present, as are his favourite types of guardians. Even the voices inside people's heads are strongly remniscent of Stephen King. It's not a complaint for me... I really enjoy Stephen King, and I don't find many horror authors who I enjoy, so someone who writes like him is great as far as I'm concerned. When discussing this book in conversation I was asked "so it's like reading classic Stephen King?". My answer had to be "no". It's much more like reading modern Stephen King... something within the last 10 - 15 years.
Perhaps that's the reason for my lack of enthusiasm, I am setting Joe Hill up against Stephen King and finding Heart Shaped Box passable as a Stephen King novel, but not in the top ten. That's probably unfair, and I'd have to acknowledge that as a new author I've just discovered, I found the writing excellent, and have quickly added him to the list of authors I'll look for in the bookstore or the library.
Next up will be Barry Eisler's Rain Fall, and after that, perhaps the new Robin Cook novel.
The plot's good, it moves along, has some neat scenes, but for whatever reason, I didn't find it particularly compelling. I had no difficulty putting it down after a chapter, or in the middle of a chapter and then picking it up again. Hard to say exactly why, except that somehow there didn't seem to be enough of an engine driving the plot. And some of the scenes that should have been engaging, exciting and tension filled, seemed to go a little bit flat. Part of that is the plot choice to involve the use of hypnosis combined with a first person perspective, so it necessarily seems a little remote. The other part of it was that the protagonist seemed a little too well protected. Although I got a sense of danger to other characters, I was never really in fear for the protagonist.
But I think in the end, that those aren't significant complaints. It was well written, I enjoyed reading it and I'd pick up another by him.
I do want to comment briefly on his pedigree as Stephen King's son. I really admire him for not using the Stephen King name to sell himself as an author. However (and I recognize this is unfair because I knew of the relationship before starting his books), I think even without being told I would have guessed this book was either by Stephen King under a pseudonym, or by a really big Stephen King fan writing some sort of pastiche.
The plot moves in a similar way, it's resolved in a similar way, Stephen King's favourite indicia of bad guys are present, as are his favourite types of guardians. Even the voices inside people's heads are strongly remniscent of Stephen King. It's not a complaint for me... I really enjoy Stephen King, and I don't find many horror authors who I enjoy, so someone who writes like him is great as far as I'm concerned. When discussing this book in conversation I was asked "so it's like reading classic Stephen King?". My answer had to be "no". It's much more like reading modern Stephen King... something within the last 10 - 15 years.
Perhaps that's the reason for my lack of enthusiasm, I am setting Joe Hill up against Stephen King and finding Heart Shaped Box passable as a Stephen King novel, but not in the top ten. That's probably unfair, and I'd have to acknowledge that as a new author I've just discovered, I found the writing excellent, and have quickly added him to the list of authors I'll look for in the bookstore or the library.
Next up will be Barry Eisler's Rain Fall, and after that, perhaps the new Robin Cook novel.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
20th Century Ghosts by Joe Hill
I'm not sure entirely how to comment on this book. It's a collection of short stories, and I'm always at a bit of a loss when I try to comment on collected works. (I guess I should have thought of that before, but I'm into it now anyway...).
I like to read short stories occasionally, generally when I don't feel I have the time to fully engage in a novel. I prefer samplings of a variety of authors and I usually go with something like "Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine" rather than a book collection. My primary purpose in reading short stories is to see if there's a neat idea, turn of phrase or observation to convince me that it's worth picking up a novel by that author.
In that regard, I like a collection like Legends. It's a collection of fantasy authors, writing prequels, sequels or other stories set in the worlds created by those authors in their longer series. It gives a reader a flavour for their work and can potentially introduce a reader to some new authors and series. That's exactly what I'm looking for in a collection of short stories (though to be fair, it's more of a collection of novellas). A side benefit is getting an extra story set in a familiar world by an author I have already been reading.
Otherwise, I don't tend to read short stories for the form itself. I find they're usually one-idea stories, with little characterization or insight. Often I think the nature of the idea is such that it probably wouldn't warrant a novel (or hold the interest of a reader for that period). As a result, reading a collection of short stories usually doesn't hold my interest, and by a certain point I'm generally looking for the "short" short stories in the collection, interspersing my reading of the collection with other books and generally feeling as though it's a chore to finish rather than any desire to continue.
