Vrinda Pendred's Reviews > The First Fifteen Lives of Harry August

The First Fifteen Lives of Harry August by Claire North
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review

did not like it
bookshelves: modern-literary-fiction, sci-fi, no-no-no-no-no
Recommended for: People who enjoy watching paint dry

WARNING: There are 'spoilers' in this review.

This is possibly the dullest book I've ever read. I suppose that deserves credit of some sort. Like ‘The House of the Seven Gables’, the author excelled at making me feel so claustrophobic and trapped in a realm of endless tedium that I related to the narrator’s disgust with life after suffering through just fifty pages. That’s not the mark of a good story, though.

The 'plot', if you will (and if I sound like I'm speaking in a pretentious poncy way, it's because I've been infected by the style in which this narrative was composed...ahem):

Harry (the narrator) is one of many who live their natural life, only to find that following death, they are reborn in the same life, to start all over again. Most people with this condition (it's never clearly explained why some people have it or how it came about, and the author didn’t seem concerned with thinking about this) can't remember details of their previous lives when they're reborn. Yet they remember that they lived again, and that they're doing everything all over again. They bemoan this problem many times.

Harry is one of the rare few who remember 'everything'. He is labelled a 'mnemonic'. Apparently he needs to be killed for this, because he could take knowledge from the end of his life and apply it to the beginning of his next life, thus altering the course of events. Why does this fail so spectacularly as a plot device? Because they also repeat ad infinitum that no matter what you do in each successive life, 'you cannot change anything'. It even says it on the back of the book as part of the synopsis. Yet the whole 'plot' revolves around the fear of things changing. Apparently it's dangerous.

In fact, after pointless fatalistic monologues about how no matter what you do, you can never actually change what's meant to happen...there are complaints that so many of these 'ourobourans' (the reborn) don't understand that 'it's not a good idea to kill Hitler' because of the repercussions of changing history. Um...?

Another mnemonic is a 'friend' and 'enemy' named Vincent, who has a forgetting device (which isn’t thought through at all). It doesn't work on Harry, and yet Harry is still scared of it. And although Vincent is meant to remember 'everything' (cue dramatic music), he often forgets he's met Harry in previous lives. Vincent says he's inventing a machine called a 'quantum mirror' that will allow you to realise you're actually God. I'm not kidding, that's how it's 'explained'. There's no visual description. There's no science. There's no philosophical insight. There's no...ANYTHING. I must have read that section ten times before I was willing to accept that the author didn't bother to think this idea through. It isn't even an idea; it's an idea of an idea.

A lot of other reviewers here said the science and philosophy went over their heads. No, it didn't. The ideas presented in this book are actually very basic; the author rehashed a bundle of clichéd pop-science without much original insight. The reason these concepts confused other reviewers is that they're so badly 'explained' it's clear the author herself doesn't know what she's talking about. They didn't relate to anything else that was going on, either.

And what else WAS going on, exactly? Tirade after endless boring pointless mind-numbing agonising soul-destroying pretentious tirade about things like communism - as if ANY of this is new and interesting and insightful in 2015. Harry has the ability to live again and again, and yet this is what he does with his time? Seriously? He never thought to do something more with his time, and he never got so gut-wrenchingly bored to tears with the repetition and monotony that he lost his mind? It isn't plausible in the slightest; no one would handle such a situation in this manner.

There is also zero characterisation in this book. Even the narrator - I can't tell you a thing about him. He's the most soulless character ever thought up. I've read critical theory textbooks with more personality. He has all this time to think and grow and develop as a human being and he does none of that. He just stands in dreary stuffy rooms drinking whiskey and speculating that life is meaningless. At one point, he says he loved a woman named Jenny and she put him in an institution because she thought he was mad when he told her he knew the future. She's never mentioned again for 300 pages. Finally, it turns out she's married to Vincent. Harry says he's heartbroken, and…I’ve pretty much worded it the way the book did. That’s as deep as it gets. He says he was so in love with her, and then moves on and that's the end of another potential idea of a storyline. Is that meant to be emotion? I also found it incredible that every character happened to be brilliant at quantum physics. Isn't that convenient?

Everyone was an elitist middle-class snob, as well, and utterly pretentious. I wanted to hit every one of them. And there were a lot of them to want to hit, because there was a new character in every single chapter – none but Vincent was never seen again in future chapters. There was no one to hold onto. And when I say chapters, I mean segments of 1-3 pages. That's how long every chapter was, and they all went nowhere. They just dropped off into nothing. Turn the page - scene over - characters gone - why did I read it?

