*Nerd Alert* - sort of like a spoiler alert to let you know that if you don’t want to read nerd stuff, please stop reading now.
I thought I’d try somet*Nerd Alert* - sort of like a spoiler alert to let you know that if you don’t want to read nerd stuff, please stop reading now.
I thought I’d try something new. I’ve been having a hard time being moved by anything I’ve been reading lately. As a result, I have not been writing any reviews. So, I thought I would try to apply a rating to the book as I move through it at 10% intervals. I already track how many pages I’ve read and my progress through the book and therefore, I thought this should not be hard to do. Yeah, yeah, I’m a data geek, but playing around in Excel with my Goodreads database actually translates into creative ways to view data in my job. Alright, and it’s fun too.
From the chart, you can easily see that this was the print edition and although I was rating on a 10-point scale to pick up nuances as to how I felt at that point in the book. I then converted the score back to a Goodreads scale by dividing the average by 2. I know, I know, nerd stuff.
The chart shows that the book started out with so much promise with a great concept about being able to identify psychopaths in the population and started heading downhill from there with temporary lift about halfway through the book with a less than stellar finish.
One of the things that really annoyed me throughout the book was the continual unnecessary negative references to U.S. Presidents, which really impacted my impression at the 80% mark.
On the positive side, I got to learn about such exotic places as Saskatoon Canada (seriously, I don’t think I’ve ever read a story with that as one of the featured places) and the possibilities of what could happen if we could really identify psychopaths so easily. Would it be a new way to discriminate or would it help us identify prevent future tragedies?
In the end, a 3-star rating – which means “I liked it” on the Goodreads scale, but just barely as the overall average translated to 3.15....more
This was a 5-star book through 90% of it. The mystery of what was going on in the building had my attention gripped. The final 10% of the book was a "This was a 5-star book through 90% of it. The mystery of what was going on in the building had my attention gripped. The final 10% of the book was a "bit out there" but was softened slightly as it could be expected. Still, I thought that the author's writing style was captivating and I am looking forward to giving him another chance with The Fold....more
Great story and characters. Stephen King did an amazing job narrating his own work. At then end of the narration there is an interview with King thatGreat story and characters. Stephen King did an amazing job narrating his own work. At then end of the narration there is an interview with King that gives you some additional insights into how the book came about. I enjoyed it very much....more
Who the hell am I? After listening to the audio version of this book, I have to question who I am, but before I get to my explanation, let me first giWho the hell am I? After listening to the audio version of this book, I have to question who I am, but before I get to my explanation, let me first give my full disclosure. I won the audio version of this book through a giveaway at the Time Travel group . Any time I am fortune enough to win a free copy of a book, I feel that I owe a review of or my thoughts about it—whether it be good, bad, or otherwise. So, here we go.
First, duel or multi-cast narrations, I am not a fan. If I had to pick between fiction and non-fiction as the genre that identifies me, it would be non-fiction. Duel or multi-cast narration does not translate well into non-fiction and so it is what this grumpus has grown accustomed to. In fact, I am such a non-fan, that this is a feature I consider when deciding whether or not to choose an audiobook. However, the fluid team narration between Noah Michael Levine and Erin deWard seamlessly brought me into their world and won me over. I cannot imagine the resulting impact if this was read by a single narrator. Their voices and timing of their interaction was outstanding and impressive. This is not my father’s multi-cast, old-time radio styled presentation I envisioned and feared. I liked it, I really liked it! It had me questioning myself as to who I am. Maybe I don't know myself as well as I thought.
Love stories? Typically, I avoid them unless they are part of a non-fiction historical perspective—like John and Abigail Adams. The only “love story” I’ve enjoyed was ironically, the time travel based Outlander series. I’m very reluctant on picking up anything as trivial as a “love story”. So again, I questioned who the hell am I, that I should be drawn into the love story of these likeable characters?
