The Strangler Vine

M.J. Carter  |  Fiction

This is one of the most boring books I have read.  Throughout, I was reminded of our Improv Director, Rhonda, who often declares, “Don’t tell us what happened … show us!”  M.J. Carter writes of endless meetings and endless dialogue in her novel.  There is very little action, though if you make it to page 250, finally something does happen!  Then there’s 70 pages of action, intrigue, and breath-holding passages before Carter descends once again into incessant meetings and dialogue.  I read the entire book because it was a Book Club book, and I prefer to engage in our conversations. If I were on my own, I would have taken this book back to the library pronto!

I fear the author fell victim to the shortcomings of first-person narration. From a blog on the “Most Common Writing Mistakes” I was able to glean some confirmation for what I suspected was the underlying snag in this book:  “The first-person narrator, more than any other type of narrator, is inclined to lapse into self-centered telling, in which he overpowers the story, at the expense of the other characters and even the plot itself. ... <Two of the challenges of writing in the first person are> … Telling thoughts instead of showing; and inserting lengthy narrative at the expense of action and dialogue.”  I believe M.J. Carter trapped herself into the worst specimens of first-person narration.

Back-cover reviewers used words like “rip-roaring” and “gripping.”  I THINK the publisher swapped in reviews from some other book!  Find something else to read as the leaves turn color and fall from the trees.

 

 

 

 

2 responses on “The Strangler Vine

  1. Mary C Crawford

    I learned to be suspicious of book cover reviews unless they are from reliable sources such as Kirkus Reviews, Publishers Weekly, LJ, or newspapers. Reviews by other authors are usually ones where author friends barter for reviews – as in “I’ll give you a review of your new work if you’ll do one for mine.”

    1. Andrea Sigetich Post author

      The reviews were legitimate … NY Times was one and I think the Washington Post may have been one of the others.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *