A review by jedbird
Devil's Chew Toy, by Rob Osler
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
This was very queer and...cute. It was a cute mystery. I haven't read a lot of mysteries in recent years, and cute/cozy wasn't ever my go-to, but the queerness of this one hooked me. The MC is a little redhaired guy, and I have always appreciated redheads of all genders, so I was already predisposed to want good things for him. He's a teacher on summer break, and he's also a blogger, doing a column inexplicably called Mates on Dates, on gay dating. A few examples of his column are woven into the story and...he's probably a good teacher. That's probably what he should stick to doing.
There's people of every ethnicity, go-go dancing, DACA, foster dogs, people of unusual size, gay bars, bakeries, nonagenarians, pet shops, and all of Seattle.
(I lived in Seattle for years, and I was confused by the references to the Magnolia neighborhood as a playground of the wealthy. I mean, there were some nice houses when I lived in Magnolia, but it was mostly cottages and ranches. But again, I lived there many years ago and maybe now it's all glam.)
I figured out the who just because, but not the why or the how, and it was a reasonably satisfying conclusion. Well, except for the last few lines of the book, which I didn't understand. Who was he talking to/about?
There's people of every ethnicity, go-go dancing, DACA, foster dogs, people of unusual size, gay bars, bakeries, nonagenarians, pet shops, and all of Seattle.
(I lived in Seattle for years, and I was confused by the references to the Magnolia neighborhood as a playground of the wealthy. I mean, there were some nice houses when I lived in Magnolia, but it was mostly cottages and ranches. But again, I lived there many years ago and maybe now it's all glam.)
I figured out the who just because, but not the why or the how, and it was a reasonably satisfying conclusion. Well, except for the last few lines of the book, which I didn't understand. Who was he talking to/about?