I'm Conflicted

Have you ever felt that way?

I have. More than once.

Conflicts come in many forms but in this case it's regarding the making of a decision. Do I or don't I? Should I or shouldn't I? Can I or Can't I? Will I or won't I?

Doesn't matter how you ask it, the important fact is, the question has to be asked and answered.

In my last post, Everyone's a Critic, I mentioned about conflict of interest and how it can compromise your review.

This post explores a different aspect of the same beast.

When you review because you feel as though you ought, because of friend, crit partner or any other emotional bent, the previous post explained why you should say 'no'.

I want to touch upon those folks that review for more than one site, or those that like to post their review of the same book on multiple venues like Amazon, Goodreads, etc.

Writing a review for those places is fine.

What this post is hoping to achieve is to create in a reviewer an awareness of consequences.

First, I understand the emotional satisfaction of being accepted as a preferred reader for such places as NetGalley or Edelweiss. Being able to read books long before the general public has access is a natural high for any fan of the written word. It's wonderful.

When isn't it wonderful?

When it skews statistics. When it divides your loyalties. When it causes conflict. When it inadvertently leads to accusations of plagiarism. When intellectual property is threatened. All of this is possible.

Once again I need to clarify that this post is geared to those reviewers who review for a professional site. To sharpen the focus further, this is targeted to those sites who also, in their professional capacity, have contracts with those same NetGalley kinds of sites.

The question should be: Who do I review for?

The answer: One or the other, NOT BOTH.

I repeat: You can not review the Same book for BOTH sites - or a multiple of sites.

But you ask: Why not, especially if I write a completely different review?

First - and the obvious: Unless your opinion of the book (like vs dislike) has changed drastically (which it shouldn't), you are sharing the same opinion. As such, and which brings me to the second point, you are skewing the statistics. If you share reviews on Goodreads, Amazon, the review site you belong to, and anywhere else where statistics matter, then you are not allowing an honest and fair assessment of the book to occur.

It's almost like being a shill at an auction - driving the price up so the item will sell for a higher price than is warranted, than it otherwise would.

I realize that's not what most people intend. I say 'most' because there ARE unscrupulous people out there. But the effect is the same. If you share your review with four sites, it looks as though four different people are liking the book for the same reasons, but in actuality, the number is one - you. Multiply you by 100 doing the same thing and think about how that affects the book. If the publisher thinks that many great reviews are out there, they equate that to sales. But take away the You Effect and what is the reality? Three HUNDRED of those reviews are invalid.

Did you ever think about that?

Another conflict is this.

If you take a book from NetGalley under your own name, you can NOT review the book for anyone else or anywhere else. It has to be your own personal blog. That is what NetGalley expects from you because that's the agreement. By the same token, if you review for a site that also contracts with NetGalley, they can't use the book that YOU personally took from NetGalley.

Only books that THEY request from NetGalley can be reviewed on THEIR site.

In other words: NetGalley and Edelweiss expect you to post the review on your own website or blog, and don't mind that you do it on Goodreads. You'd be linking back to your own personal blog anyway. The problem arises when a professional website, like LASR, (not a personal review blog) has their own account, but their reviewers are posting the NetGalley reviews on their personal NetGalley account and not the professional website.

Do you see the conflict? Do you understand where I'm going with this?

Intellectual property is serious business. Whether you get paid or not - monetarily, in books, or you do it out of the sheer joy of sharing, when you submit a review that will reflect the site, the reputation of the site, and will be credited to the site, it becomes the property of the site.

What is NetGalley is NetGalley's. What is Edelweiss is Edelweiss'. What is a professional review site is the professional review site's. What is LASR is LASR's.

The goal of this post was to enlighten, guide and teach reviewers about another aspect of reviewing. The business side. And how every review you write has greater worth than the apparent.

You matter.
What you think, matters.
What you say, matters.
Where and how you share it, matters.

End the conflict.
Make the right decision.
Because your decision, matters.

Everyone's a Critic, Right?

That's right; everyone has an opinion about something.
Some folks criticize to correct someone and challenges them to help them grow.
Some folks criticize to demean and destroy.  Cue: Snark

But, there is a flip side to criticism - both good and bad.

But what IS criticism?

For reviewing purposes, I chose this explanation: The analysis or evaluation of a work of art, literature, etc.