So perhaps it was a little unfair to Mr. Hill to sample his short story collection first. I justify my decision on the basis that I was kind of conflicted over whether I wanted to read him at all. I tend to be disappointed in horror novels, and often seem to set a higher standard whereby I am prepared to feel manipulated much more easily than I would with other genres of fiction.
At any rate, a number of the stories in this collection were exceptional. I've been convinced that it's worth trying some of Joe Hill's other works, and am looking forward to Heart Shaped Box.
As with any short story collection, it was hit and miss. Some of the stories I found predictable and trying too hard to push buttons. Others I thought were excellent and haunting. Some, frankly, I didn't get. I don't think it's because of a lack of attentiveness in my reading, I think perhaps the stories might speak to certain people in certain ways, or maybe the author just isn't managing to connect.
"Pop Art" is much vaunted in the introduction to 20th Century Ghosts, and in my view is entirely deserving of the praise. It's an excellent short story. Really neat. I found "My Father's Mask" extremely disturbing. It's one of those stories that I think speaks to particular people in particular ways. Many might find it just weird, whereas some of those I found weird or empty might resonate for other readers. "Abraham's Boys" was fun and cleverly written. I enjoyed "Voluntary Committal", which was one of the longer stories, but it's an indication of how much I was enjoying this short story collection that even though it was the last story, I was still interested enough to enjoy reading it and turned the last page looking for more.
Overall, this is a well written, compelling collection. I would definitely read Joe Hill's novels, and (surprising to me) would probably be inclined to pick up another short story collection if I saw his name.
I like to read short stories occasionally, generally when I don't feel I have the time to fully engage in a novel. I prefer samplings of a variety of authors and I usually go with something like "Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine" rather than a book collection. My primary purpose in reading short stories is to see if there's a neat idea, turn of phrase or observation to convince me that it's worth picking up a novel by that author.
In that regard, I like a collection like Legends. It's a collection of fantasy authors, writing prequels, sequels or other stories set in the worlds created by those authors in their longer series. It gives a reader a flavour for their work and can potentially introduce a reader to some new authors and series. That's exactly what I'm looking for in a collection of short stories (though to be fair, it's more of a collection of novellas). A side benefit is getting an extra story set in a familiar world by an author I have already been reading.
Otherwise, I don't tend to read short stories for the form itself. I find they're usually one-idea stories, with little characterization or insight. Often I think the nature of the idea is such that it probably wouldn't warrant a novel (or hold the interest of a reader for that period). As a result, reading a collection of short stories usually doesn't hold my interest, and by a certain point I'm generally looking for the "short" short stories in the collection, interspersing my reading of the collection with other books and generally feeling as though it's a chore to finish rather than any desire to continue.
So perhaps it was a little unfair to Mr. Hill to sample his short story collection first. I justify my decision on the basis that I was kind of conflicted over whether I wanted to read him at all. I tend to be disappointed in horror novels, and often seem to set a higher standard whereby I am prepared to feel manipulated much more easily than I would with other genres of fiction.
At any rate, a number of the stories in this collection were exceptional. I've been convinced that it's worth trying some of Joe Hill's other works, and am looking forward to Heart Shaped Box.
As with any short story collection, it was hit and miss. Some of the stories I found predictable and trying too hard to push buttons. Others I thought were excellent and haunting. Some, frankly, I didn't get. I don't think it's because of a lack of attentiveness in my reading, I think perhaps the stories might speak to certain people in certain ways, or maybe the author just isn't managing to connect.
"Pop Art" is much vaunted in the introduction to 20th Century Ghosts, and in my view is entirely deserving of the praise. It's an excellent short story. Really neat. I found "My Father's Mask" extremely disturbing. It's one of those stories that I think speaks to particular people in particular ways. Many might find it just weird, whereas some of those I found weird or empty might resonate for other readers. "Abraham's Boys" was fun and cleverly written. I enjoyed "Voluntary Committal", which was one of the longer stories, but it's an indication of how much I was enjoying this short story collection that even though it was the last story, I was still interested enough to enjoy reading it and turned the last page looking for more.
