Unspeakable Things

Unspeakable Things
by Jess Lourey


Blurb:

Cassie McDowell’s life in 1980s Minnesota seems perfectly wholesome. She lives on a farm, loves school, and has a crush on the nicest boy in class. Yes, there are her parents’ strange parties and their parade of deviant guests, but she’s grown accustomed to them.

All that changes when someone comes hunting in Lilydale.

One by one, local boys go missing. One by one, they return changed—violent, moody, and withdrawn. What happened to them becomes the stuff of shocking rumors. The accusations of who’s responsible grow just as wild, and dangerous town secrets start to surface. Then Cassie’s own sister undergoes the dark change. If she is to survive, Cassie must find her way in an adult world where every sin is justified, and only the truth is unforgivable.

My Reaction:
I listened to the audiobook version and found it riveting. I loved the can-do, positive attitude of the protagonist. Honestly, if it weren't for Cassie, I might not have liked this book at all. The subject matter is dark and disturbing, the "mystery" is average, and I found the ending rather rushed and not completely satisfying-- but for the bulk of the book, Cassie is the focus, and I loved her!

I also loved the flood of nostalgic memories brought on by the 1980s rural setting. (I grew up in a rural community in the 80s, though we lived on a relatively busy highway, and I mostly stayed close to home-- much more sheltered and fenced-in than the "meet up with the neighborhood kids each morning and don't come home until just before dark" version of "retro childhood" that's so common in fiction and other people's memories of youth).

Caitlin Kelly's narration was great. Unfortunately, sometimes narrators "interpretations" distract from the story, but in this case, it was a big positive. Cassie's personality came through loud and clear.

I saw an epilogue mentioned in another review and went to read it on the author's website. She left it out of the book (and audiobook) because she wanted readers to form their own ideas of what happened to her characters after the events of the book. Overall, I think she did well to leave it off (though clearly not everyone agrees).


SPOILERS to follow!!

Skip the next part
if
you
don't
want
SPOILERS!!


I was glad that Cassie turned out okay-- married, even had kids. I never doubted that she'd be alright. She's a survivor, and no way would she have been denied a life of her own.

What I wasn't so thrilled about was that she and Sephie lived with their mother after Cassie "told her story". On one hand, that's probably what Cassie wanted, but on the other... Their mother had to know what was happening, and she failed to protect her daughters. She left them alone with their father-- gave him the opportunity to terrorize and abuse. She was complicit!

I understand that she had been abused herself, growing up-- (wasn't that heavily implied?)-- and that it's complicated, but I hated their mother, and I still do. She didn't do enough. She barely did anything! Even apart from failing to protect them from abuse, she seemed so cold toward her children. A couple of the saddest moments are when it's clear that she doesn't express normal affection and love for her daughters. Doesn't tell them she loves them. Almost forgets/barely acknowledges their birthdays. (You don't need a lot of money to make a child feel special on his/her birthday.)

I know, I know! She wasn't "raised right", probably doesn't know how to be a good, loving mother, but some people manage to overcome those kinds of obstacles and grow into wonderful, admirable people. This woman didn't. She was caught in the cycle of sickness, and I just found it really sad that her daughters were stuck with her, even after escaping their evil father. (And to be honest, I'm not buying that she wouldn't have gone back to her crappy first husband, once he got out of jail...)

I was also sad that Sephie ended up living with their father, as an adult. That part seemed very odd... Is that realistic/typical behavior? I've mentioned surprise that their mother didn't end up back with her creepy abuser of a husband, but I'm even more surprised that Sephie would live with him. I can believe that she might maintain contact and pretend everything was normal, but moving in with him is shocking and hard to swallow.

On the other hand... It's just occurred to me that Sephie was named after Persephone, who was doomed to spend a portion of her life in the Underworld, living as the wife of Hades... And Cassie was named after Cassandra, who was cursed with knowledge of the future that no-one would believe. Cassie does repeatedly try to speak to people in authority (police, her parents), and is always ignored, until the very end. I have a feeling these things aren't coincidental.


SPOILERS over!

It feels strange to say that you liked or enjoyed a book with these kinds of themes, but I did! I wouldn't recommend it to just anyone, but I found Cassie a very worthwhile character, and I'm glad to have met her.