That's a basic definition and it applies to reviewing. It's the part that takes a story to task for failing a reader at certain points. I admit, it can be incredibly hard to be a constructive critic. Human nature has a tendency to go overboard sometimes.

But the hardest part about being a critic and exercising critical thinking is when a reviewer is conflicted.

What puts a reviewer in such a position? To feel torn, or obligated? When they are asked to crit a friend's work - doesn't matter if it's about a book, a screenplay or a poem.

When a person is emotionally vested in a relationship, whether personal or professional, the ability of a person to be objectively critical is compromised and feelings oftentimes are in the driver's seat.

If you are asked to review a friend's book, do you? As a rule, the answer should be no. I'm not talking about a situation where you really don't want to read and review their book, but when you do want to. And along with that wanting to read their story and offer up your opinions, you run the risk of getting on your own emotional roller coaster - and it's not a pleasant ride.

Guilt will plague you.
Worry will haunt you.
Second guessing yourself will torment you.

Are you being too harsh? Will whatever you point out as 'wrong' hurt your friend's feelings? How accurate can your crit be if you are constantly trying to couch your suggestions so as to not hurt someone, or worse, make them angry? How fair are you being? No wait, are you being unfair? I think you can get an idea as to where this is going.

I guess a lot depends on the kind of relationship you have with the person whose work you are critting. If you are lucky, there's an established trust where the author has a thick skin and understands the vein in which the crits are presented thereby allowing you to honestly share how the book really affected you - the good, the bad, and the hilarious.

But, I believe one of the worst case scenarios is of a reviewer taking on a book to review for someone, and by virtue of feelings of obligation, duty, friendship or hero-worship, gives a glowing, gushing high-five write-up that whitewashes the whole book into a shining example of perfection, when it's possibly anything but.

That does an author a huge disservice.

I repeat, giving a carte blanche glowing review no matter what does not benefit the author in any way, except perhaps, ego. But that's ephemeral at best.

Another point about that practice, and let me be clear, is that it hurts a reviewer's credibility. The damage doesn't necessarily stop there either. If you review for a professional review site, it could compromise their reputation. If you give a book a top rating whereas all the other ones are much less, it calls into question the veracity of the review, and by association, the review site as a whole.
Now, before you jump all over that last sentence and remind me about reviews being opinions, let me explore that difference.

If a book is riddled with errors and blatant plot holes and objective points of criticism that would always and everywhere lower a rating in a review and THAT book still gets a glowing gushy top rating from you with absolutely no acknowledgement of the well known issues that have come to light in other reviews, then it stands out like Jeff Foxworthy at a mime convention.

Another compromising position for a reviewer is one who is a diehard, devout fan of an author or series.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with following a series. Nothing at all. If, and that's a big IF, the reviewer can step back from his or her fandom and view the book objectively. That means being willing and able to point out any inconsistencies or plot issues like they would have for any other book and not only mention them, but rate it accordingly.

As long as a reviewer can do that, then review away. Because let's face it. There is no way an author can consistently have top ratings or best book ratings for every single book in a fifteen book series without at least once or twice dropping the ball and falling through a plot hole, get confused on a head hop or create a character so flat, they don't even warrant the title of pancake. Authors are human too.
The bottom line?

Review with honesty.
Review with a pragmatic approach.
Review without guilt or pressure or perceived expectations.
Be willing to give constructive criticism.
Be willing to say no.

And if you can't say 'no', or are totally crushing on wanting to read that story, then do yourself and the author a favor.

Rate the book on how it really is, and NOT on how you think they'd want you to rate it.

All authors want to hear their baby is great. It's human nature. But as kids need braces to fix oral misalignment, so too do authors need to hear what doesn't work, so they can correct it and write a better scene the next time.

Yes, everyone can try be a critic. But not everyone knows how to, or when not to. And that's the difference.

Fanning the Flames and When to Douse Them

Actors have fans.
Movies have fans.
Games of sport have fans.
Sometimes, fans of sports are rather rabid in their enthusiasm. Same goes for bands and other music groups. Fans at concerts can be so wild as to rival sports buffs.

Authors and books have fans too, although I'm not aware of riots being caused by a favorite author speaking at a Barnes and Noble.
That would be something to see.

Then again, I guess fans of movies made from books do tend to exhibit things a bit ... different than most.

Fans of a book or book series have taken it a step further and it's more in an intellectual vein.

