tobyyy's review
3.0
Oy. Okay, where should I start? This was a good story, and I enjoyed Hiebert’s writing style enough to buy the first three books in the series. But — BUT — there was a significant drawback to this book that definitely impacted my enjoyment of it.
It was too long. Too. Freaking. Long. Hiebert admitted that his editor allowed him to double his expected word count “to tell the story the way it wanted to be told.”
Ummm... no. Dude, listen to your editor. Your story was about 200 pages too long. The amount of unnecessary detail was painful. Full conversations with waitresses about your meal order? No thanks. Paragraphs on how lockpicking works, on basic forensic details like fingerprinting and blood spatter, paragraphs on how motion detecting lights work... not necessary. Nor was the amount of repetition regarding how Woodpecker Wind rhymes with Blind, and how in that one area of town, the roads were laid out with deep ditches on either side and were all named after birds.
PUHLEEZE. Spare me all of that. It added NOTHING to the story except pages that I knew I could skim.
But aside from that, I enjoyed the story. Hiebert does a good job of creating small town ambiance, and his characters were also likable (although Abe felt a lot younger than 13).
I also didn’t mind how he pulled in schizophrenia and dissociative identity disorder — since the book takes place in 1989, a lot of what was understood then about schizophrenia and DID was wrong... so even though that’s in my field of expertise, the gnarly bits and incorrect bits about DID were forgivable, because DID has only really begun to be understood to be a trauma-related disorder in the past 10-15 years. I can totally see how in 1989 it would’ve been more closely understood to be linked to schizophrenia (especially by laypeople), as with less research and minimal understanding of the effects of trauma, it could easily appear to be a disorganized disorder akin to schizophrenia.
It was too long. Too. Freaking. Long. Hiebert admitted that his editor allowed him to double his expected word count “to tell the story the way it wanted to be told.”
Ummm... no. Dude, listen to your editor. Your story was about 200 pages too long. The amount of unnecessary detail was painful. Full conversations with waitresses about your meal order? No thanks. Paragraphs on how lockpicking works, on basic forensic details like fingerprinting and blood spatter, paragraphs on how motion detecting lights work... not necessary. Nor was the amount of repetition regarding how Woodpecker Wind rhymes with Blind, and how in that one area of town, the roads were laid out with deep ditches on either side and were all named after birds.
PUHLEEZE. Spare me all of that. It added NOTHING to the story except pages that I knew I could skim.
But aside from that, I enjoyed the story. Hiebert does a good job of creating small town ambiance, and his characters were also likable (although Abe felt a lot younger than 13).
I also didn’t mind how he pulled in schizophrenia and dissociative identity disorder — since the book takes place in 1989, a lot of what was understood then about schizophrenia and DID was wrong... so even though that’s in my field of expertise, the gnarly bits and incorrect bits about DID were forgivable, because DID has only really begun to be understood to be a trauma-related disorder in the past 10-15 years. I can totally see how in 1989 it would’ve been more closely understood to be linked to schizophrenia (especially by laypeople), as with less research and minimal understanding of the effects of trauma, it could easily appear to be a disorganized disorder akin to schizophrenia.
blkxmermaid's review against another edition
3.0
The protagonist was so weak! Everything about Leah just annoyed me. She didn’t appear to have a backbone especially when it came to her alcoholic boyfriend. I was tired of her crying every other chapter as well. I figured out who the “Stickman” was after her first interview with Noah. The 3 stars is for Abe, he was my favorite. Please make a novel all about Abe and Dewey.
petra_reads's review
3.0
Joe Fowler's career as a detective was shaped by the hunt for The Stickman, a serial killer who terrorized Alabama in 1973/74. Fowler identified Harry Stork, and in a classic showdown, shot and killed him. 15 years later, a murder scene reminiscent of the stickman's leads Fowler's daughter, Detective Leah Teal, to look into her father's old case. Is she dealing with a copycat murder? Or did her father kill the wrong man and the stickman has returned?