What bothers me most is that this book was promoted as a time travel story. It's NOT A TIME TRAVEL STORY. He repeats his life over and over again. He's not jumping back and forth through time. Yet the author decided to write it as if he did, so you had no idea what was going on. Back and forth, back and forth - the only reason I can think of for her doing this is to disguise the fact that NOTHING HAPPENED. Put it out of order, keep readers guessing if there might be a story, after all! (There wasn't.)

The premise was good. She could have shown the key events in life one, had him die, then shown him reborn, had him be surprised, shown the key events in life two, shown him changing as a person because of it, shown him learning the secrets of his parentage, etc. as a slow mystery; each life, he could have learned more about himself and his roots. We could have seen him having a breakdown at some point, going nuts, before he decided to use the time for something worthwhile, and...oh yeah, that's 'Groundhog Day'. Sorry, all you endorsers on the back of the book - this book ISN'T 'totally original', after all.

Another point is that I had to keep reminding myself the narrator was meant to be a man. He sounded so like a woman, it really threw me when he randomly said he was in love with Jenny. I thought, wow, I didn't get the impression this was a lesbian, at all, and - ohhhh, right, yes, it's a man. I didn't get that impression, either.

And finally - who gives themselves a pen name and then immediately on the inside front cover of the book puts a colour photo of themselves, with the blurb, 'Claire North is the pen name of...,' followed by their real name, where they live and what they do as a day job? And then lists their personal interests as things like 'urban magic' and 'graffiti-spotting'? Did I mention this book was pretentious and elitist?

I also have to note that it speaks volumes that all the fans who take the time to comment on my review are hostile, nasty and think it's appropriate to make personal attacks on me without having met me. THAT is why I'm deleting such comments - not because my OPINIONS are 'wrong' or I'm 'too stupid to know how to read' (honestly, someone has thought it okay to say that). Those are the types of people driven to defend this novel - just another reason I HATE this book.

To sum up: I remember a line in ‘Catcher in the Rye’ when Holden says the sign of a really good book is when you finish it and want to pick up the phone and give the author a call, just to talk. If Claire North called me, I would hang up.
108 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The First Fifteen Lives of Harry August.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

January 8, 2015 – Started Reading
January 8, 2015 – Shelved
January 8, 2015 –
page 62
January 9, 2015 –
page 90
January 9, 2015 – Shelved as: modern-literary-fiction
January 9, 2015 – Shelved as: sci-fi
January 9, 2015 – Shelved as: no-no-no-no-no
January 9, 2015 – Finished Reading

Comments Showing 1-40 of 40 (40 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Nikki Claire North is a pen name for Catherine Webb -- a name under which she wrote several books when she was sixteen. A little more grown up, she wrote as Kate Griffin, and now as Claire North. I imagine that, like many writers, she's actually using different pen names to denote books of different tone and genre (examples: Robin Hobb/Megan Lindholm, J.K. Rowling/Robert Galbraith, Sarah Monette/Katherine Addison, Kim Harrison/Dawn Cook... and many others). In the case of Monette/Addison, it was a demand on her publisher's part to get past bad sales on a previous book.

There's only one excerpt from a future novel by Claire North, and it's all of a page long. The other was by Charlie Fletcher, about whom I know nothing, but whom I suspect is not also Claire North.

Apparently, most people with this condition (it's never explained - I don't know why some people do it and some don't, and no one even once questions this in the novel) can't remember their previous lives when they're reborn. Yet somehow they remember that they lived again, and that they're doing everything all over again. They bemoan this problem many times...while immediately repeating that almost none of them can remember previous lives.

Uh... no. It's stated multiple times that most people don't remember their previous lives immediately, but at the age of three or four start to remember. Once you've lived several centuries, however, things start to become blurry -- the same way as childhood memories are blurry for ordinary people, I assume, though that's not specified. The difference with Harry August and the other mnemonics is that they remember every detail and cannot forget.

I can get disliking the book, but yeesh, basing a big chunk of your opinion on a total misreading... Most of this book just plain wouldn't work if people didn't remember previous lives, so when you read it that way, of course you thought it was idiotic.

message 2: by Vrinda (last edited Jan 16, 2015 11:27AM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Vrinda Pendred I didn't base my opinion on a 'total misreading'. I wrote quite a lot in my review, which you seem to have ignored.