Fan Fiction

Fan Fiction has its place. It is one of the highest of praises for an author. It means that the world the author has built has made such an impact on its readers that they want to stay immersed in that world. And they go so far as to write stories within that imaginary place with all its rules and wonders, and share it with others. That can be a very good thing.

It does not, however, have a place in writing a review.

What do I mean?

It means that a reviewer should not ever ever do any of these things:

Rewrite parts of the book by offering examples of how it "should" have been done.
Rate the book down because the author didn't write it the way you felt she/he should have.

That is not, has not nor ever should be part of writing a review. Period.
A review is an opinion of what is written. Anything else falls into the realm of Fan Fiction.

I realize that it may be hard to resist.

I also realize that a reviewer who does so on their own personal blog, Facebook journal, Live Journal or Word Press account has the right to do anything they want.

This blog is dedicated to the reviewer that contributes to professional review sites. Those sites usually have a reputation, style and format that does not accept shades of Fan Fiction. Remember what I wrote in my past post, Be Good To Me,

"My advice? Before you review for a site, check with the site owners or, if they have it, the list of criteria or FAQs that might provide information about the tone or style of their reviews and what they look for.
Read some of their published reviews and get a feel for what they typically accept."

If the review site lends itself to adventures in mixed reviewing - mashing opinion with fan fiction- then you've found a home for your review. However, most sites I'm aware of do not accept that style.

I realize it's human nature to want to correct a percieved wrong, and that includes the wording or direction in a story. But the only person that can re-write a story is the person who wrote it in the first place - the author.

Please keep that in mind the next time you are tempted to think, "I can do it better."
You can't in your review.
But you can if you wrote your own fan fiction.
Or, better yet, your OWN book, complete with your own rules, wonders and characters.

Be Good To Me

I loved that song by Tina Turner back in the day. Better Be Good To Me

It reminded me about something.
It reminded me about professionalism.
It reinforced that respect has its place and is a necessary component in every aspect of our lives.
It made me remember that T.V. has a strong influence on our opinions and it's not always a positive outcome.

I see it in sitcoms, Reality T.V. and children's cartoons. It's rubbing off on society as a whole. Sure, it has its place and some instances, it's needed and to the point. But if we aren't careful, it could become a habit, a way of interacting that spills over into aspects of our lives we don't intend it to. And that absolutely includes writing a review.

What am I referring to? It goes by many names because it's considered a gray area. Snark. I.E.: Sarcasm. Causticity. Derision. Disparagement. Scorn. Contempt. Disrespect. Sneering.

Let me put it like this, and it's a quote from a respected author regarding a scathing review that appeared on Amazon.

"...have this Simon Cowell mentality that you have to be cruel in order to get your point across as to how much you hate the book or the performance or in this case, the romance genre in general."

In a nut shell - it comes across as a lack of respect.

Some review sites channel their inner Simon Cowell. They don't call him Judge Dread for nothing. He might be entertaining on television, but his style does not translate well to writing reviews for romance books. Some people need to be reminded of that. Despite and in spite of the review blogs that are out there that cater to that mind set, it's not what everyone looks for.

My advice? Before you review for a site, check with the site owners or, if they have it, the list of criteria or FAQs that might provide information about the tone or style of their reviews and what they look for.

Read some of their published reviews and get a feel for what they typically accept. And that includes whether they care to edit their reviews or leave them as they are. If they leave them as submitted, that means the onus is on the reviewer to edit and present a coherent review. If the review site cares, that is.

If your writing is cutting edge with clever quips and snark and they love that type of writing, then you've found a home.

By the same token, if they are more about information, fairness, respect and articulate coverage of what works and objective comments on what doesn't without resorting to flaming prose, and that's what you prefer to share, then that's the review site to join.

Long and Short Reviews' readers don't get snark at all. They don't get the flamboyant and/or the exaggerated. Nor the mean, the cutting or the brutal type of opinions that can turn off reader and author alike.

Usually readers look for solid, well written, professional and trustworthy reviews. They want someone who can articulate without resorting to flashy verbiage or the current fad lexicon of the moment, certainly they don't want a review that makes them cringe from the harshness of the comments.

And that's where the title, Be Good To Me, comes in.
Respect yourself as a reviewer.
Respect the author's work.

Please don't make any criticism personal by making disparaging comments that allude to a negative reflection of the author. The author is not being reviewed, the book is. The story is. The technique is. The dialogue is. The plot is.

