On another thread -- or several other threads -- where people discuss writing reviews I find comments about the stinkers and the stars of the books people have gotten from LT. So, I wonder, from all of those posters, what books were worth it and which ones were not?

Any you really liked? And which did you really hate? A sentence or two about each would probably be enough... but feel free to elaborate!

Hi karen_o! The stinker that immediately comes to mind is Any Given Doomsday by Lori Handeland. I know I'm not alone in hating it. It was shallow. Handeland just threw everything into a paranormal she could think of, stirred it up, and got a mess out of it.

The Fire by Katherine Neville is a close second, for different reasons.

Probably most of us who will comment here wrote the required reviews, so I won't link mine here.

One of the stars for me is Sworn to Silence by Linda Castillo. It is a great thriller/suspense comparable to Tami Hoag and Iris Johanson. Castillo draws you into her characters.

Another was Devil's Cape by Rob Rogers. It is a world of super heroes and super villains. I like a book that has a good story line and just gives you enough info to let you visualize the characters and events. This book did a great job of it.

My stinkers were Shunned by Arthur L. Ford. I just couldn't like the man that the story was wrapped around, not the main character but the Amish farmer. The storyline was too split. I don't know how to describe what I mean. It was about this event and this event running simultaneously, nothing else. The characters were very narrow and unexplored.

Another stinker was One in a Million by Kimberla Lawson Roby. It was shallow with no character development. It was predictable and boring.

I agree with karenmarie, Any Given Doomsday stank. Not only was there all sorts of random paranormal crap just crammed in, but there was weird sexual stuff and all the main characters were awful.

Zoe's Tale by John Scalzi is very good, but I knew I was going to like it because I had (and liked) pretty much every other book he's written already.

Most of books I've gotten have been neither amazing nor awful. Those two were the only stand-outs so far.

Message edited by its author, Apr 21, 2009, 12:54pm.

Stars (rated 4 stars and above, from highest to lowest):
Tears of the Desert by Halima Bashir
My Father's Paradise by Ariel Sabar
Honeymoon in Tehran by Azadeh Moaveni
The 19th Wife by David Ebershoff
Sweetsmoke by David Fuller
Franklin and Lucy by Joseph E. Persico

Stinkers (both rated 1/2 star, nothing else is lower than 3):
Two Brothers: One North, One South by David H. Jones
Holding Her Head High by Janine Turner

For me the stinker so far was Blackbird, Farewell uninspiring all round. The best book was Every Man Dies Alone by Hans Fallada a well deserved classic.

Because of the change in the interface, I can't see all the books when I look at tags (or just the library). So going by memory and what I can see:

Star:
John Birmingham's Without Warning
James Rollins' The Last Oracle

Stinker:
Stan Lauryssens' Dali & I (http://www.librarything.com/work/5336958)

Couldn't finish:
Manil Suri's The Age of Shiva

6> I just knew the Fallada would be a gem -- I didn't manage to snag an ER copy, so it's definitely on the must-buy list.

I haven't received any out-and-out stinkers yet (knock wood) but The Retreat by David Bergen and Mutiny on the Bounty by John Boyne were both stars.

Stars for me were definitely Honeymoon in Tehran and The Translator for nonfiction and Everyone is Beautiful, Journal of Curious Letters and The Charlemagne Pursuit for fiction. (With honorable mentions to Outcasts United, Shade and Elisha's Bones).

The best so far: The Translator.

The worst so far: Any Given Doomsday. I don't want to put it in brackets and give it any more room to be the "most discussed" book. :)

The absolute worst- Luminous Cities- ugh! I can't believe that I read it to the end- oh yes- it improved slightly.

Worst: One in a Million, Kimberly Lawson Roby.

Best: Serendipity, Louise Shaffer.

The best? mm- there have been many-Tyrants by Marshall N. Klimasewiski,The Translator by Daoud Hari, and Love's Civil War:Elizabeth Bowen and Charles
Ritchie by Victoria Glendinning.

To date, I've done three ER (more MG books).

Star: Patient Zero by Jonathan Maberry.

It wasn't AMAZING, but it's been the best I've read so far.

Stinker: Rich Like Them by Ryan D'Agostino.

It operates under the guise that it will give you financial advice, only to tell you (a) stuff you already know, and (b) stuff that you probably could have figured out on your own if you sat down and contemplated how to get rich.

As far as MG books,

Stinkiest stinker I've ever chanced to smell: Pureheart by Rita Hsu Syers.

If you're one of the other people who've read the book (other than the blurber who gave it a 5-star), you'd know what I mean!

Stars: Outcasts United by Warren St. John
The Tricking of Freya by Christina Sunley

Stinkers: Any Given Doomsday
Tender Grace

Star: The Economist Book of Obituaries

Stinker: Dali and I

Gents and The Flying Troutmans were outstandingly good - the others I've received have ranged from OK to a bit blah, but no utter rubbish!

For me, 2 out of 5 received 4 stars - A Forgery of Venus by Michael Gruber and Black Doll by Edward Gorey.

The stinkiest stinker in stinktown (so long!) is Sweetpea's Secret which was a complete horror and an insult to brain cells everywhere.

Actually, I haven't received any real stinkers myself, so I wondered what people were referring to in that other thread. I guess I would have to say that Sweetsmoke is my least favorite, but it certainly doesn't rate a stinker label.

I've received mostly good ER books and would probably rate The Piano Teacher and The Melancholy Fate of Capt. Lewis near the top.

A definite stinker for me was the Linda and Gary Cargill book. Unbelievably bad, and undoubtedly the worst book I read in 2008.

The other books I've received have been anywhere from 2 to four stars. So nothing truly stands out.

A star for me was Things the Grandchildren Should Know. Luckily, I haven't read any ER books that were stinkers.

Great thread! :')

I'd say The Story of Forgetting has been my favorite, followed up by America, America and The Pirate's Daughter.

I guess I'm lucky in that I don't feel like I've really gotten any stinkers yet, although some of my "less favorable" would include The Cross: 38,102 miles. 38 years. 1 mission., Sitting Practice, and A Dangerous Age.

Message edited by its author, Apr 21, 2009, 8:29pm.

The best I've gotten was Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet by Jamie Ford. I really loved that one.

I haven't gotten any huge stinkers so far.

Annie's Ghosts is amazing. One of the best books I've read, period. The Disappearance was another excellent read.

No real stinkers for me, though Lookin' Back, Texas wasn't my cup of tea. I think if it's Christian fiction, then a person who reads the full summary on the LT ER page AND skims the main page of the author's website should be able to tell!

