Tina's Reviews > Out of the Easy

Out of the Easy by Ruta Sepetys
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
12748514
's review
Oct 27, 2012

it was ok
Read in September, 2012

I might re-review this book again, since I read the ARC and not the actual novel. Also, I should state that this is VERY, VERY different from Between Shades of Grey.
The beginning of the novel was fantastic. Sepetys set the novel in 1950's New Orleans, and gave it a lush background. There are several very noble characters, most who work in a whorehouse, and Josie is a daughter of one of the prostitutes. She also cleans the house, and does little jobs for some of women. For the most part, the matron Willie keeps Josie protected and tries to offer her a better life. And Sepetys stuffs the book full of intrigue: there's books and murder and a future collegiate career.
From then on, the book's plot takes off, forcing Josie to stand on her own two feet. Unfortunately, Josie on her own two feet isn't as strong as Josie when she is surrounded by the shady characters. The book loses steam about halfway through, causing all of the characters to lag along with it. And--I hate to say it-- InstaRomance occurs.
There were a few things that held the book back: the start of the book as much stronger than the finish, and while Josie was likeable, she wasn't the most colorful or complicated character in the story. Maybe when I re-review the actual published version, I might have a different opinion.


*In my original review, I mistakenly referred to the setting as the 1920's when I meant 1950's. I apologize if the typo confused anyone.
1 like · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Out of the Easy.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-3 of 3) (3 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

MaryAnn Thanks for the term, InstaRomance. That seems to me the more I read, a common plot contrivance. I look forward to reading the book with your insight.


Naomi The book is set in the 1950's not the 1920's


Tina Naomi wrote: "The book is set in the 1950's not the 1920's"

Ah! You're right. It was a typo. I'm sorry for the confusion.


back to top