Please don't confuse enthusiasm with outlandish vocabulary: gonna, wanna, yo', bitchin', any profanity, slang spelling and slang vernacular.

Please treat the literary work, short or long, with respect.
Especially short stories.

Don't get angry because you felt it wasn't long enough. If it's a short story, it's a short story. It focuses on ONE aspect, ONE development thread and if that is not enough? Don't read short stories.

Know your personal expectations and choose books accordingly.
It's not a fault if the book is short.
It's wrong to use that reason to lower a book's rating.
Do you know what that is like?
It's like ordering one scoop of ice cream and getting upset because it didn't fill you up like two scoops.
One scoop of ice cream is like a short story. Remember that.

I tried to find an example of snark that insults not only the author but the book. I tried to find something that incorporated the don'ts - like swearing, while also providing what those other review blogs have, entertaining snark. I stumbled upon this video regarding a series that I actually enjoy. I overlook a lot of stuff that drives many readers wonky. I don't know what it is, but I have enjoyed every book in the series for what it gives me in that book alone.

Obviously, this particular Vlog has made video snarking an artform.
If a reviewer was to put in writing for LASR what is in this clip: synopsis, a bit of spoiler, profanity and yes, snark, it would never see the light of day. SNARK THEATER for one of the Anita Blake books.

I think it makes the point.

How to Stay in the Race

The first thing a reviewer needs to do to reach the checkered flag at the end is make a good start at the beginning.  If we're talking horses, I'd say you have to shoot out of the starting gate as soon as it goes down.   If we're talking the Olympics at the sprinter's race, it is the sound of the starting pistol that gets everyone to move forward.  You can't stay in the race if you never get your best foot forward.  You can't stay in the race if there's no incentive to do so.  Your race = being read.

In all instances, an effective start puts a competitor in a better position to perhaps keep the lead and cross the finish line first.  That's the hope of every competitor.

The checkered flag in the end  = a reader who sticks around to read your entire review.

For a reviewer, their starting gate is the first paragraph. Their start signal is the first sentence.  I've covered this before but it's nice to have a reminder every now and again.  First, I'll give a link to the first time I touched base on this.

The Beginning of the Same Difference

The reason I believe it's good to visit this again is to remind reviewers that stating the obvious is boring.  Making it your first sentence is a buzz-kill.  Rehashing  - This is # such and such in the LaLa series and it's great - doesn't do a thing for me.  Not as a reviewer and certainly not as a reader.

Why should you avoid stating a book is whatever number it is in a series in your first sentence and paragraph? Because you'll lose a reader immediately.  The only ones that will keep reading your review is someone already a fan of the series. Readers unfamiliar with the series or the author and his/her works will say - "Oh, forget this.  I'll have no idea what's going on, so I'm not going to read anymore.  There are other books out there."

Right after identifying the number in the series, some reviewers will rehash the blurb - a major no-no and another boring addition.  Why?  Many review sites post the blurb first.  It's after reading the blurb that a reader will then continue onto the review.  Telling them what it's all about after they just read what it's all about is a waste of their time for reading, and a waste of a reviewer's time for writing. The only time giving a brief overview has value is when a review site does not include a book's blurb with the review and reviewers have to give a reader some insight.  For this post, I'm specifically addressing reviewing for sites that do provide the blurb up front. 

What you put in your first paragraph is key.  I like variety so, here are some examples to peruse for Bite Me, Your Grace by Brooklyn Ann.


Terrific, a wonderful bland of historical, romance and paranormal.

Of course, the typo in the first sentence doesn't inspire confidence much.*grin*

A fearless virgin and a reclusive duke sound interesting when paired together but throw in a vampire duke and a young woman determined to remain unmarried and willing to do anything to ensure she won’t, makes this book unique and fascinating.

The intro sentence compares the usual Regency fare to that same scenario with a twist, thereby teasing the reader to read more. Okay, so I wrote that particular review, but still, that is the result I was aiming for. How'd I do compared to the other examples? I enjoy feedback.

When I chose this book to review, I was intrigued by both the title and the premise. “Bite Me, Your Grace” as the title had me imagining a story using a clever double entendre. A clever title shows an author with a clever mind, right? In some ways the book was clever and there was evidence of that double entendre.