Overall, this is a well written, compelling collection. I would definitely read Joe Hill's novels, and (surprising to me) would probably be inclined to pick up another short story collection if I saw his name.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
The Two Minute Rule by Robert Crais
I liked this book. Sometimes with authors I enjoy their one-off, non-series work more than their series works. I think this may be the case with Robert Crais. So far I've preferred the non-series books and characters (though I include Joe Pike in this category) to the Elvis Cole novels.
The Two Minute Rule follows a convicted bank robber released from prison the day after his son (a policeman) is murdered. The murder is connected to bank robberies, and the bank robber (Max Holman) decides to try to solve the mystery surrounding his son's death.
The mystery plays out in a fairly straightforward way, and there isn't a lot mysterious about it. The solution, in my view, doesn't quite cover all the bases to explain what happened and how, and yet the ending also came pretty fast and wrapped up perhaps a little too neatly. That being said, I don't object to closure, and prefer it to leaving things open ended. My complaint is mostly that it felt a little like the author hit whatever page number, decided "oh, guess we should wrap it up", and finished it off in 15 pages.
Mr. Crais took some time with the characters, and did a really good job with Max Holman. I thought he nicely avoided some of the cliches and expectations, but did a good examination of an ex-con. Again, as I've noted in his other works, he has an excellent ability to show and not tell to create sympathy for his characters. I think it's this characteristic of his writing that will keep me coming back to his books.
I've still got a couple of Robert Crais books on the shelf, but I'm going to transition to Joe Hill for a bit. Next up will be the short story collection 20th Century Ghosts (belatedly for Halloween), and after that I'll probably move to Heart Shaped Box.
The Two Minute Rule follows a convicted bank robber released from prison the day after his son (a policeman) is murdered. The murder is connected to bank robberies, and the bank robber (Max Holman) decides to try to solve the mystery surrounding his son's death.
The mystery plays out in a fairly straightforward way, and there isn't a lot mysterious about it. The solution, in my view, doesn't quite cover all the bases to explain what happened and how, and yet the ending also came pretty fast and wrapped up perhaps a little too neatly. That being said, I don't object to closure, and prefer it to leaving things open ended. My complaint is mostly that it felt a little like the author hit whatever page number, decided "oh, guess we should wrap it up", and finished it off in 15 pages.
Mr. Crais took some time with the characters, and did a really good job with Max Holman. I thought he nicely avoided some of the cliches and expectations, but did a good examination of an ex-con. Again, as I've noted in his other works, he has an excellent ability to show and not tell to create sympathy for his characters. I think it's this characteristic of his writing that will keep me coming back to his books.
I've still got a couple of Robert Crais books on the shelf, but I'm going to transition to Joe Hill for a bit. Next up will be the short story collection 20th Century Ghosts (belatedly for Halloween), and after that I'll probably move to Heart Shaped Box.
Monday, November 2, 2009
L.A. in Fiction
A brief comment prior to posting my thoughts on The Two Minute Rule by Robert Crais.
Michael Connelly is one of my favourite authors. I like to collect the hardcover editions of his work, and there are a very small number of authors who meet that standard.
Erle Stanley Gardner is another of my favourite authors. I like to collect multiple copies of the paperbacks, because I like having the various different editions.
Let me preface the following comments by stating that I've been to Los Angeles only once, about 25 years ago, and my memory of the city is extremely limited. For all intents and purposes, let's pretend I've never been.
Both Michael Connelly and Erle Stanley Gardner set the majority of their books in Los Angeles. However, Erle Stanley Gardner (the Perry Mason and Donald Lam books) could probably be set just about anywhere. They're enjoyable books in all kinds of ways, but I wouldn't say that they give me a sense of L.A. in the 1930's - 1960's when they are set. The books could as easily take place in Chicago. There are occasional side trips into the desert, or reference to Santa Ana winds, but I don't think someone could read all of the Perry Mason novels, then go to Los Angeles and think "I knew it would be just like this."
