Hush, Hush: Final Assessment
ZeldaQueen: Well, I'm sure you're all eager to see this horrible book put to rest. So, without further ado, let us have our final assessment of Hush, Hush!
Also, a very belated happy birthday to erikalyndis
Plot
I'm going to start off by saying that I know it's not fair to just say this is a Twilight rip-off for a few similarities. Many fans insist that it should not be read as as such, and lord knows that just because a few tropes are shared, it does not make one work a rip-off of the other.
The trouble, however, is that this book does not just share a few similarities. It shares a whole lotta them. More than that though, this book shares many of the same problems Twilight does, at least by way of plot. A plain, ordinary girl gets the attention of an ancient being who is male and - by complete coincidence - also in his teens and, oh yeah, very hot. They get all hot for each other almost immediately and focus exclusively on each other, while everyone else in the book serves no purpose but to comment on how great they are together or be jealous of their Twu Wuv. Oh, and the entire courtship is spent with the guy being an abusive asshole and the girl bending over and taking it because of course he knows better than she does what's good for her. That, and his abs are just so dreamy, how could she possibly resist.
The biggest issue, I would say, is the issue of pacing. Dear lord above, the pacing. The plot...it just is not put together. I don't even mean it's put together badly. It's half-baked, runny and pink on the inside and crusty and burnt on the outside. The plot kicks off on a rather weak note, with us getting virtually no introduction to the world we're spending the next twenty-three chapters living in. Like Meyer, Fitzpatrick began the book with a single scene, in this case the very first biology class. And like with Meyer, it's more than obvious that Fitzpatrick didn't put much thought into the story beyond that one scene. Getting the entire thing started hinges on the readers buying the idea that Patch is so intriguing that a girl would be interested in delving into his past to learn his story. And as I'll discuss later, he certainly isn't. At his most harmless, it's believable that a girl would ignore him in an attempt to escape his harassment. At his worst, it's believable that a girl would be doing everything in her power to put a small continent between herself and him. Meanwhile, the few attempts Fitzpatrick makes to inject plot and mystery into the story fail completely, mostly because they happen so randomly and are glossed over and forgotten almost immediately. Oh, we're supposed to think that Nora is scared by the events, but I fail to see evidence of that, given how she's mysteriously attacked one minute and wandering around areas of town she's unfamiliar with later. I really must ask, if Nora, the protagonist of the story, does not act in a way that convinces us that these things are cause for concern, why should we, the readers, believe we should be worried?
Act Two is just a desolate wasteland of various events, most of which are just boring or face-palm worthy. Fitzpatrick does make a legitimate effort to weave something into the plot beyond "Nora and Patch make goo-goo eyes at each other", but it's still too weak to carry much weight. The subplot with Dabria was completely unnecessary, and really only served the purposes of (A) giving the fangirls, Fitzpatrick, and Nora a reason to wank because of course Patch loved the plain human girl and not the smoking bombshell of an angel and (B) a weak attempt to throw the readers for a loop. The ultimate reveal with Jules as the mastermind was even worse, because we hardly saw him at all! I could count on one hand the number of times he was mentioned, and he made actual appearances even fewer times! There is a difference between diverting the attention of one's audience away from the true guilty party by downplaying them, and completely forgetting to set up the true guilty party at all. Really, the various red herrings that Patch is the guilty party are completely nonsensical and sloppy. I'd also like to add that they are badly set up. Fitzpatrick appeared to be going for the idea that from the outside, Patch looks like a frightening kid who is trying to kill Nora, but once the reveal is made, we see that he is a decent guy who is looking out for her. That just doesn't work here though, mainly because Patch is not a nice guy ever in the book, both before and after the reveal (but more on that in a moment).
The end of the book is a mess, plain and simple. Again, to Fitzpatrick's credit, she does make an actual effort to have something happen, and in the hands of a competent author I'd even bet that the climax could have been interesting. The way it is though, it's tedious. It only comes about because the characters are so unbelievably stupid, and the entire thing is just wrapped up offscreen, in an attempt to throw together a hasty happy ending.
Characters
Nora Gray: Poor Nora Gray. I don't think I've ever felt so sorry for a character who's supposed to be getting the greatest happy ending ever.
