thegothiclibrary's review against another edition
3.0
A brand manager representing this author sent me a copy of The Bourbon Street Ripper for review. Overall, it was a great way to get me back into the mystery/thriller genre, which for some reason I had essentially abandoned for many years. In overall concept, it reminded me a lot of some of my favorite crime-based TV shows in which underdog detectives and amateurs team up to catch the bad guys. It especially reminded me of Castle since this book also involves an author who assists with the case (although I find the character of Richie Castellos in The Bourbon Street Ripper far less charming than Nathan Fillion).
The Bourbon Street Ripper is the first in a series of crime novels following the case to catch a serial killer, one who may be a copycat of "The Bourbon Street Ripper" who terrorized the streets of New Orleans two decades before. The central character is Robert Bergeron, a gruff and somewhat jaded detective who was intimately involved in the original Ripper case. As Robert and his fresh, young partner Michael LeBlanc take on this new case, neither of them are quite prepared for the depth to which they'll have to relive 20-year-old history and uncover secrets long buried.
Also forced to confront her traumatic past is eccentric mystery writer, Samantha "Sam of Spades" Castille. A child at the time of the original case, Sam is the granddaughter of the first Ripper and is now a suspect in the current investigation. Though estranged for the past 20 years, Detective Bergeron was a close family friend of Sam's, and his strong protective feelings toward her draw them back into a close relationship as the case unfolds. Meanwhile, Sam meets a fellow mystery writer Richie Costellos who awakens feelings in her she didn't even know she was capable of.
Set in New Orleans, The Bourbon Street Ripper has a fun (if a little cliche) gothic backdrop of organized crime, ancient family tensions, voodoo, and the occult. In this first book, you get just hints of the various secret cults and organizations that operate in the underworld of New Orleans. There are many twists and turns in the story, some predictable and some pleasantly surprising. It has its moments of gore, but the real focus is on the investigation and the internal lives of the various characters involved in the case.
This book definitely does not stand on its own, so prepare to commit to the entire series, if you want to ever find out who the killer is. I wasn't particularly planning on picking up the next book, but now I guess I'll have to, since I got invested despite myself.
Most of my complaints about the book have to do with the editing and the treatment of its female characters. There are lots of typographical and editorial errors throughout the book, though not really enough to totally interfere with meaning and distract you from the story (unless you edit for a living, like I do).
When the brand representative pitched me this book, she used the phrase "strong female character" which I'm afraid gave me too high of expectations. There is a female main character (Sam) and she is strong in many ways, although her significance derives from the various male characters of the story--her familial relationship to the original killer, her father-figure relationship with Detective Bergeron, and her romantic relationship with Richie. The male characters like Bergeron and Richie are attracted to Sam because of her vulnerability, and frequently engage in annoying over-protective "alpha male" thoughts and behaviors that will have most female readers rolling their eyes and banging their heads against the wall. Certain characters, such as Bergeron and Sam's therapist think about Sam as a child, which is kind of condescending considering the fact that she's a 30-year-old grown woman. (There's also a lot of pseudo-Freudian psychology going on here.)
Despite also having a number of female side characters, this book barely passes the Bechdel test with only one brief conversation about work between Sam and the bitchy, man-hating, lesbian editor of the newspaper she publishes her stories in. (Even in this conversation, the main focus is on Richie and his intense feelings of hatred towards this "bitch.") One other character, a fellow police detective named Dixie, is explicitly labeled as a feminist. But the only role this really plays in the story is that Richie is able to easily manipulate her into a rage by acting like a misogynist, thus derailing her interrogation of him.
One recurring motif in the book is the surprise revelation that certain characters are female. At first it's kind of fun and empowering, because it draws attention to the sexist assumptions of the male characters. But it gets kind of tiring after the third time. Surprise! Important suspects can be women. Surprise! Bad guys can be women. Surprise! Cloaked figures can be women. You'd think by the end of the book, the two detectives would learn to stop assuming that the world is populated entirely by men.