Message edited by its author, Apr 22, 2009, 10:00am.

One stinker for me The King and Mrs Simpson: The True Story of the Commoner Who Captured the King, fortunately it was a quick, but very frustrating read.

I've actually enjoyed all the other books I've received, but my top books are A Night Out with Robert Burns: The Greatest Poems, The Spare Room and An Elegy for Easterly with a mention in dispatches for The Flying Troutmans which has stayed with me.

Message edited by its author, Apr 22, 2009, 5:55pm.

Stars- Rain Song by Alice J. Wisler was a good ER book. I know some didn't think so, but I really enjoyed it. The Wednesday Sisters: A Novel by Meg Waite Clayton was a good rainy day read.

Stinkers- On A Day Like This by Peter Stamm was not my cup of tea at all. I could have had more excitement writing a week in my own life.
Seasonally Fit; Nature and the Governing Dynamics of Fitness and Health by Brian Syme, L was hard to get through. The Widows of Eden: A Novel by George Shaffner was one I couldn't even get through, my sister liked it, but boy I didn't!

My favorite so far is Tell Me Where it Hurts, which was my first ER book. Haven't had any stinkers, but a few I didn't love.

I've got three ER books, two good and one stinker. Annie's Ghosts is the star. Four stars, in fact. I handed it off right after I was done to my mother-in-law, who was a psychologist at a Michigan Psychiatric Hospital.

I also received (along with everyone else) The Uncommon Reader. Three and a half stars. A short little novella, and witty.

Stinker was Dream Lucky. It read like a B- high school term paper.

Message edited by its author, Apr 23, 2009, 9:23pm.

Two absolute stinkers: Bestseller! by Jane Daniel, and Stupid American History by Leland Gregory.

Shining star in The New 50 Simple things Kids can do to save the earth.

The one I just got Wife of the Gods a first novel by Kwei Quartey looks like it's going to be a winner!

edited to correct touchstone

Message edited by its author, Apr 23, 2009, 9:33pm.

I've gotten a couple I'd consider stinkers (I'd rather not single them out here, bleeding heart that I am), and a some that were just okay. But a lot of the ER books I've happened to receive from other sources were amazing, so I think I've just had bad luck!

I did just finish my March ER book, Comes Love, Then Comes Malaria, and it was a fun read. I'll be posting my review next week.

Right now I'm struggling through the awfulness that is Pureheart by Rita Hsu Syers. One of the most annoying tendancies the author has is capitalizing words that are Important so you you will understand that they are Significant and pay Attention to them. The author also has a tendency to have a long paragraph followed by a one sentence paragraph. This is so the reader will Understand that the offset material is Important.

Because the reader must Get The Point.

Message edited by its author, Apr 24, 2009, 10:25am.

>31.

Hehe. I found that Totally Annoying about PureHeart. Also, the capitalization was nonstandard. It would sometimes be Capitalized, but other times, it would be lowercase. And then, there was MidWord capitalization, but that too was InConsistent.

I almost felt like I was reading a German Book in which every Noun is capitalized.

Your comment on the Summary Sentences made me think of those long forum posts that have a TLDR (too long, didn't read) line that summarizes what the poster was trying to say.

You should just throw in the Towel on Pureheart. There's nothing good there, only Pain. And the last page will not be a Blessing, but a Curse.

Syers likes to use a Hammer to make sure that the Reader gets the Point. Also, she effectively owns/runs her publishing company, so I doubt there was little quality control over her books.

The best one I've received was America America. I was disappointed with Blackbird, Farewell and Dream Lucky, in that I thought each could have been better with some small changes. Oh well. And to quote Dot Parker (I think), Any Given Doomsday is not a book to be tossed aside lightly; it should be thrown with great force.

Two stinkers so far:

Any Given Doomsday - a conglomeration of the worst possible fantasy cliches
Happy Hour is for Amateurs: A Decade in the World's Worst Profession - I really thought most of it was lies. Simply did not pass the truthiness test.

I have gotten some really terrific books:

The 19th Wife - fastest 600 pages I ever read
The Spanish Bow - lush and detailed and fabulous
The Mystic Art of Erasing All Signs of Death - really loved this one

I'd say the stars for me were The Translator: A Tribesman's Memoir of Darfur (simple, wise, beautiful), Black Ships (a great fantasy beginning a new series), and Winter Rose (lovely historical fiction). There've been some other good ones, but those really stood out. I'm not done with The Sound of Building Coffins yet, but I suspect it may shoot to the top of the list when I am.

The Stinkers? Any Given Doomsday for too many reasons to mention, as noted before, along with Golf Unplugged, which was possibly the worst edited book I've ever read, and didn't really match up to the summary given. Also, I have to say that I found The Story of Forgetting a waste of my time--it was nicely written, but it also felt sloppy in a lot of different ways, story-wise.

All three I've recieved have been Ok-good, neither stars nor stinkers, gents too short, jasmine tortoise slightly muddled, and busted flush also muddled.

32: Mostly at this point, I am reading Pureheart with an eye towards the Humorousness that will come from the resulting Review. It is also annoying how when a new Character is Introduced the character will often engage in a disgression consisting of an InfoDump.

When I was a younger Man and in high School,, I had a black poodle mix dog named Harry that was my best friend. He would meet me at the Door when I came home, sit on my Feet when I studied, and sleep at the Foot of my bed at night. But he was Really Old and mostly blind and deaf. One day my mother was backing her car out of the driveway and he didn't notice and she killed him by accident. It was a Terrible day.

Because that infodUmp was important background Material:: it shows how much of a Dog Lover I am and how Wounded I am so I can fit into the mutual PIty pArty that the main characters of the book engage in.

>37.

lol.

Good luck topping my review, though.

Also: I used writing snarky comments in the margins as a coping mechanism. Thus the poor, unfortunate soul who picks up the book from the donation bin will at least be amused by two hack authors, instead of just one.

I also disliked Any Given Doomsday immensely.

I'm not much fonder of Send Yourself Roses by Kathleen Turner.

38: If, as you indicate in your review, this is the sort of book you would buy to give to an enemy you would like to punish, then I have to ask: Why, oh why, did you put it in a donation bin? What terrible things has humanity done to you to deserve such treatment?

;)

Humanity gave me PureHeart!

Now I want to read Annie's Ghosts. This thread has more uses than I thought.

And I'm halfway tempted by Pureheart just so I can learn to Write so Eloquently with random Capitalization.

(Did I get carried away there or have I caught the Essence?)

