Crime Fiction Dossier

Ask the Critic: Can you identify this book?

I couldn't... But maybe you can.

The main character is an L.A. detective (recently promoted, I believe), and the book starts quickly with him witnessing the murder of a criminal by his senior peers, iirc in a parking garage, and he is troubled by how to handle it. This is one plot, intertwined with that of a serial killer on the loose. I cannot recall how it all comes together, but basically the young detective winds up in a race to catch the serial killer before being killed or framed by his senior peer detectives, and also to catch the killer before the killer catches him. He tracks the killer to Europe, is helped by a detective over there (Russian I believe). Another sub-plot is this detective has an adult sister who had some trauma so he cares after her... and it turns out the killer is some sort of Duke or something who is about to marry her in Europe..and a big blazing shoot-out in a train garage was one scene. Also the end came together at a museum.

Sounds pretty silly the way I described it, but it actually was a pretty good read...kept me turning pages...

Any ideas?

Books I won't read, Part 2

Following on the last "Books I won't read"...

Any book in which the first chapter (prologue, etc.) is rendered entirely in italics. Won't read it.

If for some reason the chapter is so disconnected from the rest of the story that it needs to be set in italics, just eliminate it. Cut it out entirely. Chances are better than good it won't affect the story at all.

If you insist on including a superfluous prologue that only serves to delay the start of your story, at the very least print it in a regular font. Pages of italics are annoying as hell to read.

"One Book, One Chicago" selects Raymond Chandler

The Chicago Tribune reported over the weekend that Raymond Chandler's The Long Goodbye has been selected for the Chicago Public Library's "One Book, One Chicago"  program, an effort to promote the reading and discussion of books by all the city's residents.

I like programs like this -- I like anything that encourages people to read more -- and I'm especially pleased to see a crime novel chosen. (And it also helps that this is my favorite Raymond Chandler book.) Chicago is a great town for crime fiction, which is one of the reasons I like writing for the Sun-Times so much.

There's more info over at The Outfit blog, along with a statement read by author Sean Chercover at the press conference announcing the selection. (Chercover is also quoted in the Trib piece.)

So everybody get to reading! If you haven't yet had the pleasure of reading Chandler, this is an excellent time to start.

Edit (3/17): I should note that the Sun-Times ran a piece on this as well. But they didn't quote Chercover. (Or "Chercove" as the Trib calls him.)

Books I won't read

We all have books we're tired of, disgusted by or just won't read for one reason or another. (For example, I will no longer read any book with the word "Templar" in the title.)

Here's my latest addition:

Any book whose jacket copy contains the phrase, "not only was her head missing..."

Won't read it.

Dennis Lehane on literary fiction

From Dennis Lehane's appreciation of Richard Price (on the National Book Critics Circle blog):

I was in graduate school when Clockers came out. It was right at this point that I was growing disillusioned with where a lot of (though, by no means all) American literature seemed to be heading. It felt as if so many of the alleged "literary" works being produced at that time were excessively insular, navel-gazing affairs, more often than not centered upon some disaffected, overly verbose young asshole or his/her late-middle-aged counterpart, an academic of some sort having an affair with a student. The third type of book that predominated was the "homage," which involved grafting the plot of a Shakespeare play or some similarly pantheonic work over a contemporary setting, thereby proving the writer had read his/her classics and was therefore worthy of our attention and esteem but also wholly overlooking the small fact that he/she was too devoid of originality to tell a story that he/she had actually, you know, created.

He then goes on to say that Clockers is "one of the few Great American Novels in the North American canon."

Put that on the paperback

"Scooby-Doo-meets-The Sopranos."

From Entertainment Weekly's review of Lisa Scottoline's Lady Killer.

Do we all read a different book?

There's an expression that some readers like to use -- I just saw it earlier today -- and I've always found it a curious one: "We all read a different book."

I know what people are trying to say when they use that phrase, but it still grates every time I see it. One of the things that I think is most enjoyable about reading is that, to the contrary, we all read the same book. Thus it's a shared experience that provides a common point of interest and reference for fellow readers.

Books are immutable -- one of their most remarkable features, I think. While everything around us changes, the words on the page stay the same. When we pick up a copy of Huckleberry Finn, the story is the same as Twain wrote it over 120 years ago. And that's a wonderful connection to the past that is almost impossible to get otherwise. (How else can we have a direct experience of late-19th century American life and thought?)

Of course, we as readers are all different, and we bring our own thoughts, beliefs, knowledge, expectations, emotions, biases and everything else to a book -- so the way in which we experience it is different. But it is we that are different; not the book.

No matter how times change, and technology advances, and trends come in and out of fashion, the book remains the same. And thank God for that.

Get free books!

Those of you who know me know I love free stuff. I live for swag. The only reason I became a book critic was 'cause of the free books. I don't even like to read.

So this is something cool: Tor is giving away free books!

Okay, they're e-books. But still -- they're free. And one of them's actually good: John Scalzi's Old Man's War. (The others may be good, too. Dunno. Haven't read 'em.)

John has the details on his site.

"The Liar's Diary" Blog Day

Over 300 bloggers from the world of publishing are blogging today in support of the paperback release of Patry Francis' book, The Liar's Diary. Patry was recently diagnosed with cancer and has been frequently hospitalized. Since she's unable to do any promotion in support of her book, a few of her friends decided to help out.

Patry is blogging about her battle with cancer, in case you're interested in learning more.

To learn more about how she came to write The Liar's Diary, read her Backstory.

You can watch a trailer for The Liar's Diary on YouTube:

Here's hoping that Patry's health improves soon!

Recommendations for reading Ross Macdonald

Ross Macdonald has been enjoying something of a renaissance in recent months, as Vintage Crime/Black Lizard has been reprinting many of his books.