But the biggest problem is the way that this book falls into the classic horror trope of punishing women for their sexuality. All of the serial killers murder victims are women who are sexually transgressive in some way. The first victim is a prostitute, the second victim is a, and the third victim is a .
I'm hoping that this choice of victims gets addressed in a thoughtful and mature manner in the later books, but for now it comes off as a lazy horror technique which generally serves to control women's actions and expression while also catering to the male gaze in erotic scenes of terror and torture.
One other thing that might make current readers wince is the way that the characters tend to make light of police brutality, which leaves a bad taste in your mouth considering recent events.
Anyway, despite these rants, the book was overall enjoyable, if at times problematic.
For a discussion of this book and its relation to the gothic genre, keep an eye out on my blog: TheGothicLibrary.com
The Bourbon Street Ripper is the first in a series of crime novels following the case to catch a serial killer, one who may be a copycat of "The Bourbon Street Ripper" who terrorized the streets of New Orleans two decades before. The central character is Robert Bergeron, a gruff and somewhat jaded detective who was intimately involved in the original Ripper case. As Robert and his fresh, young partner Michael LeBlanc take on this new case, neither of them are quite prepared for the depth to which they'll have to relive 20-year-old history and uncover secrets long buried.
Also forced to confront her traumatic past is eccentric mystery writer, Samantha "Sam of Spades" Castille. A child at the time of the original case, Sam is the granddaughter of the first Ripper and is now a suspect in the current investigation. Though estranged for the past 20 years, Detective Bergeron was a close family friend of Sam's, and his strong protective feelings toward her draw them back into a close relationship as the case unfolds. Meanwhile, Sam meets a fellow mystery writer Richie Costellos who awakens feelings in her she didn't even know she was capable of.
Set in New Orleans, The Bourbon Street Ripper has a fun (if a little cliche) gothic backdrop of organized crime, ancient family tensions, voodoo, and the occult. In this first book, you get just hints of the various secret cults and organizations that operate in the underworld of New Orleans. There are many twists and turns in the story, some predictable and some pleasantly surprising. It has its moments of gore, but the real focus is on the investigation and the internal lives of the various characters involved in the case.
This book definitely does not stand on its own, so prepare to commit to the entire series, if you want to ever find out who the killer is. I wasn't particularly planning on picking up the next book, but now I guess I'll have to, since I got invested despite myself.
Most of my complaints about the book have to do with the editing and the treatment of its female characters. There are lots of typographical and editorial errors throughout the book, though not really enough to totally interfere with meaning and distract you from the story (unless you edit for a living, like I do).
When the brand representative pitched me this book, she used the phrase "strong female character" which I'm afraid gave me too high of expectations. There is a female main character (Sam) and she is strong in many ways, although her significance derives from the various male characters of the story--her familial relationship to the original killer, her father-figure relationship with Detective Bergeron, and her romantic relationship with Richie. The male characters like Bergeron and Richie are attracted to Sam because of her vulnerability, and frequently engage in annoying over-protective "alpha male" thoughts and behaviors that will have most female readers rolling their eyes and banging their heads against the wall. Certain characters, such as Bergeron and Sam's therapist think about Sam as a child, which is kind of condescending considering the fact that she's a 30-year-old grown woman. (There's also a lot of pseudo-Freudian psychology going on here.)
Despite also having a number of female side characters, this book barely passes the Bechdel test with only one brief conversation about work between Sam and the bitchy, man-hating, lesbian editor of the newspaper she publishes her stories in. (Even in this conversation, the main focus is on Richie and his intense feelings of hatred towards this "bitch.") One other character, a fellow police detective named Dixie, is explicitly labeled as a feminist. But the only role this really plays in the story is that Richie is able to easily manipulate her into a rage by acting like a misogynist, thus derailing her interrogation of him.