I haven't had any real stinkers through LT. I think my favorite LTER book is one I just got, Baby Jesus Pawn Shop.

Stinker: The Night Battles; It was like reading a Fellini film; maybe if it had been a film it would have made more sense.

Star: Larry's Kidney; It was funny and touching. I'll remember Larry and Daniel for a long time.

My stinker? Beverly Jenkins's Bring On the Blessings. Seemed interesting on the surface, but the plot was paper-thin and the writing sloppy.

The stars? Katherine Center's Everyone Is Beautiful -- incredibly well-told and moving! I also loved Courtney Summers's Cracked Up To Be, a young adult novel I got as part of a batch last year.

Stars? Say Goodbye by Lisa Gardner
My Husband's Sweethearts by Bridget Asher
Hell Bent by William George Tapply
The Pre-Nup by Beth Kendrick
Sworn to Silence by Linda Castillo

Stinker? Playing Dead by Allison Brennan

Only got one ER so far, but Shanghai Girls was definitely a star!

Most of the ER books I've snagged so far have been good ~ a few were a bit less fun/interesting/well-written than others, but not so bad I had to stop reading to throw the book across the room. A couple were outstanding: Mr. White's Confession and The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society.

I'm just grateful to have had the chance to get in on the LTER action.

The funniest thing about Mr. White's Confession is that it's about 10 years old. Terrific novel though.

Two of the worst books I ever read :

The Eight which I purchased and had on my shelf when I requested and received The Fire.

When I was notified that I was getting The Fire, I quickly read The Eight.
It was excrutiating. Too many characters, and too many facts. If she came across something about the time period she threw it in. By the time I finished my eyes bled.

Then I had to read The Fire ! It was somewhat less painful than The Eight, but only the difference of a hot poker in the eye v/s a poker in the eye.

What I mean to say is The Fire was a stinker for me.

ETA

blest atheist.. also a stinker. I kept imagining the author in an upper body cast, having injured herself patting herself on the back so often....

Message edited by its author, Apr 26, 2009, 9:53am.

My very favorite was a recent one, Loon: A Marine Story by Jack McLean.

My second favorite was The Amish Cook at Home: Simple Pleasures of Food, Family, and Faith by Kevin Williams.

I had some books that I liked a lot less but non I'd want to call "stinkers". I guess I've been lucky.

Moving Your Aging Parents: Fulfilling their Needs and Yours Before, During and After the Move by Nancy Wesson is my favorite ER book, and looking at the reviews, it was appreciated by other reviewers also.

I think that To Buy or Not to Buy: Why we Overshop and How to Stop by April Land Benson, Ph.D. is a 'sleeper'. It has broader application and greater depth than the majority of reviews seem to indicate, in my opinion. (But then, how many people rave about the fun they had going to the dentist? - see my review).

Some of the least enjoyable ARC's were Sweetsmoke, Beef: The Untold Story, Falconer on the Edge, Some of the Dead are Still Breathing, American Buffalo: In Search of a Lost Icon, Telex from Cuba. If I had purchases any of these I would have been disappointed.

Some of the best ARC's for me include Scheisshaus Luck, The Translator: A Tribesman's Memoir of Darfur, Every Man Dies Alone (Hans Fallada), The Lost City of Z, Waiter Rant, Au Revoir to All That. None of these I would have normally purchased (other than perhaps Lost City), but now that I have read them, I would easily recommended to anyone to buy, well worth the time and money.

(ps. I get most of my ARC's from sources other than LT, don't want anyone thinking I have an unfair number of ER copies since they are harder to come by here.)

Message edited by its author, Apr 26, 2009, 10:42am.

I've really enjoyed all four ER books I've won so far . My fave is Everyone Is Beautiful by Katherine Center .

My favorite was Etta by Gerald Kolpan. I would have read it even if I hadn't received it as an arc. My least favorite was Rocket Man. It just wasn't for me.

31,32,37,38 - Too funny!

I'm so glad it wasn't Just Me that was overly disappointed by Pureheart. The info-dumps were painfully long and incredibly ill-timed and the cApitaliZation thing was certainly weird as well. If I can throw in one More Gripe without any of you ripping my head off and splattering my blood in copious arcs of Arterial spray across otherwise unstained walls while my head dangles limply from my shoulders by a thin stretch of flesh and ligaments, it was the author's need to include overly detailed scenes of violence in what appeared to be a youth-oriented book.

Call me craZy, but somehow talking dogs and horses don't quite fit in the same novel as a girl being brutalized by family members before the whole household is slaughtered by demons.

elbakerone, haohaohaohaa! Good post, made me laugh.

These PureHeart posts are too funny. Didn't read it but thanks for the warning.

I'm surprised that Olive Kitteridge hasn't shown up yet on this list as a star. I liked it quite a bit and was pleasantly surprised to hear that it was awarded the Pulitzer last week.

The other star of my 9 ER reads was The Translator. I read it right around the same time that I read What is the What and I learned so much about Sudan from those two books.

Great discussion topic!

I really disliked Any Given Doomsday.

Yesterday I finished The Last Bridge and it was excellent! I hope I'm fortunate enough to receive more book like this one.

57: That was definitely a Weird part of Pureheart, but I was more Annoyed when the InfodUmps would throw in Information that was far in the Future - case in Point: Jack talks about how Moose is killed in his first InFodumP about him, but Moose doesn't actually die until much LaTeR, so he is in a bunch of scenes later in the BoOK.

>61.

I think that the InfoDumps were there to FillOut an otherwise Skimpy Book. At times, I experienced the same thing for NaNoWriMo, as I needed to hit that 50k WordMark, so I'd add all sorts of UselessInformation. Of course, I never Published my Crap (aside from making it free OnLine), forcing People to Pay $25 to ReadIt!

Is anybody else wondering how much the five-star reviewers got paid for their inability to find anything wrong with the book? Or, better, what book they actually read? I'd like to read that one instead, plz.

This book is so bad, it makes me want to rewrite it and send it to Syers free of charge. It's a pity she already published her notes, as otherwise, she could have found a real publisher more willing to take the final draft.

She shoulda read this first: http://www.orcutt.net/othercontent/sfds....

>57:
I wasn't going to join in about Pureheart - that is until I got to the part elbakerone mentions. When the demoness, mid-slaughter, just happens to interrupt a teenage sibling spit-roast... well... words fail me.

I thought it was bad enough when Jack was "licking his mother's open gash" (couldn't stop giggling at that - I know, my filthy mind), but I really don't think anything can beat the above.

