Manhattan Nocturne, by Colin Harrison

Didn't I just give an author a second chance only to be disappointed with Mystery Girl? The exact same thing happened with the second book I've read by Colin Harrison, Manhattan Nocturne. From my review of Risk by the same author, I concluded with: "Overall, this book was only so-so because the concept wasn't exciting enough and the stakes never built up during the story." Wouldn't you know it, but Manhattan Nocturne had the same problem.

The story is about a reporter tricked into solving a mystery by a beautiful woman. The mystery is somewhat interesting, but we never care enough about the lead character or the woman to care much about solving the mystery. The stakes just aren't there. It's funny, his career, his family and his life are all at stake at some point, but I just didn't care because the protagonist didn't seem to care much about any of these things. A lot of the inner dialogue of the character was about how flawed and evil our species is. His job was at stake, but he wasn't proud of the work he did. His marriage was at stake, but he cheated on his wife with the beautiful woman and didn't regret it until it led to trouble. His family was at stake, but only by accident and it wasn't a direct part of the plot. His life was at stake in some parts, but he had so much self-loathing that he didn't seem to mind too much except for the physical pain. I think the lesson here is that to make sure the reader is interested in the main character, the character himself must desperately want to achieve his goals. If he doesn't, you end up with a so-so story such as Manhattan Nocturne.

Mystery Girl, by David Gordon

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. I loved the first part of David Gordon's The Serialist, but it switched tones in the middle and I ended up not liking it. I thought perhaps Gordon's inexperience building a consistent plot and theme was just a rookie mistake that he corrected with Mystery Girl. Boy, was I wrong. Gordon seems to be opposed to structured plots, on principle. The protagonist of Mystery Girl is a frustrated writer who likes to write dark, stream-of-consciousness, soul-searching novels with no plot and that nobody reads. Unfortunately, this seems to be a description of Gordon's ideal. He ends up writing a mongrel mixture of a commercial mystery with a "literary" modern novel, and he ends up satisfying neither audience.

Mystery Girl has action and mystery, but it isn't structured in a way that makes us care. The protagonist doesn't know what he wants, and as a result the reader doesn't care what happens to him. There's lots of scheming by minor characters and more than a few plot twists, but we just don't care enough to follow all of them and instead we end up focusing on the implausibility of the schemes.

Gordon has excellent style, but little else, and its a shame.

Wayward, by Blake Crouch

As soon as I finished Pines, I immediately downloaded the next book in the series, Wayward. The Kindle makes it too easy, and I borrowed both for free with my Prime account (Crouch still gets some money for borrowed books.) The big secret revealed at the end of Pines was excellent and I wanted to see what happened next to the characters I'd been following. After such a great reveal at the end of Pines, it isn't surprising that Wayward wasn't able to match the surprise. However, there is still a mystery to solve in Wayward which makes the book stand on its own in the trilogy: Why was the Founder's daughter killed?

While just as well written as Pines, I wasn't as satisfied with Wayward because the payoff at the end wasn't as big. However, since this book is in the middle, it needs to set up a big finish for the third novel, and it did this well. The last book in the trilogy, The Last Town, isn't out yet, but I plan to read it soon after it is released so see what finally happens to these characters I've come to love.

Pines, by Blake Crouch

I really enjoyed Crouch's Run so I was looking forward to another exciting thriller from the author, Pines, and he did not disappoint. While not as dark or scary as Run, Pines was very entertaining and mysterious.

I didn't realize it when I started, but Pines is the first book in a trilogy (the others are Wayward and The Last Town). Even though this is just one third of the whole story, the book has a good structure and is self-contained. That's one thing I like about Crouch--he gets the four-part structure that makes novels entertaining. He also gets concept, which for Pines is: What if a special agent woke up in a strange mountain town after a car accident and couldn't contact the outside world? The secret of the town, Wayward Pines, is slowly revealed throughout the book until the big secret is revealed at the end.

The only part I didn't like was how the town would have murderous search parties to find a traitor where they all dress up in weird Halloween-type costumes. It wasn't believable that so many people would go along with such a bizarre spectacle. But this wasn't a key part of the novel and it didn't ruin a great story executed almost perfectly.

The Deep Blue Goodbye, by John D. MacDonald

I read this book after I learned that Dirty Jobs host Mike Rowe is a fan of the Travis McGee series. Written in 1964, it has a lot of psychobabble that was popular at the time but is distracting today. The main women in the story also acted like helpless victims, which I suppose was normal for that time period, but also seemed out of place in today's culture.

Besides these aspects not standing the test of time, the book was well written with a decent plot. But it wasn't as good as Robert B. Parker, who is my favorite author in this type of hard-boiled detective genre.

I probably won't read another Travis McGee novel, but I may try The End of the Night, which Stephen King mentioned as a great American tragedy. Or I might try The Executioners, on which the movie Cape Fear was based.

The Age of Reagan: 1980-1989, by Steven F. Hayward

I really enjoyed the first volume of Hayward's biography of Ronald Reagan, The Age of Reagan: 1964-1980. I also enjoyed the second volume, but not as much as the first. I liked learning about Reagan's principled stand for lower taxes, a strong defense, the elimination of nuclear weapons, and the evil of communism. I didn't like the stories about the infighting among his cabinet and the political necessity of compromising with congress. These were big parts of Reagan's presidency and deserve to be chronicled--I just wasn't as interested. I also would have liked to read more about his relationship with Margaret Thatcher and the similar economic revolution she brought about in Britain.

Hayward is a great writer and has a wonderful way of setting up each chapter to let us know something interesting is in store for us, either by talking about a controversial topic, such as Iran-Contra, or by putting it in the context of a bigger event, such as the fall of the Soviet Union.

After finishing both volumes of Hayward's biography, I have to rank Ronald Reagan as one of our best presidents. He fought for economic reform which resulted in a growing economy for two decades, he put pressure on the Soviet Union which ended the cold war, and he showed that a principled politician can win and make progress toward smaller government, even though no president after him has followed his lead. We can still hope a future president will.

'Salem's Lot by Stephen KIng

In my continuing quest to read everything Stephen King has written, I've finished 'Salem's Lot, a tale about vampires taking over a small Maine town. This was King's second published novel, and it showed off his skill at style with wonderful descriptions and beautiful phrases. However, the characters were rather thin even though he spent a lot of time developing them. The plot was also lacking, and about half-way through I found it tough to keep reading because I already knew that the rest of the book would be people vs. vampires, and I didn't really care that much about any of the characters.

The introduction to 'Salem's Lot is interesting. Written in 2005--thirty years after publication--King makes a case against plotting in favor of panting. He says that he intended the vampires to win in the end but that his characters took over and slayed the vampire. I'm sure this made it entertaining for King to write, since he didn't know himself what was going to happen. But by just letting the story wander and find its way, it made it much less interesting for the reader, as noted above.

He also mentions that he had another book, Roadwork, finished and that he could have published that one as his second novel. His editor thought Roadwork was more "literary" but that 'Salem's Lot would sell better. They decided to go with the latter, even though it typecast King in the horror genre. I think I'll read Roadwork next, to see the difference.