DNF
Title: The Glass Heart Girl
Author: Michelle Diana Lowe
Publication Info: Amazon Digital Services July 2014
ISBN: 978-1500209346
Genre: New Adult
We all know that wackadoo historical is where my heart truly lies. But I have been trying to expand my horizons, so here I am reviewing a New Adult (which is a genre name I have so many issues with but this is neither the time nor the place).
But this was so badly written that I couldn’t finish it. I only made it 50% of the way through the book before throwing in the towel. (Like, by the point I’d given up, I’d read a paragraph, sigh heavily, and go check twitter, make pained noises, pour a glass of wine, weave a few inches on some placemats I’m making, then read another paragraph.)
This is a horribly overwritten New Adult about Alena, in her second year at the University of Leicester, and her boyfriend, Phillip. Alena is a rape survivor- her high school math teacher seduced her into a relationship that ended when he tried to kill her. Phillip used to steal cars and go joy riding in them.
These two met on the first day of their Freshman year, love at first sight, making out two minutes in.
“Oh gees, what the heck,” he mumbled, grabbing me into his arms and pulling my mouth to his lips, overwhelming mine, and massaging my thin, red aperture. My lips started to pulsate- not the lips on my face, but the other ones, my lady lips [YES REALLY], which were throbbing like mad as I half mounted his leg, enjoying this amazing first kiss and dry humping session….
“…I usually don’t snog strangers,” he said, explaining his impetuous actions.
That really doesn’t explain anything, but okay.
Anyway, Alena also has a “bestie,” Becca, who is from California. She has some jealousy issue with Phillip, and apparently, according to Lowe’s twitter, this is explained later in the book. The three of them are studying Psychology and are just the smartest cookies that ever did live.
“A stars, As and Bs in our A levels, so we are a clever bunch of college students. It’s not that the others are dumb, it’s just that they are not on our heightened, and in sync, wavelength.”
We are introduced to Becca by Alena saying that she accidently swiped one of Becca’s pairs of underwear from the laundry room, and it was weird to think of her lady bits rubbing against Becca’s prize pink panties. Yes, these are actual words in the book.
Alena has been with Phillip for 18 months, but they haven’t had sex yet because of her PTSD, and she doesn’t leave campus except to go to the grocery store and home for holidays. Phillip alternates between being understanding about her fear of sex, and trying to nudge her into it. She doesn’t want to go to therapy because she should be able to heal her demons on her own, and having Phillip should be enough but of course it’s not.
Basically the plot is- Alena has a panic attack, and Becca and or Phillip help her calm down, Phillip tries to nudge her towards sex, then cries when she says she can’t, rinse, repeat. There’s a point in one of them classes where Alena’s menstrual flow is dangerously high, and no one takes her to the hospital (like, they say multiple towels are used to sop it up, and she’s given some vitamin C by the university nurse and everything is fine. I don’t even know.)
There were a lot of things that frustrated me. The author’s website indicates that she is a Woman of Color, so this is not as cringey as if a white woman wrote this, but I found the language used to describe Phillip as almost fetishizing: Alena’s Barbardian Prince, chocolate colored, delectable brown meat– it made me super uncomfortable.
Lowe has not met an adjective she won’t try to shoehorn into a sentence. Why use one when you can toss in three, or five?
“Overlooking the clear, deep water from a perfect right angle is a grove of small trees, flurescent evergreens, which encircle the briny creek with glee, and frequently blow the scent of a sweet crispy auburn breeze, into their lover’s dreamy aqua demesne.”
Everything is like this. Pebbles are not pebbles, they are small and sharp. Becca isn’t fidgety, “…her hands and feet need to be occupied; she’s got fidigitis. In other words, she enjoys a good fidget to pass the time.” Alena “…puckered my lips slightly, my mouth crinkled into a perfectly shaped cupcake case.”
(I don’t know what that means.) (Neither does anyone else who I've read that line to. They do, all, pucker their mouths and go, “Like this?” Humans are fun.)
Yes, the “three words that mean the same thing” device is a tried and true technique, but it needs to be deployed like a scalpel, not a sledgehammer every other sentence.
There was also chapter 3, where the narrative was brought to screeching halt while the University of Leicester was described in prospectus-worthy detail. Date founded, number of buildings, etc, etc. It was ridiculous.
AND THE DIALOGUE. When Alena and Phillip meet, Alena tells him where’s she used to live, and he says:
“Good thing you moved from that side, Alena. A girl got raped in that part of town four years ago. My cousin found her near the main road….she was only covered in a towel. Jermaine, my cuz, covered up her dignity with his long faux fur coat. I’ll never forget that story. So terrible.”
Alena, of course, was that girl, and after she convinces him of that (with details only Jermaine and the girl would know) she says,
“I can’t believe we have so much in common, such an extraordinary connection from the past, and this totally hot magnetism… I barely know you, Phil, and yet, I feel like I’ve known you my whole life.”
