23 of 26 people found the following review helpful
Laws of impossibilities,
This review is from: Rules of Crime (A Detective Jackson Mystery) (Paperback)
Customer review from the Amazon Vine Programme (What's this?)
There are so many crime thrillers doing the rounds these days, I guess it's hard for an author to find a detective with a different approach to his or her solving of the crime. I haven't read any of this author's books featuring Detective Jackson before. He appears to be dying on his feet as he manfully struggles to locate his kidnapped ex-wife.
I did like the author's ability to interweave several storylines with other crime solvers on the case, each one appearing unique but then blending together almost seamlessly. It does help to have a basic knowledge of the rather all-American sorority set up and the, I think, illegal activity of hazing so that you can understand why the detectives in one of these stories were taking the matter so seriously; that a young women almost dies because of hazing seems utterly non-sensical to me but, there we are, strange things happen.
Nonetheless, because there are so many characters in this book, it's hard to empathize with any of them; their development is brief and understated, although the author does manage to bring in a transgender detective - that's a first (for me, anyway) and the, by now, de rigeur gay couples involved in either the detecting or the journalistic reporting or both.
The ending is not good but more than that I can't explain. The reader can make his/her own mind up about how life pans out, suffice to say, it did seem strangely weird with the result that I felt as though I'd rather wasted my time reading this.
If you're a fan of this series, I've no doubt you will understand more of it than I did. Unfortunately, for me, this book didn't encourage me to await the next one with any sense of eager anticipation.
Tracked by 2 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-8 of 8 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 24 Feb 2013 20:05:53 GMT
Eileen Shaw says:
Please can somebody tell me what hazing is?
In reply to an earlier post on 25 Feb 2013 10:18:34 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 25 Feb 2013 10:21:19 GMT]
In reply to an earlier post on 25 Feb 2013 10:21:11 GMT
Last edited by the author on 25 Feb 2013 10:22:33 GMT
Queen Bee says:
Hazing is the practice of rituals and other activities involving harassment, abuse or humiliation used as a way of initiating a person into a group. Hazing is often prohibited by law and may comprise either physical (possibly violent) or psychological abuse. It may also include nudity or sexually oriented activities.
Posted on 1 Mar 2013 16:31:01 GMT
Nico Riley says:
Not a bad review, but given that you yourself has admitted to not knowing the Detective Jackson series of books, I think it a little unfair to judge from reading a book that is the most recent in a series of about 6 so far (forgive me if I have this incorrect). I am currently on book 4 of the series and would NEVER dream of reading them in any order other than that they were written and therefore intended for me to do so in that order. Detective Jackson has had a very up and down career and personal life, not to mention health issues and therefore, please don't judge the author on one little book when the rest are absolutely excellent. Maybe had it been read in the correct order, you would have been able to emphathise with the characters more...?
In reply to an earlier post on 1 Mar 2013 16:44:15 GMT
Michael Watson says:
Yes, I agree with you about the earlier books in the series. Unfortunately, life's too short. I read this in the hope that the next one would also be worthwhile; one likes to notch up another author one wants to read. As I said, I'm sure his many fans will have enjoyed this book but I don't really want to hold on to a new book until I've read the previous 5 or 6 so, for better or for worse, it just wasn't for me.
In reply to an earlier post on 5 Mar 2013 00:05:25 GMT
O E J says:
It's not 'unfair' to judge this book based on reading this book alone. This is a review of a single book and it should be judged on its individual merits. Michael Watson has done a reasonable job of assessing its merits having read all of it. It's likely that you regard it as 'unfair' because the reviewer doesn't like it as much as you think he should.
In reply to an earlier post on 18 Aug 2013 20:27:41 BDT
I agree that you should be able to judge a book as a stand-alone. I get so annoyed by series of books that make little sense unless you've read the earlier ones in the series. I recently read one of the books in this series and felt left up in the air -I assume the next book would tie up loose ends but felt that was wrong. I haven't bothered to look for the next one.
This was a good review.
In reply to an earlier post on 22 Aug 2013 15:47:13 BDT
Eileen Shaw says:
I agree with OEJ and Jac. It's fair to judge a book as an individual offering, rather than saying, read all the previous books first. If a book doesn't do it for you, move on.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›