What do you think?
Rate this book
Unsigned
A newly married couple receive an anonymous suicide letter delivered to their house by mistake.
The wife, feels the need to discover whom the letter was written for. Her husband, Jay, would rather focus on settling down and starting a family.
As Louisa investigates the note's origins, secrets of broken childhoods and abuse are uncovered, and Louisa reunites a group of long-lost friends.
The wife, feels the need to discover whom the letter was written for. Her husband, Jay, would rather focus on settling down and starting a family.
As Louisa investigates the note's origins, secrets of broken childhoods and abuse are uncovered, and Louisa reunites a group of long-lost friends.
- GenresFiction
355 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 17, 2010
7 people are currently reading
136 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
January 6, 2024
Great read
I am probably biased as the author is my amazing cousin but I really enjoyed this book, I loved the highs and lows of the story
I am probably biased as the author is my amazing cousin but I really enjoyed this book, I loved the highs and lows of the story
July 29, 2011
Well-written and sad story. I would have given it another star if the author had tied up the main story loose end that was left open at the end. I was a bit disappointed to find that the plot point that made me interested in the story was left unsolved.
did-not-finish
March 20, 2025Not terribly surprised that this was seemingly removed from the digital storefront. It left a lot to be desired. The structure was awful. The way time passing was depicted was atrocious. I was glad to be rid of it.
DNFed at 2%.
DNFed at 2%.
July 29, 2011
The Good:
The plot was awesome. Basically, this unsigned suicide note shows up at a newly-bought house, and the new owners try to track down the previous owner to give them the note. It doesn't grab you right up front -- I didn't really get hooked until about a third of the way into the book. But then, I just wanted to keep reading, especially since McKinnon did a very good job of building suspense and tension through the middle section of this book. In fact, I found the plot and tensions so enjoyable that it allowed me to overlook many of the grammatical/logical flaws I came across. This is the type of book that makes a so-so read, but would make an excellent movie with the right screenwriters.
The Bad:
Most of this book read like a rough draft. There were run-ons, fragments, and comma splices throughout (and yes, I am taking into account the fact that I'm used to American English and it was written in British English -- but a fragment is a fragment and a run-on a run-on). Many authors use such errors intentionally to help develop a character's profile or to set their style apart. That was not the case here, however; the frags and run-ons were sporadic and inconsistent, and they stuck out like a sore thumb. Parts of the book were jumpy and uneven, others flat out contradictory. For example, at one point two characters meet up in a cafe. McKinnon describes them arriving, but after two brief lines of dialogue, he (she?) describes the waitress clearing their plates away. When did they order or get served? If those actions aren't worth mentioning, then neither is clearing off the table. Or, later in the book, McKinnon tells us that 21 of a certain item (vague to avoid spoilers) were found. The next sentences tell us that 5 of those objects were too old, leaving 18 of the right age. I'm sorry, but since when does 18+5=21??? It's simple mistakes like these that leave the book feeling unedited and rough around the edges. Then, there are other, more nagging errors, like writing "him" when it should have read "his." Some sentences had extra random words in them, others used adjectives where adverbs were expected -- the most probable reason I could think of was that parts of those sentences had been rewritten but not proofread afterwards. Stuff like that really detracts from the essence of the story by jolting the reader out of the book-world.
Probably the toughest aspect of this book for me to get past is that McKinnon breaks one of, in my opinion, the most important tenets of creative writing -- show, don't tell. Most of this story is the reader being TOLD about object, characters personalities, reactions, feelings, judgments, etc. For example, many readers don't want to read, "The girl was nervous."* Instead, they usually prefer to read, "The girl fidgeted in her hair, biting at her lip. Her hands moved with a mind of their own, one picking at the lint on her skirt, the other fussing over a strand of hair." The difference between telling and showing is what makes a piece of writing really stand out from the rest, it gives it a more engrossing feel, it lets the reader discover more about the characters for themselves, and it tells the reader that the author has confidence in his/her writing to get the story across (in other words, that the author knows the reader will understand without being led directly to it).
Overall, this book is excellent in conception, but poor in application. It's a good read, and I would suggest it to anyone, though there are some loose ends that nag at you after you finish reading (and not in the modern or post-modern sense -- they're questions raised by the basic premise that are never answered, and I felt that McKinnon simply didn't know how to solve those issues so he/she didn't bother to try). Still, it's a good read, but I think I'd prefer to see it in movie form (and I'm not one to say that often).
*It's not that "The girl was nervous" is bad writing per se, it's just that describing the physicality of the nervousness gives the reader a better sense of what's going on, how nervous she is (like a 2 out or 10? or a 7 our of 10?), how her nervousness is apparent, etc. I would argue that most readers prefer to be shown because it allows them to really immerse themselves in the fiction-world, whereas being told prevents them from really visualizing the story. You can say "Bob walked into the Victorian house," but your readers will all picture different Victorian-looking houses (and some may not even know what a Victorian looks like!) So telling isn't necessarily bad, it's just that showing is usually preferred in story-telling.
The plot was awesome. Basically, this unsigned suicide note shows up at a newly-bought house, and the new owners try to track down the previous owner to give them the note. It doesn't grab you right up front -- I didn't really get hooked until about a third of the way into the book. But then, I just wanted to keep reading, especially since McKinnon did a very good job of building suspense and tension through the middle section of this book. In fact, I found the plot and tensions so enjoyable that it allowed me to overlook many of the grammatical/logical flaws I came across. This is the type of book that makes a so-so read, but would make an excellent movie with the right screenwriters.
The Bad:
Most of this book read like a rough draft. There were run-ons, fragments, and comma splices throughout (and yes, I am taking into account the fact that I'm used to American English and it was written in British English -- but a fragment is a fragment and a run-on a run-on). Many authors use such errors intentionally to help develop a character's profile or to set their style apart. That was not the case here, however; the frags and run-ons were sporadic and inconsistent, and they stuck out like a sore thumb. Parts of the book were jumpy and uneven, others flat out contradictory. For example, at one point two characters meet up in a cafe. McKinnon describes them arriving, but after two brief lines of dialogue, he (she?) describes the waitress clearing their plates away. When did they order or get served? If those actions aren't worth mentioning, then neither is clearing off the table. Or, later in the book, McKinnon tells us that 21 of a certain item (vague to avoid spoilers) were found. The next sentences tell us that 5 of those objects were too old, leaving 18 of the right age. I'm sorry, but since when does 18+5=21??? It's simple mistakes like these that leave the book feeling unedited and rough around the edges. Then, there are other, more nagging errors, like writing "him" when it should have read "his." Some sentences had extra random words in them, others used adjectives where adverbs were expected -- the most probable reason I could think of was that parts of those sentences had been rewritten but not proofread afterwards. Stuff like that really detracts from the essence of the story by jolting the reader out of the book-world.
Probably the toughest aspect of this book for me to get past is that McKinnon breaks one of, in my opinion, the most important tenets of creative writing -- show, don't tell. Most of this story is the reader being TOLD about object, characters personalities, reactions, feelings, judgments, etc. For example, many readers don't want to read, "The girl was nervous."* Instead, they usually prefer to read, "The girl fidgeted in her hair, biting at her lip. Her hands moved with a mind of their own, one picking at the lint on her skirt, the other fussing over a strand of hair." The difference between telling and showing is what makes a piece of writing really stand out from the rest, it gives it a more engrossing feel, it lets the reader discover more about the characters for themselves, and it tells the reader that the author has confidence in his/her writing to get the story across (in other words, that the author knows the reader will understand without being led directly to it).
Overall, this book is excellent in conception, but poor in application. It's a good read, and I would suggest it to anyone, though there are some loose ends that nag at you after you finish reading (and not in the modern or post-modern sense -- they're questions raised by the basic premise that are never answered, and I felt that McKinnon simply didn't know how to solve those issues so he/she didn't bother to try). Still, it's a good read, but I think I'd prefer to see it in movie form (and I'm not one to say that often).
