Contemplated two stars then remembered how it explained gay vs. straight and used it as a running joke that I took away the extra star. It's not fair to her to be teased for that nor is it fair to Cameron for being the product of those jokes.
As for the plot, I found it completely predictable. I'm not sure if anyone else guessed exactly where both sets of jewels were, but I got the hiding spot of the modern jewels the instant it was mentioned way back in the beginning pages (I was actually flabbergasted at being so. I shouldn't have been right. I shouldn't have been). As for the other set, I think it was alluded to quite obviously, so that was less of a surprise. Also, predicted the subject of the epilogue to then lead into probably a second novel.
I feel too young for this book. Or this book feels outdated for the time it was published (2015). It reads as if it's talking to a 60 year-old who still believes gay is the devil incarnate and it's trying to teach/tell them otherwise, but only for the first third and then it drops the subject altogether. The line in there just feels directly pulled from a Rent song "...you'll never share real love until you love yourself..." and this musical was first shown in '93 and the movie adaptation in 2005. I'm not sure who the audience is here, but it's certainly not for those born in the 90s or later. There are many references to older television shows as well as music from quite sometime ago that I felt lost, but somehow this book was riddled with clichéd junior high quality sexual innuendo: "She's not your girlfriend if you pay for it." This barely touches upon how much these jokes are utilized. To me, they appeared on almost every page. Yet, with all of that the author doesn't give a us sex scene. It felt promised with their nearly going to, but stopped because of a voyeur, yet it still didn't happen later on.
The first line was a great first line, but then the narrative repeated over and over and over and over and over (this is exactly how it felt) and over and over again; this of course tarnished the first line and actually made it uncreative (an impressive feat). When you have a good line in a novel you don't repeat it. A novel is not a poem, and this one in particular shouldn't try to read like one.
Ross repeats Death's background to so many other characters that you're getting hit over the head with it. And he'll tell the story and then she chooses later to show it without adding any additional information to the plot. Wren also cried at the tiniest sad bits in his past which just made it feel fake rather than authentic.
These small town settings bother me and I wish cozy mysteries would move away from them. There are too many stereotypical characters used and it gets redundant and sickening. The characters know far too much and are too involved in every little aspect. It's annoying more than it is endearing.
This is a first novel and it reads like one. There are strange places where there's a break in the narrative to go omniscient, especially in the case of page 187 where it mentions a shadowy figure watching Wren and then never addresses it later. There are also a few times where the narrative goes away from either Wren or Death's head into minor never - to - return characters, which is a strange breaking of pace. The young girl is basically used as a way for Death to story dump his background in one fell swoop, unfortunately (as previously mentioned), this gets repeated again and again.
Why did the ex-wife have to appear? Just why? She added nothing. She came in for a scene and then was gone almost as fast as she came. Also, how did she find Death? Should have been saved for book two for those wanting to read on.
A fun title, "Death and the Redheaded Woman", but not a good novel did it make.