Today we see that not all readers respond the same way to a given story.
Note from Jefferson: Due to an administrative snafu, both Bryce and I tackled the same book, and each came away with different findings. But rather than cramming the second review bound and gagged into the trunk of my car, I think it’s instructive to leave it free and treat the situation as a case study. At the very least it demonstrates how two different readers can react quite differently to the same book.
We’re treating this as a “minority report,” submitted from the bad-Spock universe. (Hence the reversed colors in the score card. :-) For comparison, here’s Jefferson’s review from a couple of weeks ago, which lasted 13:26. Is Bryce a credulous pushover? Is Jefferson a jaded curmudgeon? We’ll let you decide. We now return you to Bryce’s commentary, joined in progress.
What I gleaned about the story: When the love of your life lies in poison-halting stasis, you do whatever it takes. Even if it means going home.
Find this book on Amazon.
Analysis:
This forest had always fit like a well-worn cloak. But tonight, the way the forest wrapped around felt familiar, but not quite comfortable, as though it remembered wrapping around a slightly different shape.
[…]The hope was too fragile, like the new skin of ice over a pond. Just the effort of shaping it into words could shatter it.
[…]After what I have done, I can no longer call myself a Keeper. There are decisions that can’t be unmade, paths that cannot be unchosen, choices that change us too much for us to ever change back.
[…]With each day, we decide anew who we are, what we will grow toward.
There’s not a whole lot to say here. These lines (and several more) really resonated with me. A sprinkling of good, thought-provoking lines does a lot to earn the reader’s trust.
Analysis: Kordan [had] lived there for some time doing experiments.
The narrative is talking about past events at the moment, so past perfect is necessary. A tiny pothole on the road to adventure! Onward!
Analysis: After he enters the Keep, Alaric decides to visit the Wellstone. It’s a galling bargain for someone who’s already disillusioned with his order: he must trade his memories since his last visit for the Wellstone’s memories which may save his dying wife. Flashback time!
Flashbacks are easy to botch, but this set worked for me. Since we already know how Alaric and his wife turn out (and the price he’s willing to pay to save her) the scene where they meet is poignant without even trying. Andrews doesn’t go overboard with the flashbackery either: a few pages, then we’re back in the present and Alaric is moving forward on his journey. We see the past, but we don’t get mired in it.
The book has me hooked on several fronts. The magic system is interesting, with each use exacting a price. The magical memory repository has some interesting quirks. Alaric’s returning hat-in-hand to an order he’d once turned his back on, which is a captivating dynamic. I’m invested in the protagonist’s goals, yet rooting for his horse to get the better of him. Threat is off to a strong start.
Take the Pepsi Challenge: Want to know if my own writing measures up? Try the free sample on one of my books or short stories and decide for yourself.
I really enjoyed Threat of Shadows and found Jefferson’s review to be focused on his personal pet peeves rather than how engaging the book was. Glad that you liked it enough to post your own review. Thanks for the minority report!
Thanks for commenting, Ann. You raise an interesting point, which bears upon the fundamental premise of IOD, so I thought I’d take a moment to respond.
IOD has never attempted to measure engagement as some abstract quality inherent to a book, in and of itself. Engagement can only be assessed in light of the specific responses it evokes in a specific reader. When something disrupts my reading experience, my immersion breaks. Simple. Just as things that bother you break your immersion, and things that bother Bryce break his. This holds true for every reader, anywhere in the world, each with a distinct list of triggers.
So for me to ignore my personal peeves and pretend immersion did not break would have been entirely disingenuous, and a violation of the very point of ImmerseOrDie. Moreover, it would have been arrogant of me to presume which issues would or would not disrupt other readers. The only thing I can do is report my own experience as honestly as possible, and then try to explain how the book created that experience for me.
To the extent that an IOD observer shares my triggers, my reports may be of some predictive value for them, but others may find Bryce’s disruption profile a better match. Or Dave’s. (That’s one of the reasons I’ve been expanding the reviewer list.) But even at the best of times, there are still going to be cases where a particular reader’s trigger profile will disagree with the reviewer-of-record.
This is precisely why I invited Bryce to post his minority report, and then worked with him to ensure that it fully reflected his distinct experience; as a reminder to IOD followers and authors alike that every reader is a unique audience and that no book pleases or displeases all readers universally.
Not even IOD reviewers. Like any readers, our experiences are governed by our personal preferences, and IOD will always be open and honest about reporting them, as they really happened. The rest is up to you.
If you’d given me advance notice of the “bad Spock universe” joke, I would have started growing a goatee. ;-P
Spot-on explanation. Pet peeves matter. That you not only don’t hide yours but actually highlight them makes the IOD reviews unique and valuable.