In the Dark

In the Dark 
by Loreth Anne White


Blurb:

A secluded mountain lodge. The perfect getaway. So remote no one will ever find you. 

The promise of a luxury vacation at a secluded wilderness spa has brought together eight lucky guests. But nothing is what they were led to believe. As a fierce storm barrels down and all contact with the outside is cut off, the guests fear that it’s not a getaway. It’s a trap.

Each one has a secret. Each one has something to hide. And now, as darkness closes in, they all have something to fear—including one another.

Alerted to the vanished party of strangers, homicide cop Mason Deniaud and search and rescue expert Callie Sutton must brave the brutal elements of the mountains to find them. But even Mason and Callie have no idea how precious time is. Because the clock is ticking, and one by one, the guests of Forest Shadow Lodge are being hunted. For them, surviving becomes part of a diabolical game.

My Reaction:
I listened to the audiobook version of In the Dark-- another selection made on the basis of availability through Kindle Unlimited-- and I'm happy with the choice. This is the best KU-sourced audiobook I've come across since I started listening to them on the Echo Dot. (So convenient for listening when my hands are dirty busy in the kitchen or working on something in the craft room!)

In the Dark is atmospheric and creepy-- it kept me guessing-- even the detective/search-and-rescue parts were engaging (which I didn't expect at first)-- and it also helps that it's geared toward fans of Agatha Christie (the master of the murder mystery).

Now, I still have some nit-picks (the narration felt a tad melodramatic to me at times, I couldn't stand the "kid voice" [a frequent irritation in audiobooks, I find], I got a little bored during the summing up scene, I'm not sure about the believability or realism of some of the motivations and decisions, I was a bit let down by the "whodunit"-- though I didn't have anything else specific in mind-- and so on), but over all, I really enjoyed it.

I will say that if you think you might want to read Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None (and want to avoid spoilers), you should do that first, because there are major spoilers for that novel in this one.

Speaking of spoilers...

Skip the next section of this review to avoid spoilers for not only In the Dark, but also both And Then There Were None and Murder on the Orient Express...

.
.
.

I'd already picked up on the parallels between And Then There Were None and this book before ATTWN was first referenced, so it was amusing when that novel became such an important part of the plot.

The parallels between this novel and ATTWN are very clear-- a group of (mostly) strangers invited to an isolated location under false pretenses, all turning out to be guilty of a crime, their being killed one at a time in shockingly violent ways, etc.

However, while listening, I also felt that there were similarities to Murder on the Orient Express.

MotOE is about a group of seemingly unrelated people all seeking revenge/justice for the murder of a child. The events of In the Dark are also triggered by the desire for justice after a child's murderer goes unpunished. Whereas in ATTWN (almost all of) the criminals don't know one another and are guilty of completely unrelated crimes (...as far as I can recall), in In the Dark the guilty parties are all linked to a single crime... And in MotOE, the group of revenge-seekers (who are also murderers, by the end of the book), are also all linked to a single crime (though they are the family/loved ones of the victims). The judge in ATTWN isn't a sympathetic character, from what I remember, but we do sympathize with the judge-jury-executioners in MotOE, as we are meant to sympathize with Stella. ...I don't know; there's more, though it's all kind of a jumble-- but while listening, I definitely felt that this novel was inspired by both ATTWN and MotOE.
. 
.
.

(Spoilers over now!)

It feels like this could be the first in a series, possibly. There's a complicated relationship that is still just beginning by the end of the book. However, on the other hand, it might be best left to the reader's imagination. The setting is supposed to be a quiet backwater town where serious crime is almost unheard of, so it's unlikely that there would be enough fodder for another crime mystery novel or three set in the same location. However, little things like that don't usually deter writers of crime fiction!

This author's name is one I'll remember for another time!

Shadow Moon

Shadow Moon
by Chris Claremont and George Lucas


Blurb:

War and chaos have gripped the land of Tir Asleen. An ancient prophecy reveals one hope: a savior princess who will ascend to the throne when the time is right. But first, a Nelwyn wanderer must face forces of unimaginable malevolence and dangerous, forbidden rites of necromancy that could bring back a powerful warrior from soulless sleep.