I had a conversation recently with Tom Nolan, crime fiction critic for the Wall Street Journal and the acclaimed biographer of Macdonald, in which I asked Tom for his recommendations for a reader who is new to Macdonald's work. This is his reply:

The Underground Man, with its forest-fire motif, is an exciting work, as much of a thriller as a murder-mystery; the fire itself is almost a character, racing towards its own destruction.

The Chill is maybe RM's masterpiece, combining his particular themes with memorable characters, terrific sequences, and a surprising plot.

The Galton Case is what he called the fulcrum of his oeuvre, upon which the rest of his work would turn; it was the book in which he most explored his own past (fictionally), and when he consciously committed his most serious writing ambitions to the mystery-novel genre.

I think any RM book from the golden period of the 1960s, when he had come into his mature prose style, would be a good Macdonald to start with; The Zebra-Striped Hearse, The Far Side of the Dollar, and Black Money are all excellent.

Then again, those who prefer a more hard-boiled approach might favor a '50s book. The Way Some People Die or The Barbarous Coast are among my own favorites.

I'm woefully unfamiliar with Macdonald's work, having only read (that I can recall) one novel and a couple of short stories. So I've definitely got some catching up to do.

TBR Stack

Here is a snapshot of my current to-be-read stack. (Along with some that I've read recently but haven't gotten around to filing yet.)

Every couple of months, I go through and remove the ones I never got around to reading, in order to make room for the new batch.

If you think this is bad, you should see the basement...

Gary Phillips' serialized online novel

Gary Phillips, the excellent writer of such under-appreciated novels as The Jook* and Bangers, is writing a serialized novel for The Nation.

Here's the description:

Political fact marries political fiction in Citizen Kang, an online serialized novel that unfolds in weekly installments on The Nation.com throughout Campaign 08.

I haven't read it yet, but Gary is a fine writer, so it's worth checking out. It's a shame Gary isn't still writing and publishing crime fiction.

*If you're a fan of George Pelecanos, I recommend you read The Jook. It's a book that most people aren't familiar with, but it's very good.

Edit: It turns out my impression of Gary's publishing hiatus was, fortunately, exaggerated. He has two anthologies coming out later this year: Politics Noir, which he edited, from Verso, featuring stories from the likes of Ken Bruen, John Shannon and Sujata Massey; and The Darker Mask, edgy prose superhero stories from Tor, which he co-edited with Chris Chambers, featuring stories from Walter Mosley, Naomi Hirahara, Lorenzo Carcaterra and others.

Gary has also written another serialized online story, the novella The Underbelly, which can be read on FourStory and will be published in hardcover later this year by PM Press.

Top 10 Mysteries/Thrillers of 2007

I know I'm late with this. I wasn't going to make a list at all, but then I decided I'd bite the bullet and put one together. Part of the difficulty is that my list has changed several times. It would probably be more accurate to make a Top 20 list and then I could include all the books I was considering. That seems like cheating, though, so I went ahead and narrowed it down to just ten. (Note: the books I selected for my Top 5 Debuts were not considered for this list.)

All of these were books that delighted me during the year. But I'll be honest and say that there were several others that I enjoyed very nearly as much, and that could reasonably have been included here instead. But ten seems to be the magic number, so here they are, in alphabetical order:

Robert Crais - The Watchman
Joseph Finder - Power Play
Robert Harris - The Ghost
John Hart - Down River
Gregg Hurwitz - The Crime Writer
Charlie Huston - The Shotgun Rule
David Ignatius - Body of Lies
Laura Lippman - What the Dead Know
M.J. Rose - The Reincarnationist
Daniel Silva - The Secret Servant

I reviewed most of these, and wrote about the rest here on the blog, in case you're interested in learning a little more about why I liked them.

If anyone else has a list, I'd like to see it. Please share in the comments section.

Sean Chercover's "Big City, Bad Blood" to be adapted for television

It was announced awhile ago that my friend Paul Guyot was hired by Fox to adapt Sean Chercover's PI novel Big City, Bad Blood for a possible television show. Crimespree Cinema has some more details.

Guyot is a good writer, despite his limitations as a human being. So this project actually has some potential.

Of course, the strike killed all that. But hopefully things will get back on track once the labor strife is resolved.

Top 5 Debuts of 2007

I've been tinkering with some lists of the best crime fiction of 2007. Since Roddy requested it, here is my list of the best debuts of the year.

Like every year it seems, 2007 was a so-so year for first novels. There were a handful that showed promise and too many that disappointed. The ones I picked, though, are all strong.

In alphabetical order:

Gordon Campbell: Missing Witness (Book of the Week selection; Chicago Sun-Times review)
Brent Ghelfi: Volk's Game (Book of the Week selection)
Philip Hawley, Jr.: Stigma (Chicago Sun-Times review)
Joe Hill: Heart-Shaped Box (Chicago Sun-Times review)
Nick Stone: Mr. Clarinet (Book of the Week selection)

Honorable mention: Jennifer Lee Carrell: Interred with Their Bones (Chicago Sun-Times review)

What's on your list?

2007 year-end statistics

As many of you know, I'm a compulsive list maker. I not only record all the books I review, but all the books I read. Here are my stats for last year:

Books read in 2007: 144

That was down slightly from 2006 (150 books read) and down quite a bit from 2005 (175 books read). It is more, however, than 2004 (125 books read).

Books reviewed in 2007: 60*

That is very close to the 2006 total (59 books reviewed), down from 2005 (72 books reviewed), and up slightly from 2004 (57 books reviewed).

The newspapers I reviewed for were:

Chicago Sun-Times: 56 books reviewed
Philadelphia Inquirer: 6 books reviewed
Washington Post: 2 books reviewed
Philadelphia City Paper: 1 book reviewed

(The reason this adds up to 65 is because I reviewed 5 of the books twice.)