One recurring motif in the book is the surprise revelation that certain characters are female. At first it's kind of fun and empowering, because it draws attention to the sexist assumptions of the male characters. But it gets kind of tiring after the third time. Surprise! Important suspects can be women. Surprise! Bad guys can be women. Surprise! Cloaked figures can be women. You'd think by the end of the book, the two detectives would learn to stop assuming that the world is populated entirely by men.
But the biggest problem is the way that this book falls into the classic horror trope of punishing women for their sexuality. All of the serial killers murder victims are women who are sexually transgressive in some way. The first victim is a prostitute, the second victim is a
Spoiler
sexually aggressive touristSpoiler
teenage girl who gets described in the narration as looking like a "streetwalker" because of the way she dressesI'm hoping that this choice of victims gets addressed in a thoughtful and mature manner in the later books, but for now it comes off as a lazy horror technique which generally serves to control women's actions and expression while also catering to the male gaze in erotic scenes of terror and torture.
One other thing that might make current readers wince is the way that the characters tend to make light of police brutality, which leaves a bad taste in your mouth considering recent events.
Anyway, despite these rants, the book was overall enjoyable, if at times problematic.
For a discussion of this book and its relation to the gothic genre, keep an eye out on my blog: TheGothicLibrary.com
philantrop's review against another edition
4.0
Just when I was thinking nothing really good would ever come out of giveaways, I got "The Bourbon Street Ripper" (BSR). Put off at first by the lurid title, I quickly got drawn into the book.
As usual, I'll skip summarising the story as others will have done this before. In short, it's basically a well-done mystery novel and, in contrast to the author's "Clearly not your normal mystery book." it *is* a normal mystery book with a few twists and some "extra features". It's *not* normal in that most "normal" mystery books are treading well worn-out paths which, to a fair extent, BSR succeeds to avoid.
The main characters are mostly believable and well-developed and both the 20-years-before story as well as the current storyline and interestingly (and rather subjectively) presented through some of the characters.
The contrast between two of the protagonists, namely Rodger and Michael, works well for the book as do the similarities between two other characters (albeit the presentation of those could have been a bit more subtle).
For me at least, this was a real page turner in spite of having to apply some suspension of disbelief at certain points in the story (a certain scene with the priory comes to mind). The book still "works" for me, though, since when I'm reading a piece of fiction I'm willing to "just let go" a fair part of my usual skepticism.
Unfortunately, there *are* a few downsides to this otherwise nice work. Starting with what annoyed me the most, there were some scenes that were presented in an overly gory way - there was no need to describe in rather blunt terms how a side-character gets murdered and how the crime scene looks afterwards. I consider these gore scenes actually one of the weakest points of the book.
Some people might take offence at the Voodoo theme as well; I'm not one of them, though. It may make sense, considering the primary location in the book is New Orleans, though, I'm not sure. Speaking of which: From what I've read, I somehow got the notion the author might want to convey his ideas and feelings about or for New Orleans. Maybe even get the reader to become interested in the city itself. If that's part of the goal, it failed for me.
The cliffhanger at the end didn't really come as a surprise either - there were (too) many allusions as to what would happen for my taste and, thus, the "cliffhanger" didn't work for me - I expected exactly what happened and I'm pretty sure I can predict what the second book is going to start with.
I do like, though, that I'm not yet sure who's behind it all - I do have my suspects but not having made up my mind at the end of the first book is certainly a good sign.
This is my final gripe with BSR, though: A mystery thriller shouldn't come in two books. Never ever.
Don't get me wrong, I've read lots of, e. g. epic fantasy; I've stuck with Wheel of Time. I'm *not* happy with a mystery thriller trying to pull off the same, though. Those should come as one (huge, if necessary) volume. Yes, the publisher might not like that, people with an attention span of about 10 seconds might not either. It might even sell worse at first but, really, a good mystery will find its audience even if it has a thousand pages.
