Takedown Twenty by Janet Evanovich

Some writers start with a bestseller, then it’s all downhill. You’re lucky to get the same bestseller repeated a few times with a slightly different plot. Others get better book after book. Michael Connelly is in that group, and Janet Evanovich seems to be there as well. Takedown Twenty was one of the best from the Stephanie Plum series. There were exploding cars, a bit of grimdark comedy, and a stray giraffe but it was balanced and Stephanie did well.

Stephanie should’ve been 50 by now. Technology ages but she stays 30. Other than this little glitch in the Matrix, it’s a great series.

March in Books

I finished 13 books in March. The only big one was White Sand Omnibus (which can count as 3).

The best ones were Thraxas and the Sorcerers, White Sand, and Avenger!

3 out of these books were written by writers I met in person.

I feel like I will slow down reading given that I have two difficult ones lined up and I’d like to finish them.

Thraxas and the Sorcerers

Thraxas, an oversized former “battle mage” with dubious magic skills and incredibly powerful liver, has to lobby for his friend to become the global chief magician. Makri will be the bodyguard.

There are a few tiny issues. A murder. It’s cold. Makri seems to be unable to fight when under the influence and she uses whatever is available all the time. She’s in love with an elf who doesn’t write back.

There will be no sword fights and the battle axe is going to be soft and sad. They’ll have to use their foggy brains this time.

5/5

Is it okay to criticize books?

I awarded 3* to Brandon Sanderson’s Warbreaker with a few harsh sentences and a couple of weeks later, it was announced he’ll visit Bulgaria. He did and I met him. Felt so embarrassed. But why was that?

When it comes to criticism, Dale Carnegie has been my ultimate guide. He wrote:

Dale Carnegie

Dale Carnegie says criticism does not work, it’s always bad, and he’s also attributed to a saying that constructive criticism doesn’t work either. Are there any exceptions? Dale Carnegie himself criticizes the people who criticize by saying they are fools, so at least one exception must exist.

The only somewhat working system I’ve seen so far is to criticize actions and not the people who do the actions. When I yell at my kids, I yell things like “Fighting with each other is bad” and I don’t yell “You are bad”. When reasoning is provided, it should be specific and with no generalizations. “This particular thing is bad because of this specific reason”. “Don’t punch your brother, he’ll feel bad and cry and I’ll take your phone” as opposed to “Stop you, idiot”, even though the second feels so much more rewarding.

So, in the context of Stephanie Plum , I said this: “I didn’t like that Stephanie ate so many donuts and faced no consequences. Most of us would burn in hell if we ate half of that.” – this criticizes Stephanie and generalizes because she doesn’t always eat vast amounts of donuts, only when her hair is messed up or her car explodes. Most people probably don’t have sugar issues, and I can’t speak for most people anyway – I can only speak for myself. I should’ve said something like “Reading about Stephanie eating 7 pieces of cake in one go made me feel nauseous. Cakes and donuts in such amounts can make her ill. I wish she had another way of dealing with the burnt and exploding cars.”

White Sand Omnibus by Brandon Sanderson

I blogged about this book because it’s heavy and impressive due to its size. I read it today. It was quite an adventure.

I only had rough memories from White Sand part 1, and the Omnibus contains parts 1, 2, and 3, so it’s technically 3 books. Reading the first part didn’t mess up with my experience, and I wouldn’t even count it as a re-read. It had additions to part one, and the visuals were significantly changed so it felt like a different book.

The second and the third parts had different artists. Part three was the simplest and I liked the most.

Story-wise, I’m surprised by the low 3.5 rating on Goodreads. The story is good. A typical Sanderson with a clever magical system, an attempt to explain it but not too much so that there’s room for 2-3 follow-ups. There’s a hint of a romance but nothing more. It’s good vs evil, however the evil is biting from the shadows.

Worth the time and money. 5/5.

PS. not sure how I was supposed to read it, I left prints on the book. I’ve never noticed leaving prints on books. This one was prone to prints. Go figure.