>49 & 50

I also loved Mr. White's Confession - gave it a very favorable review on my blog.

> "licking his mother's open gash"

That sentence alone would keep me from reading it.

That's what I decided, too. It sounded amusing before, now it just sounds gross!

I can't say that I've hated any of the books I received.

But the best book I've received is Utagawa Kuniyoshi : the Sixty-nine stations of the Kisokaidō, by Sarah E. Thompson.

>64:
The author was referring to the dog healing a wound on his mother's leg, but it was a really unfortunate way of putting it.

The more gruesome/sexual moments of the book are often thrown out there without warning or context, almost as an aside, making them inappropriate (there aren't too many of them, but that makes it worse when they come up). And as the tone is often that of a YA book, it's a bit weird.

Star:
The Translator

Stinkers:
Sitting Practice
Arlington Park

Star? Going To See The Elephant. It was just a good, fun read, and a book that I would not have bought for myself, so that was a bonus.

Stinker? Well, I don't want to heap scorn on a free book, but you can easily identify it amongst my reviews.

Not for ER, but for Barnes and Noble First Look I got The Physick Book of Deliverance Dane. And I thought it was so dull and predictable--but then I joined the online discussion and everyone just loved it! Anyone else want to join me in bucking public opinion and pronouncing this book thoroughly mediocre?

#70: Agreed! Everything about that book was just trite and predictable. The characters were stereotypes, and the romance part was just there to be there. I have a review up at Amazon on it...

I'm calling Wife of the Gods: A Novel, by Kwei Quartey, a star. Enjoyed the reading very much!

I'm just dropping back to say that now that I've finished The Sound of Building Coffins, it is indeed my favorite ER book received to date, with the possible exception of The Translator: A Tribesman's Memoir of Darfur. It's just so hard to compare fiction and nonfiction!

I have to add The Last Bridge to my stars list. What a great book! One of my favorite ER books.

I was glad to see savedbyhisblood mention Arlington Park by Rachel Cusk. That one was hard to get through.

But I've had far more stars than stinkers: The Given Day by Dennis Lehane, Every Last Cookoo and Story of Forgetting.

Annie's Ghosts is definitely a Star, I absolutely loved it!

When The Lights Went Out: Britain in the Seventies is proving to be a star so far - very good!

>70 and 71 -- I had problems with DELIVERANCE DANE, too. Haven't posted my review yet, though, so I won't say more.
I'll come back later with my stars and stinkers.

#72---I totally agree: Wife of the Gods is going to be a big hit...it's wonderful. See msg 19 for a full review.

Well, I've finished Pureheart, and posted a scathing review if anyone wants to experience the hideousness of the book second hand.

>80.

*slow clap*

Excellent review, StormRaven. I too wanted to point out the fragile yet indestructible book in my review, but I didn't want to get too carried away with my nit-pickery. I wanted to nit pick about every single problem on every single page, but, hey, then I'd STILL be writing my review.

You should totally cross-post your review to Amazon.

Also, I wonder if all the negative reviews may have had anything to do with the author's recent trip to the hospital...

Stormraven, I agree with aethercowboy--great review that should be listed elsewhere, though I'm sorry you had to deal with such a book! I'm so glad I got nothing that month instead of that one!

Hi Karen et al
Stone's Fall by Iain Pears is a current ARC that's very long but also quite wonderful.

Among my favorite LT ARCs were The Piano Teacher by Janice Y. K. Lee and The Story of Forgetting by Stefan Merrill Block

Stinker: I was repulsed by Theorin Johan's Echoes from the Dead I simply couldn't read it for the ugliness of the actions of one of the main characters (including animal cruelty for fun). Simply a personal choice; I couldn't read enough of it to give an overall opinion.

I'm looking forward to reading Shanghai Girls

I guess I struck a nerve with my review of the terrible trash that is PureHeart. Clark Isaacs decided to send me a response in my personal e-mail - not even having the courage to make his response public. His e-mail, by the way, was titled "Your left wing comments have no foundation!", which just gets tossed into the pile of incomprehensible statements flowing from him. Anyway, here is what he wrote to me:

"Isn't it interesting that you would write a review and slam a work which you would not have the courage or imagination to pen yourself.

Yes, I am an uneducated oaf with only three degrees which you did not bother to ask about or check out.

If you would have bothered to ask, I did not get paid for the review which was published on the cover of the book and will be published in several newspapers.

Poor old Ezra Pound would turn over in his grave if he knew that distant kin of his was pounding sand!

How many books have you written? Do you know what it takes to put your heart and soul into a story?

Because you are spewing such loggerhead and incomprehensible diatribe only shows your truly not a man of God. Turn the other cheek!"

I don't care how many degrees Mr. Issacs has, nor do they matter. What matters is that his blurb of a review is rife with lousy grammar and incompehensible sentences. Further, it glowingly praises a truly putrid book. If he has three degrees, it is obvious that none of them required the ability to write coherently. Here's his "review":

"Demons, witches, and Angels from God abound on earth in fury {sic} battles. The conclusion will make you a believer that the main character of PUREHEART is a champion in all sense {sic} of the word. Jack, a Boston terrier, and his sister Scout bring to life a story that revolves around the nether world and other unearthly creatures which are swiftly dispatched. A thrilling read which will have you longing for more. J.K. Rowling, move over, Rita Hsu Syers has arrived."

Note the grammar, which would flunk a fifth grade class. In addition to the errors I noted, look at the misuse of commas: there should be one after "his sister Scout", and there couldn't be one after J.K. Rowling". Are the demons, witches and angels all from God? There is also the bizarre construction of "the nether world and other unearthly creatures which are swiftly dispatched". Is the nether world swiftly dispatched? Is the nether world an unearthly creature? What newspaper would accept such semi-literate work?

He resorts to the ancient and completely bankrupt canard that those who have not written a book cannot therefore review them, which is just as silly as his contention that J.K. Rowling should move over to make room for Syers. It doesn't matter if you pour your heart and soul into something if the end result is terrible. The end result of Syers' efforts is laughably bad. I'd compare it to The Eye of Argon, but that would be insulting to The Eye of Argon, which is at least funny.

He says he wasn't paid for the review, yet there is no other way to explain his fondness for this piece of awfulness. My review was, if anything, too kind to PureHeart.

Message edited by its author, May 5, 2009, 12:19pm.

Apparently, Clark Isaacs didn't get a degree in Being Polite...