Let's back up for a moment, please, and take a look at exactly who her character is - she is still recovering from the violent murder of her father a year ago (which it's established that she is affected by to some degree), is often left alone by her mother with only a Germanic woman for guardianship, is mercilessly stalked, harassed, and frightened by a guy who is able to control and dominate her in pretty much any way possible, is unable to turn to her best friend, teacher, the police or even her therapist for help because they all either don't believe her, ship her with her stalker, or are evil themselves, is nearly killed by at least three different people, and is apparently perfectly mentally sound by the end of the book. Oh yeah, and this is proven by her passionately making out with the guy who outright told her that he intended to murder her for his own selfish gain.
Perhaps the most frightening aspect of Nora's character is the fact that throughout most of the book, she does show a modicum of intelligence and backbone. With characters like Bella Swan, you can at least argue that they're too stupid to realize what danger they're skipping off into. With Nora, there's no such comfort. She's well aware of how dangerous Patch is. She knows full well that he can hurt her. She realizes that he is stalking her and treating her in ways that are far beyond inappropriate. Yet she continues to flirt with him and kiss him and go back for more. All in the name of him being "irresistible" and "sexy".
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is either where the book gets very frustrating or extremely frightening or both. About halfway through the novel is when Nora is made well aware of exactly how far Patch is willing to go. He's not just being annoying or making crude comments or stalking her, oh no, he intends to flat-out murder her. She is told that he wants to kill her. Kill her, for no reason at all. And her response to this is to want to date him. Besides that though, there are many other points when the Harvard-bound Nora is incredibly stupid, making very bad decisions during her Portland trip and her stay in the motel, along with her constant decisions to lie to her mother and the police about the dangerous situations that she keeps finding herself shoved in. There are really only two ways to see this behavior - either Nora's character receives a lobotomy from Fitzpatrick as a way to keep the "romance" on track, or Nora finally suffers a mental breakdown and gives in and surrenders to her abuser. Neither of those cases is appealing in the slightest, and both leave me reeling in terror.
The treatment of Nora goes even worse than that however, when we see that, as the book goes on, she is slowly stripped of everything she has that defines herself. She's supposed to be a straight-A student? Patch actively works to sabotage her grade, forcing her to choose between meeting in a seedy, dangerous bar or be unable to complete an assignment. She's supposed to be a girl focused on her schoolwork and working for a scholarship to an Ivy-league school? After Patch enters the pictures, that all goes out the window, with him going so far as to tell her that she won't be bothering with such colleges because she'll find them unsatisfying. Any relationship with her mother she might have had? She's encouraged by Patch to sneak out and lie to her mother about it. She decided that she wasn't interested in boys or having a boyfriend at that moment? Patch smugly tells her that she just has high standards and outright tells her that she loves him and they'll be together, giving her no say in the matter and manipulating events so that she's forced to go on dates with him. Really, what can she do? She can't overpower him, she can't escape from him, no one believes her when she tries to tell people about what he does to her, and if she gets out of line, he has no problem with mindraping her or the people around her to make her come across as insane, isolating her even more from anyone who might help her.
All of that, coupled with the fact that Nora is only is involved in the events that play out because Patch fell in love with her (and notice how that played out - he made the decision first and continued to manipulate events to help himself to what he wanted) paints a very bad image. She is the point of view character. She is telling this story. She is supposed to be the protagonist. And yet every single thing about her is slowly removed, so her only trait, the only thing that defines her, is Patch. Nora is meant to be the everyday girl, brainy but plain and unpopular. We're meant to be cheered that she gets the hot boy because looks don't matter and her personality wins out, right? Wrong. And that brings us to the issue of...
Patch: Patch is meant to be our typical love interest, a bad boy who you feel an attraction to. Heavy emphasis on the "meant to be". Because there was nothing, absolutely nothing, about this guy that was the slightest bit appealing.
Let me start off by getting this off of my chest. I hate Patch. I hate him and find him horrifying and disgusting. I despise him even more than Jace Wayland and Loren Blake. Not even Edward Cullen invokes this level of revile in me. To any fans who might be reading this, I'm terribly sorry. I'm just one of those boring people who thinks that murderers are monsters who are not sexy or attractive in the least.
And yes, that is what Patch is, or at least aspires to be. The reason he met Nora to begin with? He was stalking her to murder her. His big plan? To murder her, and Jules. This is not like Edward Cullen's "Your blood is tempting me to kill you", this is, by his own admittance, premeditated murder. The reason he asked her out on dates? To have means to kill her. Everything about the start of their relationship stemmed from the fact that he would try to kill her, and I'm supposed to be moved by this? I'm moved to get an axe, that's about it!