I based my opinion on the fact that every moment of this book was utterly boring and it went absolutely nowhere, I hated every single character, I didn't care what happened to any of them, everyone was cold and emotionless and up themselves, and I found it a struggle to get to the end.

Perhaps the 'explanation' of the mnemonics thing (and it's a very flimsy explanation that doesn't make for good plotting) was lost in the sea of self-indulgent communist diatribes and I missed it in one of the moments when I found myself nodding off.

Admittedly, I skimmed the excerpts from other books, at the end, because I was so fed up with what I'd just read, so I didn't notice the second excerpt was from a different author. I don't intend to read it, whatever it was.

Nikki I read your whole review. Some points I have no comment on, as they're spoilers; some I have no comment on because I don't substantially agree or disagree. You made several mistakes about fairly basic plot points that I know are wrong from being 244 pages in or flipping curiously to the back. Like...

Apparently, most people with this condition (it's never explained - I don't know why some people do it and some don't, and no one even once questions this in the novel) can't remember their previous lives when they're reborn. Yet somehow they remember that they lived again, and that they're doing everything all over again. They bemoan this problem many times...while immediately repeating that almost none of them can remember previous lives.

Harry remembers 'everything'. I'm not sure what distinction this is from everyone else who also seem to remember everything. He is labelled a 'mnemonic'. Apparently he needs to be killed for this, although it's never really explained why. I believe it has something to do with him having the ability to take knowledge from the end of his life and apply it to the beginning of his next life, thus altering the course of events.


And by the way, how can they even get the idea to kill young Hitler if they don't remember their previous lives and therefore the future?


At the end of the book, there were excerpts from the author's future novels. OMG, they were equally painful.

If you misunderstand or misread or don't read basic concepts of the book, of course you're going to think it's stupid. That doesn't make it actually stupid.

(I don't even know yet what my final opinion of this will be, I just know that your review is factually wrong, which irks me.)

message 4: by Vrinda (last edited Jan 16, 2015 12:35PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Vrinda Pendred It's a VERY weak plot device. Whatever the explanation, it in no way changes the fact that it goes nowhere. The things you're saying I got factually wrong are in fact one thing - which I clearly missed amidst endless waffling. When a book is so boring that an avid reader misses your whole 'plot point'...that's just bad writing.

Nikki So... if I can get the plot point, what does that make me? Super avid?

message 6: by Vrinda (last edited Jan 16, 2015 02:16PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Vrinda Pendred No - it means you aren't bored silly by it, like I was, and that's just a matter of taste. But when you finish it, do ask yourself why there's a full paragraph in which the narrator says no matter what he does, he can't change the course of events - he can't prevent certain people from dying, etc. and yet eventually the plot revolves around the idea that people are changing the course of events and that will somehow bring about a cataclysm.

Apparently you can't prevent the deaths of those you love, yet it's possible to kill Hitler and prevent WW2. In theory, anyway. Not that anything actually HAPPENS. They spend much of the book talking about what could happen, and talking, and talking, and talking...and none of it ever does. And, as I said, it's the most unoriginal idea. Are readers meant to respect the author as deep for questioning whether you would go back in time to kill Hitler? Are we meant to think, 'Ooh, interesting idea, I've never heard that one before'?

Nikki To be honest, I find the Chronus Club's reasoning pretty weak. If minor events can be changed (as clearly they can, or each kalachakra would live the same life over and over again, not varying in any details), why not large ones? And if their lives vary significantly, as they do, how can that not have a larger effect?

I haven't finished the book yet, but my understanding so far is that they're not talking about changing anything big, the things that seem inevitable -- which presumably come with too long a causal chain to be changed (e.g. WWI led pretty directly to the conditions for WWII) -- but about those small changes having an impact. You know, if a butterfly beats its wings in China, etc. At some points, it seems to me like the Chronus Club is not saying 'we can't change things', but 'we mustn't, because we don't have the ability to see exactly what our changes will cause'. If they do change something, that means that kalachakra who should exist further down the line no longer exist; taken to extremes, if the end of the world comes sooner each time, then gradually every generation of kalachakra will be erased.