Okay, so I like the narrators and their acting skills in terms of bringing the author’s characters to life. I’ll admit too, their love story was initially intriguing but would the overall story hold? I don’t recall ever using the ubiquitous adjective of a paid (book or movie) reviewer prior to this in any of my reviews/comments but it is well-deserved here--brilliant! The time travel aspect of the book was handled in a unique, believable manner and kept me engaged throughout.
I am not a prude—or so I thought. I don’t mind a love story but I was a little embarrassed by some of the sex descriptions. Maybe it was the multi-cast which gave it a more realistic feel. So realistic it felt as if I was in the room with them while this is happening. I doubt a single narrator could deliver that type of impact--it did make me a little uncomfortable. Maybe it was the fact that my typical love story is from a more sterile, 18th century perspective? Remember my mention of John Adams and Abigail Adams? Who the hell am I?
After listening to this book, I don’t know who I am any more. Have I grown? Possibly. While I may no longer have a good mental picture of who I am, I do know that I am a now fan of D.L. Orton, and if someone like me enjoyed this book so much, I’m certain more “normal folks” will too. ...more
First off, for full disclosure, I won this book from the author through a contest run through the Time Travel group here on Goodreads. The author posFirst off, for full disclosure, I won this book from the author through a contest run through the Time Travel group here on Goodreads. The author posed the following question to the group “What will be the top headline or news story for March 1, 2035? The best answer wins. My winning response was, The end of disease and eternal youth now comes with risk—loss of free will. Who is hacking the health robots in our bloodstreams forcing people to do the will of those now controlling these formerly benign health-bots? I was very excited and grateful to have been chosen to win the autographed copy of the book and a watch! I also feel strongly that in winning any giveaway, although not required, you owe it to the author to give an honest opinion.
That background stated, I’ll move on to my thoughts (in order of strength of opinion). The book is promoted by asking the question, “Would you ever travel forward in time if you knew it would be a one-way trip?” This teaser intrigued me and I was excited to read how that might work. (view spoiler)[ It’s essentially a guy aging slower that the rest of us. I don’t recall the exact ratio but along the line of seconds to him equaling days to the rest of us. I don’t see how that makes him a time traveler. Based upon that assumption, aren’t we all time travelers on a one-way trip? (hide spoiler)]. Because of this I feel I cannot even shelve this as “time travel”.
Goodreaders who know me know that I’m a clear-cut ending guy. I always refer to the movie, Field of Dreams. I didn’t get that ending. Please don’t leave it to me to interpret. I don’t if it is my introverted nature thought process or what, but I don’t like to have my invested time whether book or movie, left unresolved. For most people this does not seem to be an issue. So, I don’t let this be a huge detractor for you.
On the positive side, I thought the writing was excellent and the future events described chilling, and more disturbing, plausible. The likeability of the story followed an inverted bell curve. It did not take long to be sucked into the story but tailed off during the middle. It didn’t seem like much was happening during that time and was too drawn out. The ending however, picked back up to earlier levels and I could not wait to find out how it would all wrap up. (view spoiler)[ It never did, in my opinion. (hide spoiler)].
The best and most poignant part of the book was his relationship with his daughters. I have two of my own and I could truly connect with the protagonist in terms of his relationship with them. In summary, the positives and negatives cancel each other out and that is the rationale for my 3-star I “liked it” rating. ["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>...more
It received my nomination based upon an interesting plot line -- seemingly unstoppable aliens overtaking the Earth! The first 90% of the story was interesting and I enjoyed it very much. The final 10% of the book however, was just silly in how the Earth was saved. While the outcome is predictable, I thought it would have been a tad more creative. ...more
I’ve never used the following adjective to describe a book or much of anything really. While a very common word it has never had significant role in mI’ve never used the following adjective to describe a book or much of anything really. While a very common word it has never had significant role in my lexicon. I wonder why?
Anyway, the books upon which I write a commentary, seem to have a word, phrase, or association that comes to me during the reading/listening. In this case, I found this to be a very lovely story.
The characters were interesting and the story compelling. It made for a lovely listen. Steven Crossley, who narrated C.J. Sansom's series about the hunchback lawyer, Matthew Shardlake in Dissolution did an amazing job.