What do you think?
Rate this book
They Never Came Home
Joan’s boyfriend and her brother are missing and assumed dead. Until the voice on the other end of the phone hints at something more terrible.
192 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1968
131 people are currently reading
1460 people want to read
About the author
Lois Duncan
68 books2,004 followersLois Duncan (born Lois Duncan Steinmetz) was an American writer and novelist, known primarily for her books for children and young adults, in particular (and some times controversially considering her young readership) crime thrillers. Duncan's parents were the noted magazine photographers Lois Steinmetz and Joseph Janney Steinmetz. She was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but grew up in Sarasota, Florida. Duncan started writing and submitting manuscripts to magazines at the age of ten, and when she was thirteen succeeded in selling her first story.
Duncan attended Duke University from 1952 to 1953 but dropped out, married, and started a family. During this time, she continued to write and publish magazine articles; over the course of her career, she has published more than 300 articles, in magazines such as Ladies' Home Journal, Redbook, McCall's, Good Housekeeping, and Reader's Digest. After her first marriage, which produced three children, ended in divorce, Duncan moved to Albuquerque, New Mexico, to teach journalism at the University of New Mexico, where she also earned a BA in English in 1977. In 1965 she married Don Arquette, and had two more children with him.
Duncan was best known for her novels of suspense for teenagers. Some of her works have been adapted for the screen, the most famous example being the 1997 film I Know What You Did Last Summer, adapted from her novel of the same title. Other made-for-TV movies include Stranger with My Face, Killing Mr. Griffin, Don't Look Behind You, Summer of Fear and Gallows Hill.
In 1989 the youngest of Duncan's children, Kaitlyn Arquette, was murdered in Albuquerque, New Mexico, under suspicious circumstances. Who Killed My Daughter? relates the facts and conjecture about the still unsolved case.
Duncan's second book about her daughter's murder, ONE TO THE WOLVES: ON THE TRAIL OF A KILLER, picks up where the first book leaves off and contains all the new information Kait's family has uncovered from private investigation.
The 1971 children's book Hotel for Dogs was released as a theatrical movie in 2009, starring Emma Roberts. That book has now been republished by Scholastic along with two sequels, News for Dogs (2009) and Movie for Dogs (2010).
Duncan's Gothic suspense novel, DOWN A DARK HALL, is being filmed for the Big Screen and will probably be released in 2016.
Follow Lois on Twitter: http://twitter.com/duncanauthor
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?i...
http://www.kaitarquette.arquettes.com
Duncan attended Duke University from 1952 to 1953 but dropped out, married, and started a family. During this time, she continued to write and publish magazine articles; over the course of her career, she has published more than 300 articles, in magazines such as Ladies' Home Journal, Redbook, McCall's, Good Housekeeping, and Reader's Digest. After her first marriage, which produced three children, ended in divorce, Duncan moved to Albuquerque, New Mexico, to teach journalism at the University of New Mexico, where she also earned a BA in English in 1977. In 1965 she married Don Arquette, and had two more children with him.
Duncan was best known for her novels of suspense for teenagers. Some of her works have been adapted for the screen, the most famous example being the 1997 film I Know What You Did Last Summer, adapted from her novel of the same title. Other made-for-TV movies include Stranger with My Face, Killing Mr. Griffin, Don't Look Behind You, Summer of Fear and Gallows Hill.
In 1989 the youngest of Duncan's children, Kaitlyn Arquette, was murdered in Albuquerque, New Mexico, under suspicious circumstances. Who Killed My Daughter? relates the facts and conjecture about the still unsolved case.
Duncan's second book about her daughter's murder, ONE TO THE WOLVES: ON THE TRAIL OF A KILLER, picks up where the first book leaves off and contains all the new information Kait's family has uncovered from private investigation.
The 1971 children's book Hotel for Dogs was released as a theatrical movie in 2009, starring Emma Roberts. That book has now been republished by Scholastic along with two sequels, News for Dogs (2009) and Movie for Dogs (2010).
Duncan's Gothic suspense novel, DOWN A DARK HALL, is being filmed for the Big Screen and will probably be released in 2016.
Follow Lois on Twitter: http://twitter.com/duncanauthor
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?i...
http://www.kaitarquette.arquettes.com
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 190 reviews
November 17, 2015
Just because Lois Duncan’s They Never Came Home was written in the late 1960s (my Avon paper book edition published in 1969) doesn’t mean it should be as incredibly stupid and sexist as it is. This book is awful. I picked up this book somewhere, sometime during my travels and it’s sat on my book shelves for years. Because I needed some brain candy relief from the intense intellectual strain of my current book, I decided, hell yeah. Now’s the time to read this. Blech. Cardboard characters, melodrama, terrible dialogue, dopey plot, rampant sexism and outdated social mores make this book a forgettable and irritating reading experience. I should throw it out because I don’t think anyone else should read it, but I won’t. I have a weird phobia about throwing out books. Even crappy ones. Hello, library donation box.
Larry Drayfus and Dan Cotwell go hiking in the mountains near their home in Las Cruces, New Mexico. Dan is a senior in high school, just about to graduate but Larry is a year younger. Dan is an experienced hiker and an all-around athlete; Larry is a pale, thin slacker. Dan knows Larry only because he is dating Larry’s older sister, Joan. One day Larry suggests they go hiking even though he doesn’t hike and they’ve never hung out together. So they go out one bright morning and never return. After three days, Mr. Drayfus reports them as missing and a search for the boys ensues. They are not found, but are presumed dead. Not long after all this, a strange man calls the Drayfus house and says that Larry was in business with him and owes him two thousand dollars. He wants the money back. Joan, who spoke with the man, doesn’t want to tell her parents because mother is having a nervous breakdown and her father has a bad heart. So Joan, instead of going to the police (because wouldn’t that sound odd to you? Wouldn’t that perhaps indicate that maybe someone helped your brother disappear or that he ran off with the $2k, which in the 60s is quite a bit of cash) she decides she’s going to make this mysterious man prove that her darling younger brother actually received the money. Supposedly Mystery Man has a receipt (which, when you know what the mysterious business is that Larry was involved in, is freaking hilarious) with Larry’s signature on it. But Joan is just a weak, nervous female. She can’t go alone! She befriends Frank Cotwell, Dan’s younger brother. Even though he is only sixteen, Frank becomes the hero of the story and makes much of the decisions for Joan. Because, you know, she’s just a girl. I’m not going to hide spoilers in this review. The book is too dumb. So quit reading now if you want (for whatever reason) to read this book and don’t want to know what happens.
Meanwhile, the story shifts focus to two young guys living on their own in California. Their names are Dave and Lance. Dave has amnesia. He can’t remember anything. Lance tells him they are brothers and Dave was very sick and is still recovering, and their parents are dead. Lance has answers to all ofDan’s Dave’s pesky questions. It’s clear that something isn’t right, but hey, these two guys have nothing to do with those two guys. They live in California!
