DP54Cover - Deadly Pleasures

input near the end of next year, so be mulling this over. I
hope to do something similar with the Mystery Series of the
Decade, although perhaps not in a Barry Award fashion.
Reginald Hill’s Latest. Reginald Hill continues
to impress with his wide array of talent and style. In 2008
he published the latest in the Dalziel & Pascoe series
(which, in my opinion, represents the best of his writing) A
CURE FOR ALL DISEASES, and the sixth in the lighter,
more humorous Joe Sixsmith series, THE ROAR OF
From From the the Assistant
Assistant
Editor
Editor
As a reviewer, I do, at times, write negative
reviews. For me, this usually occurs when I am assigned to
read books I normally would not pick up. For example, the
Reviewed to Death books for DP (although I have liked
several of them – the current CHILD 44 being an
example of that) and the Edgar/ CWA nominees, which I
volunteer to read and review each year. These selections
and short lists often include many books not to my liking.
In my regular review column, I tend to write
favorable reviews because I choose to read what I think I
will like. This is quite common with all fan reviewers. But
given that I attend mystery conventions with many, many
authors in attendance, any negative reviews I may have
written can lead to awkward situations in that I sometimes
encounter the authors of books I have panned. My first
experience with this phenomenon was at my first
Bouchercon in Milwaukee. I remember witnessing George
and Russ being verbally chastised by an otherwise very nice
female author whose book they gave mixed reviews to (she
had the room right across the hall from them and the
“nightmare” continued – with some humorous encounters
– throughout the convention). I don’t see her books around
any longer, so perhaps George and Russ knew what they
were writing about.
This year I had an especially difficult time reading
the Edgar nominees. To me, it was overall an uninteresting
list and, hence, proved difficult to get through. After weeks
and weeks of struggling with these nominees, the last book
I picked up was BLOOD OF PARADISE by David
Corbett. This is a very long book, well written, but full of
political background on San Salvador (a subject of no
interest to me) and it had what I considered a stagnant
pace. This novel was way more than I wanted to take on
at that point of the process and I put it down part way
through. My mistake was giving it an “F,” meaning failure.
BLOOD OF PARADISE certainly does not deserve that
rating and I want all readers to know that David Corbett is
an excellent and very talented writer. I remember reading
and enjoying his first book, THE DEVIL’S REDHEAD.
The problem with my review of his latest book resides
Deadly Pleasures
35
BUTTERFLIES (in this case, a golfing mystery – if that is
of any interest).
There are some unusual aspects to the publication
of THE ROAR OF BUTTERFLIES. In the U.K. it
is published in hardcover, but the hardcover has no
dustjacket (the boards themselves are illustrated). In the
U.S., it is published in mass market paperback (that
recently hit the bookstores) and there will be no hardcover
edition.
more with me than with David Corbett’s work – especially
the frame of mind I had when I picked it up. I tried to
explain this in the review, but didn’t do a very good job of
it. My apologies to David and to those who liked his latest.
Every year I attend the Edgar Awards in New York
City. For the last few years, the night before the banquet,
after the MWA Agents and Editors Party, I go out to dinner
with Otto Penzler and one or two others whom we might
ask to join us. Unbeknownst to me, Otto invited David
Corbett. David, being none too happy with me, declined
the invite, citing the fact that I hated his last book and that
I thought he was a left-wing radical. (This is not true. I never
thought he was a left-wing radical – I never got that far into
the book to make a judgment call on that – and even if he
were a left-wing radical, that wouldn’t affect how I judged
the book’s quality.) I apologized to David with the above
explanation.
This is an unintended consequence of trying to
give you my honest opinion as a reviewer – I may make
some enemies. But let me assure you that when I write a
negative review, it has nothing to do with whether I like or
dislike an author as a person – it is not personal – yet some
writers may take it that way.
Recently, on DorothyL, the online mystery digest,
a woman bemoaned the fact that there are too many bad
reviews being written by fan reviewers, who don’t know or
understand the writing process and how difficult it can be,
because they are not novelists. Only authors should review.
Her whole argument was quite silly and she was roundly
taken to task by the others on the list. From my standpoint,
I don’t really care how difficult it is to write a book. I
understand how hard it may be, but to me, the end product
is all that matters. Who better to review a book than the
readers and consumers of the product? Other authors may
love a book’s complexity and appreciate how technically
difficult it was to create. Yet, if nobody buys it and reads it,
the book might as well not exist. No, leave the reviewing
to those of us who buy and read them (which includes some
knowledgeable author-fans) and the writing to those who
create them. It works fine that way.
www.eurocrime.co.uk
Excellent website that focuses purely on British
and other European crime fiction writers (that
have been published in English). Contains a lot of
information about authors (with links to author
websites) and lots of reviews of current crime novels.