I'm jealous, though, I didn't get an e-mail from Isaacs, though I obliquely insulted his review and his prowess at reviews (just like I indirectly insulted Mr. RK Edit).

Also, I've written a few books and short stories and technical articles, a few of which have been legitimately published, so I understand what it means to pour my heart and soul (and various humors) into a piece of work. But I also understand that the first draft is always never worth publishing (which is why you don't see my NaNoWriMo novels being published by Bronwen, Lulu, iUniverse, Paolini International, or any other vanity publisher). And, I totally agree with you regarding your feelings towards such a horrible, uninformative, sensational blurber review written by Isaacs.

My theory on Isaacs is that he wrote the five-star in order to GET LISTED on the back cover, because I guess some people enjoy seeing their names on the backs of horrible, poorly edited, manuscripts, praising said sub-par works. I guess other horrible authors will see that and realize that he'll write a WONDERFUL review for the book.

Hey, if Isaacs wants to spend his time reading very, very poorly written trash, then I guess that's his right. I'd prefer to read something with a little more quality control.

85: I didn't even get into the lousy writing in his e-mail. For example, he uses "your" instead of the correct "you're" when he says that I'm apparently not a man of God (presumably because I paid attention when studying Christian theology).

He also uses loggerhead incorrectly when he goes about insulting me - in the sentence in question it should be "loggerheaded". I guess that's what one ends up writing when using words that one doesn't really understand.

Message edited by its author, May 5, 2009, 12:27pm.

>86.

I love it when people who can't argue get upset when you call them out, and then make fools of themselves in the process of trying to sound all "edumacated."

I noticed that the day after I tagged PureHeart on Amazon with "horrible" someone tagged it with "wonderful."

I think there's a conspiracy going on. Dan Brown should write a book about it.

At least he knows how to write lousy prose that people want to read.

*snort* Dan Brown That is a good one aethercowboy.

Wow, a bitter bad blurber! I'm so glad that even people that have never wrote a book are allowed to read them. I can't even get my mind around the childish comments that he made.

Edited to fix my error.

Message edited by its author, May 5, 2009, 3:56pm.

>88.

It's important to note that StormRaven did not receive a reply from the AUTHOR, but by one of the reviewers whose blurb appeared on the back of the book.

I just wanted to clarify this matter, as Rita Hsu Syers, to my knowledge, did not give Mr. Raven an ear-full for his review. And, as much as I disliked reading her book, I don't think it's right to let this confusion persist.

Thanks for pointing that out, I'll fix my post.

I'm glad you let me know. I was disappointed in the author for the comments and am relieved that he wasn't the one to say them.

Message edited by its author, May 5, 2009, 3:58pm.

89: I should have clarified that Isaacs wasn't the author, although I point that out in my review. I think it is important to note that the only way I can think of for him to have gotten hold of my personal e-mail address is for Bronwen Publishing to have given it to him (since, at their request, I sent them a copy of my review via e-mail). He did not send his comments to me via LibraryThing, and my personal e-mail is not on my profile.

StormRaven, if I were you I'd let Tim or Abbey know that--I'd say complain to the publisher, but I would think that Lt's management complaining would give more weight. Even if he doesn't bother you again, I have to say that sets a bad precedent--as much as I love ER, I certainly don't want my private email being given to authors and reviewers (though I don't mind the publishers having it).

92: Done.

I'll also point out that Isaacs is a member of LibraryThing. His "review" of PureHeart is on the site. On his comments section of his page, he as much as admits that the review he gave was meaningless fluff.

92>

Well, in this case the publisher is the author (as was pointed out over in this thread), and StormRaven willingly emailed the review. So she could have easily replied to it without breaching any privacy.

What I find exceedingly weird is that she chose to let some third-party freelance reviewer do her pique-work. Whether she initiated it by crying to him about the nasty LT person or he initiated it by getting all ragey and insisting on defending her honour, she had to at some point say "Here's the address; write to him."

94: That is odd. Of course, since I am basically a litigator in temperment, it is usually not fun to tangle with me when you've annoyed me. Isaacs has annoyed me, and I've made sure his diatribe has been made pretty public by attaching it and my comments in response to it to my review. I also posted a couple comments on his LT page which, bizarrely, he hasn't figured out he can simply delete.

Since I was curious, I looked at all the LTers who gave PureHeart four or five star reviews. It is an interesting lot.

EnglishTeacherUSA gave it 5 stars. They have 4 books in their LT library and one review (for PureHeart of course). ETUSA says he gave it to his 14 year old niece, who loved it, and wants to buy 100 copies to teach to his high school students. Yep, scenes of gang raping siblings, matricide, dismemberment, and buckets of graphic gore is just what young teens need.

tamjeang1 gave it 5 stars. They have 1 book in their library, and 1 review. Guess which book that is?

JennMarie68 gave it 4 stars. She has 163 books and 52 reviews. The average rating of a book in her library is 4.09 stars. That's pretty high in my estimation.

clibrarianhalstead gave it 5 stars. She has 30 books, and 4 reviews. 3 5-star reviews and one 3-star. She also says she has three teenagers who are excited to read the book. Just as with ETUSA I am left wondering exactly what she is thinking.

edhead gave it 4 stars. He has 263 books, and 11 reviews. Most are pretty much fluff pieces, but he does seem to have some books he dislikes (average rating 3.89).

clarkisaacs, of course, gave it 5 stars. He has 365 books, and 72 reviews. You have to dig pretty deep into his reviews to find any that he has rated lower than 4 stars.

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 8:47am.

IMO, the trouble with people taking offense at reviews and 'attacking' the reviewer is that reviewers might 'pad' their future reviews so they don't anger someone. I am very non-confrontational and would be upset if I opened an e-mail or got a message criticizing me about something I wrote.

> 95

EnglishTeacherUSA's review has me worried about the state of education in this country. The writing style is pretty pathetic.

Do you think it's a coincidence that he joined LT on April 3 and has reviewed only one book?

You have to dig pretty deep into his reviews to find any that he has rated lower than 4 stars.

I gather that he doesn't review books he doesn't like. I've seen other reviewers with the same attitude. (See this discussion.) Personally, I don't get it. I'm a firm believer in warning people away from bad books.

97: Yeah, ETUSA's review bothered me a lot, but then I decided that the entire profile is probably just a sham so that Bronwen Publishing could get a review up on LT. There's just so little there that it is hard to imagine someone bothering to start a LT profile and then putting that sparse a library up.

The thing I find amazing about Isaacs is that he actually is in a couple tiny newspapers. The reviews he has in those papers are all pretty unimpressive too. I wonder if he has pictures of the editors of those rags in compromising positions or something.

