The book: Hysterical.
The author: Worth reading again.
Review:
I picked up Custard's Last Stand on a lark after my local librarian accused me of not being able to take out a mystery unless food was somehow involved. I had read all of my usual go-to food mysteries, and had picked this one up because it's title caught my eye. When the line underneath the author's name read "A Pennsylvania Dutch Mystery with Recipes," I decided this would be my designated food-related mystery.
I left this book until the others I had checked out were completed. Honestly, I was not overly convinced I wanted to read anything that was Pennsylvania Dutch. Then again, if I knew the main character, Magdalena Yoder, was going to have lines that would make me laugh out loud, I would have made this my first selection to read.
Whatever I had heard about the Pennsylvania Dutch clearly did not prepare me adequately to meet Magdalena. I was expecting something a lot more, um, straitlaced and serious. I was not expecting someone who wails out her frustrations, has to slap herself for her snarky comments, or who gives out her measurements (33-32-33) as a confirmation number to certain select guests at her inn. I found myself laughing far more than I should have at unexpected comments.
The basic plot of the book is that a gentleman who is staying at Magdalena's inn winds up murdered, and it is up to our heroine to figure out Whodunit before she becomes one of Whodunit's victims. In and of itself, this is not a unique story, and the cast of characters certainly seems to be full of just about every stereotype imaginable, most of them less than intelligent. It is a sign of my own lack of intelligence that it took me the vast majority of the book before I realized the joke behind one of the character names. (It was Miss Anne Thrope, in case you were curious. I am so ashamed that I missed something so glaringly obvious that was first mentioned on page four. I can only excuse myself by stating that I play an online game where people choose play-on-word names all the time so I tend to gloss over them. My own "Murphy Brawn" is one of those examples.)
I have no idea what made me enjoy this book, but I did. The stereotypes and random dumb characters should have made me roll my eyes and never want to read another book by this author again. However, I found myself laughing. Tamar Myers clearly has a very active imagination. Whereas I have heard of scary, deaf, old piano teachers who would grab your ear to tweak as punishment, I had never heard of someone training a small dog to stay quietly in their bra in order to fake bulk in that department. It was the randomness of some of the descriptions that kept me rushing to finish reading this book. I look forward to experiencing more Pennsylvania Dutch mysteries in the future.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Sunday, November 13, 2011
The Charming Quirks of Others by Alexander McCall Smith, a review
The book: Charming and quirky
The author: Worth reading again
Review:
This was my first Isabel Dalhousie novel. I have no idea how many of them are in existence, but I shall go off in search of others. I am used to protagonists being quirky or having their own unique spin on life. This was the first novel I read in which the main character actually does something specific that I do: follows tangentially-related ideas until she realizes she has been completely ignoring whoever is supposedly waiting for her response. This includes smiling at inappropriate times, staring blankly at others, and typically making comments that are completely unconnected to the subject at hand.
Needless to say, I liked Isabel immediately.
In this book, Isabel has been asked to discretely determine which of three individuals has a skeleton in his closet. There is an actual back story given to explain why these three people are connected, but it's ultimately irrelevant. The end result is that someone wants everyone to be perceived in a poor light, and therefore sent off the letter that sparked Isabel's inquiry.
Everyone in the story has his or her own quirks, and that is really at the crux of the matter. Some of the quirks are more harmless than others. Some are downright criminal. Regardless, Isabel's quirk of responding to a question with a six-degrees-removed train-of-thought was entertaining enough to keep me reading.
Ultimately, she discovers all of the skeletons in numerous closets, and I was secretly disappointed that she chose to not reveal her hand to one character in particular, but liked the character enough to accept that decision. I shall not spoil the specifics for others who wish to read this novel. However, I will include a quote from page 250, which at least lets Isabel explain her opinion:
"I'm sorry," she said. "I would normally give people the information to which they are entitled,
but I do not think you deserve this information. So I shall not."
On the whole, Isabel is rather introverted, intelligent, and prone to random attacks of philosophy, which makes sense given that she considers herself to be a philosopher. It certainly makes it interesting when she comes up against those decisions about whether or not to show her cards. Finally, a detective of sorts who does not feel compelled to spill the beans when asked to do so!
I look forward to reading both past and future installments of Isabel Dalhousie's life story. Kudos to Alexander McCall Smith for his thought-provoking quirky story.
The author: Worth reading again
Review:
This was my first Isabel Dalhousie novel. I have no idea how many of them are in existence, but I shall go off in search of others. I am used to protagonists being quirky or having their own unique spin on life. This was the first novel I read in which the main character actually does something specific that I do: follows tangentially-related ideas until she realizes she has been completely ignoring whoever is supposedly waiting for her response. This includes smiling at inappropriate times, staring blankly at others, and typically making comments that are completely unconnected to the subject at hand.
