I had the pleasure of meeting the author and her family at a book signing recently. She seems like a delightful person who cares about her craft. In this novel, she has created a memorable (although inconsistently characterized) protagonist in Chase Harlem.
I loved the humor in the book. Elise Burke Brown shines in the sarcasm and wit of her characters. I also enjoyed some of the moments when she allows the readers to infer rather than directly stating character traits (secondary characterization vs direct characterization as ELA teachers are happy to point out). An example of this is early on, when Chase handles a man brandishing a small knife easily.
As much as I wanted to love this book, especially having met the delightful author and knowing the struggle it was getting this book published, I think it could have used more beta reads. I kept stumbling over small details that interrupted the flow for me and took me out of the story. This is especially sad because I could tell that the book would have had a wonderfully quick pace had I not been tripped up so much.
One of the most annoying impediments to me was in word choice. Ferrets do not “purr,” they “dook” or “chuckle.” I have not heard the phrase “straight edge” since the 1990s. Speaking of archaic terminology, Chase refers to herself as a “gumshoe,” which took me out of this modern tale and into the world of Mickey Hammer and Phillip Marlowe. Chase uses the term “mustelid” in referencing Louis. While this is an absolutely accurate term, hardly anyone outside of David Attenborough’s friend group would use this term.
This brings me to a related problem that I had with the characterization of Chase. Her inner monologue and dialogue use two different sets of vocabulary. As this is first-person narration, the reader is treated to the thoughts of Chase who uses a diverse academic vocabulary. However, when she speaks, that disappears. I understand that most people have an inner personality that they keep to themselves and another that they share with the world, but the voices of the narrator and her dialogue seemed far too distant to me.
There were other errors that my ADHD brain would not let me skim over, some were small things like a period that was not placed next to the last character in the sentence or that Brown divided Bluesmobile into “Blues Mobile,” which of course made me think of the town of Mobile, AL having a festival in honor of W.C. Handy. SEC fans were probably triggered by the lack of capitalization of Tigers on page 18. As I stated earlier, these are small details that could have been fixed by more readers being involved, and the exclusion of these little accidents would have helped me enjoy the book more.
Bigger issues that I had with the book include a heavy hand with NOLA references (to where it felt like pandering) and my questioning the verisimilitude of this tale. While adding details such as dialect and specific locations can enhance a story, the oversaturation of the references in this book seemed like the author was name-dropping to prove her knowledge and love of The Big Easy. For example, on page 82 the narrator mentions the “New Orleans heat” in the same paragraph as the “New Orleans light.”
As to the realism portrayed in the novel, there are two examples that pulled me straight out of enjoyment. The first is the scene where Chase is running through a graveyard with a holstered gun. I used to run through cemeteries all the time; they are quiet places with hardly any traffic and decent pathways, not to mention how they provide a meditative experience. However, in my running days, there would be no way I would run recreationally with a holstered gun! That would restrict my movement and add an unbalanced weight to my stride. (I hated even wearing the small water bottles on my running belt during my half-marathon training days).
The other example of my questioning the reality of this book is Chase being allowed into Burke’s investigation at all. Yes, she WAS an FBI profiler. However, in the timeline of this story, she IS a civilian. To let her into the investigation as much as Burke did is inconceivable to me, especially with how regulated everything is today out of concern for litigation, chain of evidence, and general public perception.
I want to end this review by saying that this book did have a lot of heart to it. I could tell that the character Burke was inspired by the author’s brother because the rapport between the police detective and Chase seemed familial. There is also a lot of love for the Crescent City (even though I believe it could be dialed back just a little). Elise Burke Brown has put her soul into this book, and I hope that my comments are seen in a constructive light– should she read them. I look forward to reading more from her in the future.