Even though I liked how it started and because I did, I read more - with this review (it's from a site that does not provide a blurb) I found the tone quite negative in the extreme even though it was well written.

Merging the humor of a Regency romp with the darkness of a vampire novel, Ann has come up with a charming debut that captures the light and dark of the era.

Although I liked this sentence, using an author's first name is unprofessional.  I covered this no-no in my post That Familiar Touch.

I included the above because they showcase how a good first sentence lures a reader to continue reading.

Next, I tried to find a book in a series, I chose, Lion's Heat by Lora Leigh:

This was another hot episode in the Breeds series. (ho-hum)

FULL of Spoilers!  Readers of this blog know how I feel about spoilers. 

Gives a wolf whistle and pumps fist in the air: She’s baaaaaaaaaaaaack! Oh Em Gee everyone, Ms. Leigh hit it out of the park with this long awaited story, Lion’s Heat.

I liked this because of the sheer enthusiasm of the reviewer.  Her comment about "died hard fans" had me laughing, which I'm sure was not her intent.  See?  Editing IS important!  And ::sigh:: spoilers again. What is it with spoilers in reviews??

This volume in Lora Leigh's Breeds series is a pretty good entrant -- unlike many of the other books in the series she published around the time of this one, it doesn't feel totally phoned in, maybe because the character of Jonas had received a lot of fleshing out in earlier volumes, or because of the build-up from the volumes.

Wow- nothing like bringing out the negative. Really makes me want to read the rest of the review. NOT!

Expectations can be too high sometimes. I was really looking forward to this book by Lora Leigh, Lion’s Heat. This is the 21st book in the breeds series and Jonas’s story which is a breed who has figured prominently in many of the breed stories to date.

Here we go, the # of the book, and negative to boot. I don't think this horse should have gotten out of the starting gate, do you? And, because I found two reviews back to back with prevalent negativity, it's the perfect segue for you to check out the The Sandwich Rule for Reviewing. There's a place for, and a way of, mentioning what didn't work for you in a review. It's worth referring to, believe me.

Director of the Bureau of Breed Affairs Lion Breed Jonas Wyatt knows the only person who could bring him to his knees is his assistant, Rachel Broen. -

I don't call this a review. It's a synopsis, pure and simple - and disappointing.  The first sentence starts as it went on.  In a race, it would have been disqualified. 

So, do you see what I mean? Initial presentation is important in writing a review. You want to be read, not passed over.

From an editing standpoint, many of these would have given an editor a headache due to content. Ouch.

Don't Let Inspiration Cloud Your Judgment

I appreciate being inspired. It propels me to do great things - or at least attempt mediocre things with flair. 

A painter spies a glorious multi-hued  rainbow of colors bathing the sunset with its spectacular display.  He's inspired to try to capture on canvas what he saw so he could share it with the world. 

A musician hears a chorus of birdsong and realizes the melody fits with some lyrics that have been plaguing his brain for months. He's inspired to write a song. 

A soldier returned from war finds himself beset by injuries of mind and body and somehow perseveres to heal and find love and a brighter future.  

A fireman rescues a puppy from a burning house and the young man whose dog was saved, is inspired to become a fire fighter when he grows up. 

To be inspired is a wonderful thing.  It's how many of our culture's masterpieces got created in the first place. 

When a reviewer reads a book that moves them, touches them emotionally and makes them feel powerful feelings, it's quite natural to say that the book inspired them.  The urge to buy all the back list books of that author, the quest to seek other books in that series, or the impulse to contact that author to express appreciation, all of those actions stem from being inspired.   

Being inspired, or a book being an inspiration to you, is not the same as a book being an Inspirational.  An Inspirational is a noun.  A genre, or as some view it, a sub-genre.   

In researching for this post I found a lot of jibber-jabber and conjecture but ultimately, when I read far enough, I found the common ground that they all eventually came to. 

Inspirationals, whether they be romance, mystery, westerns or contemporary fiction all have one thing in common:

They usually do not allow profanity or explicit sex - the bedroom door is firmly closed. They are books that have a specific religious background, portraying characters who are part of a particular religious tradition, usually Catholic, Jewish or Christian and oftentimes portray a hero or heroine struggling with issues of faith within that tradition and working through those issues of faith and belief to a hopefully happily ever after, or happy for now. God is a part of their lives and is their guiding force.  It's very clear. Wikipedia has their own definition. 

