Trey Grey; Out of the Dark (Trey Grey, #2) Trey Grey; Out of the Dark discussion


Comments Showing 1-2 of 2 (2 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Kathleen (new) - added it

Kathleen Tara's first book in her "saga" showcased incredible talent. But this first book suffered tremendously from a lack of editing and research that engendered a fair number of 2 and 3 star ratings that could have been 4 and 5 star ratings. I'm hoping that her next one is fully edited and properly researched so that:

1) its plot is tighter (shortening up the story a bit)

2) all the typos and grammatical errors are caught (too many to enumerate)

3) the medical/psychological terms are correct and actually exist. Goodreads' reviewer Karen* comments: a) There is no such thing as a 5 day “psychological coma”. b) When someone has a serious suicide attempt they are going to be committed to a psychiatric hospital for a few days at least. (I did not agree with her comment about abnegator...that is, indeed, a real word and its use can certainly be justified if used correctly.)

4) the author is more careful about human anatomy and physiology. Again, Karen at Goodreads comments: a) When you stab yourself with a 3 inch wide butcher knife the likelihood of missing all vital organs is slim to none, and the bladder is at the very bottom of the abdomen with the diaphragm at the top, so worrying about both in the same stab wound doesn't make any sense. b) Anyone who scrapes the skin off their body repeatedly and sprays bleach on it will have some really horrific scars that will not be fixable via plastic surgery.

* Karen is a Goodreads reviewer and a self-professed "medical professional". As a tech writer, I insist on correct grammar, punctuation, accuracy, and a tight the ver least. Karen's review alone would have sent me running if the talent hadn't been there.

So, I while I wait for the next one, I hope the author enlists the assistance of a professional editor. She deserves to have her books shine.

message 2: by Carmel (new) - added it

Carmel I am by no means a professional of any kind unless it is reading. When I read, it is for my own enjoyment and not with the intention of nitpicking the authors 'mistakes'. While I acknowledge Karen's right to nitpick and point out flaws, I prefer an honest review of the actual story line. I personally do not care about anatomical correctness, but I do care about the author letting me into the mind of the character and allowing me to empathise, sympathise and/or mentally slap the character up the ear for poor choices or whatever. I am not a fan of poor grammar but I can skip over it in my enjoyment of a story in which I am involved or a character I like.
Having said that - I tend to toss a book that is over-the-top-poorly-written and as such unenjoyable. I look for the personality of the character rather than the correctness of the dialogue, the empathy of the author for the character rather than the political correctness of the situation. Finally, if I like the synopsis of a book, I do not read reviews until after I have read the book. Usually I find that my opinion and the most negative reviews are polar opposites.
I respect the opinions of Karen, your Goodreads reviewer, but when I read for enjoyment I lock the critic in the cupboard. When I read from the point of view of a critic or reviewer, then I can be brutal.
Cheers & blessings. Carmel Smith - Newcastle, Australia

back to top