I'm curious to read how this all is going to end and, thus, will buy the second book for sure but, Leo, if you pull such a stunt again, you can become the next winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature and I still won't read another book of yours.
Even though it might not seem like it after all this criticism, all in all, I really liked this book. I recommend it wholeheartedly to anyone who likes to read a good mystery. Four out of five stars from me.
--- UPDATE ---
This review got me into touch with Leo directly and I was able to discuss things with him. Leo, as it turned out, is a really friendly, approachable person and very transparent with respect to his ideas, plans and reasons for his choices. While it doesn't change my feelings about BSR, this is something out of the ordinary and yet another reason to keep an eye on his further works.
Authors who write good books *and* are simply nice people, open to criticism, deserve my support at least and I hope you, dear reader, feel the same. :-)
As usual, I'll skip summarising the story as others will have done this before. In short, it's basically a well-done mystery novel and, in contrast to the author's "Clearly not your normal mystery book." it *is* a normal mystery book with a few twists and some "extra features". It's *not* normal in that most "normal" mystery books are treading well worn-out paths which, to a fair extent, BSR succeeds to avoid.
The main characters are mostly believable and well-developed and both the 20-years-before story as well as the current storyline and interestingly (and rather subjectively) presented through some of the characters.
The contrast between two of the protagonists, namely Rodger and Michael, works well for the book as do the similarities between two other characters (albeit the presentation of those could have been a bit more subtle).
For me at least, this was a real page turner in spite of having to apply some suspension of disbelief at certain points in the story (a certain scene with the priory comes to mind). The book still "works" for me, though, since when I'm reading a piece of fiction I'm willing to "just let go" a fair part of my usual skepticism.
Unfortunately, there *are* a few downsides to this otherwise nice work. Starting with what annoyed me the most, there were some scenes that were presented in an overly gory way - there was no need to describe in rather blunt terms how a side-character gets murdered and how the crime scene looks afterwards. I consider these gore scenes actually one of the weakest points of the book.
Some people might take offence at the Voodoo theme as well; I'm not one of them, though. It may make sense, considering the primary location in the book is New Orleans, though, I'm not sure. Speaking of which: From what I've read, I somehow got the notion the author might want to convey his ideas and feelings about or for New Orleans. Maybe even get the reader to become interested in the city itself. If that's part of the goal, it failed for me.
The cliffhanger at the end didn't really come as a surprise either - there were (too) many allusions as to what would happen for my taste and, thus, the "cliffhanger" didn't work for me - I expected exactly what happened and I'm pretty sure I can predict what the second book is going to start with.
I do like, though, that I'm not yet sure who's behind it all - I do have my suspects but not having made up my mind at the end of the first book is certainly a good sign.
This is my final gripe with BSR, though: A mystery thriller shouldn't come in two books. Never ever.
Don't get me wrong, I've read lots of, e. g. epic fantasy; I've stuck with Wheel of Time. I'm *not* happy with a mystery thriller trying to pull off the same, though. Those should come as one (huge, if necessary) volume. Yes, the publisher might not like that, people with an attention span of about 10 seconds might not either. It might even sell worse at first but, really, a good mystery will find its audience even if it has a thousand pages.
I'm curious to read how this all is going to end and, thus, will buy the second book for sure but, Leo, if you pull such a stunt again, you can become the next winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature and I still won't read another book of yours.
Even though it might not seem like it after all this criticism, all in all, I really liked this book. I recommend it wholeheartedly to anyone who likes to read a good mystery. Four out of five stars from me.
--- UPDATE ---
This review got me into touch with Leo directly and I was able to discuss things with him. Leo, as it turned out, is a really friendly, approachable person and very transparent with respect to his ideas, plans and reasons for his choices. While it doesn't change my feelings about BSR, this is something out of the ordinary and yet another reason to keep an eye on his further works.
Authors who write good books *and* are simply nice people, open to criticism, deserve my support at least and I hope you, dear reader, feel the same. :-)
More...