*It's not that "The girl was nervous" is bad writing per se, it's just that describing the physicality of the nervousness gives the reader a better sense of what's going on, how nervous she is (like a 2 out or 10? or a 7 our of 10?), how her nervousness is apparent, etc. I would argue that most readers prefer to be shown because it allows them to really immerse themselves in the fiction-world, whereas being told prevents them from really visualizing the story. You can say "Bob walked into the Victorian house," but your readers will all picture different Victorian-looking houses (and some may not even know what a Victorian looks like!) So telling isn't necessarily bad, it's just that showing is usually preferred in story-telling.
September 2, 2011
This story is about a young couple who moves into a new home and has an unsigned suicide letter mailed to their address. The letter is years old, so obviously not meant for them, and they decide to try and track down whomever the letter is intended for. As the cast of characters grow, so does the mystery surrounding the letter’s author and motivation.
Jay and Louisa are the young couple, and they disagree to what extent they should get involved. Jay is hesitant to do much, while Lou is insistent upon seeing the project through. She instantly bonds with Jean, the previous owner of the home, and is horrified to learn of the torture Jean and her friends went through during their childhood at an orphanage. As Jean's friends are introduced, you get to see what effects child abuse has on people, and how it manifests into different adult psychological issues - from alcohol abuse, bouts of rage, obsessive compulsion and panic attacks. Jean, Tom, Eddie and Ray all all very well drawn characters and are real examples of how catastrophic situations can mold the human psyche.
The story is told through the eyes of many different characters, allowing you to feel the emotions each one battles with. You get to feel the push and pull of Jay and Lou's marriage as life's obstacles and the trauma of the crime affect their relationship. You get a glimpse into the fear of Jean, Tom, Eddie and Ray as the police start to investigate the abuse and murder of the children they lived with so many years ago. It's a story of love, loyalty, guilt, shame, redemption, and moving on. These are all very real situations, and C. C. McKinnon does a great job of weaving this story and bringing it to life.
Jay and Louisa are the young couple, and they disagree to what extent they should get involved. Jay is hesitant to do much, while Lou is insistent upon seeing the project through. She instantly bonds with Jean, the previous owner of the home, and is horrified to learn of the torture Jean and her friends went through during their childhood at an orphanage. As Jean's friends are introduced, you get to see what effects child abuse has on people, and how it manifests into different adult psychological issues - from alcohol abuse, bouts of rage, obsessive compulsion and panic attacks. Jean, Tom, Eddie and Ray all all very well drawn characters and are real examples of how catastrophic situations can mold the human psyche.
The story is told through the eyes of many different characters, allowing you to feel the emotions each one battles with. You get to feel the push and pull of Jay and Lou's marriage as life's obstacles and the trauma of the crime affect their relationship. You get a glimpse into the fear of Jean, Tom, Eddie and Ray as the police start to investigate the abuse and murder of the children they lived with so many years ago. It's a story of love, loyalty, guilt, shame, redemption, and moving on. These are all very real situations, and C. C. McKinnon does a great job of weaving this story and bringing it to life.
August 14, 2011
Louisa and Jay receive an suicide note at their address, but the letter is unsigned and there is no name on the address. Louisa is determined to find the person for which the letter is intended. She locates, Jean, the former owner of their house and a mystery begins to unfold. Jean reveals that she had grown up in an orphanage and had a group of friends that she was close to there. Once leaving the orphanage, they lost track of each other. What happened at the orphanage is frightening and the story keeps the reader's interest. The writing at times is amateurish, particularly the dialogue. For example, instead of saying something like, "Louisa laughed and said, I don't know! I waited for you," the authors says, "I don't know, ha-ha I don't know. I waited for you so we could read it together." Although the writing style could use some help, I enjoyed the story and wanted to keep reading to find out exactly what happened at the orphanage and what involvement Jean and her friends had in those events. Spoiler alert! We never find out who wrote the letter or for whom it was intended. So, I guess my question is, do books always have to be wrapped up neatly at the end?