Granted, then if the circumstances for the birth of kalachakra still exist, then new kalachakra will be born who know nothing of the previous timeline, but it's still a loss of many potential lives. That, I think, is what's so bad about it.

Say, for example, I'm a kalachakra and I live until 2080. In that time, a unified theory of everything is discovered by a guy with two kids, and I can grasp the principles enough to pass them on. So when I'm reborn in 1989, I live through my childhood, then go straight to university to become a physicist. I publish the theory of everything fifty years before anyone else could.

Then the scientist who would've come up with it kills himself before he has children, because I pre-empted his theory. Those children don't exist, then, and worse, any potential kalachakra who descend from them don't exist. So I've wiped out the existence of dozens of lives, maybe hundreds of centuries of living. Is it my right to decide that?

And then what if another kalachakra born in 1945 takes my theory of everything back and publishes it even before I'm born. What effect does that have on all the people, all the scientists who might've worked on the intermediate steps? What if somehow that means my father doesn't meet my mother? And then I don't exist. In a way, it's murder, even if the people for whom it is the present only see it as a murder of potential people.

It doesn't have to be a theory of everything -- that's quite a big target to pick, I picked it because there will be one, and it will revolutionise physics and probably make no difference to ordinary people, no influence in a war, etc. But any change can create a ripple effect like that -- just like not understanding the kalachakra's relationship to memories can make a lot of the story senseless. I wonder if you were misremembering Virginia's statement that sometimes they choose to forget and wipe their memories, so they can start over?

Anyway, I think the problem is not so much that the kalachakra can't change the course of the events, but that they shouldn't. And my problem with the plot, so far at least, is that the whole situation as described would change things, no matter what. It's an interesting thought experiment, to me, but unfortunately I can't see a way out of the paradoxes North's set up here. I guess we'll see if I change my mind in the last hundred pages or so.

message 8: by Vrinda (last edited Jan 16, 2015 03:15PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Vrinda Pendred No, I remember Virginia's statement about choosing to forget. It's featured a lot in the last section of the book. I just found it all very un-thought-out. I enjoyed reading your comment much more than I enjoyed the book. Yours reflected consideration. I didn't feel persuaded that the author had thought about any of this, clearly. I was finding holes in it everywhere I turned. And you're right - they shouldn't change things. But it's inevitable that by living again and again, they will. So I didn't understand the statement that they couldn't. It defied logic.

They kept banging on about deliberately going back and altering things, and then about needing to find the one who was doing this because it would bring about the end of the world. I kept thinking, surely by trying to get rid of this person, you're only doing the same thing that person is doing. How can you not see this?

I also had a problem with things like the memory wiping, for the simple fact that the author didn't even attempt to explain how that really worked. It was just so wishy-washy. They can do things to wipe out certain parts of the brain. Again, this has been done so many times. I felt like I was reading a Batman comic - but it was less entertaining. It didn't mix with the pseudo-intellectual style of the rest of the novel. It felt like a cheap cop-out.

And it bothered me that all the endless politics they babbled on about had zero significance to the storyline. When you get to the ending, you'll see - they serve no function, other than the author trying to show off about how much she 'knows' about historical politics. I can't personally stomach books that spend most of their time focusing on irrelevant details, where if you stripped that out, there would be very little left of the book. It's filler, to pad out the novel and mask the fact that there isn't much of a plot. Similarly, the endless characters every 3 pages, who you never get to know in any real way, are filler to mask the fact that there is no characterisation.

As I said in my original review, the only reason I feel so strongly about this is because there so many other writers out there struggling to get noticed (I'm a writer myself) and publishers only take on about 10 books a year...and when I see things like this, which make less sense than indie books I've read, it makes me wonder about the publishing industry.

message 9: by Vee (new)

Vee Hey! You leave Batman alone!

Hhahahaha just playing with you

Vrinda Pendred Hahahaha

Nikki I ended up being pretty disappointed with the way it all came together, though I rated it better than you overall. It's a shame, because I remember Claire North's other work being better than this. It's probably easier for her to get published because she's had a foot in the door for nearly ten years now...