Of the books I reviewed for the Chicago Sun-Times, 50 of them were included in round-up columns (10 of them) and 6 in single-book reviews. All the other newspaper reviews were single-book pieces. (That represents a total of 25 separate articles in newspapers.)

I also reviewed some books on here and had several Book of the Week picks. I'm nothing if not prolific!

*I also reviewed one book for the New York Times, but the piece never ran.

Chicago Sun-Times contributors' favorite books of the year

The Sun-Times' contributors, including myself and Dana Kaye, reveal our favorite books of the year.

I won't keep you in suspense: mine was the new Harry Potter. I know it doesn't make me look high-brow like most critics try to do, but I was being honest. I flat out loved that book to pieces.

The Sun-Times' Books Editor, Teresa Budasi, also discusses the cutbacks in the paper's books coverage with an essay titled "How the Grinch stole the Books section." The amount of space devoted to books will be cut at least by half. Sad news for all.

Support a good cause -- First Book

First Book's mission is to give disadvantaged children the opportunity to read and own their first new books. They were named a Gold Star Charity by Forbes Magazine and received a Four Star rating (the highest) from Charity Navigator.

Nonsense from the literary elite

James Fallows, National Correspondent for The Atlantic Monthly, writes on his blog:

Like most people who enjoy spy novels and crime fiction, I feel vaguely guilty about this interest...You feel a little cheesy when you see a stack of lurid mystery covers sitting next to the bed.

The piece overall is complimentary to crime fiction (sort of) and he posits a reasonable test to determine if genre fiction rises to the level of "real" fiction: if he can remember the book a month or six months or a year later.

So that's fine. But what I want to know is: Are there really people who feel guilty about reading genre fiction? And, if so, what the hell is wrong with them?

I can understand feeling embarrassed if you're reading porn on the subway. But feeling "cheesy" because you enjoy mystery novels is idiotic.

It's no wonder that people don't read much in this country when the so-called intelligentsia hold absurd ideas like this.

(hat tip)

Amazon's Top 10 for 2007

Amazon has released their Editor's Picks for the Top 10 Mysteries and Thrillers of 2007. I read 6 of them. Here's what I thought:

1. Chelsea Cain - Heartsick. The best book of the year? Most over-hyped book of the year, maybe. I couldn't even finish it. Dull and more than a little silly -- why read this when I could just read Silence of the Lambs again?

2. Charlie Huston - The Shotgun Rule. Excellent choice. This fine novel was my Book of the Week pick on 8/27. I don't know if it would make my Top 10, but it's damn good.

3. Tana French - In the Woods. Total head-scratcher for me. This book is so tedious it took me 25 minutes to read the first 10 pages. Thriller writers should hold their words dear. French uses them like she buys them on sale at Wal-Mart.

6. John Hart - Down River. Another excellent choice. Hart is a truly gifted writer. This one might be in my Top 10. I look forward to reading Hart for years to come. (I reviewed Down River in the Chicago Sun-Times.)

8. Laura Lippman - What the Dead Know. One of my favorite books of the year. I don't know that I could pick just one book as my favorite of 2007, but if I had to, this would be a strong contender. (I reviewed  this in the Philadelphia Inquirer, but the link to the newspaper's website is now dead.)

10. Joe Hill - Heart-Shaped Box. A very strong debut -- a terrific, scary thriller. Hill is the pseudonym for Stephen King's son, and he does the old man proud. (I reviewed it in the Chicago Sun-Times.)

So...4 good choices, 2 lousy ones. Not a bad average, all things considered.

Book suggestions?

I'm looking for a good book to read...  Something published between now and the end of October. Preferably by a woman. Hardcover, paperback, whatever. Nothing self-published, though.

Any suggestions?

Up all night on the edge of your seat

Last night I was reading in bed before I went to sleep, as I do every night. The book is a modestly-hyped new thriller that the publisher seems to be putting some energy behind. (I'm not going to mention the name, since this isn't a review; it's about a larger point.)

I've been reading this book for a couple days now and have been enjoying it overall. Interesting plot, good characters, and it's a little different from the run-of-the-mill thriller plot that frequently gets utilized these days. If I end up reviewing it, I'll have positive things to say.

Yet, I found myself last night with only 20 pages left in the book, and decided to put it down and go to sleep. I wasn't overwhelmingly tired, although it was past the time I usually turn in. I certainly could have kept reading for another 15 minutes or whatever it took to finish the book. But I didn't. And I think that's a telling reaction.

There's a certain almost ineffable quality to finely-executed thrillers that makes us want to keep reading them no matter what distractions arise. Sometimes it's a result of the pacing (as in Joe Finder's work), sometimes it's the intricacies of the plot (Ross Thomas), sometimes it's the compelling nature of the characters (Lee Child), sometimes it's the invigorating action (Barry Eisler). Whatever it is, the books have us obsessively turning the pages, hungry, desperate to find out what happens next.

This book didn't have that. It's a pleasing story, entertaining, well written even. But it lacks that "edge of your seat," "stay up all night" quality that the blurbmasters love to tout. As a result, it is less effective overall as a thriller.

As much as anything, I think it is that compulsive page-turning quality that separates the truly fine thriller from the merely good ones. And it is that quality which is hardest for authors to capture, which separates the masters from the pretenders.

If you can easily put a thriller down at any time, read it a little here and a little there, not really care what happens in the end...Well, that is as good a description of an ineffective thriller as you're likely to find.

The final Harry Potter novel -- no spoilers

I've just finished a whirlwind reading of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. I don't want to say too much, as I don't want to spoil anything. But I will say that I enjoyed the book immensely and it was everything I hoped for. The seventh (and, regrettably, closing) installment in this brilliant series is a magnificent and fitting end.

