PanThe Chicago Review of Books...while Meyer has succeeded in writing a headstrong heroine, much about her new book is less definitive, starting with the character’s code name ... This one-track romance between Alex and Daniel is where the book wrestles with itself. What should be the B-story becomes the focal point around 150 pages in. The once-promising plot of assassins, bio-terrorists, and backstabbing government entities takes a backseat to teenagers-at-the-movies kisses and directionless talking head scenes—both of which fail to move the story forward. The story declines steadily from there: The action feels inconsequential, the stakes grow increasingly lower, and the desire to keep reading dips with each page.
Colin Dickey
RaveThe Chicago Review of BooksDickey connects themes in each story to literature, philosophy, psychiatry, or sociology, making for a deceptive, albeit entertaining, way to eat your vegetables ... Dickey has a knack for breathing life into an urban legend and then letting the air out, making Ghostland satiating for skeptics ... One can’t also read Ghostland and not notice a west-coast bias ... but at its core Ghostland is as informative as it is entertaining, a rare balance of the supernatural and the academic. It’s a must-read this Halloween and worth revisiting many times after.
Lionel Shriver
PanThe Chicago Review of BooksThe Mandibles delivers on economic rigmarole while also tackling massive, interconnected issues of class, race and family dynamics. This is a gauntlet only a select few can pass through ... Shriver chocks the first 200-or-so pages with financial talking-head sessions that read more like cut-and-paste jobs than realistic dialogue ... [leaves] readers with a colder-than-cement sentiment towards the family ... Even worse is the consistent degrading treatment of the book’s only major black character ... yes, The Mandibles is a solid example of Shriver writing about the issues of our time. But this is a flawed novel, and whether she likes it or not, Shriver isn’t exempt from due criticism. More important than this book’s weaknesses is that the list of great writers who can deliver a quintessential book about our socio-economic future just got smaller.
