Seldom has a book irritated me as much as J.S. Law’s debut
novel Tenacity. And that is saying a lot, because over a
lifetime of reading, I have been exposed to some real stinkers. So what makes Tenacity stand out?
Well, how about this?
The thriller is intended to introduce a character that will continue on
in a whole series of books about her exploits as an investigator in Britain’s
Special Investigation Branch’s “Kill” Team.
In layman terms, that means that she is a homicide detective who works
on cases involving military personnel.
Nothing wrong with that and, in fact, that is a proposition just
different enough to intrigue readers who might be a bit bored with the more
usual crime fiction environments out there.
But Danielle “Dan” Lewis, God bless her heart, is a slow
learner. The book opens with a bit of
Dan’s backstory, a story in which her stubbornness and failure to trust her
team enough to have someone provide backup for her almost got her killed. Only her physical agility and a whole lot of
luck allowed her to survive a physical confrontation with the serial killer she
and her team were trying to identify.
But did she learn anything from that escapade…you know, maybe about
making sure a backup is in place next time she goes snooping in an isolated
place? Apparently not, because Tenacity ends (if you can call it an
ending – more on that in a minute) just about where it begins: with Dan Lewis
fighting for her life, alone, in a desperate situation in which she has no
right to expect that she will survive.
Law does a good job in developing the Dan Lewis
character. Despite my low opinion of her
common sense and ability to recognize death traps, I think I understand the
character and what makes her do such stupid things. The author even managed to give a little
depth to two of the book’s side-characters, a couple of men who try desperately
to protect her from herself but are so frustrated with her that they have just
about had it.
Submariner and Author J.S. Law |
Much of Tenacity
takes place within the confines of a nuclear submarine in which Dan has
inserted herself as the only female on board – with predictable results. I enjoyed learning about the day-to-day routines in that kind of
environment and a little bit about what makes submariners tick. They are a special breed, and Law, being one
of them, knows what he is talking about and it all seems very real. That is the real strength of Tenacity because the plot, although
interesting, is not all that surprising.
But just when I was prepared to give the book a 3.5-star rating, I read
the last few pages. And exploded.
The book has no ending.
It just abruptly stops after setting up a cliffhanger that will
presumably lead to Book Two of the Dan Lewis series. No, no, no…that does not work. I consider it less than honest to pull this
stunt unless the publisher slaps a warning label on the book cover so that I
can decide up front whether or not I want to invest five or six hours of my life
in reading such a book. This is the kind
of literary misstep that, in my estimation, is worth at least a one-star
deduction on any book. Reader beware.
(Advance Reader’s
Edition of the book provided by the publisher for review)
Post #2,541
Post #2,541
I just ran into this problem with Mercy Falls by William Kent Krueger. I liked the book, but it had no ending either. Clearly, the author expected me to read his next book. I don't like that either. When I finish a book, I want it to be done. I did enjoy the story, though, so I went back to the beginning of the series and read Iron Lake. It had an ending, so I hope the author just hasn't gotten tricky as the series went on. That I won't stand for!
ReplyDeleteI agree, Joan. I don't mind an open ending, one that lets the reader choose which way it probably ended, but deliberately setting up a cliffhanger is out of bounds, IMO. You already know that the hero is going to ultimately prevail, so there is really no suspense involved, certainly not enough to get me anxious to read the next book in the series. As you can tell, my reaction is, in fact, the exact opposite. I doubt that we are alone. This old technique should have gone out with the death of all that pulp fiction that was so popular at one time.
Delete