J.K. Rowling's achievement with this set of 7 books -- which really comprise one big story -- is nothing short of astounding. She deserves every bit of praise, every ounce of hype, and every million dollars. What a truly gifted and rare talent.

Brava, Ms. Rowling.

Post-9/11 books

In the comments section to a post below, writer Patti Abbott writes:

I've been reading Second Hand by Micahel Zadoorian, a book written around 2000 and set in Detroit. I wonder if a case can be make that novels written pre-9/11 have a completely different feel to them. This is leisurely and the angst in it manageable rather than apocalyptic. Do you see a difference?

I've been thinking about it, and I can't say that I've seen any major differences between the books I've read that were written before and after 9/11. Obviously there are some subject matter differences (in some books, at least), but in terms of themes, style, etc., I can't point to anything.

I think the differences between individual authors and books are so great that it's difficult to generalize much in terms of how books overall might have changed. I'm sure that some authors have changed, or some books have changed, but I haven't seen any widespread differences in the genre as a whole.

It's an interesting subject to think about, though.

So, what are you reading?

I just started Power Play by Joseph Finder last night. About 15 minutes before that, I finished Beyond Reach by Karin Slaughter.

I've been on an excellent streak of good books lately.

Can you identify this book?

A reader writes in, asking if we can help identify a book she read:

The book is unusual in that it makes use of a lot of first person journal entries, the killer's being among them.  There are also journal entries from one of the main characters, a high school English teacher who is having her students do a lot of journal writing.  The story revolves around who is killing young women.  One is a local high school student, very popular, etc.  Another is a young runaway.  The third to be victim is the daughter of the teacher.

Ring any bells?

Novels about assassins

I wrote this up for another website and thought I'd share it here as well. Obviously it's not an exhaustive list, but these are some of my favorites.

Lawrence Block -- Hit Man, Hit List, Hit Parade
Barry Eisler -- Rain Fall, Hard Rain, Rain Storm, etc. (6 books in the John Rain series)
Frederick Forsyth -- The Day of the Jackal
Geoffrey Household -- Rogue Male
Robert Ludlum -- The Bourne Identity, The Bourne Supremacy, The Bourne Ultimatum, The Matarese Circle, The Matarese Countdown
David Morrell -- The Brotherhood of the Rose, The Fraternity of the Stone, The League of Night and Fog
Warren Murphy & Molly Cochran -- Grandmaster
Thomas Perry -- The Butcher's Boy, Sleeping Dogs
Daniel Silva -- The Kill Artist, The English Assassin, The Confessor, etc. (7 books in the Gabriel Allon series so far)
Trevanian -- The Eiger Sanction, The Loo Sanction, Shibumi

What are some of your favorites?

(Considering that my novel also features an assassin as the protagonist, this is clearly a topic that I enjoy too much.)

Congrats, Mr. Eisler

Congratulations to Barry Eisler, whose latest John Rain thriller, Requiem for an Assassin, debuts at #19 on the New York Times bestseller list. This is the first time that one of Eisler's books has cracked the extended list, so kudos are in order.

It's nice to see that someone can still build a career the old fashioned way, with talent, hard work and persistence. Way to go, Barry!

(My review of the book will be running soon.)

New York Magazine's The Best Novels You've Never Read

New York magazine put out a call for critics to submit their favorite novels and authors that they believed had been unfairly overlooked. I responded with George Pelecanos.

I don't remember exactly what I wrote (had I known it would make the magazine, I probably would have worked harder on it), but here's my annotation they used:

"Few authors can write about race and the urban landscape with his nuance and insight—and nobody else can do it while telling such a damn good story."

Pelecanos is hardly an unknown writer, but given how good he is, he should be a much bigger name.

If you'll allow me a brief ego stroke

Here's an ad for Lee Child's latest book that ran this morning in the New York Times:

If you click on the image, you can read the fine print at the bottom, where they include blurbs from Janet Maslin and myself. Publishers use blurbs all the time, of course, but it's nice when they include the critics' names with the quotes.

We deserve a little recognition for our words, don't we?

Cracking the Top 10

Laura Lippman's superb new novel, What the Dead Know (which I reviewed last weekend), debuted this week at #11 on the New York Times bestseller list. Now comes word that next week it will be moving up one slot to #10.

Due to some changes in my reviewing work lately, I've been paying more attention to the bestseller lists than I usually do. But even if I weren't, this is something worth noticing.

What the Dead Know is an excellent book, one of my favorites of the year so far, and its success is further proof that a crime novel doesn't have to be style-less or overly simplistic in order to be a bestseller. (Robert Crais' fine The Watchman is also on the same list, coming in at #8.)

Congrats to Ms. Lippman! If you haven't read the book yet, I recommend you give it a try.

Will you read my book?

Sure. Just add it to the pile.

This is one day's haul.

Books I'm looking forward to this year

Philip Hawley Jr.'s Stigma -- I read this in manuscript form 2 years ago and have been waiting eagerly for the book ever since.

Lee Child's Bad Luck and Trouble -- I always look forward to a new Reacher book. They never disappoint.

Barry Eisler's Requiem for an Assassin -- The last book in the John Rain series (unless something changes). I think this is going to be a killer and hopefully be the book that really breaks Eisler out to a larger audience. 

M.J. Rose's The Reincarnationist -- Another book I read in manuscript form. This is going to blow a lot of people away.

Laura Lippman's What the Dead Know -- Lippman is at the top of the mystery genre in terms of talent and execution. Every book she writes is an event to look forward to.

Joseph Finder's Power Play -- Finder is writing some of the best thrillers of anyone right now, so this should be another winner.

Robert Crais' The Watchman -- The first Joe Pike novel has the potential to be very good. This is a series that once had real magic. Let's hope it's back.

