El secreto del castillo de Cant

Castle Cant #1

by K.P. Bath

Lucy Wickright is the reliable sidekick and maidservant to the Baron of Cant's daughter Pauline. Lucy becomes a self-styled spy and player in a rebellion that is brewing not only throughout the Barony, but within the castle itself. With the aid of her friend the court astronomer Luigi Lemonjello, she flees the clutches of the evil Vladimir Orloff, thwarts the rebellion, and in true dramatic fashion rescues Pauline from the castle prison.

Genres: Fantasy, Middle Grade, Childrens, Adventure, Young Adult, Fiction, Mystery

320 pages, Hardcover

First published September 1, 2004

About the author

K.P. (Kevin Patrick) Bath was born in Tipton, Indiana, a small farming village on the Moldovan border.

He was convicted of possessing child pornography in july 2010 and sentenced to 7 years in prison.

His parents were laborers. Bath learned reading and sums at St. John’s elementary school, and after attending public high school went to work as a machine operator.

After some years of factory labor Bath enrolled as an undergraduate at the state university (“Old Mimeograph”), from which he eventually emerged as a Bachelor of Arts (summa cum laude). He remains a bachelor to this day.

Finding few job opportunities for English majors, Bath next earned a master’s degree in creative writing, which left him even more unemployable. Penniless and alone, he turned to his pen. The result was his first novel, The Secret of Castle Cant.

The book found a following among the better sort of child, and spawned a sequel, Escape from Castle Cant. With the purchase of a ukulele Bath entered a period of contented productivity.

Reviews

[Kaye · Rating 1 out of 5]

PARENTS, CONCERNED ADULTS AND CHILDREN TAKE NOTE.

THE AUTHOR OF THIS BOOK IS A PEDOPHILE.

A CONVICTED PEDOPHILE.

I'm sorry. I just couldn't finish this book after I found this out - by chance, because I was looking up the man who would write such an "adorable", "well-written" book about girls. I mean, who writes about young girls unless he has some of his own, or else is a child-loving, kind-hearted person?

How wrong can you get.

Apparently, the person behind this seemingly delightful book is one who openly supports pedophilia, and who apparently remarked that he can't get enough of nine-year-olds and "this is coming from someone who is writing for nine-year-olds".

Seriously? How sick can you get?

Don't read this book. Don't give it to your children. I'm ashamed that America has gotten so placid over what is being given to young minds, that a pedophile's book can still be kept on the library shelves a year after his incarceration. More protests should be raised.

[Wendy Darling]

This book involves a pedophile convicted of possession of child pornography. Here is the link to the story:
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/in...

Thanks to Kaye who put the alert in her review.

[Donna]

This book involves a pedophile convicted of possession of child pornography. Here is the link to the story:
News Article-K.P. Bath

This is why it is so important that Goodreads do not hide reviews that aren't specifically about the book. Readers should have the right to decide whether or not to support an author based on their behavior, lifestyle, beliefs, etc.

[Leo · Rating 1 out of 5]

I listened to this without knowing this was written by a pedophile 🤮🤮

[Manny]

I am bemused to discover that some - not even most! - reviews of this book have been deleted under the new Goodreads censorship policy, as far as I can make out because they state that the author is a convicted pedophile. I completely fail to understand the logic of this decision. First, the information that K.P. Bath is a convicted pedophile is so far from being secret that I only have to type "k p bath" into Google to get the following displayed in the second hit:

Jul 9, 2010 - PORTLAND, Ore. - A federal judge has sentenced children's author K.P. Bath to six years in prison for possessing child pornography.

Second, I had literally never even heard of Bath until Goodreads started deleting reviews. He has now become a widely discussed figure on this site. The only effect of the censorship policy thus appears to have been to publicize further the fact that Bath has been jailed for possessing child pornography.

Well, in accordance with the Hydra principle, I am adding my own little contribution to underline these obvious points. Feel free to join in.

[Mir]

The phrase "Lucy's eagerness to please" about a little girl character just seems wrong once you know the author has been convicted of owning child porn.

[Michelle Witte · Rating 1 out of 5]

I actually really enjoyed this book and its sequel when I read them several years ago. But then I saw this article, and any illusions I had of this just being a fun book for kids was destroyed:

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-08/ju...

