Sarah Null's Reviews > Obsession, Deceit, and Really Dark Chocolate

Obsession, Deceit, and Really Dark Chocolate by Kyra Davis
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
May 14, 08

bookshelves: junk-food, whodunnit, californian, craptastic
Recommended for: liberal chick lit lovers
Read in May, 2008

** spoiler alert ** When a friend of mystery author and sometime amateur sleuth Sophie Katz asks Sophie to find out if her husband is cheating, Sophie never expects the husband to turn up dead. Sophie teams up with PI and on-again-off-again boyfriend Anatoly Darinsky to solve the murder and is drawn into a bizarre web of politics, religion, and Furries.

Well, I'd have to say that this is my least favorite of all of Kyra Davis' novels. Each of the books in the Sophie Katz mystery series has been fluff, junk food for the brain, and not at all memorable or earth-shattering. But up until now, they've also been fun.

The main reason for my dislike of this book is its clear bias against conservatives and Christians. Now, I'm not so naive or sheltered as to only read books where the beliefs depicted therein match my own. However, in this book, it grew tiresome reading stereotype after stereotype. All the Christians and Conservatives are either Jerry Falwell-types or Mark Foley-types. It's interesting to note that the author, Kyra Davis, is half Jewish and half black. Were a white Christian to write in such stereotypical terms a novel about Jews or blacks, the novel would be repudiated as Anti-Semitic and racist. However, it is perfectly socially acceptable to stereotype Christians. It also grew tiresome that the character of Sophie reiterated on every other page that she didn't agree with the views of the conservative characters. Okay, Ms. Davis. We get it.

It's also interesting to note that a major theme in the book is tolerance - mainly, tolerance toward the sexual perversions of others (Furries and Plushies feature prominently). Apparently tolerance toward any sexual lifestyle is admirable while tolerance toward religious beliefs is not. But, what else can one expect from a character and author from San Francisco?

One particularly ignorant quote: "I would rather burn in the fires of hell than spend eternity in heaven listening to a bunch of religious zealots say I told you so." I hope you don't get your wish, Ms. Davis. I don't think you would like the fires of hell so much as you think. There is a reason it is called hell.

And finally, a note to the publisher: In the description on the back cover, the reference to the Furry community should be removed. The whole Furry thing is a big reveal in the novel but it's obvious from the beginning if one has read the back cover.

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Obsession, Deceit, and Really Dark Chocolate.
sign in »

Comments (showing 1-6 of 6) (6 new)

dateDown_arrow    newest »

TheFountainPenDiva The entire book was one big fail of stereotypes, not just conservatives and christians. Though your not so sly dig at San Francisco shows your lack of tolerance too. I lived there for eleven years and guess what? Lots of people in SF attend different types of churches. I lived in the predominantly latino Mission District, named for Mission Delores. That was a mostly Catholic neighborhood. Guess what, even gay men and women attended church. Go figure. So maybe while you're criticising about stereotypes, you might not want to expose your own.

Sarah Null Vixenne, I have lived in northern CA my whole life. I have lots of friends and family in the Bay Area and in San Francisco specifically. And it is my experience that the city is a predominately liberal, leftist community where conservative Christianity is not the norm. It is also a city with a worldwide reputation of sexual freedom, dating from the free love movement in the 60s. That does not mean that I believe there are no Christians in San Francisco, nor that there aren't any liberal San Franciscans who are tolerant of others' religious beliefs. It also doesn't mean that I don't think we should be tolerant of others' sexual proclivities. If you knew me at all, which you don't, you would know that I am an enthusiastic supporter of gay rights. I just found it ironic that a novel which preached tolerance could be so blatantly biased.

TheFountainPenDiva Was it really biased, or is it that you were forced to see conservatism and christianity through the eyes of characters who have to deal with the effects of both on a daily basis? When was the last time a conservative christian was bashed until they were dead? When was the last time a conservative christian was told whom they could marry? How many gays and lesbians have attended military funerals holding signs that read GOD HATES FAGS?

The real issue here isn't the lack of tolerance, but the sad fact that whether you like it or not, this is the image that a lot of people have about conservatives and christians. It's not a pretty one, but ironically, it's the very one that gets fostered by the media and by the tacit silence of those conservatives and christians who do not rebuke those who use hate rather than love. Very few people know about the Rev. Peter Gomes, but everyone knows about Pat Robertson. Few people know who Jim Wallis is, but again, everyone knows who Fred Phelps is. Personally, there's an image problem that seriously needs to be rectified.

While we're speaking of tolerance, as a supporter of gay rights you should have been just as outraged at the epic fail of Ms. Davis' stereotyping gay men as hairdressers. Overall, there was much to be desired about this book period no matter what side of the aisle on is on. I think I gave it two stars and that was only because I liked one of the characters.

message 4: by Meghan (new)

Meghan What the heck kind of book did you read? Furries? Really?

message 5: by Meghan (new)

Meghan PSA: Stop Reading Trash. Just Say No.

Sarah Null Yeah, I read it 3 years ago.

back to top