Jason Starr and Ken Bruen's Slide -- The sequel to Bust, one of the best crime novels of 2006. I'm also looking forward to Bruen's Priest. The Jack Taylor novels are probably the best thing going in the PI genre today.

Harlan Coben's The Woods -- I don't know anything about this book, but Harlan can write a page-turner with the best of them. 

New books from Michael Connelly, George Pelecanos, Lawrence Block, Robert Ferrigno, Denise Hamilton, Thomas Perry...whenever they have them. These are all must reads for me. They may not have books out this year, though.

(Now that I think about it, Connelly is coming out with The Overlook, the serial novel he wrote for the Times coming out. I don't know if you count that as "new" or not.)

These are the books I was able to think of off the top of my head. There are, of course, many others that I'll read as soon as I lay my hands on them. Here's hoping 2007 will be a great year for crime fiction.

What about you? Which books are on your must-read list for 2007?

Mail call

I've mentioned often on this blog that I get a lot of books. Well, yesterday was a banner day here at Crime Reviewing Central. I got packages from the USPS, UPS, FedEx and DHL. Here's the breakdown:

Hardcover books -- 10
ARCs for hardcovers -- 4
ARCs for trade paperbacks -- 1
ARCs for paperbacks -- 2
Manuscript -- 1
Total books: 18

Here's what I plan to read:

Hardcovers -- 3 (Including 1 I've already read)
ARCs -- 2 (Including 1 I've already got)
Manuscript -- 1 (If I have time)
Total books planning to read: 6

That's actually a fairly high percentage of good stuff for this batch. The book I'm most looking forward to reading of these is Lee Child's new one, Bad Luck and Trouble.

2006 Statistics

As regular readers of this blog know, I'm a compulsive list keeper. So here are my collected stats for 2006.

Books read: 150
Most books by 1 author (Lawrence Block): 7
Second-most books by 1 author (Rex Stout): 5

Book reviews written (including multi-book columns): 26
Books reviewed: 59
Books reviewed more than once: 7
Total books reviewed: 66
(Note: The above stats include only my print work, not online-only.)

Newspapers reviewed for: 5
Chicago Sun-Times reviews (including columns): 12
Philadelphia Inquirer reviews: 8
Boston Globe reviews: 2
South Florida Sun-Sentinel reviews: 2
Philadelphia City Paper reviews: 2

I can do the breakdown by publisher, too, in case anyone's interested.

Not bad output overall. It appears that this year my review output will increase substantially, too. By the end of 2007, you're going to be sick of me!

Debut novels

Two of the books I was planning to review in my column on debut novels had to be dropped. (I recommended to my editor that they get the feature treatment instead, and apparently she listened!)

So I'm still looking for first novels to review. Anything published between January 1 and March 15 (or so). No vanity, POD, PublishAmerica, etc. The paper won't allow them.

The last time I ran this message, an author helpfully wrote in, and I'm now reviewing his book. But I only heard from a few people. (I thought I would be deluged, but apparently my traffic isn't what it used to be.)

You can email me or leave a comment.

Thanks!

Is it just me?

Every Sunday morning, I go to Sarah Weinman's blog to check her round-up of all the major mystery reviews. When I see a book that looks interesting (something I've read, something I plan to read, something I'm curious about), I'll click through and read the review. (Note: I don't usually do this if it's a book I plan to review -- but by the time someone else's review runs, mine would probably be done anyway.)

Lately I've been noticing how much I disagree with the reviews I'm reading. The same thing goes for the PW reviews that I see on Amazon. Reviewers are heaping praise on books that I find to be, at best, merely average -- and often they're much worse than that.

This leaves me wondering: are reviewers getting soft or am I just turning into a grumpy old man?

I don't think I'm being any more curmudgeonly than before. I still find plenty of books that I enjoy and that I would feel comfortable giving glowing reviews, too. But I can't help but be surprised at all the crap that people are heaping praise on.

Same thing for many of the Best of 2006 lists that I read. I thought that last year was just okay for crime fiction; hardly a banner year. There were a lot of good books, but few great ones -- and an awful lot of truly bad ones.

But when I've looked over the lists that people put together, I've seen plenty of titles that that were disappointing, if not mediocre; lots of books that I simply gave up on reading.

So all of this makes me wonder: are reviewers getting soft? Are people becoming reluctant to pan books (or, at least, give mixed reviews to books), unless they're written by Michael Crichton or Thomas Harris?

I know the temptation to over-praise books, subconsciously or otherwise, and I know some of the reasons why it happens. But it seems to me that the plaudits being doled out lately are above and beyond.

Win free books!

International Thriller Writers is giving one lucky winner autographed copies of 150 novels by some of the biggest and best thriller authors in the business, including people like Joseph Finder, Tess Gerritsen, John Lescroart, Gayle Lynds and David Baldacci. To enter the contest, visit http://www.150thrillers.com/ before February 15th and sign up to get the free ITW newsletter.

In related news, if you haven't already done so, consider making plans at attend ThrillerFest this summer in New York. Last year's inaugural conference was so much fun, it would be a crime to miss this year's.

(And I say that even though I'm not involved with the planning or programming this time around. It's still going to be a blast.)

Charlie Huston rocks

If anyone knows Charlie Huston, tell him, from me, that his books kick ass.

I just finished reading No Dominion, the second book in the Joe Pitt vampire/detective series, and it's another winner. (I read the first, Already Dead, a couple of weeks ago, and it, too, is outstanding.)

I haven't read Huston's Hank Thompson trilogy yet, but I'm planning to. Yesterday I went on Amazon and bought a copy of Caught Stealing, the first book in the series. (You may not know this, but I'm a cheap bastard and I hate paying money for books. So this is saying something!)