And what is Patch's motive to murder an innocent, frightened girl? To be human. That's it. Because...he wants to feel things. Never mind that he only ever acknowledges humans to hold them in disdain. Never mind that there is no sign that he is particularly worse off without a human body. I'm sorry Fitzpatrick, but having your murderous love interest say "I want to be human" isn't enough to invoke any sort of sympathy in me, nor is it sufficient to make me believe that it's a genuine pay-off for him killing an unsuspecting person. It just makes your character look like the selfish douche he is, seeing as he gets along just fine without feeling things and is apparently fine with ruining the lives of unsuspecting people just for what he wants. A real prize, right.
I've seen people try to handwave Patch's behavior in various ways. That he is wittily sarcastic. That he and Nora have good chemistry. That he is cocky and sexy. One reviewer chalked his behavior up to values dissonance (because we all know that premeditated murder was perfectly fine in the good old days...oh, wait). Perhaps the one I see brought up most often is this: "Oh, he's not supposed to be a good guy! He's meant to be a bad boy!" And I will concede that on that score, Fitzpatrick did a fine job. From start to finish, Patch was a bad boy. In fact, he was completely and utterly terrifying.
Here's the thing that I've never seen answered to my satisfaction though: Why are we supposed to like him for it?
I'm serious. On no level whatsoever is Patch an appealing character. He is rude. He is antisocial. He is conceited. He is condescending to the few people that he actually acknowledges. He is a parasite. He is an asshole, plain and simple. Even Nora, the girl who he is supposed to love the most, out of everyone in the world, is treated like garbage by him. He stalks her, gives her no privacy, frightens her, baits her, puts her down, sexually harasses her, assaults her, manipulates her, leads her to engage in unsafe activities which her mother (and oftentimes she herself) disapprove of, and ultimately outright admits that he wants to kill her for his own selfish gain. If Patch were written to be a slasher villain, I'd applaud Fitzpatrick for her writing skills.
And for those who are shaking their heads and saying that I just don't understand? Allow me to show you something that we like to call the Hare Psychopathy Checklist:
Factor 1: Personality "Aggressive narcissism"
Glibness/superficial charm - Patch pretty much spends the entire book "dazzling" Nora (for lack of a better word). One could argue that this is the only reason he gets away with most of the shit he pulls on her
Grandiose sense of self-worth - Given how he's acting like he's the greatest thing to walk the Earth, I'd say so. He certainly believes he deserves what he wants even if it takes murder to get it
Pathological lying - I'd say that spending the first half of the book lying to Nora about his intentions for her, pretending to take her on outings with the intent of killing, ought to count. That's not even mentioning that fucking scam he pulled, pretending that his Jeep broke so he could get her in a motel with him
Cunning/manipulative - The entire book is nothing but Patch manipulating Nora to do exactly what he wants
Lack of remorse or guilt - Yeah, Patch isn't sorry for anything he does. Big yes
Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric) - Like I said, he spends the entire book doing nothing but laying it on thick to trick Nora. By her own admittance, she can't figure out what he's thinking or feeling, even though he constantly swears he'll be honest with her.
Callousness; lack of empathy - If failing to show guilt or sorrow for mindraping Jules and completely ruining his life or stalking and hurting Nora don't count, I really don't know what does
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions - Patch sure does drop the fact that it's his fault that Nora was nearly killed multiple times, attacked, frightened, and had part of her house burned down pretty quickly. He doesn't even acknowledge that the only reason both of the bad guys after her were entirely his fault, nor does he ever take responsibility for his inappropriate actions towards Nora, just insisting that she wants him, so that makes it alright
Factor 2: Case history "Socially deviant lifestyle".
Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom - Given that Patch spends his days running around, playing paintball and pool and getting into bar fights (when he's not stalking and trying to kill Nora, that is), I'd say yes
Parasitic lifestyle - While Patch does have a job at a restaurant it's pretty clear that most of his livelihood is made up by playing pool and gambling. Also, he completely ruined Jules' life, condemning the poor guy to an eternity of having his body stolen and used for a variety of activities, among which are implied to involve sex
Poor behavioral control - *raises eyebrows* Does throwing his girlfriend against a wall and threatening her life count?
