Iron Kissed (Mercy Thompson #3) Patricia Briggs

[rolanni]

The advertent auditor of this journal will have noticed that I keep a "books read" list. Mostly, this is for my own information, to prove to myself that I am too reading, at least a little. I rarely comment on the books, because I learned when I was working for SFWA that commenting truthfully on novels written by people I know was more likely to get me grief than not, and, thanks to the SFWA job, I know an awful lot of fantasy and science fiction writers.

That said, there was a conversation the other day regarding the third book in Patricia Brigg's Mercedes Thompson series, Iron Kissed. It seems that the excellent buymeaclue had some issues with the third book, and the question was asked what I thought.

I have not read buymeaclue's commentary, and don't intend to. What I think is that the [spoilery thing] of which I understand she complains, and its aftermath is handled appropriately and believably for this reader. The book was not a warm and cozy read, but the [spoilery thing] worked on the storytelling level (again) for me. As always, YMMV. If you are a person who believes that fiction must never use violence against women as a "plot device," then you might not want to read this book; it'll only get your politics in an uproar.

What I understand to be a secondary beef regarding the structure of the werewolf pack and the peculiar powers of the pack Alpha -- these things were set up very clearly and maintained consistently from early in the first book. If a reader of the series managed to get to Book Three only then to be offended by the pack social structure, well...sometimes we don't read as carefully as we ought.

Comments

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

I totally support your right to have whatever opinions you like about the book in question or, hell, any book out there, and to disagree with anyone you like in any way you like...

Thank you for your support.

But I guess I would like to ask you to refrain from describing my problems with the book if you haven't read my post about it?

I note that your commentary was pointed to in my post and in the original post from the person who thought the discussion in your blog interesting, so auditors of this blog had immediate access to what you actually did say -- whereupon they could decide if I was misrepresenting you. As you can see from your conversation with gryphonlsb, some folks did exactly that, so good on them. That's why the pointers were there. It seemed only fair for me to say right off that I hadn't read your comments, and didn't intend to do so, because, well -- truth in advertising.

[buymeaclue.livejournal.com]

I do appreciate the link and the statement that you didn't read the post, and should have said as much in my initial comment. Thanks for that. If you're going to comment on something you haven't read, that's probably the best possible way to do it.

I still can't help feeling it's mighty unfair to describe and judge something without being willing to have a look at it for yourself.

But it is, of course, your journal, and you can do whatever you like. I'll retire from your space now.