Joan and Frank, meanwhile, agree to “run errands” for Mr. Brown, the mystery man, in order to work off the $2k that Larry owes him. Joan’s searched his room for the cash, has checked local banks to see if he has a checking account, but nope. That money just gosh darn disappeared. Dang it. So Mr. Brown tells Joan some absolutely ridiculous story about how he distributes jewelry made by Native Americans based on Mexican designs. Larry’s job was to drive to Juarez to pick up the “designs” and jewelry “samples” from Mr. Brown’s contact there and bring them back to Mr. Brown in New Mexico. So Dumb Ass and Dip Shit say, yeah, we’ll do that to work off the $2k. That way Joan won’t have to pay the money back from her college fund. WTF. This plot would NEVER work in a contemporary novel. How gullible are these two? What, the post office didn’t work in the 1960s? Why would someone have to drive across the Mexican border every other week to pick up jewelry samples and designs? That’s a dumb cover story for what is (say it with me everyone) drugs! Yes, these two idiots, instead of notifying their parents or the police about this weirdness, became drug mules. They didn’t know this until after many trips back and forth. Duh. The boys from California part of the story is just as idiotic. Dave’s memory is returning but Lance continues to give him bullshit explanations and Dave says, uh okay, Lance. I guess I can trust you. Even though he’s suspicious. Even though a girl recognizes him and calls him Dan. The ending to this novel is incredibly melodramatic and so artificial—I immediately recognized Duncan wanted a big, shocking ending so that’s what she wrote. And it’s not shocking. It’s stupid.
No one should read this. Even as brain candy. Maybe as an example of how not to write characters, plot, and dialogue? Yes, that’s the only reason to read this book—to use as a negative example. The characters and their families come across as old-fashioned even for 1969. It’s as if time froze in the mid-50s. The characters use such shocking language as “gosh,” “gee whiz,” “golly,” “cripes,” and someone of very low character is described as being a “punk.” I understand the book will of course be dated since it’s a contemporary thriller/mystery, but the plot is poorly constructed and fairly obvious. My questions: Why did Larry bring Dan with him to California? Larry pushed him off the hiking trail, hoping he’d smash his head and roll down the mountain into the storm-swollen stream below. But Dan didn’t cooperate and stopped rolling. When Larry checked on him, Dan was awake, but clearly didn’t recognize Larry. So Larry says he brought Dan because if he’d left him, he’d eventually be found and would tell rescuers he was pushed off the trail and left behind. Soooo…that’s why Larry brought him to California with him? Why didn’t he just give Dan another push? Obviously he has no qualms about killing Dan. Later in the book, “Lance” encourages “Dave” to sit on the balcony and think. Because, you know, it’s been fixed now. That balcony is really safe now, yessirree. Go ahead and lean on the railing. You won’t fall over. Sigh. The convoluted reasoning for Larry to bring Dan with him is an example of very bad plot construction. Larry would have simply finished Dan off on the mountain; he never would have taken the trouble (and risk) of bringing him to California with him.
Along with the dopey plot and bad dialogue, the book is full of girly romance stuff: Joan loves Dan and misses him and knew as soon as she met him that all she wanted to do was to marry him and have his babies; preachy paragraphs about how bad marijuana is (that tired old argument of marijuana being a “gateway” drug, even though that term isn’t used); and the underlying theme that women are hysterical, emotional, weak, fearful and need male guidance. Blech. I think this book is aimed at the teenage reader, what we now call YA. But YA readers deserve well-written books just as much as adults. They Never Came Home is not good reading now and I seriously doubt it was in 1969.
Larry Drayfus and Dan Cotwell go hiking in the mountains near their home in Las Cruces, New Mexico. Dan is a senior in high school, just about to graduate but Larry is a year younger. Dan is an experienced hiker and an all-around athlete; Larry is a pale, thin slacker. Dan knows Larry only because he is dating Larry’s older sister, Joan. One day Larry suggests they go hiking even though he doesn’t hike and they’ve never hung out together. So they go out one bright morning and never return. After three days, Mr. Drayfus reports them as missing and a search for the boys ensues. They are not found, but are presumed dead. Not long after all this, a strange man calls the Drayfus house and says that Larry was in business with him and owes him two thousand dollars. He wants the money back. Joan, who spoke with the man, doesn’t want to tell her parents because mother is having a nervous breakdown and her father has a bad heart. So Joan, instead of going to the police (because wouldn’t that sound odd to you? Wouldn’t that perhaps indicate that maybe someone helped your brother disappear or that he ran off with the $2k, which in the 60s is quite a bit of cash) she decides she’s going to make this mysterious man prove that her darling younger brother actually received the money. Supposedly Mystery Man has a receipt (which, when you know what the mysterious business is that Larry was involved in, is freaking hilarious) with Larry’s signature on it. But Joan is just a weak, nervous female. She can’t go alone! She befriends Frank Cotwell, Dan’s younger brother. Even though he is only sixteen, Frank becomes the hero of the story and makes much of the decisions for Joan. Because, you know, she’s just a girl. I’m not going to hide spoilers in this review. The book is too dumb. So quit reading now if you want (for whatever reason) to read this book and don’t want to know what happens.
Meanwhile, the story shifts focus to two young guys living on their own in California. Their names are Dave and Lance. Dave has amnesia. He can’t remember anything. Lance tells him they are brothers and Dave was very sick and is still recovering, and their parents are dead. Lance has answers to all of
Joan and Frank, meanwhile, agree to “run errands” for Mr. Brown, the mystery man, in order to work off the $2k that Larry owes him. Joan’s searched his room for the cash, has checked local banks to see if he has a checking account, but nope. That money just gosh darn disappeared. Dang it. So Mr. Brown tells Joan some absolutely ridiculous story about how he distributes jewelry made by Native Americans based on Mexican designs. Larry’s job was to drive to Juarez to pick up the “designs” and jewelry “samples” from Mr. Brown’s contact there and bring them back to Mr. Brown in New Mexico. So Dumb Ass and Dip Shit say, yeah, we’ll do that to work off the $2k. That way Joan won’t have to pay the money back from her college fund. WTF. This plot would NEVER work in a contemporary novel. How gullible are these two? What, the post office didn’t work in the 1960s? Why would someone have to drive across the Mexican border every other week to pick up jewelry samples and designs? That’s a dumb cover story for what is (say it with me everyone) drugs! Yes, these two idiots, instead of notifying their parents or the police about this weirdness, became drug mules. They didn’t know this until after many trips back and forth. Duh. The boys from California part of the story is just as idiotic. Dave’s memory is returning but Lance continues to give him bullshit explanations and Dave says, uh okay, Lance. I guess I can trust you. Even though he’s suspicious. Even though a girl recognizes him and calls him Dan. The ending to this novel is incredibly melodramatic and so artificial—I immediately recognized Duncan wanted a big, shocking ending so that’s what she wrote. And it’s not shocking. It’s stupid.
No one should read this. Even as brain candy. Maybe as an example of how not to write characters, plot, and dialogue? Yes, that’s the only reason to read this book—to use as a negative example. The characters and their families come across as old-fashioned even for 1969. It’s as if time froze in the mid-50s. The characters use such shocking language as “gosh,” “gee whiz,” “golly,” “cripes,” and someone of very low character is described as being a “punk.” I understand the book will of course be dated since it’s a contemporary thriller/mystery, but the plot is poorly constructed and fairly obvious. My questions: Why did Larry bring Dan with him to California? Larry pushed him off the hiking trail, hoping he’d smash his head and roll down the mountain into the storm-swollen stream below. But Dan didn’t cooperate and stopped rolling. When Larry checked on him, Dan was awake, but clearly didn’t recognize Larry. So Larry says he brought Dan because if he’d left him, he’d eventually be found and would tell rescuers he was pushed off the trail and left behind. Soooo…that’s why Larry brought him to California with him? Why didn’t he just give Dan another push? Obviously he has no qualms about killing Dan. Later in the book, “Lance” encourages “Dave” to sit on the balcony and think. Because, you know, it’s been fixed now. That balcony is really safe now, yessirree. Go ahead and lean on the railing. You won’t fall over. Sigh. The convoluted reasoning for Larry to bring Dan with him is an example of very bad plot construction. Larry would have simply finished Dan off on the mountain; he never would have taken the trouble (and risk) of bringing him to California with him.