The author is currently serving time for possession and trading of child pornography. Really nasty stuff, as it mentions in the article.

I'm grossed out beyond reason, because I can't imagine how his position of trust as an author could possibly have led to crimes against the very children he was writing for. This is all conjecture on my part, but I can't get that image out of my head.

Reading these books is up to you, since they're actually good stories, but the subtext and implications behind his words are too much for me to handle.

[Tracey · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is a prime example of why discussion of authors must be allowed as part of the discussion of books. See this article, for the proof that the author of this children's book is currently serving time "for possessing child pornography he traded on the Internet". That affects perception of the book - or it should.

Thanks to Wendy for her review, and Ceridwen and several others on Booklikes where speech is a bit freer.

[Alfaniel Aldavan]

Original review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Cross-posted on Soapboxing.net
Look, I know everyone is sick of talking about the new moratorium on writing book reviews about "author behavior" here on Goodreads - dudes, that was so last week - but I'm not. I'm still pissed as hell.

Last week I compiled a database the book reviews Goodreads deleted from 13 of the 21 people affected by the "policy change". (And in your link-whoring department, full analysis of the deletions here.) Two of the users had reviews from this book deleted. Here is a screencap of one of the deleted reviews, because while Goodreads can delete something, Google cache is forever:



This book was written by a convicted pedophile. 'nuf said.


I'm not going to link to the dozens of reviews that note this fact and nothing else, but they are still up on Goodreads. You know why? Because this policy about author behavior is complete bollocks. This "policy change" was a witch hunt, pure and simple. 21 people had their reviews deleted because the management at Goodreads didn't like them personally.

21 people.

I aim for 22.

[Makhda · Rating 1 out of 5]

Do not read this book.
THE AUTHOR OF THIS BOOK IS A PEDOPHILE.
He was convicted of possessing child pornography in july 2010 and sentenced to 7 years in prison.

[Ryan Ceresnak · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm torn regarding this book -- on one hand, this ended up being a pretty delightful little story. A tale of mystery, intrigue, suspense, humor, and drama. What is the secret of Castle Cant? What has Lucy gotten herself into by allying with the imprisoned Arden Guts? ON THE OTHER HAND: The author is currently imprisoned for Child Pornography for six years (as of July 2010) and wonder if supporting his work is necessarily a good idea. Should a work be judged on it's literary merits alone, or should the personal life of the author be taken into account? Is this a case like the suggested pedophilia of Lewis Carroll and this work was meant to draw young people to him? Or is he just a clever and gifted children's author, with a dark side unrelated to his work?

[Kogiopsis · Rating 1 out of 5]

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/in...
end of story.

[G.R. Reader]

Having discovered that the author of this children's book is a convicted pedophile, I am very curious to read it. I have heard conflicting reports: some reviewers say it's absolutely innocuous, others that Bath's unhealthy feelings about little girls are all too apparent. Clearly, there is only one way to find out the truth of the matter.

Ever since I read Lolita at the age of nine, I have in general been fascinated by literary pedophiles. I wish people would be a little more helpful here. It is rare to see a shelf straightforwardly entitled 'written-by-a-pedophile'.

[Kelly (Maybedog)]

This book was written by a pedophile convicted of possession of child pornography. Read the story here.

I do not want to support this author's behavior.

[~♥*Marianna*♥~]

I won't ever be reading this.
A suggestion: google this author.

You know what, let me Google that for you!

[Stuti Rai]

I direct you to....Ceridwen's review.

[Elle · Rating 1 out of 5]

I picked up this book like I pick up any book. I thought it looked interesting so I picked it up. I read about half before I logged it into goodreads. I saw that it had a low rating which intrigued me. Up until I saw the rating, I thought it was a brilliant little book. I'll go into a synopsis a little further on. Intrigued, I began to read the reviews. The first one advised me to stop reading this book because it was written by a pedophile. In fact, the next ten reviews discuss the issue of a known pedophile writing a children's book.

I'm stubborn so I kept reading the book till the end. Let me tell you. It is hard to disregard the fact that the man who wrote this book is a pedophile. Within the book the heroine is asked no less than three times by three different male figures if she knows about how children are made. Icky? It gets worse. There is a weird relationship between the heroine and the man who she has known as her uncle; there is a description of her hugging and kissing her uncle when she sees him. The heroine has a crush on this one guy but he appears to be significantly older than her. And even though there is nothing explicit, there is a relationship implied that makes me uncomfortable. Then there is this whole setting that is maybe a stretch but I can't stop thinking about it. The name of the book is THE SECRET OF THE CASTLE CANT. I have to read into it. It is about a little country in modern times so hidden away and sheltered that it is still living in the dark ages (a time when pedophilia was more accepted maybe?) There is a secret in this castle... do I have to spell it out? This is the mantra of those with aberrant behaviors. Then there is this word, title, name, CANT. I don't even want to reveal my thoughts on this matter because I feel that it is obvious. So imagined or unimagined, the story being written by a known pedophile ruins it completely. Here is the kicker: there is a sequel. I would have read the sequel and the series had it not been for someone alerting me to the fact.

So the story line is about Lucy. She is a very young maidservant of Pauline, the daughter of the Baron of Cant who is the leader of this little country. Lucy is an orphan and dresses in modern clothes even though everyone around her dresses in past fashions. Her mistress is always getting her into trouble. When they are not in trouble they are busy exploring and playing games together. Lucy came to be in this position because her parents were candle makers. They had made a special candle for the Baron. A weird lady came by just as they were going to this ceremony and Lucy stayed behind to prepare an order for her. While she stays behind, her parents and little brother are killed. She is left to be raised with her uncle who has no idea how to raise a little girl. The benevolent society comes to take Lucy away when someone interferes and she is brought to the castle to live as the playmate of the spoiled Baron's daughter. The leadership and aristocracy is addicted to gum. There is revolution in the wind and the Baron has fallen ill. Lucy agrees to be a spy and find out information. The information reveals that her history has been false and wicked people are out to live out wicked schemes and no one wants to allow Lucy a voice. Since I'm hoping you don't read the book I will ruin the ending by stating that Lucy is the illegitimate daughter of the Baron (it is hinted that her mother is a young underaged maidservant) and has full rights to the baroncy but since she is not 21, she is in need of a regent. There are at least two quarreling parties vying for power when she finds her sister and breaks out of the castle. They are on the lam when the book ends.

[Marianneboss]

I received this book as a gift years ago and I hadn't read it until now (due to my ever growing pile of books). But when I finally came to add the title, I found out that the author is a convicted pedophile, so, in good conscience, I cannot give it a rate. I did finish it, though, I was already midway through and I have a compulsion for completion.
However, this sparked a question in me, how is his crime any different from Rurouni Kenshin's author (Nobuhiro Watsuki) and yet, the latter got to keep his work and even resumed his publication after ONLY a fine for possession of child pornography? How can anyone keep buying his stuff after knowing that?
Furthermore, how is it that a depraved like the Marquis of Sade keeps selling his novels so many centuries after his death? What makes it okay for some works to be forgiven regardless of the crimes of their authors?

[Carmen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm not sure how to feel about this book. On the one hand, it was a very enjoyable read. On the other, I just learned that the author has been convicted for possession of child pornography.

[Loafer · Rating 1 out of 5]

Book by a convicted paedophile, don't think so kiddies.

[Miren · Rating 4 out of 5]

imagine you just got to meet your real dad and he was a baron and then he died and you found out your misstress is your sister also you became the baroniss of the town that is how lucy wickwright felt how hard would that be.The Secret of Castle Cant: Being an Account of the Remarkable Adventures of Lucy Wickwright, Maidservant and Spy

[Rachel · Rating 2 out of 5]

*Minor Spoilers*

I honestly don't know how to voice my opinions of this book. It seemed that the author was trying to create a book similar to A Series of Unfortunate Events, as far as the writing style is concerned, but failed miserably. I found the book to be thoroughly confusing, with too many characters that were all a little too similar to the point where I had trouble keeping them all straight. The only character I could say that I even liked or cared about was Pauline.

The romance in the story was uncomfortable. Lucy meets Gutz one time, is convinced she hates him and then spends the majority of the rest of the book fantasizing about how he will thank her for all her masterful spying. Will her hug her? Or will he possibly kiss her? And the ages of these characters (although Pauline's and Lucy's are known) are a bit of a mystery, which makes this plot line ever weirder. When they first meet, Lucy states he can't be but a few years older than she is. If Lucy is 13 at the most, he would be 15 or 16. But then the last time she sees him, she calls him a grown-up. And then there are two boys - please don't ask me their names, as I had a lot of trouble keeping them straight - who both had crushes on Lucy. She's only seen interacting with them a few times and then, near the end of the book, one of them gives Lucy the most awkward first kiss ever recorded. On all three accounts, while I understand romance was not the main focus of the book and I was okay with that, these "romances" were not well-written or well-developed.

There was also a lot of innuendos, I suppose you could call them, which - had I read this book at 13 or 14 - would have made me extremely uncomfortable. There is much discussion of "where children come from" - "Have you seen the mother swine?" - and fathers "laying with" other women before they were married. Lucy becomes uncomfortable when Gutz mentions the word "breast" in reference to herself - "You bear the emblems of justice on your breast!" - and she mentions ghastly things that happen to girls when they're older.

The book is described as being "outrageously funny" but I didn't find it so. As previously mentioned, Pauline was the only character I liked, so if I happened to crack a smile during my reading, it would probably have involved her character. Otherwise, I understood when the author was attempting to be humorous, but it fell short with me. I felt like the book was a little lopsided. It tried to be a comedy at times, but then at other times, tried to be a political drama. I think I may have liked the book had it stuck with either genre. The uprising and political agenda of the book was simply ridiculous, with the townsfolk believing that all of their problems are caused by the fact that the royals are addicted to... chewing gum. Seriously. That's what divides the nation of Cant.

It took me over a month to read this relatively short book, because I simply could not bring myself to be interested in the plot or care about nearly any of the characters. And I have this fault where if I start a book, I have to finish it. After this read, I may work on correcting that fault.

[Adaline Griffiths · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is about Lucy Wickwright, who when she was orphaned went to work at the castle. Her charge is Pauline, the daughter of the Baron, who is one year younger than Lucy. Lucy is 12 years old at the time of the story. Pauline is constantly pulling pranks and Lucy is constantly being blamed. A rebellion is in the rising. For 10 years the nobles have been obsessed with gum, and the commoners have been suffering the consequences. When Lucy is unintentionally drawn into the battle, she becomes a spy for the outsiders. But the business is hair-raising, and Lucy is constantly in danger. Then some startling facts are revealed, and Lucy's position changes. To make things worse, the Baron is on the point of death. Will Lucy and Pauline survive during this time in war? What will happen to the kingdom? Will gum destroy the city? I recommend this book to older kids. There are intense scenes and parts of the book are inappropriate for younger readers. Overall, I rate this book 3 out of 5 stars.

[Cathy Smith · Rating 1 out of 5]

I did not get this through Goodreads; it was given to me. And I started reading this book not knowing about the author. Then I realized that someone had taken the cover of this book and put it over another book.....so I really never got to read any of it! I am reading another author! So I can't review this book, but no longer have the desire to read it. Not-a-review-at-all.

[L. C. Julia · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5
I know there is a lot of controversy around this book, but I'm trying to judge the book here and not the author, so I have to admit that I enjoyed this. It was a fun book, lighthearted and even sweet in some moments. It was definetely made for a younger audience, and there were some aspects that I felt that could have much more work or that borderline my disbelief, but it was generally ok.
If I recommend or not, is another question I suppose and one that would remain unanswered.

[Elise · Rating 1 out of 5]

I read this book and the sequel years ago as a 12 year old, and loved the books at the time. As an adult, going back through books I've read before, I was quite disturbed learning that the author is a pedophile. I tried to get through it, but once you know, the book is no longer innocent fun. And the phrases that seemed odd before, are just gross and criminal.

[Diane · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lucy, maidservant to Pauline, finds out that her heritage makes her a baroness

[Brittany Baker · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fun read, but it ends rather abruptly. Perhaps a sequel is planned?

[Tania Montano]

Muy tarde me di cuenta que el autor es acusado de pedofilia ¬.¬ Aún así, publico que lo leí y lo escribo aquí para que no le suceda a otras personas.

[Alyssa Skinner · Rating 5 out of 5]

I love this book, even upon rereading it many years after the first time I read it. It is so creative and interesting, and. . . I just love it. The end.