One of the things I really like about Michael Connelly is that Harry Bosch loves living in L.A. His various novels are set to move Bosch around L.A., and Bosch, having lived in L.A. all his life, does a good job of giving the reader the sense of history of Los Angeles, and that he's watching it grow and develop. After reading a bunch of the Harry Bosch novels, I can picture myself moving around Los Angeles, and might like to visit some of the places referenced in the books just to see what they're like.
However, as noted, I've been reading Robert Crais lately. Mr. Crais also sets his novels in Los Angeles. His books seem to follow Michael Connelly's style in referring to the city more than Erle Stanley Gardner. That is, he uses the city almost as a character, and his descriptions of the city are such that I believe I would recognize certain landmarks.
This brings me to my complaint/question/comment. Michael Connelly, Robert Crais and, on reflection most of the other books I've read that use L.A. as a key part of the story, all seem to refer to similar landmarks and sites. Now, making reference to Union Station, the Dodger's stadium or Parker Centre makes sense to me. These are big landmarks, integral in some ways to a police procedural novel, and the consistency in description lends credibility to each of the descriptions.
However, it's beginning to strike me as unusual, curious and pushing the boundaries of coincidence that the same restaurants and bars get referenced in each of these various L.A. authors. I could understand a reference to the Brown Derby (which, incidentally, is not referenced in any of these works). It's a famous restaurant, a symbol of old Hollywood, invented the Cobb salad, etc. I've heard of In & Out Burger, which I understand is some kind of chain, albeit local to L.A.
Instead, these books all reference some of the same restaurants and bars, and the recurrence of these references seems suspicious. L.A. is a large city, both in population and geographic area. Does everyone really know the Shortstop as a cop bar? or Musso's in Hollywood? or Frankies as some sort of take-out stand? I think the same doughnut shop in Farmer's Market was mentioned by several authors as well. In a city of a couple hundred thousand people, or in a tightly contained area, I could see that there would be a couple of local businesses that get referenced like that, but I find it harder to see it in a place like L.A.
At this stage I wonder if these are L.A. landmarks, existing in the popular consciousness on the scale of Hollywood & Vine, or an inside reference to some Dragnet episode, or just a shortcut by authors who read about L.A. from other authors. Maybe my only recourse will be to take a trip to L.A. and try to track down doughnut shops and hot dog and taco stands.
Michael Connelly is one of my favourite authors. I like to collect the hardcover editions of his work, and there are a very small number of authors who meet that standard.
Erle Stanley Gardner is another of my favourite authors. I like to collect multiple copies of the paperbacks, because I like having the various different editions.
Let me preface the following comments by stating that I've been to Los Angeles only once, about 25 years ago, and my memory of the city is extremely limited. For all intents and purposes, let's pretend I've never been.
Both Michael Connelly and Erle Stanley Gardner set the majority of their books in Los Angeles. However, Erle Stanley Gardner (the Perry Mason and Donald Lam books) could probably be set just about anywhere. They're enjoyable books in all kinds of ways, but I wouldn't say that they give me a sense of L.A. in the 1930's - 1960's when they are set. The books could as easily take place in Chicago. There are occasional side trips into the desert, or reference to Santa Ana winds, but I don't think someone could read all of the Perry Mason novels, then go to Los Angeles and think "I knew it would be just like this."
One of the things I really like about Michael Connelly is that Harry Bosch loves living in L.A. His various novels are set to move Bosch around L.A., and Bosch, having lived in L.A. all his life, does a good job of giving the reader the sense of history of Los Angeles, and that he's watching it grow and develop. After reading a bunch of the Harry Bosch novels, I can picture myself moving around Los Angeles, and might like to visit some of the places referenced in the books just to see what they're like.
However, as noted, I've been reading Robert Crais lately. Mr. Crais also sets his novels in Los Angeles. His books seem to follow Michael Connelly's style in referring to the city more than Erle Stanley Gardner. That is, he uses the city almost as a character, and his descriptions of the city are such that I believe I would recognize certain landmarks.