Along with the dopey plot and bad dialogue, the book is full of girly romance stuff: Joan loves Dan and misses him and knew as soon as she met him that all she wanted to do was to marry him and have his babies; preachy paragraphs about how bad marijuana is (that tired old argument of marijuana being a “gateway” drug, even though that term isn’t used); and the underlying theme that women are hysterical, emotional, weak, fearful and need male guidance. Blech. I think this book is aimed at the teenage reader, what we now call YA. But YA readers deserve well-written books just as much as adults. They Never Came Home is not good reading now and I seriously doubt it was in 1969.
August 4, 2015
Read this in an evening. The twist was obvious, but still I wanted to finish it. Simple but interesting. Unfortunately, I got the 2012 edition from the library. This meant that most of the story felt like the sixties, and then Joan takes online courses like it's the nineties all of a sudden. I then questioned how much else had been changed.
July 5, 2016
I normally love books by this author, but this one was unironically sexist and left little to the imagination in terms of plot. Love the author, just not this book.
February 3, 2022
Just terrible. Definitely outdated. Good lord
January 17, 2013
Well, I’m continuing my Lois Duncan bent by reading through the books that I don’t remember very well first. All I could remember from this one was basically what it says on the front cover… two boys go camping and they never come home.
To be honest, I can see why (comparatively speaking) this book didn’t stick in my memory as much as the others. It’s not as…. what’s the word I’m looking for… relatable? No, that’s not it. I think maybe the word is just interesting. It’s not as interesting as all the others. BUT (and this is a big but) that’s not to say it’s not interesting. I promise you, it is interesting.
With her teen thrillers Duncan likes to look at families and relationships and see how they hold up under pressure. Where do the cracks show? What makes a person strong or weak? Where can a young person find the courage and resources to handle unimaginable situations? They Never Came Home is no different.
Joan is living in teenaged bliss. She has a loving family and a handsome boyfriend that adores her. In the fall they will go off to college together and have the amazing lives they’ve always dreamed of. When her boyfriend (Dan) and her brother (Larry) don’t return home from their camping trip things start to fall apart. Joan becomes the new head of the house, caring for her mother’s crumbling nerves and keeping her father stress free so as not to put strain on his heart condition.
When a strange man calls her house claiming that Larry owed him a lot of money, Joan takes the responsibility upon herself and confides in Dan’s younger brother Frank. Together they try to protect Joan’s crumbling family and get the money to pay back the mysterious Mr. Brown.
As always the pacing is brilliant. Duncan steps your through the story bit by bit, revealing just the right amount of plot and uncovering little by little just the right amount of character. This would make a great daytime movie. That sounds like a bad thing but really it’s not. I don’t think there’s enough action to be a blockbuster but I do think it would transfer very well to film.
The thing I love most about Lois Duncan’s young adult books as that they tackle mature themes without the need for smut or violence or foul language. These days even books aimed at young teens have people falling into bed with each other or detailed descriptions of dismembered limbs. I think all that does is cloud and pollute the mind and takes away from important themes that run through books, themes worthy of serious thought.
As I read through this book I thought to myself, what is the glue that holds families together? Why does a tragedy strike two families, one it pulls apart, the other pulls together? What is grief? Where does it end and become something more akin to selfishness? A heart-tingling love scene or edge-of-your-seat violence would have pulled away attention from those themes. It would have been a good read, sure, but it wouldn’t have had any real value.
So, in summary, no I don’t think this particular book is as interesting as most of her other young adult novels BUT it’s a high standard and it’s still pretty brilliant. Re-readable, pass-onable, gripping, throught-provoking and as always impeccable writing.
Four stars.
To be honest, I can see why (comparatively speaking) this book didn’t stick in my memory as much as the others. It’s not as…. what’s the word I’m looking for… relatable? No, that’s not it. I think maybe the word is just interesting. It’s not as interesting as all the others. BUT (and this is a big but) that’s not to say it’s not interesting. I promise you, it is interesting.
With her teen thrillers Duncan likes to look at families and relationships and see how they hold up under pressure. Where do the cracks show? What makes a person strong or weak? Where can a young person find the courage and resources to handle unimaginable situations? They Never Came Home is no different.
Joan is living in teenaged bliss. She has a loving family and a handsome boyfriend that adores her. In the fall they will go off to college together and have the amazing lives they’ve always dreamed of. When her boyfriend (Dan) and her brother (Larry) don’t return home from their camping trip things start to fall apart. Joan becomes the new head of the house, caring for her mother’s crumbling nerves and keeping her father stress free so as not to put strain on his heart condition.
When a strange man calls her house claiming that Larry owed him a lot of money, Joan takes the responsibility upon herself and confides in Dan’s younger brother Frank. Together they try to protect Joan’s crumbling family and get the money to pay back the mysterious Mr. Brown.
As always the pacing is brilliant. Duncan steps your through the story bit by bit, revealing just the right amount of plot and uncovering little by little just the right amount of character. This would make a great daytime movie. That sounds like a bad thing but really it’s not. I don’t think there’s enough action to be a blockbuster but I do think it would transfer very well to film.
The thing I love most about Lois Duncan’s young adult books as that they tackle mature themes without the need for smut or violence or foul language. These days even books aimed at young teens have people falling into bed with each other or detailed descriptions of dismembered limbs. I think all that does is cloud and pollute the mind and takes away from important themes that run through books, themes worthy of serious thought.
As I read through this book I thought to myself, what is the glue that holds families together? Why does a tragedy strike two families, one it pulls apart, the other pulls together? What is grief? Where does it end and become something more akin to selfishness? A heart-tingling love scene or edge-of-your-seat violence would have pulled away attention from those themes. It would have been a good read, sure, but it wouldn’t have had any real value.
So, in summary, no I don’t think this particular book is as interesting as most of her other young adult novels BUT it’s a high standard and it’s still pretty brilliant. Re-readable, pass-onable, gripping, throught-provoking and as always impeccable writing.
Four stars.
September 13, 2015
This is one of Lois Duncan's novels that I hadn't read before. Most of her books have some sort of supernatural occurrence (whether it be a main aspect of the book, like in Locked in Time, or a brief moment of ESP, like in Killing Mr. Griffin or I Know What You Did Last Summer) but this one didn't. It also wasn't particularly creepy, as her books tend to be. (Although yes, I know she wrote Hotel For Dogs and that she writes a lot of non-scary books, too.)
I really like the premise of this book. What would happen if someone you love went off on a weekend camping trip and never came home? How long would it take you to start to believe they were dead, even if no bodies were ever found? How long can you keep hoping?
