Despite the many times his buddies on the phone point out how much he loves chasing skirts, at no point does Luc show any interest in the women around him besides the one he’s interested in: Maryse. He is such a lazy use of romantic tropes that he can’t even be arsed to be a proper annoying asshole–instead we must rely on the testimony of others to learn what an awful womanizer he is. In keeping with the trend of terrible characters, we have the male protagonist/love interest, Luc. Needless to say, this was really bizarre. She could literally be compassionate and considerate right in front of the other characters, and a few lines later they would go on about what a terrible person she was.
In fact, I usually found myself rooting for Helena, since her decisions were often the only ones which seemed to make sense. Either my moral compass is completely out of whack, or the author made a bad guy who isn’t actually bad. At no point did I find myself angry with her, or even disapproving of the choices she had made. (Yes, the book is rife with casual gendered slurs) But Helena’s actions aren’t actually that bad. For instance, Helena Henry, the supposed antagonist of the book, is frequently described by Maryse as “a total bitch”. There’s also a very strange disconnect between how the characters are described, and how the characters actually act. Shamefully, the protagonist Maryse is the blandest of the bunch. Pretty much the only unique thing she has going for her is that she’s a scientist but instead focusing on this, the story makes her social life the central point of her character. I would much rather have read about the adventures of a brilliant, introverted botanist who is fulfilled by her work and just happens to have an adventure…rather than watching a flat, 2D form get shuffled around from conflict to conflict to constantly keep her toeing the line of being a “Damsel in Distress”.
Oh, how I wish I was kidding about this.) (There is literally even a “If it wasn’t for you meddling kids” scene at the end when the main bad guy is abruptly revealed. The characters are especially flat, which is terribly unfortunate since the plot reads like a lost episode of “Scooby Doo”. So I tagged it for reading under my #MandarayReads hashtag, thinking that at the very least it would be short, light, and have a consistent sense of humor to help keep the livetweeting interesting.ĭespite its cute cover and snazzy synopsis, “Trouble in Mudbug” is an experience which I would describe largely as “tepid”. It advertises itself as a fun, lighthearted adventure with a mixture of ghosts, psychics and romance that I thought sounded interesting. I never expected “Trouble in Mudbug” to wow me. Final Rating: cups of leopard-print tea which tasted very strongly of fat-shaming and boredom.
0 kommentar(er)
