*sigh* Ok, this is my official vow in writing that this is the last of this series that I'll read. I've been doggedly reading each book as they're released, out of a sense of obligation because of my ties to the Maine warden service and because the series is really popular with my library patrons.......but in my opinion...*looks around furtively, then covers mouth to whisper*.....they're not very good.
In every book, I can't help but feel that the main character, Mike Bowditch, is a total author-insert dream fantasy. Like, Bowditch is too perfect. Oh sure, he has flaws like being too reckless and willing to jump into danger....but that's still like a macho fantasy flaw. It's not stupid, it's badass! But aside from that....He's young and fit, he's super knowledgeable about EVERYTHING, especially anything related to knives and guns, but he's also an "old soul" who appreciates antiques and old farmhouses and history and stuff. Even though he repeatedly does stupid shit and gets in trouble, he always comes out on top and saves the day. He even got special permission to be issued a Jeep Compass instead of the standard warden pickup truck, because he wants to be able to investigate more covertly, but obviously you wouldn't just do that in a vehicle that isn't also manly and cool. Bowditch is also, like, pretty "woke", always making sure to use PC terms for minorities and making sure to give us a little aside about how enlightened he is personally about X topic, even if others don't necessarily agree with him. That's how cool he is.
And it goes with out saying that the ladies like him too.
Ok, so he's a Gary Stu character. Fine. He's definitely not alone in the detective/action/thriller genre in that regards. I could go along with it for the sake of some fun adventure, but *sigh*...
Something about the writing always annoys me. It's told in Bowditch's first-person POV, which is fine, but of course it means that Bowditch tells us stuff that doesn't really fit with the flow of the narrative. Like, every time a gun or a knife comes out, he has to tell us the make, model, caliber, or whatever other details he knows about it (which is everything).
Take, for example, the opening scene of this book. Mike Bowditch has crashed his Jeep Compass, going over a bank and into a frozen river. Oh no! Peril! Action! Shit is going down! He has to act fast to cut through the straps hold his wolf-dog's crate in the back so that Shadow doesn't drown too! He reaches for the folding knife in the front pocket of his jeans:
The Gerber 06 Auto is no gentleman's folder but a massive hunk of machined metal: an aluminum and steel bar containing a razor-sharp switchblade for use in combat. It weighs 7.1 ounces. The drop point blade, serrated at the hilt, is forged from S30V steel alloy and measures 3.6 inches from tip to finger guards. My friend Billy Cronk carried this knife on his tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan and survived while thousands of his fellow warriors perished. Although Billy never said so, I believe the blade may have taken lives. He gave it to me as a gift on my thirtieth birthday. His nickname for it was "The Beast."
I can almost hear the grungey heavy metal music playing in that background of this infomercial ("A massive hunk of machined metal!), while "THE BEAST" flashes across the screen in edgy diagonal font. Probably with lightning bolts crackling from the sides.
Like....WHY???? Why is it important to the narrative to stop mid-action to tell us that this knife weighs seven-point-one ounces and that the blade measures three-point-six inches? Who the hell cares? Is the author getting paid to endorse certain products in his book, so he has to include spec details straight from the catalog?
I feel like that knife paragraph really sums up how...not....good...the writing is in this book. I read these books on audio, which is probably for the best. If I was reading them on paper, then I could more easily stop to take notes about dumb things I notice in the narrative. AND I WOULD. Because there are a lot. Stupid things like a character getting struck in the face by the butt of a shotgun, and the line was something like "when you get hit by synthetic fibers, you go down". It wasn't that exact phrase (again, I wasn't note taking), but it was something about the fibers. Now, we'd already been told in detail what kind of material this shotgun stock was made from, carbon fiber or whatever, so we get what the author meant by being hit by these fibers......but it also just sounds dumb when you're trying to say some kind of clever one liner to explain why our badass hero still went down because of the fibers. That was just ONE eye-rolling description that I remember, but there were honestly so many that they kind of blend together.
I did make a note of one facepalm stupid detail toward the end of the book. These books are excessively detailed when it comes to making note of gun calibers, knife weights, clothing materials, etc that you have to think the author has a Cabelas catalog open next to his writing computer at all times. He must have a contact in the Maine Warden Service that he calls up anytime he wants to verify the details on, like, what kind of tread pattern are on their LL Bean issued boots. ALL OF THAT excessive meticulous detail........And then in the second-to-last chapter, he mentions a state trooper putting on her campaign hat and then fastening the chinstrap. The chinstrap, I tell you! *cackles* Oh man, imagine being so specific about a knife weighing seven-point-one ounces, and then screwing up a detail about Maine state troopers wearing hats with a chinstrap. Sooooooo great. In case you're not at all familiar with Maine troopers: their hats have a strap that go around the back of their head. Female officers (like the one in this chapter) often wear their hair in a low tight bun, and the strap settles just underneath. It's a pretty distinctive obvious detail, and I can't understand how the author messed that up when he's so gear-detailed everywhere else.
*sigh*
Anyway, excessive details that pander to the ammosexual crowd weren't my only issue, but it's the easiest to describe. Mike Bowditch continues to annoy me for a variety of reasons, but sometimes it's hard to explain why. Take (for another example) the bit where he's describing a large amount of birds, and he says something like, "I've never seen Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds but if I had then I imagine I would probably sympathize with the birds in that scenario." WHAT? If you've never seen a particular film, and clearly know nothing about it, why would you cite that as an example for your viewpoint? Another dumb bird specific thing is when he says something about not buying into superstitions, and for that reason he doesn't use the phrase "a murder of crows". Ok, cool Mike, but like...does anyone use that term in every conversation? No, it's mostly just in writing or if someone's specifically trying to sound dramatic. "Oh, I don't use that term because I'm not superstitious." Why does this annoy me? I don't know, but...seriously, STFU, Mike.
ANOTHER thing that bothered me was when Bowditch came across a piece of woods that had been clearcut, he kept referring to it as "rape". Rape of the land, the woods had been raped, etc. Remember how I said before that he always tries to be really "woke"? Well, apparently that doesn't apply to rape. He then goes to interview a woman about the case he was working on, and he actually uses that term, saying something like, "Did he know about how they're raping the land up there?" She (rightfully) calls him out on it, asking if he'd ever been raped. When he says no, she says she didn't think so, because if he ever had then he wouldn't use the term for cutting down a few trees. He doesn't apologize or even acknowledge this statement, just moves onto the next question. So, the AUTHOR knows enough to have a character confront Bowditch on this ignorance, but still has Bowditch use the term and not amend his ways at all when called out. Of course, the woman who he was talking to was a trailer park druggie type, so she was probably just being confrontational because she doesn't like cops. *sigh* Like, someone can be "white trash" AND also be right about the inappropriateness of using "rape" in this instance. But nah, she's just aggressive. Bowditch himself wouldn't be in the wrong.
Readers may also find THIS particular book frustrating because it's told in alternating chapters of (a) Bowditch crashing into the river and then trying to survive while pursued by goons, and (b) the events of the day that led up to this climax. I don't know why this format was chosen, but it was tedious and clunky.
Anyway, I could probably keep going on about how these books are objectively....not...very...good...... But unfortunately I didn't take enough notes. Still, this is it! No more! I grudgingly read TWELVE of these books now, and this is my note to my future self to stop reading these, no matter how much obligation I feel to read them for others' sake.