And what happens if you're Joan and one of the missing boys is your boyfriend and the other is your brother? How do you go on when two of the most important guys in your life are gone? (And when the third, your father, has a bad heart so you could, in theory, lose him, too?)
So yes, this is different than her other books. This also seems a little more plausible (at least at first).
This isn't one of her best, but it's definitely interesting and fun. And there are some plot twists I didn't see coming.
I really like the premise of this book. What would happen if someone you love went off on a weekend camping trip and never came home? How long would it take you to start to believe they were dead, even if no bodies were ever found? How long can you keep hoping?
And what happens if you're Joan and one of the missing boys is your boyfriend and the other is your brother? How do you go on when two of the most important guys in your life are gone? (And when the third, your father, has a bad heart so you could, in theory, lose him, too?)
So yes, this is different than her other books. This also seems a little more plausible (at least at first).
This isn't one of her best, but it's definitely interesting and fun. And there are some plot twists I didn't see coming.
Read
November 20, 2024Okay, this one took a bit to get my brain around. Also, I was totally delaying writing a review for it.
This book was SO good. I’ve always loved mysteries, but this particular style got me. Something about the way each secret was revealed in small buildups throughout the plot made everything make sense at the end, but I didn’t feel like any quality was lost by my guessing of the ending.
There was, however, a piece I didn’t expect, and it was one of the few ways I didn’t picture the story ending. It made the most sense once it happened, but I hadn’t thought of it before.
The characters were alive more than I expected, and I care about them more than I thought I would. The sibling and parent-child dynamics of our main family characters were so correctly written that I felt I’d seen them interact myself.
There were so many little things wrong in the scenes that led so perfectly and obviously (but to reiterate, not in a disappointingly obvious way) to the reveal moments that the detective in me shivered with excitement.
Summary: impressively realistic but unique characters, well written mystery, and a bittersweet but perfect ending!
TW: mental facilities, grief, extreme delusions, manipulation
This book was SO good. I’ve always loved mysteries, but this particular style got me. Something about the way each secret was revealed in small buildups throughout the plot made everything make sense at the end, but I didn’t feel like any quality was lost by my guessing of the ending.
There was, however, a piece I didn’t expect, and it was one of the few ways I didn’t picture the story ending. It made the most sense once it happened, but I hadn’t thought of it before.
The characters were alive more than I expected, and I care about them more than I thought I would. The sibling and parent-child dynamics of our main family characters were so correctly written that I felt I’d seen them interact myself.
There were so many little things wrong in the scenes that led so perfectly and obviously (but to reiterate, not in a disappointingly obvious way) to the reveal moments that the detective in me shivered with excitement.
Summary: impressively realistic but unique characters, well written mystery, and a bittersweet but perfect ending!
TW: mental facilities, grief, extreme delusions, manipulation
July 7, 2017
While I didn't enjoy this book as much as some her more supernaturally propelled novels, Duncan's always an emotionally observant writer and her characters are always believable. That said this book is hilariously dated in parts. And those parts are my FAVORITE parts. Written in 1968 the stakes of this story revolve around a missing *TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS* and a student who's "breaking bad" by selling marijuana. These plot twists are told to us in dramatic chapter-ending revelations that made me drop the book with laughter. So it's a pretty good time. I highly recommend reading this one instead of the recent updated version that changed marijuana into (woah) black tar heroin.
March 27, 2022
A teenage girl's boyfriend and brother go camping together in the mountains one weekend and never come back. And it's not what you think.
Like someone else said, only serviceably written; but well-put together and somewhat shocking!
A subtle (maybe a little too subtle) anti-sexist undertone was interesting.
Not one but TWO references to Rock Hudson as a desirable hunk of heterosexuality were amusing.
The attitude toward marijuana seemed a bit hysterical and over-the-top.
I was very happy with who wound up with whom at the end. True love wins!
Ms. Duncan, even in this early period, had what it takes to write a gripping thriller.
Like someone else said, only serviceably written; but well-put together and somewhat shocking!
A subtle (maybe a little too subtle) anti-sexist undertone was interesting.
Not one but TWO references to Rock Hudson as a desirable hunk of heterosexuality were amusing.
The attitude toward marijuana seemed a bit hysterical and over-the-top.
I was very happy with who wound up with whom at the end. True love wins!
Ms. Duncan, even in this early period, had what it takes to write a gripping thriller.
September 13, 2018
This book did alright but I hated the mystery this book spends to much time on flash backs and on the girl friend I was hoping that this book would have more entreating parts because it is called they never came home but spoiler they did come home this book does not stick to its tittle and when they do come back it is so boring it just talks about them walking away and not how Dan owed a company 2 thousand dollars.I recommend people do not have to suffer reading this bad book.
January 20, 2020
Despite the majority of reviews for this book being negative, I wanted to read this book and see for myself. I've had it on my shelf for a long time but never got around to reading it. I have to say, I was very impressed, given the fact that I had low expectations after reading negative review after negative review. Yes, the book had sexist remarks that made me gasp at times, but it wasn't a deal breaker for me...I've read worse. The story kept me reading and I thought it ended well.
May 15, 2021
So I'm mixed up about this one. For me it was part old-school Lifetime-network-movie-bad- predictible-drama, part guilty pleasure.. I think that's my best review for this one. 2.5 stars rounded up.
June 26, 2024
She writes young adults so well. Wasn’t my favorite story of hers but kept me entertained.
April 11, 2025
They Never Came Home was written by Lois Duncan, a suspenseful thriller novel, published in 1969. This is a spoiler free review.
Two boys go missing after going out on a camping trip. Larry Dryfass and Dan Cottwell. The search goes on for many many days, before being called off, one article belonging to Dan, was found. Leading search and rescue to believe that the boys were washed away by the river.
Larry is a troubled young man, he went to a party he shouldn’t have gone to, his folks had planned to send him off to a military School, he was allowed this one weekend to go on a random hike and camp.
Dan Cotwell, gets invited to go with Larry, though the two aren’t friends but just acquaintances. Dan is Joan’s boyfriend, Larry’s sister.
Once the boys go missing, Joan struggles with the loss of her brother, though she wasn’t ever close to him, and the loss of her boyfriend, Dan. Joan answers a call on the home phone, a man on the other line explains to her that Larry, owed him a LOT of money, which the caller believes Larry isn’t dead… but in hiding.
But because Joan’s parents are in poor health, her dad with a weak heart and mother psychologically unwell from the loss of her son, Joan keeps the conversation a secret, but tells Dan’s younger brother about it. Larry had gotten himself into some trouble, and now Joan has offered to pay off his debt. The Job is shady, and very illegal. Do the bodies of Dan and Larry every get found? Did Larry take money and run?
THOUGHTS
They never came home by Lois Duncan… is a fantastic book, I loved every bit of it, mostly. There isn’t a dull moment. It’s a shorter book, around 180 pages. The story was fast paced and thrilling.
I enjoyed the writing style and character development. I thought Joan was the best part of the book. Though she didn’t have to sacrifice her time and safety to hide her dead brothers secrets, she did, for the sake of keeping her father and mother from having worse health issues.
I’ll be honest and say there were two things that could have been better… the first complaint, is that the big twist was obvious. I think the author could have done a little better at disguising some of the elements, to lead us into a more grandiose reveal. And second. The ending was abrupt, and the way it ended was on a massive emotional cliff hanger. Something extreme happens and it just… ends. There is so much more that could have been written to bring in closure. Other than those two things, I liked what I read and would love to check out more from Lois Duncan.