My Reaction:
Shadow Moon was the latest selection for the 372-Pages podcast (and a shared read-aloud with Donald). I can safely say that I would never have read this book, otherwise. I hadn't even seen Willow until shortly before starting the book-- in preparation for reading-- and neither movie nor novel were especially appealing to me.

(I think that I have some resistance to new-to-me fantasy novels, though I usually enjoy them well enough once I start. I just never believe I will like it, for some reason. It doesn't tantalize me like some genres do. I was more open to fantasy as a younger reader, and maybe it's time to give some of it a try. Part of the problem is that fantasy = looooong books, in my mind, and that's a turn-off.)

Anyway, the 372-Pages verdict was that this is the worst thing they've read to date. I certainly didn't enjoy the book, and there were times when I dreaded reading it, but I can't agree that it's the worst. No, for all its many faults, Shadow Moon is not as bad as Bob Honey Who Just Do Stuff, in my opinion, though I can see why Mike and Conor might disagree. (Bob Honey had more in the way of comedy fodder, and ultimately I think it comes down to the sheer number of pages and words. This was a long, long book. At least the steaming pile of crap that is Bob Honey was short. Still too long for me to endure, though. The only DNF of the podcast, so far.)

So... Shadow Moon... The chief problems are as follows:

-- If you read it because you liked Willow, you'll be disappointed by the fact that there's almost an entirely new cast of characters, and even the ones from the movie who do survive into the bulk of the book are changed to the point of being nearly unrecognizable.

-- What passes for a plot is stretched thin, and it moves at a snail's pace.

-- The characters aren't endearing or even interesting. Some are mere cardboard cutouts.

-- The descriptions of "magic" are far too long and repetitive. I would've been okay with a little of it, but honestly, at some point, you just stop caring. The endless descriptions of Thorn suffering agonies or being exhausted likewise hold little appeal. When a character bounces right back from being ripped apart on the molecular level (or something like that), there's no chance of anything ever truly harming him, so why even bother paying attention?

-- There's nothing good or enjoyable in this world, apparently, and the whole book is very "blah". A well-plotted, fast-moving dystopian novel is one thing, but in something as sluggish as this, it's just one more reason to not want to bother.

I was vaguely curious about how the story progresses into the second and third books-- though not curious enough to want to read the books!-- so I looked them up online. I've had no luck finding a detailed synopsis or answers to my specific questions. It's a fittingly dissatisfying end to my experience with this novel.

I was considering awarding the book 1.5 stars rounded up to 2, mostly in reaction to the mere suggestion that Bob Honey is the superior work... But after writing this review, I realize that I can't do it. This is a one-star book, I'm afraid.

In the Woods

In the Woods
by Tana French


Blurb:

As dusk approaches a small Dublin suburb in the summer of 1984, mothers begin to call their children home. But on this warm evening, three children do not return from the dark and silent woods. When the police arrive, they find only one of the children gripping a tree trunk in terror, wearing blood-filled sneakers, and unable to recall a single detail of the previous hours. 

Twenty years later, the found boy, Rob Ryan, is a detective on the Dublin Murder Squad and keeps his past a secret. But when a twelve-year-old girl is found murdered in the same woods, he and Detective Cassie Maddox—his partner and closest friend—find themselves investigating a case chillingly similar to the previous unsolved mystery. Now, with only snippets of long-buried memories to guide him, Ryan has the chance to uncover both the mystery of the case before him and that of his own shadowy past.

My Reaction (with SPOILERS):
Since there's a recent TV adaptation based on this series, I did my best to avoid spoilers, and as a result, I went into this book with a couple of misconceptions. Unfortunately, that's led to me feeling dissatisfied, now that I know more about the series of books.

You see, I thought this was the first of a trilogy, but now I discover that it's actually one in a longer (more loosely connected) series and that the books aren't all told from the same character's perspective. If I understand correctly, none of the others (to date) are from Rob Ryan's point of view, and he likely doesn't play a major role in any of the other books. This is a problem for me.

When it became clear that "Rob's mystery" (the two missing kids from the 1980s) wasn't going to be solved by the end of the book, I wasn't terribly surprised. With two more books left in the trilogy (as I thought it was), I expected to find the conclusion in the third book. Then, when things started to fall apart between Cassie and Rob, I was disconcerted, but figured it would just be grist for the mill in the second and third books. You must have conflict to have a story, etc., etc.