This brings me to my complaint/question/comment. Michael Connelly, Robert Crais and, on reflection most of the other books I've read that use L.A. as a key part of the story, all seem to refer to similar landmarks and sites. Now, making reference to Union Station, the Dodger's stadium or Parker Centre makes sense to me. These are big landmarks, integral in some ways to a police procedural novel, and the consistency in description lends credibility to each of the descriptions.
However, it's beginning to strike me as unusual, curious and pushing the boundaries of coincidence that the same restaurants and bars get referenced in each of these various L.A. authors. I could understand a reference to the Brown Derby (which, incidentally, is not referenced in any of these works). It's a famous restaurant, a symbol of old Hollywood, invented the Cobb salad, etc. I've heard of In & Out Burger, which I understand is some kind of chain, albeit local to L.A.
Instead, these books all reference some of the same restaurants and bars, and the recurrence of these references seems suspicious. L.A. is a large city, both in population and geographic area. Does everyone really know the Shortstop as a cop bar? or Musso's in Hollywood? or Frankies as some sort of take-out stand? I think the same doughnut shop in Farmer's Market was mentioned by several authors as well. In a city of a couple hundred thousand people, or in a tightly contained area, I could see that there would be a couple of local businesses that get referenced like that, but I find it harder to see it in a place like L.A.
At this stage I wonder if these are L.A. landmarks, existing in the popular consciousness on the scale of Hollywood & Vine, or an inside reference to some Dragnet episode, or just a shortcut by authors who read about L.A. from other authors. Maybe my only recourse will be to take a trip to L.A. and try to track down doughnut shops and hot dog and taco stands.
Friday, October 30, 2009
The Forgotten Man by Robert Crais
Overall, not bad. I'd still read another of Robert Crais' books.
I really liked how he depicted the criminal. He did a good job of making him suffer from psychosis and presenting it from his viewpoint. Mr. Crais managed to make it realistic and sympathetic, without being excessive or cloying. He also didn't spend a lot of time on the psychoanalysis or trying to explain why he acted as he did. He did it mostly by showing the thought processes rather than telling, and (by the way) setting up a pretty good rationale for the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.
That being said, those concepts weren't explored or even touched on in the book itself, but were interesting to think about. I might have preferred if the resolution had involved that sort of plea arrangement, but then it probably would have devolved into a lot of explanation, and I think Mr. Crais is more keen on the action.
The mystery itself isn't bad in terms of set up. Seems fairly logical and doesn't try to build suspense beyond the likely point the reader can guess the solution.
My biggest complaint is around the Carol Starkey character. I liked Carol Starkey in Demolition Angel. I thought she was a bit cliche (tortured cop, haunted past, drowning in the bottle) but again, aspects of her character were well done. I read L.A. Requiem next, and there was a character called Samantha Dolan. Samantha Dolan was indistinguishable from Carol Starkey. I was getting them confused as I was reading. I fault Mr. Crais for that a bit, he's clearly got his stock of female archetypes and both of these are the same. I read L.A. Requiem, and just treated Samantha Dolan as Carol Starkey, since they both talk the same, act the same and seem to have all the same characteristics.
In L.A. Requiem, Samantha Dolan becomes romantically interested in Elvis Cole, and pursues him notwithstanding that he's in a relationship.
Back to The Forgotten Man, Carol Starkey is a major character again, still sounding and acting just like Samantha Dolan. Now Carol Starkey is pursuing Elvis Cole, notwithstanding that he's in a relationship, and I'm certain some of the lines were from the prior novel. The plot line continues to spin out just like it did in L.A. Requiem. At the end, Mr. Crais modified the outcome, but I'm not sure if I'll give him a pass on it or not. He's clearly recycling the same ideas, and I'm not sure whether this is because it's an area of interest for him, if it's some idea he has to develop the characters, or if he's just testing the waters to see which ending goes over better for his Elvis Cole fans. Either way, I find it annoying. Perhaps readers didn't like how L.A. Requiem was resolved, or perhaps Mr. Crais thinks memories are short, but I wasn't impressed. In two weeks I doubt I'll be able to distinguish the two novels, and for me that's not a reason to pick them up again.