Charlie Huston is the real deal. Hard boiled, inventive, witty, with a fresh eye and sharp prose. If you're not reading him, you should be.

Better late than never

I finally read Bridget Jones's Diary. (Okay, so I'm a little behind the times.)

It's good. A little long, but with a strong voice and fun characters. I found it to be quite entertaining.

At this rate, I should be getting to The Da Vinci Code sometime around 2013.

Calling all debuts

If you're an author with a debut crime novel being published between January 1 and March 1, please let me know. No self-published, vanity press, PublishAmerica, etc.

Thanks!

Help identify this book

K. Watman writes:

I am searching for a book, the name of which I cannot recall. The protagonist happens to be witness to a young woman being thrown off the top of a tall building under construction. She falls directly past him to her death. Motivated to investigate, the protagonist discovers that the young woman was the daughter of a building’s prime contractor. She had been killed at the direction of an Indian (as in India) electrical equipment subcontractor who was seeking to sell defective electric motors for the building project. When the prime contractor refused, his daughter was murdered to “motivate” him to change his mind. The murderer is a truly memorable character, a member of an obscure Indian Hill Tribe, a Dhan. I’ve checked; there is such a tribe. He wields a kukri knife (like the Gurkhas), and to describe him as formidable would be a true understatement. Worship of Kali gets mixed up in this story, too.

Anyone have any ideas? It doesn't ring any bells for me.

Musings on Thomas Harris' "Hannibal Rising"

I finished the hotly-anticipated fourth book in the Hannibal Lecter series last night. (Okay...lukewarmly-anticipated.)

Rather than write a formal review, which sounds like too much work at the moment (the baby and I both have a cold), I thought I'd offer my thoughts on it in Larry King-like stream-of-consciousness style:

• Hannibal Rising isn't a thriller. I don't know what it is -- a character study, maybe? -- but it's not a thriller.
• Despite that, I found it to be reasonably entertaining.
• I still don't recommend it, though.
• Readers who are expecting another Silence of the Lambs or Red Dragon are going to hurl this book across the room in anger.
• Although it's not as much of a gorefest as Hannibal, it's still pretty bloody. But in a strangely dispassionate way.
• Lecter's really kind of a stiff in this book. He's almost boring, which considering what a brilliant character he was, is very nearly a crime.
• At times Hannibal Rising reads more like a treatment for a screenplay than a novel -- which isn't surprising, given that Harris apparently wrote the screenplay at the same time he did the book.
• How can the movie be finished at the same time the book is published? I have no idea.
• Some of the writing is god-awful -- there are some real howlers in it -- but most of it's okay. Some of the parts in the first half of the book (telling of Lecter's youth as a Lithuanian noble) are quite evocative.
• The book actually does a pretty good job of explaining how Lecter came to be the man (monster?) he is.
• I would have liked to read more about how he became so fiendishly clever, a topic the book barely touches. Probably because it would be hard to explain.
• Hannibal Rising strikes me as a lazy book. It seems that Harris put only a bare minimum of effort and imagination into it. It's also rather short.
• If the movie follows the book in anything other than name, it'll be duller than Paris Hilton.
• This makes it sound like I hated Hannibal Rising, which I didn't. It was a decent book, and I enjoyed it while I was reading it. But nobody picks this up looking for a decent read. They want to be thrilled, horrified, intrigued, scared, amazed, shocked, etc. Hannibal Rising does very little of that.
• You know how in Silence of the Lambs, Dr. Chilton shows Clarice Starling a picture of a nurse whose face Lecter mauled? Chilton says, "His pulse never got above 85, even when he ate her tongue." Well, that's Hannibal Rising. While reading it, my pulse never got above 85.
• I can think of no reason why this book was written, other than the money. Thomas Harris was once a brilliant writer, and even his junk is interesting to read, but he has squandered a truly great talent, and that's a damn shame.

What should I review?

If you have a suggestion for a book that I should review in my next column, please post it in the comments section. I've got several things on my list, but I'm not that excited about a couple of them.

Ideally, the book will be published between mid-November and the end of December. No 2007 books, please.

Score one for Buckley!

A couple weeks ago, I wrote about how a review of Christopher Buckley's in the New York Times prompted me to immediately buy the book in question.

Well, I finished Chris Miller's The Real Animal House last night and it was everything that Buckley said it was: funny, crude, tasteless, probably apocryphal and a lot of fun to read.

So chalk one up for the reviewers! If you enjoyed the gross-out humor and antics of the film Animal House you'll probably enjoy this book as well. Juvenile that I am, I loved it.

Do book reviews sell books?

Last night I read the Sunday edition of the New York Times Book Review. This was something of a rarity for me, as I don't read many book reviews. I like book reviews, but I have a lot of demands on my time, so I usually spending my free time reading books instead of reviews.

But Marilyn Stasio had reviews of some books that I'd also reviewed, so I wanted to check those out. She had an interesting column in which she actually made it obvious that she liked some books (Michael Connelly's and Robert Ward's, especially).

Then I saw that Christopher Buckley, one of my favorite writers, had a review of a book called The Real Animal House.

It turns out that one of the screenwriters of the classic film wrote a memoir about his real-life experiences in a frat at Dartmouth that helped inspire the movie. Buckley says the book is hilarious, and he's a guy whose comedy judgment I trust. After all, he's written plenty of hilarious things himself (especially Thank You for Smoking*) so he ought to know.

So I clicked over to Amazon and bought it. Before reading the review, I'd never heard of the book and even if I had, I wouldn't have bought it. But a reviewer I trust said it was good, so I thought I'd give it a try.

Hopefully, that's what all book reviews can do.

*It appears that Thank You for Smoking is out of print. How is that possible? Didn't the publisher even reissue a tie-in copy for the movie?