RATING
I will give They Never Came Home, a B+.
Two boys go missing after going out on a camping trip. Larry Dryfass and Dan Cottwell. The search goes on for many many days, before being called off, one article belonging to Dan, was found. Leading search and rescue to believe that the boys were washed away by the river.
Larry is a troubled young man, he went to a party he shouldn’t have gone to, his folks had planned to send him off to a military School, he was allowed this one weekend to go on a random hike and camp.
Dan Cotwell, gets invited to go with Larry, though the two aren’t friends but just acquaintances. Dan is Joan’s boyfriend, Larry’s sister.
Once the boys go missing, Joan struggles with the loss of her brother, though she wasn’t ever close to him, and the loss of her boyfriend, Dan. Joan answers a call on the home phone, a man on the other line explains to her that Larry, owed him a LOT of money, which the caller believes Larry isn’t dead… but in hiding.
But because Joan’s parents are in poor health, her dad with a weak heart and mother psychologically unwell from the loss of her son, Joan keeps the conversation a secret, but tells Dan’s younger brother about it. Larry had gotten himself into some trouble, and now Joan has offered to pay off his debt. The Job is shady, and very illegal. Do the bodies of Dan and Larry every get found? Did Larry take money and run?
THOUGHTS
They never came home by Lois Duncan… is a fantastic book, I loved every bit of it, mostly. There isn’t a dull moment. It’s a shorter book, around 180 pages. The story was fast paced and thrilling.
I enjoyed the writing style and character development. I thought Joan was the best part of the book. Though she didn’t have to sacrifice her time and safety to hide her dead brothers secrets, she did, for the sake of keeping her father and mother from having worse health issues.
I’ll be honest and say there were two things that could have been better… the first complaint, is that the big twist was obvious. I think the author could have done a little better at disguising some of the elements, to lead us into a more grandiose reveal. And second. The ending was abrupt, and the way it ended was on a massive emotional cliff hanger. Something extreme happens and it just… ends. There is so much more that could have been written to bring in closure. Other than those two things, I liked what I read and would love to check out more from Lois Duncan.
RATING
I will give They Never Came Home, a B+.
January 21, 2023
Let me preface this by saying I understand this book was written in the 60’s. Still, the content has simply not stood the test of time. I thought I had read almost all of Lois Duncan’s books as a teenager. I came across this one at a used book store recently and didn’t recognize it.
Lois Duncan wrote some classic stories that have held up over the decades- Killing Mr. Griffin, Don’t Look Behind You, I Know What You Did Last Summer all come to mind. This book is not in the same league as those. Very weak storyline, uninteresting plot, and just overt sexism throughout the entire book. Lots of comments on how a female character can’t get many dates because she isn’t as attractive as her friends. Nice personality but that’s all. It was really painful to read.
The ending was abrupt and rather anti-climactic. There wasn’t really much excitement to it. Again, I remember her other books being exciting and just so much better. This one was a disappointment.
Lois Duncan wrote some classic stories that have held up over the decades- Killing Mr. Griffin, Don’t Look Behind You, I Know What You Did Last Summer all come to mind. This book is not in the same league as those. Very weak storyline, uninteresting plot, and just overt sexism throughout the entire book. Lots of comments on how a female character can’t get many dates because she isn’t as attractive as her friends. Nice personality but that’s all. It was really painful to read.
The ending was abrupt and rather anti-climactic. There wasn’t really much excitement to it. Again, I remember her other books being exciting and just so much better. This one was a disappointment.
April 20, 2025
What in the looney toons was that?
That was very boring too for so little pay off.
That was very boring too for so little pay off.
October 23, 2021
I’ve tried 3 times with this book. I actually finished on the third but was predictable and very slow.
July 17, 2024
Super predictable but I liked the way the story was executed. Dan is a sweetheart <3
April 20, 2025
3.5
This is my second Lois Duncan re read. She was my absolute favorite when I was in junior high school. My gripe with this one is that I read the kindle version and they seem to have randomly updated a couple of things (upped the missing money amount and mentioned cell phone twice) while leaving everything else the same.
This is my second Lois Duncan re read. She was my absolute favorite when I was in junior high school. My gripe with this one is that I read the kindle version and they seem to have randomly updated a couple of things (upped the missing money amount and mentioned cell phone twice) while leaving everything else the same.
March 6, 2019
Oof. This one was a doozy. We have a kid who gets caught up in TRAFFICKING HEROIN and decides to take off, but brings someone with him??? Just to kill him??? This is never ever explained. So the boys fake their own deaths (kind of) and the families are like "eh, it's been a month. They're probably dead. Definitely dead. No question. Byeeeee!" The one mom is considered insane because she's grieving her missing/dead son and the sister is like "my brother has been missing for a couple months, might as well give away all his possessions!" And in case you need a constant reminder that women are just meek, shy, incapable, helpless creatures, this book will remind you over. and over. and over.
"You know how women are when it comes to the kids. They never believe they're able to take care of themselves."
"I can't just sit here. I'd be up there on the mountain too if Ed would let me. He says women would just be in the way up there."
"You don't think I'd let you go down alone do you? ... That's just empty desert, between here and Mexico. Besides, those border towns are pretty rough places. Women shouldn't wander around in them by themselves."
"'That's the trouble with hiring women for any kind of responsible job,' Mr. Brown said with a snort of disgust. 'Everybody and everything comes before the job they're being paid to do.'"
And in case you think the guys are just hard on the girls but the girls are strong, independent characters regardless...
"'There are all kinds of things that could have happened to them. Trust a girl to come up with the one that's completely impossible!' 'You're right. That's my excuse - my sex.' Joan laughed a trifle giddily."
There's also the constant reminder that Joan is PLAIN and TALL and should only settle for being someone's third or fourth choice for a date.
Oh and the book ends when the bad guy pitches off a balcony and dies. The end.
"You know how women are when it comes to the kids. They never believe they're able to take care of themselves."
"I can't just sit here. I'd be up there on the mountain too if Ed would let me. He says women would just be in the way up there."
"You don't think I'd let you go down alone do you? ... That's just empty desert, between here and Mexico. Besides, those border towns are pretty rough places. Women shouldn't wander around in them by themselves."
"'That's the trouble with hiring women for any kind of responsible job,' Mr. Brown said with a snort of disgust. 'Everybody and everything comes before the job they're being paid to do.'"
And in case you think the guys are just hard on the girls but the girls are strong, independent characters regardless...
"'There are all kinds of things that could have happened to them. Trust a girl to come up with the one that's completely impossible!' 'You're right. That's my excuse - my sex.' Joan laughed a trifle giddily."
There's also the constant reminder that Joan is PLAIN and TALL and should only settle for being someone's third or fourth choice for a date.
Oh and the book ends when the bad guy pitches off a balcony and dies. The end.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 9, 2017
I'm not sure why this was in my in my TBR list but it still sounded good when I read the synopsis so I decided to borrow it. I checked after I finished and apparently this was written in the 1960s and it definitely shows in the writing. Still, this was a fun, quick read.