Who talks like this? No one. Not even teenagers that are exploring their pretentious side.
(Also it turned weirdly religious for a while- God is credited for bringing Alena and Phillip into each other’s lives, and it was just such a jarring turn from the rest of the book.)
I think I see where Lowe was going with this- she wanted to explore a woman healing after abuse. And that’s great and something that does need to be shown. I think, if I’d been able to get through the over-writing, I would have seen Alena getting beyond her refusal to accept any help other than Phillip to help her get through her problems (there were some hints of that happening at the 50% mark). I do understand the urge to handle things on your own, but being in the head of someone who says, “I can totally handle this! I know I can’t have sex or leave campus without a flashback, but I do not, do not, DO NOT need therapy…” is just so frustrating and exhausting. I like the idea of a book being very frim on the stance that the right dick is going to fix all of your problems (which again, looked like the direction it was going in, so if I'm wrong and it turns out that all Alena needed to heal from her trauma was Phillip's Wonder Dick, well… I really hope that isn't where it was going.)
What this book needed more than anything was an aggressive editor that would cut out 2/3 of the unnecessary adjectives, deal with the overwrought dialogue, and maybe usher the plot along so it would actually happen as opposed to get bogged down in too many words. There might have been enough plot here for a novella, rather than a full length novel. I think the ideas here are worth exploring, but needs much better execution. Much, much better.
Is this book supposed to be set in the UK or the US? Because Uni of Leicester, A levels suggest England but College and Freshman suggests US. What is going on? Also what is a university nurse?? There is no such thing?? I also don’t get why her having a heavy period has to be a plot point – plenty of girls get that. Take a rest for a day girl. I know this is the least of things to get confused and baffled by this book.
You made it half way through this dreck? RHG, you are a better woman than me. I’d have stopped after:
Holy crap! Crap being the operative word.
LOL. Reviewing books like this makes me angry. It sounds like a hot mess. And, yes, kudos to you for making it that far into it.
I know if I start thinking about doing laundry, dishes or straightening up while I’m reading, you’re book is awful. A good book and there will be children screaming in the background…“Are you bleeding?” “No.” “Mom’s reading. You’re okay.”
Ok, let me get this straight…she’s a psychology student, and she doesn’t believe in therapy. Psychological therapy. Headdesk.
“A stars, As and Bs in our A levels, so we are a clever bunch of college students.”
No, if you got all A*‘s you’d be a clever bunch of college students and you wouldn’t be at Leicester University you’d be at a Russell Group university (the top UK universities on academic performance). I didn’t go to one either, but I also knew I wasn’t top rank!
Wow! Are you sure this wasn’t written by the same guy who wrote The Eye of Argon?
Dude, I wish.
Your review is hilarious.
And then sad, because, as you make clear, we all know that surviving abuse and rape isn’t funny.
I don’t want to read this book, because if the solution IS Wonder Dick I will scream – and it won’t be from ecstasy, or laughter.
I’m as likely as the next to be too easy on bad writing, having seen how easily the ego of aspiring authors can be punctured, but sometimes it needs to be, even when an attempt is being made to address a complicated issue.
Moreover, where was her editor? As Crisopera says, she is a Psych student who won’t try therapy? What the hell? Why not make her a Philosophy or Environmental Science or Botany student? Or anything else?
I don’t think she had an editor. Any editor worth their salt would have staged an adjective intervention at the least.
I looked to see the publisher-Amazon Digital Services. I’m not opposed to indy publishing because there’s some great indy stuff out there. But when I coming up on a DNF decision these days, I go back and look at who the publisher is. Sometimes that means looking up a company. When I check on the company, I often find it is a platform for indy authors. (Which is not to say is don’t have DNF moments with traditional publishers; it’s just that they are rare.) At that point of “research”, it’s somehow easier to walk away, knowing that I’m turning down half-baked muffins.
I’m so confused.
The excerpts sound like someone just Googled UK things like A-levels and then kept forgetting where the book was set. I have never in all my years heard a British person call a stream or river a “creek”.
Also how do you half mount someones leg?
@ Quizzabella
“Also how do you half mount someones leg?”
Mount their shin? Balance half way across? I am getting a lot of disturbing leg mounting, I mean half-mounting images now. Thanks!
God i’ve missed you guys. I really need to keep a better check on this place. I totally needed that laugh.
I see she gave herself five stars on Goodreads.
Argh.
🙁
OMG
I thought the thin red aperture was hilarious
But now …
I keep trying to get the image of half mounting a leg out of my head and I just can’t!
I may end up needing that therapy.
It looks like her first book is actually the story of Alena’s molestation, and based on it and the other book she wrote before this one I get the impression she thinks she’s writing modern inspirationals. I’m going to guess that I’m not the target audience.
Thanks for all your lovely comments about my book folks, how wonderful you all are!
British people do use the word ‘creek’. I am British by the way. I did have an editor. She is an award-winning author.
