Thursday, September 07, 2006

RT Review Revisited

I finally got my RT magazine in my hot little hands. I held off on posting their review on my blog (or website) because it was only available to subscribers at first and I figured anyone who would give me a TOP PICK probably wasn't the group of people I wanted to piss off by releasing their reviews to the general public before they intended.

My cover is made the table of contents page, so that was another thing to celebrate. Of course, that doesn't really surprise me since Dorchester did such a fabulous job with the cover design. It is truly eye-catching.

So without further ado - here's the meat of the review:

"Rumble on the Bayou is a wonderful, poignant and fun mystery, with a strong romantic subplot, in which all the major characters act in intelligent and responsible ways, not taking stupid chances. Filled with likeable and interesting individuals, this first-rate debut novel is a truly fantastic read."

Doesn't that just make you want to cry? Well, it makes me want to cry. Oh wait - already did that.

You know what my very first favorite part of the entire review is - when they said my characters acted intelligent and responsible. When I first read the review I let out a seriously loud "whoop" at that part.

Nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, infuriates me more as a reader than a stupid hero/heroine. I read a book one time where the heroine kept rushing away from the hero even though everyone in the northern hemisphere was trying to kill her and he was the only one saving her butt. When she took off for the four-millionth time, I threw the book against a wall and yelled "let her go - maybe she'll die!"

You know you've reached an all-time low when you're yelling at inantimate objects.

So what's your pet peeve as a reader - bad plot, too much description.........???????


Kelly Parra said...

It's kind of hard to pinpoint, but it must be slow pace that really drags for me. I need action, I need interesting, other wise I start skimming. *wince*

Jana DeLeon said...

I hear ya, Kelly. Loads of description with no point, or too much mental rehashing of the same thing over and over again and I find myself skipping ahead for some action or dialogue.

Colleen Gleason said...

Congrats again, Jana! I am so excited for you!!

As for pet peeves...yes, too stupid heroines do it for me (or heroes, for that matter).

Or people who act out of character.

Case in point on both fronts, same book: I recently read (tried to finish, but didn't) a book in which a woman, who has no law enforcement background whatsoever, got involved with a guy who had some ties to the mob.

The guy with the ties to the mob is the hero, and it's obvious he's not "in" with them, he's trying to balance something (his safety, her safety, etc.). She sees, TWICE, how violent and unpredictable these mob guys can be, and how her hero handles the sitch.

He continues to warn her that they are dangerous and unpredictable and not to get involved.

So what does she do? And the end, during a scene that where the hero has one last interaction with the mob guys (that he didn't tell her about, so she's pissed off and follows him and sneaks up on him), she barges in on a group of, say, ten or so of them, and the hero, waving a gun around.

DOH. DOH! DOH! I wish they would have shot her right there.

I kept reading. I don't know why, but I did.

I read until the hero, a machismo, alpha, type A guy, dresses up as a DRAGON and GOES TO THE HEROINE'S LAW OFFICE to "win her back" (after she nearly screwed everything up--he was staging a sting).

Uh, I had five pages left. The book hit the wall.

Jana DeLeon said...

I read that book, Colleen. The dragon scene is unmistakeable.


Jaye Wells said...

Oh my gosh, only another writer can relate to how huge this is. I am gettiing kind of emotional vicariously.

Pet peeves: gimmiky plots, stock characters, writers who try so hard to be funny it's painful, etc.

There was this one book, a regency paranormal that was so full of bad puns and showed how obviously enamored the writer was with her sense of humor that I didn't make it past the second chapter. And the characters were cardboard cut outs set up on a stage to serve as window dressing for these bad puns. Gah, I loathed it. What's worse, there's more than one of them cause it's a series.

Ally Carter said...


I hate a lot of things, including those already mentioned, but I'll add telling to the list. (And I think telling is a cause of a lot of slow pacing.)

Right now, nothing infuriates me more than learning all a character's backstory the moment they're introduced.

Rachel, my best friend since second grade whose parents were lawyers so she had a pool, whose husband left her five weeks ago, sat down beside me and said, "Hi."

Yeah. I really needed to know about that pool. Thanks.

And being told that her husband just left her is waaay better than noticing that she's still wearing her ring and wondering why...or having her put divorce papers on the table...or seeing that she's still wearing the clothes from the day before and thinking that she might have spent the night with her ex.

Yeah. Why do any of that when you can just come right out and tell me her husband just left her? Because I might not have clued in otherwise, you know, what with readers, in general, being stupid and all.

I know a lot of people don't mind this, but it drives me up a tree.


Tori Lennox said...

Congrats on the awesome review!!!

As for pet peeves, I think everyone else has covered all the good ones. :)

Jana DeLeon said...

Jaye - OMG, I simply HATE when people think they're funny and they're not. I cringe everytime someone says "can you read this - I'm writing humor." Thank God I don't have time to breathe, much less read other people's work. :)

Ally - I hear you! Guess some people didn't take the show don't tell class????? Backstory is so much better woven into the plot in snippets. (LOL on the pool comment, BTW)

Hi Tori - Thanks for the congrats!

Tammy Kearly said...

Fabulous review!!! Can't wait to read it!!

As for pet peeves. Our critique group has come up with the term "manufactured antagonism" where the hero and heroine hate each other for no apparent reason other than it will add "tension".

My other one is when the brooding, rakish hero's friend, who is affable and charming, gets his own book in the series and now he (the friend) is brooding and rakish. Stay true to the characters in a series even though they've moved from supporting character to starring role!

Jana DeLeon said...

Ooooh, Tammy - I love the "manufactured antagonism." That's a fabulous way to describe some of the stuff I've detested!

LOL on the second complaint. I don't like brooding, rakish heros to begin with, but swapping personalities for the sake of the series is even worse. That's just lazy writing.

Anonymous said...

Maybe I'm weird, but I hate action scenes, on film or paper. They usually go on way too long. When the fists or swords are flying, my eyes glaze over and I just want to know, "Who WON already?!"

And very little can beat the misunderstood shadows on the blind... Last time I read one of those I refused to read another book in the series.

An Austin DesignWorks Production