They Never Came Home starts when Dan and Larry go missing on a hiking trip and are presumed dead. Larry's family promptly falls apart, with Larry's mother falling into a delusion that her son is still alive. As Joan, Larry's sister, tries to protect her mother, she receives a phone call claiming that her brother owes this mysterious guy 50,000 dollars. As she tries her best to make up for her brother's debt (by taking on this mysterious job), she starts to discover that this disappearance may not be as simple as everyone thinks.
To be honest, I managed to guess the 'twist' in the story the first time the narrative cuts away from Joan and Frank (Dan's brother). But, I was interested in finding why and how the story was going to resolve itself, so I read all the way to the end.
As for the characters, I quite liked Joan because of the way she managed to pull herself together. I think she was a good protagonist, and I thought it was sensible of her to get help when she felt that she needed it (well, it was from her boyfriend's younger brother so it wasn't the best choice but good job for getting help and refusing to get into a stranger's car!). I also thought that the reveal of Larry's true character was quite well-done, though very predictable.
All in all, I think this is a fun, quick read. It does feel a little dated, but it's captivating enough that I read it pretty much in one go.
This review was first posted at Inside the mind of a Bibliophile
They Never Came Home starts when Dan and Larry go missing on a hiking trip and are presumed dead. Larry's family promptly falls apart, with Larry's mother falling into a delusion that her son is still alive. As Joan, Larry's sister, tries to protect her mother, she receives a phone call claiming that her brother owes this mysterious guy 50,000 dollars. As she tries her best to make up for her brother's debt (by taking on this mysterious job), she starts to discover that this disappearance may not be as simple as everyone thinks.
To be honest, I managed to guess the 'twist' in the story the first time the narrative cuts away from Joan and Frank (Dan's brother). But, I was interested in finding why and how the story was going to resolve itself, so I read all the way to the end.
As for the characters, I quite liked Joan because of the way she managed to pull herself together. I think she was a good protagonist, and I thought it was sensible of her to get help when she felt that she needed it (well, it was from her boyfriend's younger brother so it wasn't the best choice but good job for getting help and refusing to get into a stranger's car!). I also thought that the reveal of Larry's true character was quite well-done, though very predictable.
All in all, I think this is a fun, quick read. It does feel a little dated, but it's captivating enough that I read it pretty much in one go.
This review was first posted at Inside the mind of a Bibliophile
March 18, 2023
There are a few reasons why I did not give this book five stars but one reason is not because Lois Duncan is/was a bad writer.
It is one of her earlier books and lacks any kind of paranormal/supernatural element but has a hint of a more real world terror in not knowing what has happened to someone you love. It is so eerie in hindsight because of the future tragedy Duncan and her family would have to go through.
The book is of its time of the late 1960s/early 1970s with its language that seems like it is out of Happy Days which is set in the 1950s and makes many references to actor Tab Hunter.
Me being the old lady that I am actually knows who that is...*sigh*
There is also a panic about marijuana and a few sexist thoughts and remarks about women. Not explicitly to offend me but it might someone else and I can slightly defend attitude but first...
Lawrence "Larry" Drayfus Jr. and the boyfriend of his sister Joan, named Dan Cotwell, were going camping for the weekend and be back in time for school. It's April and almost time for graduation so it should have just been a fun experience.
True, Larry never seemed as if he enjoyed camping but his father was happy to let him with expert Dan alongside him. As the title suggests...they never came home.
The police and Larry's dad just laugh it off as boys being boys until days go by with no word or sight of either young man. Then a newlywed couple on their honeymoon goes missing camping up in the same New Mexico mountains and it becomes serious business then.
The couple are soon found (car stolen) but the boys are not.
Joan is answering the phone constantly to receive any news whether good or bad about her brother and her boyfriend. Her mother is a nervous wreck, missing her little boy, and her dad has had heart problems before. Joan has been going out with Dan for two years and she was looking forward to prom and graduation and possibly even college with the handsome football star.
Dan's family is just as upset about him being missing but they are of a stronger mentality than either of the Drayfus parents. They have their middle son, Frank, two years younger than Dan and their kid brother, Eddie to take care of as well. Frank helps to look for his brother but there is no luck and it is soon almost accepted that both boys are dead.
It isn't wrong to hold out a little hope they may be alive but Joan has two reasons for that.
First, her mother is in a state of shock where her grief is stuck completely in denial to a mentally unhealthy level just waiting for her son to walk in through the door any minute now.
The second reason is the call Joan receives from a man who calls himself John Brown. Besides offering his condolences about Larry, he tells her that her brother owed him money.
Money for a job Joan didn't even know he had and the sum is two thousand dollars.
Joan has no one else to turn to about this with the fragile line her parents are both walking on so she goes to Frank Cotwell to ask for his help. Frank never gave his older brother's girlfriend any thought with her plain looks and tall height but he knows Dan would have done anything for her so he agrees to help Joan.
The solution to this problem is just the start and completely over the heads of Joan and Frank because Larry's secrets have ensnared the one person they both care about...
That is the basic plot: the A plot if you will but there is also a subplot: The B plot that gets touched upon in the book from different chapters.
We get information about a young man named Dave Carter and his younger brother Lance.
We readers are not dumb...it is Dan and Lance. Dan has some amnesia and is told many lies by Larry. Things start to come back slowly after awhile with some drama thrown in that is conflicting with the life of Dan Cotwell and the life of Dave Carter thanks to a young woman named Peggy Richards who looks so familiar...
I won't spoil anything else for those who have not read the book. The climax does seem a little rushed and the ending may seem slightly corny but for me...I don't really mind that.
The things that may seem very sexist and archaic depending on your POV are just products of their time.
A woman going out of her mind because her son is missing? What else would you have her do but be hysterical when the younger brother of the older brother last seen with her son is standing in the doorway, the family resemblance just a coincidence?
Joan may make some naive decisions but she isn't stupid. She knows the type of world she lives in and even Frank seems to think she's acting like a silly female at times but we are shown how mature Joan really is. She is trying to be an adult for the sake of her parents but she soon begins to figure out the type of person her brother really was when it can no longer be denied.
The way Joan's father talks to her is just the way dads were back then. It is clear he wasn't as coddling of his son as his wife was and may have been a little strict in some areas but he was also pretty lax on some things because well...Larry is a man.
Dan is the one character I have nothing but love for. He didn't love Joan at first because she wasn't the type of girl he usually dated but he soon saw how smart she was and how beautiful she became when she smiled at him being so nice to her and treating her with kindness.
A slightly wilted corsage for a Christmas time dance to her looked as if it were made of gold and diamonds.
Schmaltzy me just happens to love that but when he sticks up for Joan at Frank's earlier comments and tells his brother not to bad-mouth his girl, Frank realizes then that Dan loves her and keeps his mouth shut...and I am just all for Joan/Dan at that moment.
Again it isn't one of Duncan's best works but there is just that tone of yesterday that sets it short of five stars. Most of her books got upgrades in technology and social themes that Duncan herself wrote but there was just probably no way to do that with this book without completely gutting it.
If it is one of her works you have not read, read in a long time or feel dismissive because it is slightly different than the more "supernatural" books written by Lois Duncan...I recommend this book to you.
Has flaws but sometimes flaws...can be beautiful.
It is one of her earlier books and lacks any kind of paranormal/supernatural element but has a hint of a more real world terror in not knowing what has happened to someone you love. It is so eerie in hindsight because of the future tragedy Duncan and her family would have to go through.