Needless to say, I liked Isabel immediately.
In this book, Isabel has been asked to discretely determine which of three individuals has a skeleton in his closet. There is an actual back story given to explain why these three people are connected, but it's ultimately irrelevant. The end result is that someone wants everyone to be perceived in a poor light, and therefore sent off the letter that sparked Isabel's inquiry.
Everyone in the story has his or her own quirks, and that is really at the crux of the matter. Some of the quirks are more harmless than others. Some are downright criminal. Regardless, Isabel's quirk of responding to a question with a six-degrees-removed train-of-thought was entertaining enough to keep me reading.
Ultimately, she discovers all of the skeletons in numerous closets, and I was secretly disappointed that she chose to not reveal her hand to one character in particular, but liked the character enough to accept that decision. I shall not spoil the specifics for others who wish to read this novel. However, I will include a quote from page 250, which at least lets Isabel explain her opinion:
"I'm sorry," she said. "I would normally give people the information to which they are entitled,
but I do not think you deserve this information. So I shall not."
On the whole, Isabel is rather introverted, intelligent, and prone to random attacks of philosophy, which makes sense given that she considers herself to be a philosopher. It certainly makes it interesting when she comes up against those decisions about whether or not to show her cards. Finally, a detective of sorts who does not feel compelled to spill the beans when asked to do so!
I look forward to reading both past and future installments of Isabel Dalhousie's life story. Kudos to Alexander McCall Smith for his thought-provoking quirky story.
The Pumpkin Muffin Murder by Livia J. Washburn, a review
The book: Interesting enough, but poorly researched
The author: Would not read again
Review:
Up until page 85, I enjoyed this book. The Pumpkin Muffin Murder was a quick, entertaining read up until I hit a part that made me absolutely cringe. As is the norm for this type of murder mystery, a food cooked by the wanna-be detective was found in the deceased person's mouth. When I read, "As far as she knew, there wasn't even anything that could have caused a dangerous allergic reaction in someone who was hypersensitive to certain foods," I hesitated.
First of all, I am a person who has a large number of food allergies. I have had circumstances where my throat started to close because someone brought into my house a sandwich that had cut onions on it. Onions are not typically a food that causes reactions in most people. I am fully aware that any food, under the right (wrong?) circumstances can cause "a dangerous allergic reaction." However, since the wanna-be detective included the caveat that it was "as far as she knew," I presumed the recipe in question would at least be free of the eight major allergens that I would truly hope most people know can cause severe reactions in allergic individuals. I flipped to the back of the book where the recipes are, only to discover that the author made a huge mistake with that poorly researched sentence.
Included in that recipe were examples of dairy, egg, flour (wheat), and pecans (tree nuts), among other foods. All of these are examples of foods that could easily cause a severe allergic reaction in a person. All four of those are on the list of the eight major allergens. (The remaining four are peanuts, fish, shellfish, and soy, for those who are curious.)
From that point on, all credibility that Livia J. Washburn had established as a thus-far entertaining author got thrown completely out the window. As far as I am concerned, this author did no research whatsoever. I am not interested in reading anything else she might have penned.
The author: Would not read again
Review:
Up until page 85, I enjoyed this book. The Pumpkin Muffin Murder was a quick, entertaining read up until I hit a part that made me absolutely cringe. As is the norm for this type of murder mystery, a food cooked by the wanna-be detective was found in the deceased person's mouth. When I read, "As far as she knew, there wasn't even anything that could have caused a dangerous allergic reaction in someone who was hypersensitive to certain foods," I hesitated.
First of all, I am a person who has a large number of food allergies. I have had circumstances where my throat started to close because someone brought into my house a sandwich that had cut onions on it. Onions are not typically a food that causes reactions in most people. I am fully aware that any food, under the right (wrong?) circumstances can cause "a dangerous allergic reaction." However, since the wanna-be detective included the caveat that it was "as far as she knew," I presumed the recipe in question would at least be free of the eight major allergens that I would truly hope most people know can cause severe reactions in allergic individuals. I flipped to the back of the book where the recipes are, only to discover that the author made a huge mistake with that poorly researched sentence.
Included in that recipe were examples of dairy, egg, flour (wheat), and pecans (tree nuts), among other foods. All of these are examples of foods that could easily cause a severe allergic reaction in a person. All four of those are on the list of the eight major allergens. (The remaining four are peanuts, fish, shellfish, and soy, for those who are curious.)
From that point on, all credibility that Livia J. Washburn had established as a thus-far entertaining author got thrown completely out the window. As far as I am concerned, this author did no research whatsoever. I am not interested in reading anything else she might have penned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)