This had the hallmarks of a character-driven mystery where you get a comprehensive insight into the relationships, thoughts, and activities of Leah and of Leah's thirteen-year-old son, Abe, and her sixteen-year-old daughter, Carry. The story is mostly told from third-person-perspective but switches to the first person for Abe's perspective. His was the most enjoyable because it was amusing in parts. He didn't seem consistent, though. On the one hand, he looked up words he didn't understand in a dictionary and on the other hand, his first person perspective contained words that didn't fit with his thirteen-year-old teenage boy persona. It's little things like this that made the character not very authentic.
Sticks and Stones is the fourth book in the Detective Leah Tale series, but the first one I have read. That is perhaps why I was struggling to connect with these characters.
Leah mostly annoyed me. She came across as weak and incompetent: a not-so-friendly inmate needs interviewing and Leah... 'better let my detective boyfriend do that while I observe how it's done'. There was an instance where she nearly fainted. Good job she had three strong males by her side....eye roll. Her monologs became repetitive: 'What if my father shot the wrong man?' 'My boyfriend is an alcoholic, and I really should be dealing with it'. But she didn't.
With some taut editing, this could have been an interesting mystery, but it was just overly long and dragged. For example, Abe reads a book on forensics and so we are given a complete basic introduction into forensic procedures. Then we get the entire timeline of the cases. Too detailed for me and it didn't help the plot. I was getting really impatient with this, and when I started counting the instances when "near on" and "on account of" was used (roughly 50 and 70 times), I knew maybe I should give up.
I love Southern mysteries, which is why I really wanted to read this, but it wasn't as gripping as I had hoped. Sorry. 2.75 stars if I could, but rounding up to 3 because once Leah finally works out the identity of the killer, there were a couple of engaging chapters and a daring development I hadn't seen coming.
Thanks to Kensington who provided me with an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
This had the hallmarks of a character-driven mystery where you get a comprehensive insight into the relationships, thoughts, and activities of Leah and of Leah's thirteen-year-old son, Abe, and her sixteen-year-old daughter, Carry. The story is mostly told from third-person-perspective but switches to the first person for Abe's perspective. His was the most enjoyable because it was amusing in parts. He didn't seem consistent, though. On the one hand, he looked up words he didn't understand in a dictionary and on the other hand, his first person perspective contained words that didn't fit with his thirteen-year-old teenage boy persona. It's little things like this that made the character not very authentic.
Sticks and Stones is the fourth book in the Detective Leah Tale series, but the first one I have read. That is perhaps why I was struggling to connect with these characters.
Leah mostly annoyed me. She came across as weak and incompetent: a not-so-friendly inmate needs interviewing and Leah... 'better let my detective boyfriend do that while I observe how it's done'. There was an instance where she nearly fainted. Good job she had three strong males by her side....eye roll. Her monologs became repetitive: 'What if my father shot the wrong man?' 'My boyfriend is an alcoholic, and I really should be dealing with it'. But she didn't.
With some taut editing, this could have been an interesting mystery, but it was just overly long and dragged. For example, Abe reads a book on forensics and so we are given a complete basic introduction into forensic procedures. Then we get the entire timeline of the cases. Too detailed for me and it didn't help the plot. I was getting really impatient with this, and when I started counting the instances when "near on" and "on account of" was used (roughly 50 and 70 times), I knew maybe I should give up.
I love Southern mysteries, which is why I really wanted to read this, but it wasn't as gripping as I had hoped. Sorry. 2.75 stars if I could, but rounding up to 3 because once Leah finally works out the identity of the killer, there were a couple of engaging chapters and a daring development I hadn't seen coming.
Thanks to Kensington who provided me with an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.
meredith_summers's review against another edition
dark
emotional
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
lyndsm28's review against another edition
1.0
After reading the blurbs on the jacket that said this book has the feel of To Kill a Mockingbird, I was so excited to start on it. Unfortunately, I was seriously disappointed. As a creative writing teacher, I had to wonder who edited this book. The story itself might have been okay, but it got bogged down by unbelievable, overly cheesy dialogue. My words cannot do justice to the nature of the badly crafted lines in this novel. A story that probably should have been told in 300-350 pages lasted well over 500 pages. Tedious as hell. People reading this may ask themselves, "If it's so bad, then why did you keep reading it?" Alas, I'm one of those souls who is unable to cast a book aside once I've started it. I would feel too guilty to purchase a book and then not see it to its conclusion.
More...