Now that I know that this book is essentially a stand-alone, as far as the 1980's mystery is concerned (and that there is unlikely to ever be more written about Cassie and Rob as a couple), all the allowances I made for the book as I read it have fallen by the wayside. Before, I'd been making excuses. Yes, the pace was slower than I'd have liked, but we'd get there eventually-- and true, Rob was very stupid and snobbish at times, and he was an idiotic jerk to Cassie, but it would all be resolved in Book 2 or 3, surely-- right? Nope.

It's unfortunate. I'd really enjoyed the better parts and aspects of the book and was curious about where the next two would take the story, but I'm not satisfied with the lack of a true conclusion for the (far more interesting) older mystery. I've read the theories (and had come to a similar conclusion on my own-- definitely picked up on some supernatural vibes throughout the novel), but it's not enough to leave me happy.

And as for Rob and Cassie-- ugh. I was never agog over their (not-so) perfect platonic relationship, to be honest. It seemed... improbable and even somewhat obnoxious (like the too-frequent, too "current" pop-culture references). "We're special. We're not like other people. We have a bond no-one else could understand, to the point that we practically read one another's mind. We'd never let romance complicate our perfect relationship. ...Oops, we let romance mess things up! Now we'll spend the rest of the book hurting one another and refusing to communicate. Aren't we quite the pair of tragic, star-cross'd lovers?" ...But anyway, even if they annoy me, I still wanted to see them work things out-- and now I know that's not happening. Ugh. No, I don't like it.

Maybe, maybe if I hadn't gone into this expecting a self-contained trilogy with a typical trilogy-style story arc, I might have been able to accept that this was a different kind of story-- not remotely happy or even satisfying. Then again, maybe it would've bothered me just as much, no matter what I'd been expecting. All I know for certain is that it's left me feeling bitter and frustrated.

I might at some point try the next in the series, which is told from Cassie's point of view, but I'm disappointed that it's not a true continuation of In the Woods. And if what I'm picking up from reviews is correct (that this author likes her characters best when they're suffering), I'm just not sure when I'll have an appetite for more.

What You Did

What You Did
by Claire McGowan

Blurb:

A vicious assault. A devastating accusation. Who should she trust, her husband or her best friend? 

It was supposed to be the perfect reunion: six university friends together again after twenty years. Host Ali finally has the life she always wanted, a career she can be proud of and a wonderful family with her college boyfriend, now husband. But that night her best friend makes an accusation so shocking that nothing will ever be the same again. 

When Karen staggers in from the garden, bleeding and traumatised, she claims that she has been assaulted—by Ali’s husband, Mike. Ali must make a split-second decision: who should she believe? Her horrified husband, or her best friend? With Mike offering a very different version of events, Ali knows one of them is lying—but which? And why? 

When the ensuing chaos forces her to re-examine the golden era the group shared at university, Ali realises there are darker memories too. Memories that have lain dormant for decades. Memories someone would kill to protect.

My Reaction:
I chose this for something to listen to while doing dishes, cooking, etc., because it was convenient and free (through Amazon Prime). After a while, I started noticing that I was in a worse mood after each "session" of listening to it than I was before. That's probably because just about every character is infuriating in his or her own special way. (Mostly that was due to how they were written, but this was an audiobook, and the whiny "baby voice" given to the 10-year-old was also excruciating. The voice alone made me hate that nearly superfluous child character, and I don't even feel guilty about it. It's a voice made for hating.)

I grew to dislike every character, by the end of the book; even Mr. Perfect (Bill) annoyed me. I continued listening simply because I couldn't be bothered to find something else to listen to. Pure laziness. Well, maybe not pure laziness; there might've been a dollop or two of stubbornness mixed in there, too.

It was just... blah. I didn't really even care what happened to the characters, by the end. I disliked them, so who really cared who lived or died-- who went to jail or was exonerated-- who ended up shacking up together-- and whether or not these utterly crappy "friendships" survived? (Seriously, with friends like these...) There was a twist or two that I hadn't predicted (coming out of nowhere), but I couldn't find it in me to care. Very much a feeling of, "Meh, whatever..."