Vrinda Pendred I gave it 1 star because I struggled and struggled to finish it, and just felt cross with the author through most of it because of how self-indulgent everything was. For me, I don't care how well-constructed individual sentences are; it really puts me off.

message 13: by Matt (new) - rated it 3 stars

Matt Stainforth I don't think the book ever suggests that Vincent forgets he's met Harry in previous lives. The book does say the reason Harry's afraid of Vincent's machine is because Harry doesn't really know why it didn't work - it could be because he's a mnemonic or because Vincent hasn't perfected the design.

message 14: by Sean (new) - rated it 5 stars

Sean What makes this narrator sound like a woman? I didn't get that impression at all, and I'm curious what it is that made you think that.

message 15: by Lynda (new)

Lynda Morgan I don't think you read the same book as me. Most of your 'facts' are wrong. Harry travelled to many parts of the world in his lives and learnt many different skills. There is no glorification of communist regimes-in fact a very bleak picture is presented. The politics, as you call it, is important as it is describing the age in which Harry's lives take place. Context is important in this type of novel - it's what gives it a feeling of reality of the time as does the description of the un-natural speeding up of scientific discovery and the uses to which it is put. The reason Vincent needs to be eliminated is that he is meddling with this for his own ends. There are some very interesting concepts in this book, both scientific and moral that seem to have gone over your head.

Vrinda Pendred They didn't go over my head. I just don't share your opinion. I felt nothing raised in the novel was original, particularly for a book written in the 21st century. If you thought those ideas were novel, I'd guess you haven't read as much on the subject as I have. I found it 'old hat' and strongly disliked the tone, not to mention the book was incredibly dull to me. The fact that fans of this book feel the need to insult people who didn't like it speaks volumes for the kind of book it is.

message 17: by Lynda (new)

Lynda Morgan I wasn't being insulting but as a physicist who takes a great interest in cosmology, I find the concept of a unified theory or a 'theory of everything' (as the quantum mirror is a symbol of) a fascinating subject, not novel, but interesting set in this context. As Stephen Hawking said, to have a complete understanding of the universe, why it is as it is and why it exists, is to see the universe with the eyes of the creator, to answer the greatest questions posed by man - what Vincent is attempting to do but, with little regard as to what his actions might have on the 'linears' or the future of planet earth. Of course the science is simplified and woven into a concept that can appeal to a wide range of people, it is a novel after all not a scientific paper. As humans are now living longer than ever before and the issue of AI is coming to the fore, some of the questions being asked are what would it be like if we could live for 2 or 3 hundred years or more without having to work? What would we do with our lives-would we be hedonistic or look for a purpose? Harry and his 'friends' have these choices albeit in a fantasy concept which is what this book is.

Vrinda Pendred This did not go over my head. There are many novels out there that have tackled this subject much, much better. Simple as that. That's my view on the matter. I thought this book was dreadful. It's not because it went over my head. It's because I seriously disliked it and have vastly preferred other books on the same sort of subject. I did not feel the author thought her plot through at all. There were so many holes, it drove me crazy. I don't want to get into a comment debate about it - that is simply my opinion of this book. Feel free to enjoy it - I didn't. It has nothing to do with whether I 'got it' or not.

Laura I wish you'd hidden your plot spoilers, I made the mstake of reading this before I read the book. Having read it, I agree that large parts of the book are boring. But glorification of communism??? I thought communiism was portrayed as being desperately bleak.

Vrinda Pendred Sean wrote: "What makes this narrator sound like a woman? I didn't get that impression at all, and I'm curious what it is that made you think that."

I couldn't put it into words. It just really sounded like it, to me. Something about the actual wording and sentence construction. You know, there are online robots where you can enter passages of text and have it guess whether a man or woman wrote it. It's encouraged for writers to try it, so if their male characters come out sounding like women, they can rethink how they've written things. I was picking up on something along those lines; the writing itself sounded so feminine, I kept forgetting the narrator was male and I found it very confusing. I didn't think he was a convincing narrator.

message 21: by Kelly (new)

Kelly Bardon I totally agreed with your review.... Unfortunately life is far to short and there are far to many good books out there waiting fore me to read to continue on with this drivel..... Tossed it at chapter 42

Vrinda Pendred I much appreciate you agreement - I wish I'd had it in me to stop reading like you did. I just kept telling myself, 'Surely it has to GO somewhere, eventually!' And then it didn't.

message 23: by Ian (new) - rated it 2 stars

Ian Casey There's a fair bit of your sentiment I agree with, but then I'm also baffled at some of it.

