From what I read and didn't like
- teresa peixe
- 8 de ago. de 2017
- 2 min de leitura
"Good advice is always certain to be ignored, but that's no reason not to give it." - Agatha Christie
I like reading everything. The good ones, the bad ones and the ones I sort as "to detox" (nor to laugh or cry!) I like to switch. Using some to forget how bad some others are, and the less good ones to digest the others that sometimes are too much.
I read two of those "to read in the summer" books (one of which I read in December 2015!), light crime books, I hope are well-written.
As I am writing this I realize that it is not fair to the summer, and beyond that, it doesn't make sense to me that you would choose lighter books for when you're in vacation. Shouldn't it be the other way around? Daydreams...
The first read, as I said, long ago, before talking about it so much and long before the possibility of a film (which I haven't seen!), "The girl on the train" by Paula Hawkins.
First, I was hooked, I felt like turning pages, until I wanted for the story to be over, in fact, in the next page. The book becomes dull and from a certain point I realized who'd be the villain. Being that it was indeed. Something that never happens in the good crime books, where we rarely hit the bad guy.
The idea is great but, from where I stand, not well conceived. It's funny how we "invent" the lives of others without knowing anything... Like it is funny the hypocrisy/fantasy in which we pass on to others what we do not live, but we would like, of our lives.
I felt sorry that I didn't kept my enthusiasm until the end. Still, I wanted to give a chance to the writer and bought her new book ... I haven't read it yet! I saw an interview that was made at the time of the book fair, and liked her. Now I want to figure out if what she does is intentional or not.

The other crime book is “Keep quiet”. Perhaps it was better to keep quite indeed!
Bought it after it was suggested to me... it is a book you can read in an afternoon and that does not require a much of us.
Crime wise it is as weak as the previous one. Also, you realize the story much too soon. Yet the idea that we act differently if we're talking about someone we hold dear, or the guy next door, makes us think about justice, in consistency ... the human being ... and it is well portrayed in this book. What is also clear is that in the end, if you look at the story, the weaker link is the one getting screwed, literally!
But read it, it is a fast read, which brings a fast end to the suffering... (I'm kidding! I've read worse and there are books that I couldn't even read!) ...
I'm not hoping you agree with me. I rather seek an explanation of where I failed in reading to not have been impressed!
Give me your thoughts!
Comments