The Ravaged

I’m going to be honest...I hated the book. I absolutely thought the book left a lot of literal mistakes that would have been rejected from publishing if it was written by anyone else other than the great Norman Mark Reedus. 

I will admit that the story overall was interesting, but the writing threw me off. The sentences are abrupt and short, there is no depth in the background, no line holding description of said background or even the characters. Very little dialogue, but that wasn’t a big issue. There are stories that go on without a line of a quote or speech. But the way the book is structured? It is like Alexander Dumas’ time, where authors were paid by the line. The short, abrupt, simple lines would have been perfect in the 1800’s. 

Norman Reedus is a brilliant actor, a wonderful artist, a beautiful model, and a great singer, but a writer? That's where he unfortunately falls short. He had a good idea, that is true, but it needed some hammering out. For his anthology, he needed an honest editor to go over what he wrote and pitch in some techniques to perfect the story. 

There is potential. I mean, I get that the book is to be fast paced, in your face, and gritty. And this would be a good book to the ones who want to fly through the pages along the side of the characters in their parallel journeys. Then again, I might be biased by my own reading habits and rituals. 

For me, I want a book that takes it slow, a book that teases the mind with anticipation and depth. I want to see the characters form in my mind, to slowly blossom into an image that I can find minutely relatable. I don’t see hidden messages or themes in the stories I read. I read for the experience. To experience the moment in the story. 

But back to “The Ravaged.”  all the points above, all I can say is that I did not enjoy the book. However, I might re-read it just to see if maybe I was too quick to judge a “book by its cover.”