Edit: Thank You for Smoking is in print. You can find it on Amazon here. Thanks to Mark in the comments section for pointing that out!

What's everyone reading?

I love to find out what other people are reading. (It's all part of my obsession with books. It's like when I go into someone's house for the first time...I'm always trying to peek at their books to see what they've got. Assuming they have books. If they don't have books, I just drink their liquor and leave.)

I'm currently reading James Grady's Mad Dogs. It's odd, but fascinating.

How about you?

More lists of the best detective novels

In response to my own 10 Greatest Detective Novels list, Maxine Clark offers up a list of her 10 Favourite Detective Authors, James Reasoner shares 10 Detective Novels that stand out in his memory, and Sherry Early passes along her Best 10 Detective Novels.

I suppose I wouldn't enjoy this nearly so much if I weren't obsessed with lists, but I am. I find it fascinating to see which novels other people consider great, and how much we all disagree on them.

I'm especially pleased to see how often Rex Stout's name is mentioned. Stout was a wonderful writer who produced many fine books, but it seems that he is little read these days, which is a shame.

I don't get it -- a follow-up

In the comments section of my post "I don't get it" (about my frustration with attempting to donate books to the local library), Johnnie Frisbie writes:

I select fiction for a mid-size public library. While some of our donations go to the library book sale a fair number also make it onto our shelves. If the books you were donating were 18 months old what you must realize is that the library ordered enough of those books to meet patron demands. Usually, unless a book is The DaVinci Code by the time 18 months has passed the initial demand for the book has passed.

What happens at some of our branches is staff takes those pristine donations and checks their shelves to see if the copy they currently have needs to be replaced. Staff that takes the time to do this can make a significant contribution to keeping their collection looking good. It is not that libraries do not appreciate donations, we do, it is just that we cannot rely on them to meet out patron needs.

I found that comment interesting, and some of it makes sense to me. But I think that in most cases the library probably didn't order copies of the books I wanted to give them, or certainly not all of them.

Of course, if they've got the books already, then it's a moot point. The reason I wanted to donate them in the first place is because I was under the impression that libraries can't afford to buy very many books. If they've got everything they need, then they certainly don't need me. (And now that I think about it, the libraries in Fairfax County must have pretty damn good funding, so maybe they really do have all the books they need.)

I'm curious about something else Johnnie wrote...He seems to imply that libraries operate on the assumption that only new releases are of interest to patrons. Is that really true? I know new books are of the most immediate interest, but don't they shelve older books? Even books from last year? Obviously they can't keep everything, but what about, for example, last year's Edgar winners or Book 1 or 2 of an ongoing series?

I think the part that disappointed me about the whole thing was that the library wasn't even interested in considering the books. I explicitly told them I realized that the books might or might not meet their needs -- in which case I knew they would be sold off at the charity sale. And that's fine.

But I wanted for the books to at least be considered for circulation, since they represent a valuable resource. Unfortunately, they weren't interested in that. So that indicates to me that, contrary to what Johnnie wrote, they don't appreciate donations at all, other than for sale. (Which is the same thing as just asking for money.)

I used to give books to a couple of nursing homes, because at least then I knew they were going to where people would read them. But the person I dealt with doesn't handle that anymore, and I haven't had much luck connecting with anyone else.

If I'm just going to donate the books for sale, this particular library is too picky about their rules. One of the other libraries in the area that I talked to was more receptive when it comes to their book sale, but it's not very convenient for me to go over there.

So I suppose I'll just keep dumping them at the Salvation Army. It's a shame that there's not a better outlet for good quality, new books. I can't even give the damn things away! As both a reader and a writer, that makes me a little sad.

I don't get it

We hear all the time how public libraries have no funding and thus can't buy any books. So recently I contacted the branch manager of the library closest to my house. I explained that I was a book reviewer and I have a large number of books that I'd like to donate.

These are good books: new, hardcover mysteries and thrillers, most of them unread, all of them published within the last 18 months or so. I said I'd like to make sure the books went to good use and could provide more in the future if it worked out well.

The librarian wrote back and said they'd be happy to take the books -- but only for the Friends of the Library sale. I could drop them off on a certain date and a certain time, but only 2 boxes worth.

What am I missing here? I can understand that a particular book might not be of any use to a library. But books in general aren't worth their time? New, recent hardcover mystery novels from major NY publishers, including award-winners, aren't the kind of thing that they'd like to have in their collection? For free?

I don't get it.

Don't you hate it when you can't find a book to read?

I know what you're thinking: How can Montgomery not have any books to read? The guy has more books than Carter's got little pills.

And it's true, I've got a lot of books. Thousands of 'em, with more coming in every day. But nothing looks particularly appealing.

I've already read everything for my next column, which isn't even due for a couple of weeks, so I'm free to read anything I want. But every time I pick something up, I end up looking at it, flipping through a couple of pages, then putting it back.

I don't know if it's me or just the books that are out right now. Maybe it's both.

None of my favorite authors, the people I'd automatically read, has a new book, and the other things I've been getting just seem so generic or otherwise unspectacular.

Anyway, maybe you can help. What should I read?

10 Greatest Detective Novels -- The List

It proved to be a nearly impossible task, but after much thought and consideration, here is my list:

10 Greatest Detective Novels (in alphabetical order):

• Lawrence Block - When the Sacred Ginmill Closes
• Raymond Chandler - The Long Goodbye
• Michael Connelly - The Black Echo
• Robert Crais - L.A. Requiem
• James Crumley - The Last Good Kiss
• Dashiell Hammett - The Maltese Falcon
• John D. MacDonald -- The Dreadful Lemon Sky
• Walter Mosley - Devil in a Blue Dress
• Robert B. Parker - Looking for Rachel Wallace
• Rex Stout - The League of Frightened Men

If you asked me again in a year, a couple of the individual books might change, but I feel pretty good about the line-up of authors. I also could think of some more books that I'd like to add on to expand the list, but I haven't come up with anything that I would prefer to what's already on there.