The book is of its time of the late 1960s/early 1970s with its language that seems like it is out of Happy Days which is set in the 1950s and makes many references to actor Tab Hunter.
Me being the old lady that I am actually knows who that is...*sigh*
There is also a panic about marijuana and a few sexist thoughts and remarks about women. Not explicitly to offend me but it might someone else and I can slightly defend attitude but first...
Lawrence "Larry" Drayfus Jr. and the boyfriend of his sister Joan, named Dan Cotwell, were going camping for the weekend and be back in time for school. It's April and almost time for graduation so it should have just been a fun experience.
True, Larry never seemed as if he enjoyed camping but his father was happy to let him with expert Dan alongside him. As the title suggests...they never came home.
The police and Larry's dad just laugh it off as boys being boys until days go by with no word or sight of either young man. Then a newlywed couple on their honeymoon goes missing camping up in the same New Mexico mountains and it becomes serious business then.
The couple are soon found (car stolen) but the boys are not.
Joan is answering the phone constantly to receive any news whether good or bad about her brother and her boyfriend. Her mother is a nervous wreck, missing her little boy, and her dad has had heart problems before. Joan has been going out with Dan for two years and she was looking forward to prom and graduation and possibly even college with the handsome football star.
Dan's family is just as upset about him being missing but they are of a stronger mentality than either of the Drayfus parents. They have their middle son, Frank, two years younger than Dan and their kid brother, Eddie to take care of as well. Frank helps to look for his brother but there is no luck and it is soon almost accepted that both boys are dead.
It isn't wrong to hold out a little hope they may be alive but Joan has two reasons for that.
First, her mother is in a state of shock where her grief is stuck completely in denial to a mentally unhealthy level just waiting for her son to walk in through the door any minute now.
The second reason is the call Joan receives from a man who calls himself John Brown. Besides offering his condolences about Larry, he tells her that her brother owed him money.
Money for a job Joan didn't even know he had and the sum is two thousand dollars.
Joan has no one else to turn to about this with the fragile line her parents are both walking on so she goes to Frank Cotwell to ask for his help. Frank never gave his older brother's girlfriend any thought with her plain looks and tall height but he knows Dan would have done anything for her so he agrees to help Joan.
The solution to this problem is just the start and completely over the heads of Joan and Frank because Larry's secrets have ensnared the one person they both care about...
That is the basic plot: the A plot if you will but there is also a subplot: The B plot that gets touched upon in the book from different chapters.
We get information about a young man named Dave Carter and his younger brother Lance.
We readers are not dumb...it is Dan and Lance. Dan has some amnesia and is told many lies by Larry. Things start to come back slowly after awhile with some drama thrown in that is conflicting with the life of Dan Cotwell and the life of Dave Carter thanks to a young woman named Peggy Richards who looks so familiar...
I won't spoil anything else for those who have not read the book. The climax does seem a little rushed and the ending may seem slightly corny but for me...I don't really mind that.
The things that may seem very sexist and archaic depending on your POV are just products of their time.
A woman going out of her mind because her son is missing? What else would you have her do but be hysterical when the younger brother of the older brother last seen with her son is standing in the doorway, the family resemblance just a coincidence?
Joan may make some naive decisions but she isn't stupid. She knows the type of world she lives in and even Frank seems to think she's acting like a silly female at times but we are shown how mature Joan really is. She is trying to be an adult for the sake of her parents but she soon begins to figure out the type of person her brother really was when it can no longer be denied.
The way Joan's father talks to her is just the way dads were back then. It is clear he wasn't as coddling of his son as his wife was and may have been a little strict in some areas but he was also pretty lax on some things because well...Larry is a man.
Dan is the one character I have nothing but love for. He didn't love Joan at first because she wasn't the type of girl he usually dated but he soon saw how smart she was and how beautiful she became when she smiled at him being so nice to her and treating her with kindness.
A slightly wilted corsage for a Christmas time dance to her looked as if it were made of gold and diamonds.
Schmaltzy me just happens to love that but when he sticks up for Joan at Frank's earlier comments and tells his brother not to bad-mouth his girl, Frank realizes then that Dan loves her and keeps his mouth shut...and I am just all for Joan/Dan at that moment.
Again it isn't one of Duncan's best works but there is just that tone of yesterday that sets it short of five stars. Most of her books got upgrades in technology and social themes that Duncan herself wrote but there was just probably no way to do that with this book without completely gutting it.
If it is one of her works you have not read, read in a long time or feel dismissive because it is slightly different than the more "supernatural" books written by Lois Duncan...I recommend this book to you.
Has flaws but sometimes flaws...can be beautiful.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 29, 2016
This is my second Lois Duncan book. It's not amazing, but it's servicable, especially considering it was first published in the 1960s. The mystery isn't particularly hard to figure out, but it might be surprising for younger readers.
I've been reading ebook versions of Lois Duncan's books, and funnily enough, they've been slightly updated. So you'll see mentions of cell phones & online classes in here. And I never would have known this on my own, but according to other Goodreads reviews, the drug of choice here has been changed from marijuana to black tar heroin (haha). Since I've never read the original unedited edition, I honestly don't know what else they might have changed. I'm honestly not a fan of the updates. The whole story feels very old-fashioned, from the dialogue to the description of relationships & dating practices. The modern updates, like cell phones and the internet, are a bit jarring. If you're interested in reading this book, I'd suggest trying to pick up an older edition.
I've been reading ebook versions of Lois Duncan's books, and funnily enough, they've been slightly updated. So you'll see mentions of cell phones & online classes in here. And I never would have known this on my own, but according to other Goodreads reviews, the drug of choice here has been changed from marijuana to black tar heroin (haha). Since I've never read the original unedited edition, I honestly don't know what else they might have changed. I'm honestly not a fan of the updates. The whole story feels very old-fashioned, from the dialogue to the description of relationships & dating practices. The modern updates, like cell phones and the internet, are a bit jarring. If you're interested in reading this book, I'd suggest trying to pick up an older edition.
December 26, 2020
I liked some of Lois Duncan's other books but this one wasn't very good. The premise here was interesting and I thought the grief that the characters have about the missing boys was fairly well done. But it never feels like a complete story, and what actually happens to Dan and Larry is incredibly dumb. So, not a very good book but did have some potential in the beginning.
August 6, 2008
I started reading this and realized I read it when I was in High school. I enjoyed it though, it has a nice twist to it, although it is pretty predictable throughout the book.
June 21, 2008
i really liked this book! it really kept me on my toes to find out wat happened next! i highly recomend this book!
January 9, 2018
I didn't find it very interesting, and it was hard to keep reading
September 19, 2019
I mean. It’s Lo Dunc. It’s a good book where nothing happens. Teen creeps foreva.
January 12, 2023
Used this book to finish my 2022 Classics Book challenge. To review, this year I decided to read all "true" classics (books written over 50 years ago) and books that are considered horror, crime/detective, SF, fantasy, dystopian, shocking, and anything else in that general area.
I usually allow a re-read, a short story collection, and a children's/YA/juvenile book in my list.
So this is both a re-read and a YA book. I loved Lois Duncan as a teen, growing up in the 80's. Duncan wrote this book in the 1960s, one of her rare books in that decade, as most of her novels were published in the 70s and 80s. I believe her books in the 1980s were the best.