As I noted in my introduction to this author, Mr. Crais leaves Joe Pike as a cypher, and doesn't do much to develop the character in a realistic way. If he's only got one female character he recycles into the same plotline over and over, and only one or two recurring male characters, then it's unlikely that he'll hold my interest.
(As a side note, L.A. Requiem was my first introduction to criminalist John Chen. I laughed out loud at the chapters from his viewpoint, and really liked how the character was portrayed. I thought he was a little weaker here, but still an enjoyable diversion, and by himself is almost reason for me to continue reading the series.)
Since I took out several Robert Crais books I'll continue reading, but I think I might give him a rest for a bit, or limit myself to older or non-Elvis Cole books.
I've just started The Two Minute Rule (a non Elvis Cole book) and thereafter I'll switch authors and move to a (purportedly) scary book in honour of Halloween, Heart Shaped Box by Joe Hill.
I really liked how he depicted the criminal. He did a good job of making him suffer from psychosis and presenting it from his viewpoint. Mr. Crais managed to make it realistic and sympathetic, without being excessive or cloying. He also didn't spend a lot of time on the psychoanalysis or trying to explain why he acted as he did. He did it mostly by showing the thought processes rather than telling, and (by the way) setting up a pretty good rationale for the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.
That being said, those concepts weren't explored or even touched on in the book itself, but were interesting to think about. I might have preferred if the resolution had involved that sort of plea arrangement, but then it probably would have devolved into a lot of explanation, and I think Mr. Crais is more keen on the action.
The mystery itself isn't bad in terms of set up. Seems fairly logical and doesn't try to build suspense beyond the likely point the reader can guess the solution.
My biggest complaint is around the Carol Starkey character. I liked Carol Starkey in Demolition Angel. I thought she was a bit cliche (tortured cop, haunted past, drowning in the bottle) but again, aspects of her character were well done. I read L.A. Requiem next, and there was a character called Samantha Dolan. Samantha Dolan was indistinguishable from Carol Starkey. I was getting them confused as I was reading. I fault Mr. Crais for that a bit, he's clearly got his stock of female archetypes and both of these are the same. I read L.A. Requiem, and just treated Samantha Dolan as Carol Starkey, since they both talk the same, act the same and seem to have all the same characteristics.
In L.A. Requiem, Samantha Dolan becomes romantically interested in Elvis Cole, and pursues him notwithstanding that he's in a relationship.
Back to The Forgotten Man, Carol Starkey is a major character again, still sounding and acting just like Samantha Dolan. Now Carol Starkey is pursuing Elvis Cole, notwithstanding that he's in a relationship, and I'm certain some of the lines were from the prior novel. The plot line continues to spin out just like it did in L.A. Requiem. At the end, Mr. Crais modified the outcome, but I'm not sure if I'll give him a pass on it or not. He's clearly recycling the same ideas, and I'm not sure whether this is because it's an area of interest for him, if it's some idea he has to develop the characters, or if he's just testing the waters to see which ending goes over better for his Elvis Cole fans. Either way, I find it annoying. Perhaps readers didn't like how L.A. Requiem was resolved, or perhaps Mr. Crais thinks memories are short, but I wasn't impressed. In two weeks I doubt I'll be able to distinguish the two novels, and for me that's not a reason to pick them up again.
As I noted in my introduction to this author, Mr. Crais leaves Joe Pike as a cypher, and doesn't do much to develop the character in a realistic way. If he's only got one female character he recycles into the same plotline over and over, and only one or two recurring male characters, then it's unlikely that he'll hold my interest.
(As a side note, L.A. Requiem was my first introduction to criminalist John Chen. I laughed out loud at the chapters from his viewpoint, and really liked how the character was portrayed. I thought he was a little weaker here, but still an enjoyable diversion, and by himself is almost reason for me to continue reading the series.)
Since I took out several Robert Crais books I'll continue reading, but I think I might give him a rest for a bit, or limit myself to older or non-Elvis Cole books.