As soon as I summon my strength, I think I'm going to shoot for the 10 Greatest Assassin Novels.

Do you recognize this book?

A reader writes in:

I read a crime fiction novel a few years ago that I'm sure was part of a series. I can't remember the title or author, and very little about the plot...I believe that the story had some involvement with the sea and/or the protagonist being a retired detective or something who now transports boats for a living. His love interest is his business partner (and maybe a former "client").

Not much to go on, I know. But does anyone know what it is? If so, please leave a comment.

Review of Karen E. Olson's "Secondhand Smoke"

Tough-talking New Haven reporter Annie Seymour returns for her second go-around in Karen E. Olson’s winning Secondhand Smoke (Mysterious Press, 272 pages, $22.99), a book even better than last year’s excellent debut, Sacred Cows (which was nominated for the Gumshoe Award).

When a popular local eatery burns down across the street from Annie’s home, she’s right there in the thick of things, covering the story with her usual deadpan cynicism. The crime starts to cut a little close to home, however, when it turns out that her own father might be involved.

Olson writes in a similar corner of the genre as Janet Evanovich, but her plots and her heroine are grounded much firmer in reality. Secondhand Smoke combines a nice sense of humor, deft use of setting and a solid collection of characters all together in one charming mystery. This book proves that Olson is no flash in the pan. She’s here to stay.

For more reviews like this one, please visit Mystery Ink.

10 Greatest Detective Novels -- Dennis Lehane

After much urging from the commenters in the previous discussion on the 10 Greatest Detective Novels, I went back to read Dennis Lehane's A Drink Before the War, the first book in the Kenzie-Gennaro series.

I've read a couple of Lehane's books before (Sacred and Mystic River) without being blown away. Although I liked this one much better -- and can see why he has his legions of fans -- I didn't think this was at the level of the other books included on my list.

Lehane's a fine writer; I don't think there's any doubt about that. And A Drink Before the War is a quality, entertaining detective novel. But it's not a great detective novel.

The plot of Drink is on the simple side. (That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's worth mentioning.) The characters are fine, but not particularly original. The prose quality is generally high, and the setting is used well. In no area, however, does it rise to the level of extraordinary, which is what I'm looking for on this list.

One area of weakness is that much of the writing is heavy-handed and overdone. Whether the topic is race, abuse or politics, Lehane makes his points with a cudgel, when a scalpel is what's really needed. (I contrast this to the work of George Pelecanos, for example, which is much subtler.)

While reading it, I couldn't help but notice that although Lehane is working in similar territory, with similar characters, and exploring similar themes as the best of Robert B. Parker's Spenser series, he doesn't pull it off quite as well as Parker did.

Granted, this was Lehane's first novel. And, considering that, it's a damn fine achievement. Having read this book, I would certainly read him again.

Ultimately, A Drink Before the War is a solid example of a detective novel, well-written and enjoyable. But it's not one of the 10 Greatest.

10 Greatest Detective Novels -- follow-up

Okay, the debate on my list of the 10 Greatest Detective Novels has been raging for a while now... Let's see if we've come to any conclusions.

Here is my original list of seven, which I'm still feeling pretty good about:

10 Greatest Detective Novels (in alphabetical order):

• Lawrence Block - When the Sacred Ginmill Closes
• Raymond Chandler - The Long Goodbye
• Michael Connelly - The Black Echo
• Robert Crais - L.A. Requiem
• Dashiell Hammett - The Maltese Falcon
• Walter Mosley - Devil in a Blue Dress
• Robert B. Parker - Looking for Rachel Wallace

To that list, I want to add:

• James Crumley - The Last Good Kiss

(Thanks to folks for pointing out that omission. Although the ending of LGK stinks, it's a powerful book.)

We also need a Travis McGee novel, so for now I'm going to add:

• John D. MacDonald -- The Dreadful Lemon Sky

(Guyot! Should I pick a different one?)

I haven't yet been persuaded to change any of the original picks, although I'm open to it. A couple people suggested Parker's Early Autumn rather than Looking for Rachel Wallace. Early Autumn is a great book, and it would be my second pick of a Spenser novel. I think that, on the level of a pure detective story, however, Rachel Wallace is superior.

As for Connelly...Most of the Bosch books are excellent, and I could pick a different one from The Black Echo. But that book is so damn good, and it also has the advantage to being the first, so I'm tempted to keep it for now.

Let's assume that I'm going to keep these same authors. That gives me nine books, with space for one more. There have been strong votes for both Dennis Lehane and Dorothy L. Sayers. I need to try to find the time to read a couple of theirs. I'm not holding out much hope, though.

I'm tempted to add Laura Lippman's Every Secret Thing to the list, but it's so recent, and I'm also not sure it qualifies as a detective novel. In fact, the more I think about it, I don't believe it does. The Tess Monaghan books certainly would, but I don't know if I could single out one of those. By a Spider's Thread maybe?

Again, though... it's so recent. Same thing goes for Denise Hamilton's work. I'd like to have at least a decade's worth of separation from the book -- and hopefully a subsequent re-reading -- in order to be certain of its lasting power.

I love George Pelecanos, whom someone suggested in the comments section, but I just don't think of him as a detective writer. While it's true that he has on occasion written about detectives, his books still don't strike me as detective novels. I might need to rethink that, though.

Part of the problem here is that there are just so many people that I haven't read. When you think of all the detective novels that have been published in the last 60 years, it's an impossible task.

Even so, though, I think this list is shaping up nicely...