July 18, 2011
Once again, I can't even review the story because I'm so aggravated by the lack of editing. If I can keep character's names straight, why can't the author? If I notice that someone's dead son who was Richard in one chapter becomes John in a different chapter, you'd think the person actually doing the writing would notice. There were many examples of that throughout the book. If you're going to have a character whose backstory includes 5 ex-husbands and a boyfriend, write their names down somewhere so you don't start calling the boyfriend by the fifth husband's name. Ugh.
This book had potential. It needs a few more drafts though to tighten up lots of inconsistencies in the story.
This book had potential. It needs a few more drafts though to tighten up lots of inconsistencies in the story.
November 14, 2011
The storyline intrigued me. Unfortunately, that is the only good thing I can say about this book. I can't believe it made it all the way through the publishing process. It was full of every mistake you can think of. Typos, mixed names, horrible grammar and run on sentences. I'm not great with grammar myself, but I'm not an author! I cringed every time I read the little ha-has. I guess this was supposed to be the character laughing, but it was annoying! I don't recommend this book at all. Maybe if it's re-written...
November 16, 2013
I initially created a new shelf in my books called "stopped reading".....because of this book. But soon after I realized if I start a book I have to finish it no matter how painful it is to my brain. This book started so slow.....was so full of typos......I could feel my nostrils flare halfway through chapter 2. At the end of the day, this is a great story, and if you can make it through the horrible editing and see it for what it was intended to be, you'll be happy you did. But someone seriously needs to edit this book again. Twice.
August 2, 2011
This book reads a bit strangely, because of the almost total absence of contractions in the dialogue. Given that it is a modern novel in a contemporary setting, I found this very strange and rather offputting. It reminded me of the later Robert Heinlein, after he went funny.
Also, some rigorous proofreading would really have helped my enjoyment of the book. I would recommend to the author the OED, particularly in respect of "lent" and "leant".
Also, some rigorous proofreading would really have helped my enjoyment of the book. I would recommend to the author the OED, particularly in respect of "lent" and "leant".
July 28, 2011
The premise of the story was unique and I looked forward to reading it. However, the actual act of reading it was painful - not because of the storyline but because it was so poorly edited. The errors were distracting. I also felt the dialogue between the characters was "off." I also felt the characters could have been more developed. I really wanted to like it......if the book had stronger writing it would have been a 4 or 5 star book. I gave it 2 stars and that's pretty generous.
December 9, 2012
This book was horrible. The writing wasn't good, and I almost felt like I was just reading it in monotone. I would have given it two stars but I was disappointed when I reached the end, and we never even found out who wrote the freaking letter!
I felt like that fact made reading this book a waste of time and if I had known that we never find out who wrote the letter, I wouldn't have bothered with reading the whole damn book. Don't waste your time.
I felt like that fact made reading this book a waste of time and if I had known that we never find out who wrote the letter, I wouldn't have bothered with reading the whole damn book. Don't waste your time.
April 21, 2011
A powerful debut novel. The book follows four senior citizens who met as children in an orphanage where they suffered traumatic abuse. They are brought together by a new bride when she receives an unsigned suicide note in the mail. Despite the dark subject matter, the book is one of recovery and ultimately of hope.
February 11, 2025
Quick read. Very interesting from the beginning
I liked the characters and the development into each of them. This is a tragic story but so interesting. I didn’t want to put this down. There are triggers warnings as you can imagine but if you can handle it I highly recommend this one.
I liked the characters and the development into each of them. This is a tragic story but so interesting. I didn’t want to put this down. There are triggers warnings as you can imagine but if you can handle it I highly recommend this one.
September 20, 2011
This was an interesting read. I would love to read another from this author. One thing that stuck out a little was the way things would be left out for a suspenseful purpose which made me at times think I skipped a page or two.
October 8, 2012
I knew it. I just knew I wasn't going to get my big question answered.
September 20, 2012
The story was good but there were so many gramatical and spelling errors.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews