I read the "Girl" books and this one and all three get one star for decent writing (above the 9th grade level and keeping the plot going at good pace. Let's look at Violet. If I were a mother, I would scream if a person like Violet Darger became my child's role model. Violet needs a lot of therapy. She a uncouth slob, aggressive, pushy, vulgar defensive person. I see her as a bully, because deep inside she's totally insecure. She does not tolerate criticism, she tries to be one of the boys instead of just being a woman and earning respect based on her performance and competence. She reads in between the lines where there's nothing to read in between the lines. She is pathetic and, worse of all,she is dumber than a tree stump. She makes impulsive decisions which kill others and suffers no consequences. Frankly, I root against her not for her. She has no manners, makes snap decision and always loses her gun which leads me to believe she should not be allowed to carry one. Now, the technical part. I hate when writers think readers are stupid and don't know anything. Before putting words on paper, knowing some will take it as gospel, writers should really do their leg work. TV is equally guilty is forming false opinions and wrong images all for the sake of entertainment. The FBI does not really work as these two want you to believe. Nobody graduates college and becomes a super star profiler in two years. Men like John Douglas or Robert Ressler worked years as agents honing their skills before the BAU was created. Writers would want us to believe agents just pick and chose their cases and do whatever they want. Violet Darger does not seem to have supervisors or folks who monitor her work. She does no paperwork, answers to no one. Have our authors ever heard the word SAC? Do they realize the Bureau is one mind boggling trail of paperwork? You do what you are assigned to and you answer for your each and every step to those above you who also have people they answer to. The Bureau is highly sensitive of the image it presents and no agent is allowed to perform the theatrics she is performing. Even the famous "Donny Brasco" had his handlers and his every move was based on what his superiors thought was the best. For goodness sake, that is nothing but common sense. When I read such nonsense, I feel offended. We give writers the artistic license and overlook errors if the book is superb. Thomas Harris had Clarice Starling pulled out of Quantico training. It does not happen. They do not pull help baked agents in training out of Quantico to solve serial killer cases. But because "Silence of the Lambs" was an awesome, terrifically written book and because Clarice Starling had everyone rooting for her, we allowed for such errors to exist. Violet Darger is no Starling. I was actually hoping Jaworsky would put some serious hurting on her that's how annoying she is. In a good suspense thriller, reader has to like the good guys. Reader likes to identify with the good guys. Darger, although allegedly one of the good guys, lacks so many empathy evoking human qualities, I just wish she'd go away somewhere. Some of her fellow agents are likeable and human. I like Loshak, he makes sense. Sanford readers like Davenport and Flowers. They are touchable and reachable and human. Darger is nothing but a bully with a huge ego and a ton of issues.
Since Bad Blood ends with a dramatic gesture of Violet throwing away her
FBI credentials, I foresee the next step will be for some big FBI boss to appear and beg her on his knees to come back since the Bureau will actually fall apart and not be able to function without her.
Yes, i know ; this is only entertainment but even entertainment should make sense. All three books are so filled with factual errors as to how law enforcement and the FBI actually function and operate it is embarrassing. The authors should fix the factual errors to make things more believable and if they wish to continue to use Darger as their super sleuth, they should fix her too.