If you think taking the piss out of a girl who was abused is funny, it says a lot about those who made those comments.
Thanks again for your honest comments.
I have a thick skin and none of you bother me in the slightest!
Keep writing your awesome comments, and I will keep reading 🙂
@Michelle Diana Lowe:
I’m confused by your response that we are “taking the piss out of a girl who has been abused”. In what way do you think either the review or the comments do so? If you are referring to the main character, no one makes fun of her because of the fact that she is abused. The reviewer points out that the way the abuse theme is handled is frustrating and that the use of language is frustrating. These are valid, if subjective, points for a reviewer to make. Dealing with a difficult subject does not necessarily mean the book is well-written – the author may have the best of intentions, but it’s the reviewer’s job to critique the results.
If you, yourself, or if any of our readers, have been victims of abuse, then understand that to critique a book is not critique of an individual person. Any abuse survivor has the sympathy and support of the Bitchery. We understand that many women have experienced many kinds of abuse and we take this very seriously. This does not change the reviewer’s responsibility to look critically at a book – does the book use language effectively? Does the book engage the reader? Does the book seem realistic to the reviewer? In this case, the reviewer felt that the book did not accomplish its apparent goals.
It’s no longer available on Amazon or B&N—or am I doing something wrong?
As an editor myself, I can tell you that we can only do as much as our clients allow us to do. Many times we make changes and suggestions that the client decides not to take, then when our names appear in the book’s acknowledgements, it looks bad for us. The final decision is always that of the client.
Regarding this review, everyone has a right to their own opinion and a right to speak (or write) it openly. I doubt that the reviewer took pleasure in giving the book a negative review, but she had to say what she truly felt. I don’t think this is bashing the book, it’s just one person’s opinion, and she has a right to voice it. Others may feel differently, and they have an equal right to say what they think as well. However, some of the comments from people who haven’t read the book could have been more constructive rather than destructive.
@jeanine0874:
I completely disagree. First, it is not your job to explain who should and should not comment on a review. Moreover, the review’s purpose is to create room for the reader to say, “I so want to read this GIMME IT NOW” or, conversely, “Based on the things you have said and the samples provided, this is not a book I will enjoy.” Both are equally valid, and, in this particular internet demesne, utterly and completely welcome.
There is absolutely NO reason why any reader’s comment needs to be “constructive” or that readers should read the book before they voice their opinion on a review. Reviews are not for authors, nor are they for editors. They’re for readers.
New Adults, being recently spawned, half-mount to hump.
I’m not defensive about the criticisms of our comments. The author and her supporter can go for it, even if I don’t share their views.
However, writing about a tough theme doesn’t give an author immunity from criticism or from having the weaknesses in a story punctured by witty reviewers.
No authors are immune.
At University, English students are taught to go for the jugular, even with works that, in the end, they are supposed to admire.
As a result, decades later, I’m still fighting with a friend about James Joyce’s Ulysses, which I find to be, in the main, incomprehensible claptrap and he loves beyond all other works of fiction.
A solution for new authors, if they find criticism, and even derision, difficult? NEVER read reviews. Never. Never. Because SB Sarah is right. Reviews aren’t for authors – they are for other readers. I buy works recommended by some reviewers and nearly, but not always, avoid ones they hate. Why? I have learned to trust them much more than the publishing blurbs and reviews “bought” by the book being provided free.
Sometimes, however, I will give a book applause only to find that one of those reviewers has declared it is rubbish.
In the end, bad reviews will always be hurtful, but it is part of the trade. Decide whose view you care about. For example, Joyce wouldn’t have given a rats that I can’t enjoy Ulysses, but he did care when Carl Jung poked fun at it, so he took him on. And he had the last laugh – a best seller that students worldwide are forced (or delighted) to read, a book that is the darling of intellectuals, revered in Ireland etc etc
PS The author is correct. A creek is a well used British word.
@Danker and @SB Sarah
First off, I’m not a supporter of the author. I was merely stating my own perspective. I don’t know the author and I haven’t read the book. Therefore, I cannot comment on either.
Danker is right – bad reviews are part of the writing business – even bestselling authors get them. Nothing will ever be loved by everyone since we all have different tastes. But it’s those differences that give us such a wonderful variety of literature.
Second, I stated in my comment that I feel everyone is entitled to give their opinion, whether good, bad, or undecided. And I didn’t say it was my job to determine who should or shouldn’t comment on a review, anyone can and will comment, but intelligent comments like Jodi’s and Carrie S’s are far more worthwhile than those that just poke fun. Only someone who has actually read the book and not just someone else’s review can make a determination of their own as to whether they like it or not. If I know another reader has the same taste in books as I do, I may make a decision whether or not to read the book based on their review, but I won’t comment on something I haven’t read. I do appreciate the honest review given by the writer of this blog, though. And that’s my final two cents on what was originally intended to be a benign comment.
@Jeaniene0874:
I’m sorry. I misinterpreted your comment, and I apologize for my hostility. My bad.