Mr. Raven, you are hereby awarded my "Totally Awesome Person of 2009" award. You, like other fellow recipients, such as Michael Moorcock (2008) and Cory Doctorow (2004), can all share in this prestigious (chuckle) honor.

It got me thinking, maybe when I do get around to publishing books, I'll stick one of the scathing reviews on the back, under some fluffy ones.

To be honest, I'd rather read a negative review for something I liked than a positive review for something I may hate. I used to be an avid reader of The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, and loved reading Lucius Shepard rip some movie a new one each month. Positive reviews are just boring. And they're really no help to the author, either. Wouldn't YOU rather be told in what ways you suck than to be praised countless times over how awesome you are? I know I would, otherwise, I'd never improve myself. That's why I started a local writers critique group, so that other people, like me, can share our work, and have people tell us what sucks about it. And then when it finally stops sucking, it's probably worth reading. I'd invite Syers, but I don't think she lives in the Houston area...

Also, I think Mr. Isaacs lives in a different era: we can't insult the writings of the ladies, they may get the vapors! And, if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all (Here's my "nice" review of PureHeart: It made a good doorstop for a while, and then lined the bird cage wonderfully! Polly made some contributing edits that made the book even more readable! Houston Free Press, step aside and let PUREHEART take center cage!)

>97.

Not just the state of education, but also, that we, the tax payers, are helping it get that way, assuming the school approves such a ridiculous purchase.

99>*ROFL*

That is a great review!

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 9:11am.

99: Thanks for the award. It warms my heart. And I don't even need dog saliva to feel happy.

Your mini-review of Pureheart gets five stars from me. Polly is probably the best editor Syers has ever had take a crack (or crap) at her book.

As to the "delicate flower" that Isaacs is defending, I think it worth noting that the book she has produced includes scenes of brothers gang-raping and brutalizing their sister while their mother lies drunkenly passed out on the couch, a teenage girl who slits her mother's throat and dumps her body into a well, a mother who kills herself and her five year old son (and is whisked away to heaven by an angel for her murder-suicide) whose blood is then drunk by a passerby, characters dissolving in a manner such that their internal organs come oozing out their bodily orifices, a teenage girl infected with ebola who is described as having her dissolving internal organs leaking from her anus and vagina, repeated references to candles made from human fat, and a description of a priest who locks his congregation in his church and sets it on fire.

And we haven't even gotten to the gruesome dismemberment scenes involving the actual demons who pop up in the narrative. My favorite is the sequence in which the lead demon bites a girl's face off, leaving only her mouth so she can hear her screams, and then takes about an hour to slowly torture her victim to death, described in detail of course.

Delicate flower indeed.

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 10:23am.

I've been following this thread and I applaud you Stormraven for writing and defending your review. I can only hope that the ensuing drama does not instead have an adverse affect and sensationalize this work of complete rubbish!

While I have not read Pureheart myself and therefore cannot comment on the book, I am appalled to think it might make its way into the educational system (should ETUSA’s profile be legitimate).

Re the high star ratings... I have realised people might find I give a high average. Thing is, I have a lot of books and not so much room, so I tend to pass along books i'm not going to keep, which includes those getting a 3 star or lower rating. I do review all my books on my blog, but my LT account is for books I own. Just my tuppen'orth.

104: I'm in that category too - I don't read much fiction nowadays (aside from re-reading old favorites, which naturally have high star ratings when I've bothered to rate them at all), and non-fiction which doesn't impress me doesn't stay around (although now I would leave it in my catalog for the ratings / reviews).

Getting back to the original question of stars and stinkers, I haven't really had either so far in the ER program. Most of what I've received for fiction have been acceptable, middle of the road stories that I neither hated nor loved.

I think the one I enjoyed the most was Baby Love: An Affectionate Miscellany by Rachael Hale but it is hard to dislike a picture book with such sweet babies!

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 10:24am.

104-105: I don't think anyone is really arguing that high reviews in and of themselves are a problem. In the cases I outlined, I was looking at those who gave PureHeart high reviews, and noted that they were either reviewers with extraordinarily sparse track records (reviewing PureHeart and little or nothing else) or gave very few reviews that rated a book as less than stellar.

The problem is someone like Isaacs, who has (1) said he never gives negative reviews for anything, and (2) said that the review he gave for PureHeart was essentially a fraud, and was simply some peppy sentences that he wrote so Bronwen Publishing could put them on the back cover (leaving aside the fact that they are badly written). Since he can make my point much better than I can, I'll let Mr. Isaacs words illustrate what I think is a shoddy way to view reviewing books:

"When you espouse yourself to be the literary giant, first proof read what you write. Misspelling a person's name is a grave error and shows a lack of consideration. Remember reading Marbury vs. Madison? Can you off the top of your head give a recitation on the facts and rule of law?

The reference to the writing of a book which I made, had nothing to do with the writing of a review. What it was about was that to insult an author about their work is not the gentlemanly thing to do. We should treat ladies with respect, if you have not liked the book, then say nothing or that it should be something that you would pass upon.

With respect to the review that I wrote, it was only intended to provide some comments that were to be incorporated into the cover of the book. The publisher wanted some short snappy lines to incorporate for the cover. Not a literary masterpiece.

I reviewed your so called library and note that you have a collection of old science fiction which I have long since discarded.

I have a following of 675,000 readers in various newspapers and magazines. The reviews which I write that are negative are 0! I choose not to write a bad review of a book, if I do not like the book I will know that in the first two or three chapters. I give all the books to charity when I am finished with them. Those which are gross, get tossed."

Let's go through this, shall we?

First off, my grave error consisted of misspelling his name as Issacs. Think about that. He can't even use commas properly, but a reversal of two letters is a "lack of consideration". He then launches into a complete non-sequitur about Marbury v. Madison (which is the most basic Constitutional law case out there). I still don't understand why it is relevant whether or not I remember the facts and holding of the case (I do).

According to him, writing a negative review is ungentlemanly, apparently because the author in question was a woman. I wonder what most women will think about the idea of giving their work a pass (regardless of quality) simply based upon their gender.

He then follows this up by essentially admitting his review is a fraud. It isn't a review: it is ad copy. The publisher asked him for "short snappy lines" to put on the cover. So, now we know that not only did Bronwen Publishing solicit the "review", we know that Isaacs agreed to write something positive about it for them without considering the actual quality of the book.

