Scan barcode
A review by robotnik
Stalking Jack the Ripper by Kerri Maniscalco
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.0
Man, I'm sure there's a good story buried in here somewhere but it was really hard to find it underneath all of Audrey Rose's NOT LIKE OTHER GIRLS moments. But I digress.
I can't say I was bored with Stalking Jack the Ripper nor did I really dislike it overall. I was entertained by it. But part of the entertainment came from how stupid parts of it were.
For a book that is centered around one of the biggest unsolved serial killer cases of all time, it was really easy to figure out thatNathaniel was Jack the Ripper. Literally, within his first appearance (I don't know, 40 pages in? Something like that), I knew exactly that this character was the killer. It made it almost comedic reading through the book whenever he appeared and knowing that the narrative thought it was some big secret when it was probably one of the most obvious plot twists I've seen in recent years.
This honestly almost makes it offensive to the real life case. Jack the Ripper has been such a mystery over these years and no one's been able to confidently deduce who he really was that assuming thatNathaniel could have pulled off these murders and not been arrested and that Audrey Rose could have helped figure it out in any way is really a disrespect to all of the Ripper's victims.
Which brings us to Audrey Rose. She is one of the biggest examples of "not like other girls" I've read recently. She spends all this time waxing about how she's equal parts feminine and intelligent and it's alright for women to embrace their femininity and care about that while she cares about science. And yet she is constantly putting other girls/women down for doing just that. She does not feel like a young woman in the 1880s who's wanting to be independent and find her own way. She feels like a teenager from the 2010s who was plucked out of her time period and dropped into the 1800s and was unimpressed things weren't like modern times. You couple this with her constantly making absolutely stupid decisions, and you got yourself an annoying protagonist.
Thomas is probably the better of the two. He's just charming bloke who flirts too much. Their romance was kind of... okay? I guess? I think the biggest flaw in it is that Thomas was instantly interested in Audrey Rose - that's not the flaw - and Audrey Rose was very obviously interested in him too but she was trying to pretend she wasn't. Just like the above "trying to point out her advanced feminism", she brings up how much she doesn't like Thomas an unhealthy amount of times. How much she doesn't focus on men (one of her "not like other girl" traits) and how she specifically was not charmed by him. And yet - and yet!!! - she focuses on him sooooo damn much. Probably more than the crime at hand. For all her complaining about how annoying he is and how much she doesn't like him, she sure does spend a lot of her time thinking about him. I am honestly embarrassed by her.
The climax of the story, much like the rest of it, was just okay. Not really surprising sinceNathaniel was so ridiculously obvious that there was no shock factor. But it was alright.
Really, this book is just a big bundle of alright. I've heard mixed opinions on the rest of this series, but it has me curious enough to give it a try at some point so I'll continue it.
I can't say I was bored with Stalking Jack the Ripper nor did I really dislike it overall. I was entertained by it. But part of the entertainment came from how stupid parts of it were.
For a book that is centered around one of the biggest unsolved serial killer cases of all time, it was really easy to figure out that
This honestly almost makes it offensive to the real life case. Jack the Ripper has been such a mystery over these years and no one's been able to confidently deduce who he really was that assuming that
Which brings us to Audrey Rose. She is one of the biggest examples of "not like other girls" I've read recently. She spends all this time waxing about how she's equal parts feminine and intelligent and it's alright for women to embrace their femininity and care about that while she cares about science. And yet she is constantly putting other girls/women down for doing just that. She does not feel like a young woman in the 1880s who's wanting to be independent and find her own way. She feels like a teenager from the 2010s who was plucked out of her time period and dropped into the 1800s and was unimpressed things weren't like modern times. You couple this with her constantly making absolutely stupid decisions, and you got yourself an annoying protagonist.
Thomas is probably the better of the two. He's just charming bloke who flirts too much. Their romance was kind of... okay? I guess? I think the biggest flaw in it is that Thomas was instantly interested in Audrey Rose - that's not the flaw - and Audrey Rose was very obviously interested in him too but she was trying to pretend she wasn't. Just like the above "trying to point out her advanced feminism", she brings up how much she doesn't like Thomas an unhealthy amount of times. How much she doesn't focus on men (one of her "not like other girl" traits) and how she specifically was not charmed by him. And yet - and yet!!! - she focuses on him sooooo damn much. Probably more than the crime at hand. For all her complaining about how annoying he is and how much she doesn't like him, she sure does spend a lot of her time thinking about him. I am honestly embarrassed by her.
The climax of the story, much like the rest of it, was just okay. Not really surprising since
Really, this book is just a big bundle of alright. I've heard mixed opinions on the rest of this series, but it has me curious enough to give it a try at some point so I'll continue it.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Gore, Sexism, and Violence