I've just started The Two Minute Rule (a non Elvis Cole book) and thereafter I'll switch authors and move to a (purportedly) scary book in honour of Halloween, Heart Shaped Box by Joe Hill.
Robert Crais
I debated whether I should try to start off with one of my favourite authors, but decided to just go with my current reading material.
I was at my local library trying to decide if I should give Lee Child a try (I did, and enjoyed him, and will likely read more of his to post here in the future), and they had one of those signs "If you like this author, you may like...", and it listed Robert Crais and Barry Eisler, among others.
I tried Demolition Angel, thought it was okay, so decided to try a couple from his series. I read L.A. Requiem and The Watchman. I think the Joe Pike character acts mostly as an invincible superhero to advance the plot of the Elvis Cole novels where necessary, but when the story was told from his perspective (The Watchman), it was less irksome.
I also think, based on the jacket photos, that perhaps Mr. Crais pictures himself as Joe Pike, but I don't mind that, since readers might like to do the same. (For myself, being more of a talkative type, I find it easier to identify with Cole, but the Hawaiian shirts comprising his outfits throw me off a bit).
I've just finished The Forgotten Man (an Elvis Cole novel) and am just starting The Two Minute Rule. Comments to follow.
I was at my local library trying to decide if I should give Lee Child a try (I did, and enjoyed him, and will likely read more of his to post here in the future), and they had one of those signs "If you like this author, you may like...", and it listed Robert Crais and Barry Eisler, among others.
I tried Demolition Angel, thought it was okay, so decided to try a couple from his series. I read L.A. Requiem and The Watchman. I think the Joe Pike character acts mostly as an invincible superhero to advance the plot of the Elvis Cole novels where necessary, but when the story was told from his perspective (The Watchman), it was less irksome.
I also think, based on the jacket photos, that perhaps Mr. Crais pictures himself as Joe Pike, but I don't mind that, since readers might like to do the same. (For myself, being more of a talkative type, I find it easier to identify with Cole, but the Hawaiian shirts comprising his outfits throw me off a bit).
I've just finished The Forgotten Man (an Elvis Cole novel) and am just starting The Two Minute Rule. Comments to follow.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Introduction
I enjoy reading. I really enjoy reading. I've recently acknowledged that I read compulsively. I read at home, at work and on the bus. I read while eating, working, walking and driving. It's not unusual for me to dream about reading.
Unfortunately, I don't exercise a lot of discretion about what I read. I like to read books that are absorbing enough to transport me, that give me something interesting to think about, or provide a character that gives some insight. I like quick reads and easy reads. I'm much more likely to pick up something from the mystery section of the bookstore or library than I am to wander the literature section.
I've been using the library very heavily lately (I seem to read more when there are greater pressures at work and home), so I've decided it might be interesting to comment on my reading material. I don't warrant that I will always provide reviews, but I will try to convey what I found interesting about a book, whether I would be inclined (or compelled) to pick up another book by the author, and my rationale for so doing.
For those of you who are interested in these thoughts and comments, welcome. If any of you wish to make book suggestions, please do so, though I am notoriously bad for neglecting to read books which have been recommended. Nevertheless, I am always looking for suggestions, and will strive to overcome this literary perversity.
Unfortunately, I don't exercise a lot of discretion about what I read. I like to read books that are absorbing enough to transport me, that give me something interesting to think about, or provide a character that gives some insight. I like quick reads and easy reads. I'm much more likely to pick up something from the mystery section of the bookstore or library than I am to wander the literature section.
I've been using the library very heavily lately (I seem to read more when there are greater pressures at work and home), so I've decided it might be interesting to comment on my reading material. I don't warrant that I will always provide reviews, but I will try to convey what I found interesting about a book, whether I would be inclined (or compelled) to pick up another book by the author, and my rationale for so doing.
For those of you who are interested in these thoughts and comments, welcome. If any of you wish to make book suggestions, please do so, though I am notoriously bad for neglecting to read books which have been recommended. Nevertheless, I am always looking for suggestions, and will strive to overcome this literary perversity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)