Why do we write reviews?
I can understand if you had maybe bought something so poor that you wanted to stop others from making the same mistake. Such as the rubbish bike rack that failed after just a few months, resulting in it crashing down onto the back of my car and taking a gouge out of the bumper. Conversely, if you had loved something so much that you want other people to know about it. Which covers me and just about any book by S E Lynes or Angela Marsons.
However, if you've already bought something and love it, do you actually, honestly want to know what other people think?
I'm reminded here of the time earlier this year, when my neighbour pulled up on her drive in her new car. It's a black Nissan Juke and she was visibly delighted with it. So much so that when she saw me, she asked the inevitable question: "Like it?"
Now I could have been honest. I know that the Juke is a small SUV that underneath, is based mechanically on the previous version of the Nissan Micra. And sorry to anyone who has a Nissan Micra, but I hired one once and hated it very much. So the very idea of buying what, effectively is an old Micra that's a bit heavier, and consequently a bit slower and uses more fuel, is something that makes me cringe. I'd rather walk.
But what would have been the point of saying any of this to my neighbour, who was not only happy with her purchase but proud of having spent her own hard-earned money on it? I'd just have been being cruel for the sake of it. And in any case, despite my opinion, there's nothing really wrong with it. It probably won't break down. It will get her to and from work and shops, and it's big enough to get her young daughter's child seat in.
So instead: "Ummm," I said. "Nice".
I kind of felt the same way about The Choice by Alex Lake, which is my first novel by this author. I've seen so many other rave reviews about both this book and some of his others that I formed the impression that he could have re-written the phone book and it would still have been wonderful. So the only thing that I might achieve by continuing to write an honest, but critical review is to make you think twice about reading this book. And I really don't want to do that. Go ahead and read it. I can see why you might like it very much. It's a fast-paced, entertaining, easy to read and fairly simple thriller.
Therefore, if you want to stop reading this review now, and enjoy this book without knowing what I really thought, that's fine by me. But if there's anyone still interested, here goes.
This isn't a book that demands you pay attention. It's one that grabs your attention by the throat from the very first page. It should have been fine for Matt Westbrook to leave his three young children in the car while he ran into a local corner shop. Certainly it's something that as a child, I remember my parents doing. But when he returned just a few minutes later, his car, with his children in it, were gone. Then the text arrives: his children have been kidnapped. If he wants to see them alive again, the ransom is his wife, Annabelle. And he has only hours to decide ...
My main problem with the book is something that's fairly simple to identify, if harder to overcome: it lacks depth.
There are three main aspects that illustrate this. Firstly, I felt that so much more could have been made of the opening chapters. The anguish that the parents were feeling. The "why"? We also hear nothing at all from the perspectives of the children themselves, which could have given the story another dimension. Instead, there are a series of chapters which deal with Matt's back-story, starting with his time at university when he met and fell in love with Annabelle. I found myself skipping these and having to force myself to go back and re-read them in case I missed something that was essential to the story. But - minor spoiler alert - there wasn't anything. Not really.
My second problem is that the identity of the kidnapper is revealed about half way through the book, and from then on it fell a bit flat for me. Mainly because it seemed that anything implausible was as a result of the kidnapper's insanity. The trouble here though is something about which Agatha Christie, in The ABC Murders, hit the nail on the head rather brilliantly:
"A madman is as logical and reasoned in his actions as a sane man - given his particular biased points of view. For example, if a man insists on going out and squatting about in nothing but a loin cloth his conduct seems eccentric in the extreme. But once you know that the man himself is firmly convinced that he is Mahatma Gandhi, then his conduct becomes perfectly reasonable and logical".
Which means that for The Choice to have really worked, the kidnapper's "biased point of view" would have to have been made so clear that we understood, and empathised with everything he did even though we knew it to be oh, so wrong. But it didn't quite manage it.
My final problem is the ending, which, without wanting to give away any big spoilers, is the one that I sort of wanted, but also expected. There could have been a shocking final twist that made me gasp, but there isn't. And this meant that a book which had been absolutely gripping at the beginning and still entertaining in the middle had seemed to fizzle out to a damp squib by the finish.
It gets three stars from me because I would only ever give anything less to a book that I struggled to read, which is absolutely not the case with this one. I read it easily. And perhaps what I'll do now is give it to my neighbour, and encourage her to write a more positive review if she loves it more than I did.