Book Review: One Little Lie by Sam Carrington

Connie Summers is back, but she claiming she met you before.

My name is Alice. And my son is a murderer. Deborah's son was killed four years ago. Alice's son is in prison for committing that crime. Deborah would give anything to have her boy back, and Alice would do anything to right her son's wrongs. Driven by guilt and the need for redemption, Alice has started a support group for parents with troubled children. But as the network begins to grow, she soon finds out just how easy it is for one little lie to spiral out of control They call it mother's intuition, but can you ever really know your own child?"

This is the second book in the series, it says this no way directly, not in marketing or online, but the main character Loser McGree first appears in 'Bad Sister'. The author also considers these to be stand alones. Well, here to say that she is in fact wrong. I won't often to say that but if two books deal with the same characters that is in fact a series and not a stand-alone. Lying about it only makes the reader confused about why are there referencing things as though they've been explained in another book and then annoyed by having to track down that information yourself. Congrats, Carrington you wrote a series. You can't claim them as a stand-alone, especially when Thriller Series standard has already been established for the over hundred years now. Same characters, completely stand-alone cases. I can read any Sherlock Holmes story in any order but don't make it stand-alone.

It's not really Carrington's fault, this is clearly marketing ploy as Stand-Alone Thrillers are the rage right now. It's a bad one. It's marketing who should clarify that characters return, instead of the returning characters not even on the blurb, which odd and bad choice. Did no one but the author like these characters? Their editor had to, right?

This book has several POVs but mainly follows Alice and Loser McGree whose real name I can't remember. It's also not on the blurb making it so much harder to find out. Okay, I'm annoyed but not that annoyed really. Her actual name is Connie Summers, she a psychologist that dealt with convicted criminals but now is trying to build a practice with their victims instead. This somehow involves her investigating a case that has very little to do with her but She is the protagonist. Would this story work better without her? possibly. She the catalysis for a lot of things to happens so it makes sense that she there. She just the most blandest, unlikable character. Maybe if I had read the first book or had gone in knowing it was a sequel, then Connie would feel more like a person instead of a list of past plot points.

This also involves a character refuses to speak for years until Connie talks to him, because convenient. I sort of specialise in Silent characters, it is fine and not offensive in anyway. It's a character who has reason to be quiet.

This is an interesting idea, the plot works having several narrators but has several asinine moments, though it quite far in the book so would be a spoiler. There are ways that actually work successfully. The Twist is pretty good.

Overall, I give this 3/5 stars for Bad Phyocogist. All the characters are unlikable, which I'm fine with, their real sin is them being as interesting as a sack of potatoes that are starting to root. I haven't read 'Bad Sister' nor am I ever likely to, even being half intrigued by the plot. I wouldn't go out my way to or any future books in this series.

Read: 4/4/2019 to 9/4/2019
Finished Review: 19/2/2020
Narractor/s: Rachel Atkins
Published Date: 6/9/2018
Publisher: HarperCollins Audio Download
Source: Library
Content Warning for Book: Don't remember.

Book Review: The Creeper Man by Dawn Kurtagich

 nn

There's a man in the trees, a man with no eyes, but still he watches, that's the surprise. Stay away from the woods, it couldn't be clearer, but the trees are creeping nearer and nearer...

Beware the creeper man.

This is Kurtagich's second novel, her first being The Dead House (which I have reviewed). With both titles of this book, you get what it's about: The Creeper Man, The Trees Creep In. Trees are spooky, the woods have something in them or do they?

This one also plays with formatting. Having different perspectives being written on different things, and in different ways.  Also creepy poetry which everyone loves. The narrative is done well and it pretty clear who writing from text alone.

There's only four characters that appear in the actual novel, other characters are mentioned or appeared sort of flashbacks (though, those are more fairy tales, than actually placing the reader in the past). We also have a Silent Character in the sister of the protagonist, while we do hear from Nori's POV, the story is definitely Silla's story, so no there will be no Silent Protagonist Review of this book. Maybe in a bonus round. It never made clear why Nori can't physically talk, can sign and write, and I can't decide if the implication is enough or not. Aunt Cath is also there. The thing I don't think I can really discuss the characters or their relationships with each other without spoilers. There's interesting stuff there.

This is set in the future, something about War. Not really sure why, especially when technology is so not in this book that it could be set in before World War II and no difference. Maybe life is a circle. Probably meant to keep the reader off-balance. Also all horror books must at one point takes place in the 80s. It's the current law.

Overall, I give this book 4/5 stars for Rotten Apples. This a creepy book with a cool concept and you will definitely ponder on The Creeper Man.

Book Review: Devotion by Ros Barber

The cover is better than the book.

April is angry. Only nineteen, April is an elective mute, accused of a religiously motivated atrocity.  Dr Finlay Logan is broken, a borderline suicidal criminal psychologist, still reeling from his daughter's death. He must assess her sanity in a world where - ten years after the death of Richard Dawkins - moves have been made to classify religious believes as a form of mental illness. 
Both April and Finley struggle to understand what happened to them

Asking fundamental questions about the nature of reality, Barber skilfully explores the balance between the emotional and rational sides of human experience. 

Sharing Secrets, silence and inability to deal with the world around them. Gently unpicking the lives of these broken characters.

This book was disappointing. I read this book mainly because Skulls and 'Elective Mutism'. Skulls on the cover and it's cool cover. Makes senses with the actual plot. There's no Elective Mutism in this book or the more modern term of Selective Mutism. It's always fun where stories set in the future have outdated terms. Even acknowledging the old definition, it's used just to be smart more than describing April; who is deciding not to speak to her count appointed Psychologist, Logan who will decide her whether she insane or not.

Going off the description, I thought it would be a dual protagonists, but it's very much Logan's story and the effect he will have on April's final outcome. This puts me in the awkward situation as I read this as part of the silent protagonist review video series I'm doing. I have seen better summaries that rightly focus on Logan. Moving on.

So Logan is a bland, male that cheats and has done terrible things to woman and his children.

The prose is fine. I didn't think about it until I seen other people talking it. It has that whole literature thing going on. It's fine.

The plot is half-arsed questioning god, but also not really. Its end up being more about choices and the whole butterfly effect thing again. Its deals with mental heath and with several characters having bad mental health. Though, they all have had fucked up stuff have happened to them. This book raises questions to abandoned them. It's fine. The classifying religion as mental illness, only deals with the type fundamentalism that involves blindly killing yourself for the cause; that's badly defined and go against your actual religion's beliefs so probably should be.

Overall, I give this book 3/5 stars for ill-advise charity events. This book brings nothing new to the table but is also not terrible. I probably would have enjoyed it more if I hadn't had such mislead ideas about what it was about. It's fine. There's nothing to rave for or against. If you like the idea, go for it.