I also learned that there is a next step to Inspirationals which is Evangelicals.  I never knew nor was aware that they existed and what the difference was.  Author Kaye Dacus had some great definitions between Inspirationals and Evangelicals.  Click Here to see all sorts of genres explained.   I found it helpful.  For reviewing purposes, Evangelicals would still fall under the title, Inspirational. 

Another good write up on Inspirational or Christian romance comes from Karen Witemeyer - I liked what she had to say so I thought I'd share the link here too.  The bottom line for this whole post is to show that there is a difference between being inspired and reading an Inspirational. 

When labeling your review, be aware of the difference. It's best not to mislead a reader who only reads Christian romances or fiction.  They're kind of sensitive about content. 

Why I Applaud Editors of Reviews

I can only speak to the editors of the Long and Short of It Reviews because that's what I'm familiar with.

I was curious about any reviews of a book that I had just finished reading.  I loved it and felt it was one of the best books in the series, so far.  I can't link to it right now because it has to go through its own editing process before it can get published at LASR.  One thing my editors will not see are some of these that I snagged from Goodreads.

"...is an incredible adiction to the"  Addiction or Addition - not sure which but an editor could have helped tremendously. 

"It sparks me to want to re-read the earlier books in the series"   - alright firefly. An editor might have suggested  sparked interest in re-reading, or  It inspired me to re-read..., or It motivated me to want to re-read... but 'sparked me' just doesn't work unless you're a fire cracker.

One review gave critical plot points away, explaining about the hero's background IN DETAIL; information I only found out when I read the book myself - as it should be.  Not only that, but the so-called review showed a huge chunk of dialogue and then continued to give blow by blow accounts of what happened later.  I had to stop reading it. I was going to blow a gasket.  Telling readers what the story is all about, what happens and explains in intricate detail why something is the way it is has a name.  SPOILERS!!  They are not reviews!  


Ok....I digress.  Let's see what else I found. 


Oh, The Pout.  Yes, a reviewer pouted.  "This book would have been so much better if there were more of  (previous characters)....."   The book wasn't about those other characters.  This book was about one man, one hero, and his journey to redemption.  Because this particular book didn't have "those" characters, the reviewer trashed it.  HELLO!!!  ::face palm:: Review and rate the book on what IS, not what you wish it could be.  You didn't write the book, the author did.  Her world, her rules, her vision.   And then the "reviewer" ended with, " complete review to come."  Really!  So, this person took the time to trash the book because it didn't have the characters she/he'd prefer to see and left a CLIFF HANGER?   Interesting technique. 

Ah, I was wondering when I'd find a review with this element.  I know the hero was as anti-hero as a man could get. He has a history of being the villain everyone loved to hate - with good reason. 

  I left Goodreads with thankfulness and switched to random clicking and Lo!

"... he is also a complete asshole." That's basically true but profanity really has no place on a 'professional' review site.  Even if it's said throughout the book, profanity really should not show up in a review.  Remember, and I'm paraphrasing, 'lady on the outside, vixen on the inside'.  I think 'bastard' can be used because it is, in fact, a noun  and a well used one during those Regency times.

Yes, editors work magic. They fix the flow of a review with a simple tweak of a word here or there.  Their jobs are made much easier if I do my homework and proof my words.  Did I mix up a metaphor?  Did I type in reslut again instead of result?  Did I put there instead of their?  Spell check won't ever catch that because there and their are real words.  This is when the human brain is superior to any computer program.  I can't rely on auto-correct either because sometimes what the computer suggests is from outer space. I am the first and last to proof before I submit.  Because I've had the honor of assisting with editing, I know what a thankless, eye-straining, headache inducing job it can be. But the polished product is a miracle. We all benefit from our editor's efforts and the result is a higher quality review.  I'm honored to have such wonderful people scrutinizing my work. They make me look darned good.

Hats off to our editors!!!!

 **VBG** After reading all of this, you are probably wondering and demanding I reveal the name of the book I was basing this post on.   I'll instead share with you a review that I thought was awesome.  Even better than  mine and it's not out yet.  I loved the insight this reviewer put into it.  I enjoyed how she skirts the cliff of spoilers, giving enough to tease and make me want to read the book all over again. I love giving credit to a great review and this one deserves it.  Click HERE to see the answer revealed.  


As always, if you have any feedback regarding this post, I'd enjoy the chat. 


Thanks for stopping by!