I don't follow your suggestion that Vincent ever forgot Harry. It appeared to me to be quite the opposite. The manner in which Vincent goes out of his way to find and manipulate Harry in multiple lives while constantly looking for clues to suggest he might have remembered something inconvenient was the horse the plot rode on for the second half of the book. I can see no evidence that he forgot Harry even once, let alone 'often'.

'Harry has the ability to live again and again, and yet all he does with his time is visit Russia and China during times of communism. Seriously?'

Sorry, what? He spends large portions of the book talking about the time he's spent travelling all across the world for everything from criminal enterprises to spiritual enlightment to just hanging out with Akinleye. In how many lives do we know he spends substantial time in Russia and China? I counted one each.

Nor do I follow what you're trying to say about the ourobourans/kalachakra not remembering details of their previous lives. They clearly remember the major things like World War II and their acquaintances with the other Club members in a similar way to normal humans, which is to say imperfectly. The mnemonics are unusual in that they do remember every detail perfectly, like savants.

On balance though, I felt this book had a lot of superficially cool ideas with not much substance underneath.

Claire Drewen This is the first book I quit halfway through. Honestly, I just couldn't take the tedious ramblings any longer. I got as far as chapter 43 and decided enough! It had the potential to be excellent going by the blurb, but not to my taste at all. I've had more enjoyment from reading text books.

Vrinda Pendred I bet chapter 43 was only 100 pages into the book, too, since every chapter was an undeveloped 2 pages long and went nowhere.

message 26: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Next time I suggest pay attention to what you're actually reading. It might still be boring, but at least you won't write a contemptuous review about all these "plot holes" and inconsistencies that (surprise!) aren't. Don't blame the author for your lack of reading skills.

Vrinda Pendred I read every boring word of this book. People are missing the point, here. For instance, someone said it said very clearly that he remembered others, so why did I say they couldn't? I very clearly said that was my issue with it - that at one point we were told they couldn't remember past lives, and then they said they did. It was so many things like that.

Maybe others should actually read my review properly.

message 28: by Jennifer (new) - added it

Jennifer Your review confirmed what I was feeling and I am only on page 67. I doubt I will finish it although it does wonders when I can't sleep at 2 am.

Vrinda Pendred Jennifer wrote: "Your review confirmed what I was feeling and I am only on page 67. I doubt I will finish it although it does wonders when I can't sleep at 2 am."

:) Yes, I suppose it's good for that.

Sindaurion So you don't even have the decency to correct factually false things in your review, even when people correct you with citations from the book itself?


Amanda I liked the first part of the book. But after Harry goes to Russia the pace changes and we get stuck with this boring Harry/Vincent circle that goes nowhere.

Amanda And the end resolved in such an unsatisfactory way that I was a little angry that I wasted so much time on this book.

Vrinda Pendred Yes. I don't mind when books have open endings, but they have to be done in, as you say, a satisfactory way. It can't just grind to a sudden halt without really achieving anything or answering all the reader's questions. That feels like an author who wasn't sure how to resolve it herself.

Stephanie Olson This review is factually inaccurate.

Sindaurion Stephanie wrote: "This review is factually inaccurate."

Yes. And the author of the review is too stubborn to admit that she simply misunderstood a lot of things in the book.

message 36: by Alexanda (new)

Alexanda Sseruga Stephanie wrote: "This review is factually inaccurate."

honestly, i think she is simply a hater :/
you know when you are determined to hate something but were too inattentive in your reading to come up with actual legitimate reasons to back up your hatin'

message 37: by Andrew (new)

Andrew Forrest After skimming your hatchet job of a review I am at a loss for words . Mean and nasty, especially the last sentence.

Kriemhild Thank you! I'm so disgruntled with this book for all the reasons you mention, but I would not have said it so well. I wish I would have seen your review before I started this mess

message 39: by Caroline (new) - added it

Caroline Bertaud Thank you for summoning up what I just couldn’t read anymore. Great review.

Virginia Your review is downright nasty. You say you're a writer (so, offer constructive writing advice, if you feel you have it to give) - and yet you tore down this book as if you had a personal vendetta against the author. You attack her for choosing to publish under a pen name (what's it to you? Many, many authors do this), you go on and on and on about plot holes and "the narrator" having no personality (I believe writers refer to the main character as the protagonist), and you endlessly spit out a barrage of hate (and inaccuracies) about a book you did not like.
Sounds less like a review to me - more like sour grapes.

back to top