« Need some happy this morning? | Main | Inside a Dog features... »

04 January 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Not to be too vulgar but the only thing that deepens later on in the series is Anita Blake's hoo haa.


I just spewed peanut butter crackers all over my computer. Awesome.


Goodness, we should get Laurell and Marisha Pessl (she of the "not dressing like a librarian") in a room so they could out-bore each other with chatter about themselves.


*big huge sigh*

LKH is getting HUGE amounts of flak from her very die hard fans because after Anita book 9 she has been continuously dropping plot lines, a few of the books have been VERY short and not worth the $25 hardcover price, and far too much of these very short books are the characters whining at each other. What were once very good and original mystery horror paranormal books now have no character developement, no plot and are nothing more than arguments between characters loosely held together by very mechanical sex scenes (Don't get me wrong, at first they were fantastic. They aren't anymore.).

Furthermore, her second series about the Fey began suffering from the same problems only 2 books into it.

It's very very sad. I have not found a substitute for this series that I liked very much (I've been reading it since Anita book 3 came out). The more criticism she gets, the less she listens to it and the more defensive "my books are too edgy so don't read them" of an attitude she adopts.

Well, I have stopped reading them. They are not too edgy for me (PLEASE). They just plain suck now.


I cannot believe how long she went on. I gave up on reading the blog post, forget about giving up on reading the series.

Though I have to say, I did get to the part where she talks about readers standing in line so they can tell her they hate her book. That is weird.

Terry Dawson

Sorry, I made it only about halfway through the first Anita Blake book before deciding I could find more interesting ways to waste time. Didn't enjoy her characters nor her prose. I know a lot of good people like 'em, but heigh-ho, other guilty pleasures for me, thanks!


I read the whole first book but didn't see why it's a big deal.


Well, that's the thing. They're not a huge deal. I have described them often as mind candy to folks I recommended them to. They are original, within their genre, I will give them that. I enjoyed that they had their own personal take on folklore. And if you had read every other vampire novel out there (my own guilty pleasure, I guess) these were a refreshing change. No whiny vamps, atleast not apologetic that they are vampires, they eventually get very whiny. But they are not genre breaking works of staggering genius that everyone will moon over. You have to dig vampire books and the paranormal sub-genre.

Obsidian Butterfly, Anita book 9, hit the NYT bestsellers list. In my opinion it was horrible and the point when the series really started to fail. It's often reffered to as her best book. I don't believe in got on the list because it was good. It got on the list because by that point in the series she had a huge rabid following (myslef included) who were just excited that the series got mainstream attention.

And yes, I'm sorry for the mini rant. I did really like the books. They were predictable in what I expected and wanted from them. Now they are just as predictable, but I do not want 200+ pages of angst and whine.


I've read her, and was very "meh" about her up until the time she blatantly ripped off Emma Bull's much better "War for the Oaks" for her fantasy series. Now I actively dislike her. Either way, she's certainly never written anything that made me think about anything other than finding something better to read.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Blog powered by Typepad