Then he gives us a clue as to why Bronwen Publishing would choose him for this job. He writes no negative reviews. He's proud of his lack of discrimination. He touts his readership - but one wonders how many of his readers actually read his rather lacklustre column, and how many know he basically prostitutes himself for publishers. He apparently doesn't toss all the "gross" books, he appears to have kept PureHeart after all.

I am amused at his attack on the fact that I have science fiction in my library. Given that PureHeart is best defined as fantasy (if one were to give it any definition other than "crap"), one wonders who this sort of book would be aimed at if it isn't readers with my tastes in fiction. Given that I have over 4,000 books in my library, one might also note that I have a lot of things other than "old science fiction" (although I have a lot of that). I'm guessing he didn't give my library any more careful an evaluation than he appears to give to the books he pretends to review. I'll also note that regardless of what kinds of books are in it, my library is actually a library. I guess Mr. Isaacs doesn't actually understand what the phrase "so called" means.

This is the kind of reviewer that is entirely useless. It isn't that he gives everything a four and five star review. It is that he considers giving a lower review to be something that just shouldn't be done, and throws in a healthy dollop of sexism to boot.

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 11:39am.

> 100

Fortunately for the taxpayers, he teaches at a private school.

108: One thing I noticed, ETUSA has four books in his library, and three of them are tagged with the tag "warm" (Player Piano, Atlas Shrugged, and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows). What the hell does that tag mean? He keeps the books in the oven?

> 109

And why has he tagged the Player Piano and Atlas Shrugged "Harry Potter"?

Curiouser and curiouser.

110: That is doubly odd.

Here's some more grist for the mill. Clark Isaacs says on his profile page that he is no longer a practicing attorney. He doesn't say why. Perhaps he is the same Clark Isaacs listed on this report who was disbarred?

http://www.courts.state.mn.us/csb/csbpai...

He also finally figured out how to delete my comments on his profile page. I guess they were too effective at exposing him for the fraud he is. No matter, I've clipped his responses elsewhere (and added choice bits to my review), so his lunacy is preserved for all time.

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 1:01pm.

Oh, man: Clark's Eye on books.

As per the standard in the industry, columns are billed based upon the insertion in media. However, to introduce your publication to the acceptance of Clark's Eye on Books, the first column is sent free of charge or obligation.

Gotta love it. No wonder all his reviews are good ones.

112: I'm not even sure what that sentence means. Is he billing newspapers for running his reviews? Or is he billing publishers for writing a review to begin with? As with everything he writes, the lousy grammar makes his meaning opaque.

I flagged his Pureheart review. Based upon his comments to me, it was solicited ad copy and not a review at all. Therefore posting it to LibraryThing is, in my opinion, inappropriate because it is (1) not a review and, (2) a violation of the terms of service.

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 2:22pm.

Don't get me wrong, I find this all very amusing and agree that Pureheart was one of the worst things I've read all year, but aren't we getting a little nasty here?

Isaacs wrote a stupid blurber that should not have been posted as a review on LT. StormRaven wrote a rather hilarious rebuttal review, but it could also be seen as an attack on Isaacs.

Granted the personal email stuff is where it just gets weird (publishers should NOT be sharing reviewers' emails with anyone let alone other reviewers!) but perhaps a better solution would be a return to civil discussion (and the actual point of this thread).

We could potentially move the Pureheart drama to a thread of its own if people want to continue discussing it, but IMHO, this is all getting a bit mean-spirited to continue here...

I guess I should be happy I didn't receive Pureheart, as I'm quite prepared to accept StormRaven's review and avoid it at all costs.

I didn't hate Any Given Doomsday as much as others; I'd just class it as "forgettable." The one I really disliked was The King and Mrs. Simpson, which I found offensive as historical narrative--the author seemed so taken with the great romance that she completely ignored any negative aspects of either of the two protagonists' personalities. It contributed nothing new at all.

Disheartened by those two books, I still haven't finished Mr. White's Confession, though the positive comments by several posters above make me want to go back to it.

114: But for the bizarre e-mail rebuttal, this would have no legs at all. The only reason this has become anything more than a review of an amusingly awful book is Isaacs e-mail to me, and subsequent admission that the review he posted was ad copy and not a review.

The best antidote for someone like Isaacs is to hold them up for ridicule using their own words to hang them. Hoisting them on their own petard, as it were. I believe this has been ably accomplished but if someone wants to have a dedicated PureHeart bashing thread, that's fine with me too.

By the way, has anyone read Syers' other book? I wonder if it is as awful as PureHeart.

One thing I was just noticing: three of the reviews for PureHeart are dated December 31, 1969. To which I can only say, huh?

there was about a week or two where the system was not putting the correct datetime stamp in and all reviews were given Unix epoch dates -1 (one second before 1970) It has since been fixed and if they resave their reviews it will update correctly.

I just have to say that I also was horrified at the EnglishteacherUSA's review. Based on what everyone's said about the book, I can't imagine the idea of buying a hundred copies to pass out to students. I teach some questionable material that I know has parents raising eyebrows, but besides it having literary merit, I also teach college. I'm inclined, though, to think it's just an odd fraud, truthfully. Okay, I'm done now.

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 11:04pm.

119: Yeah, after reading the book, I was stunned by ETUSA's review - clibrarianhalstead's too, since she is apparently a children's librarian.

In any event, I encourage anyone who feels motivated to flag issacs review for the ad copy that he has admitted it is. I think that will be sufficient penalty.

ETUSA appears to have a Google Profile (Google search for his name, written in his review to find it), and appears to be a legitimate person, though he hasn't really added much to his profile except for geographical info (all PA cities).

But, seriously, if I were a parent, living in PA, and sending my kids to his school, I would freak the heck out about him having my child(ren) read that book, and not because I'm a prude, but because I expect English teachers to give children quality literature to read, unless they're doing a series on "how not to write." (I too read the book, and unless StormRaven has surpassed me, my review should still be tops.)

And, if my kids are going to be reading questionable material, I'd rather it was by authors who could actually write and get published by a publishing house not owned by themselves.

#119-121: Picking out users whose reviews you don't like and putting them on trial here is against TOS - it's a personal attack.

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 10:19pm.

122: Only if you attack the person and not the opinion.

Spoken (written?) like a lawyer ;)

My apologies dchaikin if I stepped overboard--I edited so it just now refers to the review, which is what I was going for before. Truthfully, though, I still can't take it seriously. From what I've heard of Pureheart, I have a hart time imagining any high school allowing it into the curriculum, even when writing is aside and we're only talking about content. Private schools do sometimes teach more borderline material that crosses boundaries public schools don't cross, but they also have teachers and parents more involved in curriculum, who'd openly complain if they saw something This questionable on the list. Anyhow, while this has been entertaining, I think I'm going to leave it at just saying I'm glad I didn't get Pureheart.

