Where Honesty Never Ends.
Summary of what work is about:
In Harmony’s words: This story is predominantly about revenge. Casey and Alex try to piece together events leading up to Nate’s death. What they find leads them to believe it was murder, rather than suicide or an accident, and that an ex-girlfriend of Nate is responsible. Casey is a social outcast in her small home-town, and Alex finds himself ostracized when a certain sexual encounter becomes known about. They start out as not-quite-tolerating-each-other acquaintances, and end up friends.
In Casey’s words: Casey and Alex both lost their friend Nate in a car accident. The effect reverberates through their lives with a tremendous impact. The further they dig, the more they suspect foul play. When the evidence points to extreme circumstances (such as the local police covering up Nate’s death as an accident) they decide to take matters into their own hands.
Greetings everyone! The Review Board is here to share our thoughts on Five Years: A Fire in Redbridge. When we were provided the work, the active cover was the first one. However, we do want to take note that the cover currently being shown is the one via Amazon. In addition, we must also note that the review is based on the copy that was provided to us.
(Wait there’s a knock at the door!)
Hi everyone! Was I missed? Miss Ova Veugh here to talk with the reviewers about Five Years: A Fire in Redbridge.
So ladies, let’s get down to business! What things did the author do right in reference to this work?
Kent: The plot was well presented, and the pace steady. The characters were real and believable. This is a story that finds it easy to keep the reader’s attention, with the mystery building right from the start.
Prism: The main character’s name. 😉 I think the name Casey has a nice ring to it. Also the idea behind the story. There’s some mystery which is always nice. There’s also a smidgen of romance sprinkled throughout. The imagery is there, but what I loved the most was the underlying moral: that sometimes people need people and it can be the person you’d least expect.
Ova: It does sound like some potential is there. What did you both perceive as drawbacks or changes for improvement?
Kent: The book is told in first person POV for Casey, and third person POV for Alex. What does become confusing is that within the same paragraph the descriptive changes from ‘he/she’ or ‘Alex/Casey’ to ‘the man/the woman’. I couldn’t see any reason for this, and it threw me time and again.
Prism: Character changing with no detail as to whom beforehand- including sudden changes into third person narrative!
The Time Warp Thing
Prism: Jumping around confusion! The scene changes have no type of indication (not even a space or italics) they dive right in and leave me wondering where I am.
Kent: What also threw me, and made me have to work very hard to keep track—especially at the beginning—was the unannounced time jumping. The switches simply occurred between paragraphs, and in a few instances between one dialogue episode and another. Generally, POV switches would occur whenever a time jump occurred. I read to roughly halfway through the book before this stopped being such an issue and I felt able to just read, without screwing up my eyes and rubbing my forehead in consternation.
Ova: It sounds like the jumping proved to be nauseating. Any other nicks in the polish?
Kent: The prose is extremely passive in nature, and has a lot of telling rather than showing. Actions are often delayed unnecessarily by the use of ‘started to’ instead of the character just getting on with it. There are a lot of sentences that are garbled, and appear half edited. Many words are missing or simply misspelled. There is the occasional comma splice and split infinitive.
Prism: There were obvious mistakes. I kept note until page ten. It almost feels like the author rushed the editing process or skipped it altogether: (proposed suggestions/corrections added by the Unleashed one)
“I had thrown a pie of clothes over my bag that I needed to get washed before Friday.” (page 2–“I had thrown a pile of clothes over my bag that I needed to get washed before Friday.”) The word “pile” is misspelled.
“He took a cigarette pack out of his jeans pocket,took one out…” (page 5–“He took a cigarette pack out of his jeans’ pocket, took one out…”) Multitude of suggestions: Apostrophe should be added after jeans’ to indicate possessive nature or the author could say “jean pocket” and leave out the s. There is also the danger of misplaced modification–does “one” mean the “pocket” or the “cigarette”? Clarification is recommended. Single spacing between “pocket” and “took”.
“He washed the ash on his cigarette until it fell on the concrete floor by itself.” (page 5–“He watched the ash on his cigarette until it fell on the concrete floor.”) Suggestion: In the context of the sentence, the proper word is “watched” instead of “watch”. Also “by itself” seems unnecessary: what else would fall in addition to the ash in this context?
“…looked straight at me, His hazel…” (page 6– “…looked straight at me. His hazel…) Correction in punctuation usage.
“ “Alex?” my tone was…” (page 7–“Alex?” My tone was…”) Capitalization mishap.
he chuckled,…” (page 7–He chuckled.) Capitalization mishap.
Page 10– sudden thrust into 3rd person with “the woman” Alex and Casey. (Shift between tenses)
I’m stopping here but there are more mistakes past the first ten pages.
Ova: Looks like all is covered. Time to get in the verdicts!
This is a book that shows great promise, with a good plot and well rounded characters. If you like a good mystery then you will probably enjoy this book. There is a need for proofreading and editing to bring the novel up to par and make for a smoother read. Because of the sheer amount of errors I do not feel able to offer more than 5 out of 10 stars. However, with a good editor, I would say this is an author to watch in the future.
While I respect the ideas of character changes and time changes they must be properly executed so as not to confuse the reader. Typically I’m not one to nitpick, however between the editing misses and the spastic character changes and the sporadic time change- it’s impossible to ignore. I humbly give this book four out of ten stars. I’d be happy to entertain a new edition should the author like to submit one.
Ova: Okay let’s add the numbers and divide by two.
Overall, The Review Board awards Five Years: A Fire in Redbridge a 4.5 out of 10 Stars. Thank you for joining us. Feel free to like, share and subscribe! Have a terrific day!
I’m Ova and out!