Even by the title, you can tell this will not be one of her stronger works, but again, it is an early work of hers, so I can give some grace. I had read this as a teen, when I loved Lois Duncan and voraciously read "everything" that my library had by her. I considered this, as a teen, one of her weaker books, and I have not changed my opinion since.
Very predictable plot, especially if you are a read a lot of YA or NYT bestsellers and/or if you watch movies, TV, etc. It is definitely a plot that has been done and re-done and re-done again. The question is, how re-done was it when Duncan was writing it? I often find it unfair to read books from a long time ago and then judge it based on the fact that *now* there are so many similar plots.
I really dislike the attempts to "modernize" some of these books. I think the version I got was partly modernized. The book read like the original until at the very end, Joan mentioned buying something online. Dumb--nobody had done anything online up until then, and if internet existed, this whole book would have been completely different! The story is that 2 boys got lost in the mountains and never came home. If this were the "internet" era, the search would have been completely different, for example, as there was so much more available for a search of missing persons in the 90s versus the 60s.
If this was around the era when things were commonly bought/booked online (at least 1990s to early 2000s), then the dialogue content, especially among the likeable protags, would be considered sexist. It is because the book was written in the 60s that readers can extend a little grace. In the 60s, teens probably did think that "boys" were a certain way--more athletic, more confident--and "girls" were another way--less capable, less intelligent, and limited to careers in nursing or teaching and that was it. Women were considered more emotionally fragile, while men were considered strong. Like books written in an era where the N word was common, readers just have to know that Duncan, being a female writer in the 60s, obviously doesn't think sexist thoughts herself. But ultimately, the attempt to "modernize" a book that is clearly steeped in the 60s doesn't work.
It is because publishers felt the need to "modernize" this book to get continued sales that it cannot be considered a literary classic. It's a "classic" in that it made it its 30th or so birthday and was allowed to be printed again with "modifications", but I seriously doubt that it will survive its next printing. Compare this to literary classics, like _Little Women_, written much before, but which is read as is, because it is timeless.
So anyway--end of my classics book challenge for 2022. I initially felt like I'd cheated a bit with the last few books--_The Scarlet Plague_, _Run for the Stars_, and this book, but hey. I am usually allowed a novella, a children's book, and a short story collection. So this time, I didn't do the short story collection and did 2 novellas and a children's book. :-) Not a cheat.
I would say only ultimate Lois Duncan fans should read this book at this point. Just read it to see her development as a writer. This was just okay back then, and would read like a cactus now.
3/5 stars bc I love the author and know she has done much better.
I usually allow a re-read, a short story collection, and a children's/YA/juvenile book in my list.
So this is both a re-read and a YA book. I loved Lois Duncan as a teen, growing up in the 80's. Duncan wrote this book in the 1960s, one of her rare books in that decade, as most of her novels were published in the 70s and 80s. I believe her books in the 1980s were the best.
Even by the title, you can tell this will not be one of her stronger works, but again, it is an early work of hers, so I can give some grace. I had read this as a teen, when I loved Lois Duncan and voraciously read "everything" that my library had by her. I considered this, as a teen, one of her weaker books, and I have not changed my opinion since.
Very predictable plot, especially if you are a read a lot of YA or NYT bestsellers and/or if you watch movies, TV, etc. It is definitely a plot that has been done and re-done and re-done again. The question is, how re-done was it when Duncan was writing it? I often find it unfair to read books from a long time ago and then judge it based on the fact that *now* there are so many similar plots.
I really dislike the attempts to "modernize" some of these books. I think the version I got was partly modernized. The book read like the original until at the very end, Joan mentioned buying something online. Dumb--nobody had done anything online up until then, and if internet existed, this whole book would have been completely different! The story is that 2 boys got lost in the mountains and never came home. If this were the "internet" era, the search would have been completely different, for example, as there was so much more available for a search of missing persons in the 90s versus the 60s.
If this was around the era when things were commonly bought/booked online (at least 1990s to early 2000s), then the dialogue content, especially among the likeable protags, would be considered sexist. It is because the book was written in the 60s that readers can extend a little grace. In the 60s, teens probably did think that "boys" were a certain way--more athletic, more confident--and "girls" were another way--less capable, less intelligent, and limited to careers in nursing or teaching and that was it. Women were considered more emotionally fragile, while men were considered strong. Like books written in an era where the N word was common, readers just have to know that Duncan, being a female writer in the 60s, obviously doesn't think sexist thoughts herself. But ultimately, the attempt to "modernize" a book that is clearly steeped in the 60s doesn't work.
It is because publishers felt the need to "modernize" this book to get continued sales that it cannot be considered a literary classic. It's a "classic" in that it made it its 30th or so birthday and was allowed to be printed again with "modifications", but I seriously doubt that it will survive its next printing. Compare this to literary classics, like _Little Women_, written much before, but which is read as is, because it is timeless.
So anyway--end of my classics book challenge for 2022. I initially felt like I'd cheated a bit with the last few books--_The Scarlet Plague_, _Run for the Stars_, and this book, but hey. I am usually allowed a novella, a children's book, and a short story collection. So this time, I didn't do the short story collection and did 2 novellas and a children's book. :-) Not a cheat.
I would say only ultimate Lois Duncan fans should read this book at this point. Just read it to see her development as a writer. This was just okay back then, and would read like a cactus now.
3/5 stars bc I love the author and know she has done much better.
November 10, 2024
I read this as a child and decided to revisit some old comfort reads after the events of the past week.
The version I read has been updated from the original, but incompletely. It has the same inherent sexism and hand-wavey plot (two kids get paid for multiple trips over the Mexican border and never suspect they’re running drugs?? A character conveniently has amnesia, so he’ll believe anything he’s told?). But in this version, the heroine takes classes online, the amounts of money that are thrown around have increased, and instead of smuggling marijuana, they’re smuggling heroin. But in a world where you online classes are available, there’s no social media or national news? How about cell phones? And two boys can rent a beachside apartment with a balcony in L.A. on a single sales assistant’s salary?? Why bother updating anything, if you’re going to leave everything else unchanged from the original 1960s version? It’s like the book is set in an alternate universe.
Finally (and I’m not 100% sure of this…), I seem to recall the book hinting that the main villain was closeted and in love with Dan/Dave—in the updated version, he’s just a psychopath who uses Dan to engineer his escape and lets him live solely out of convenience. Weird thing to change.
The version I read has been updated from the original, but incompletely. It has the same inherent sexism and hand-wavey plot (two kids get paid for multiple trips over the Mexican border and never suspect they’re running drugs?? A character conveniently has amnesia, so he’ll believe anything he’s told?). But in this version, the heroine takes classes online, the amounts of money that are thrown around have increased, and instead of smuggling marijuana, they’re smuggling heroin. But in a world where you online classes are available, there’s no social media or national news? How about cell phones? And two boys can rent a beachside apartment with a balcony in L.A. on a single sales assistant’s salary?? Why bother updating anything, if you’re going to leave everything else unchanged from the original 1960s version? It’s like the book is set in an alternate universe.
Finally (and I’m not 100% sure of this…), I seem to recall the book hinting that the main villain was closeted and in love with Dan/Dave—in the updated version, he’s just a psychopath who uses Dan to engineer his escape and lets him live solely out of convenience. Weird thing to change.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 190 reviews