Message edited by its author, May 6, 2009, 11:09pm.

>122:

What Raven said. I made no ad hominem attacks.

No further comment.

So, has anyone got an ER book that they want to comment on?

*rowing with one paddle, against the current to get thread back on topic*

127: I would be happy to comment if I ever manage to get one ;-)

Well, before we went tangential, I briefly mentioned The Sound of Building Coffins as being the best I've ever received. I haven't been seeing much buzz about it on any of the groups I follow, and only about a third of the reviews are posted from folks who got it (judging from numbers only), but I can't recommend it highly enough!

#127 - yeah, back to the original topic would be nice.

#125 - I'm not really sure whether those posts really stepped overboard, or not. StormRaven has his story to tell, but when other usernames started to pop up...something needed to be said.

But, enough of that, back to the original topic, whose posts were really interesting. I've recieved 14 Early Reviewers, and one really stood out for me.

Star:
The Common Bond by Donigan Merritt - This one has hung around in my head for awhile. It's a nice story, and somehow it just resonated. I picked up another book by the author, which is my favorite this year so far, called Possessed by Shadows. I have the only copy on LT.

Some nice surprises. These aren't perfect and they are not for everyone.
Gifted by Nikita Lalwan
A Delightful Compendium of Consolation by Burton L. Visotzky - on 11th century Judaism in North Africa.
As A Palm Tree In The Desert : Part One by Zvi Ankori - an autobiographical account of the Jewish world in Poland and the Ukraine before WWII.

I think the only ones I can call stinkers were:
Any Given Doomsday by Lori Handeland
When You Come Home by Nora Eisenberg - for a good cause, but I simply couldn't stand reading it.

Message edited by its author, May 8, 2009, 12:15am.

I didn't get it from the ER program, but I did pick it up after an LT "get to know the author" forum (or whatever it's called):

The Gardner Heist by Ulrich Boser is well worth the read.

130: Just so everyone knows, I have started a new thread titled "PureHeart, Bronwen Publishing, and Clark Isaacs" so that this thread isn't derailed any further by the story of my travails with Syers and her proxies.

Message edited by its author, May 8, 2009, 8:17am.

My biggest "star" is probably the one I just received from the March batch, Evidence: Poems by Mary Oliver. I already own several books by her, and she's one of my favorite poets, so I wasn't too surprised to be selected for it, or to find it was excellent. I WAS happily surprised to get a brand new hardcover, though! At a list price of $23, plus tax, that's basically an even return on investment for my $25 lifetime LT membership.

I often seem to give out 3 1/2 stars for ER books - strangely enough - though sometimes I later feel maybe only 3 would have fit better. I gave a little more to Soldier's Heart, in part because its topic and perspective were so unique. I've enjoyed all the ones I received, except Arlington Park - and I think someone up thread mentioned it as a stinker. I wouldn't go that far - I think I've been lucky in that regard, haven't gotten anything I really HATED or thought was just bad - but in Arlington, it seemed more like short stories that were maybe linked but not much. My favorite chapter (with the character I found most sympathetic - most of them just annoyed me) didn't really seem connected to anything else in the book; the central character in that chapter didn't pop up in any other chapters, nor did her chapter mention any of the other main characters. The whole thing left me asking, "So what?"

But overall, the ER program has been very good to me. :-)

I enjoyed the January book I received, Nikolski. I gave it 4 stars and recommend it to anyone who enjoys "literary fiction."

#133, I just started Mary Oliver's Evidence: Poems, which I also received recently. I like to savor poems, particularly ones as brief as most of hers. So far, I'm enjoying it as well.

Star--Loon, A Marine Story
Stinker-Fatal Light by Richard currey

More stars than stinkers. The best is what I just received and read: The Indifferent Stars Above. I really liked The Lemur and Trespasser.

The only real stinker: Those Who Dream By Day - a huge disappointment.

I just got The Indifferent Stars Above from the library. Starting that one tomorrow so I'm glad to hear it's a star.

And Gifted... a friend of mine received that as an ER and really liked it but I'd forgotten about it. Thanks for the reminder!

Looking forward to the release of Annie's Ghosts, too, now that I read about it here.

the Gnostic Mystery was a major stinker. Scholarship was horrid, prose was worse. I'm amazed anyone could give this book a positive review. I couldn't help laughing reading the review by the guy that grew up outside of organized religion who called the book "enlightening."

Chiming in with #29, #72, and #79: Wife of the Gods is a star!!

138: Oh no! I'm supposed to be getting The Gnostic Mystery in the mail for Early Review! I'm sorry to hear you found it a stinker, though I'll still read it with an open mind and judge for myself.

I'm two chapters away from finishing First Comes Love, Then Comes Malaria and am loving every bit of it. At first, I found the author a bit whiney, but gave her a pass, as I'm sure an urban gal like me would also be a bit peevish in a place where water is considered a luxury.

I'll add my voice to the many who recommend Annie's Ghosts.

I also really loved Enhet or The Unit, though I'm still struggling with the ending.

The Dangerous Joy of Dr. Sex was another treat, as was The Addict.

Stinkers: I couldn't get behind The Stories of Devil Girl or A Constant Heart, both of which I requested early on in my Early Reviewer life. I have since learned how to better select books -- for instance, now I ALWAYS check the publisher information, including what other books the publisher has to offer. Since I've begun doing that, I've enjoyed every book I've received.

I'm in the middle of reading Assegai, an April ER selection by Wilbur Smith. This is definitely a STAR. I'm less than half-way through the book, so it will be a few days before I post my review. The book is about a young Englishman born and raised in Egypt, who leaves home and joins the army. After many adventures there, he becomes a hunter/guide for the wealthy who go on safaris. Actually,he is secretly spying on the Germans. Meanwhile, Theodore Roosevelt and his son Kermit, land in Mombassa, and our young hunter/guide becomes attached to their party. Lots of adventure and a bit bloody. Romance, of course. Lots of interesting stuff on African tribes, their customs, etc.; wonderful characters; interesting observations of flora and fauna. I'll probably give it 4 stars.

So glad to find I'm not alone on Send Yourself Roses. I've been struggling to finish it since March. (I usually breeze through 5 books a week.) Love Kathleen Turner the actress. Not so crazy about Kathleen the author.