Lack of realistic long-term goals - Patch's main goal seemed to be "Kill Nora and become human", with no follow-up plans at all. Really worth considering how his main goal is to be human, yet he shows no signs of what he intends to do when he achieves that goal
Impulsivity - If Patch actually thought out his actions, from Falling to earth without thinking about what he'd do from there to seducing Dabria, a lot of stuff in this story would not have happened. He also changes his mind about heavy topics like murdering Nora alarmingly quickly, as evidenced when he tells how he was ready to shove her out of the roller coaster up until the last minute
Irresponsibility - Unless a person calls taking a girl who is scared out of her wits, under false pretenses and against her will, to a motel instead of driving her home like she asked to be responsible...erm, yes. Because shoving aside all of the squick and nastiness there (and yes, I realize that's a big order), the fact remains that Nora more or less entrusted herself into Patch's safekeeping and asked for him to take her home, and he ultimately humiliated and hurt her.
Juvenile delinquency - Technically Patch is a Fallen angel, but he's still in the body of a teenager and he takes delight in committing crimes because he's so bad, so yeah, I'd say so
Early behavior problems - Given that he's been keeping this all up for several hundred years, starting with him mindraping and forcing Jules into servitude in the prologue, I'd say that's a yes. And yes, I'm aware that we're meant to believe that Patch was once a good person, but there's absolutely nothing in the book that suggests that
Revocation of conditional release - As soon as Patch is made a guardian angel, he goes right on to making out with Nora, using his mindrape to tell her he'd be doing so. Need I remind the jury that Patch himself said that the non-fallen angels would not use their mindrape on humans and that lust for a human woman is what made Patch fall before?
Traits not correlated with either factor
Promiscuous sexual behavior - While Patch did not seem to have slept with her, he was perfectly fine with seducing Dabria to get what he wants. He also constantly engages in activities like pinning Nora to walls, kissing her, touching her, and other such things which technically do not involve sex, but clearly are meant to have those connotations.
Many short-term marital relationships - While Patch was never married, he Falls from Heaven because he is in lust with a human girl, apparently fine with packing up and abandoning his job, his current girlfriend, and everything else. He then throws himself just as quickly into a relationship with Nora, despite the fact that (A) there is nothing to show that his infatuation with her is any more than lust as well and (B) Nora continues to voice displeasure with that.
Criminal versatility - *flatly* Gee, between cheerfully trying to steal a car, attempting to rape Nora, and planning to murder two people (Nora and Jules) to get what he wants, all of which he shows no remorse for, I think he just might qualify
Acquired behavioural sociopathy/sociological conditioning (Item 21: a newly identified trait i.e. a person relying on sociological strategies and tricks to deceive) - Patch constantly comes up with bullshit excuses and tricks to hang around with Nora, from stalking her to the library on the pretense of getting some books, to stealing her house keys so he could waltz into her house, to pretending his Jeep was broken to get her into the motel, to switching to a job as a home security installer so that he can make out with her. Word of God even says that Patch has a perfect understanding of how human psychology works, which means that all of his plans would have been already mapped out.
Vee: I hate Vee. I really do. That's all I can say about her. She's a waste of space in this story. She's alarmingly stupid, clearly unable to learn from her mistakes, and forgets about the fact that Nora's life might be in danger so often that it is almost horrific to read about. Vee is a terrible friend, and yet we are supposed to like her for it. I think I speak for all when I respond to that with a resounding "NO".
Elliot: Elliot was intended to the red herring villain. He was meant to be the one who was so frightening and suspicious that Nora's gaze (and ours, for that matter) were drawn away from the true mastermind and towards him. He was written to be the eyes and ears and extended arm of the real Big Bad, if you will. Unfortunately this doesn't really work, mainly because Elliot, like virtually everyone else in the book, has very little actual characterization. His backstory is thrown together so sloppily and hastily that it really makes no sense. In fact, nothing about Elliot makes a lot of sense, when it's all said and done. We're not told if he has family to be suspicious about him getting a lot of money out of nowhere or being accused of murder or transferring to another school. We're not told enough about his relationship with his girlfriend to let us care about him murdering her, or his motives behind it. We're not told much of anything about him. For all intents and purposes, Fitzpatrick might as well have revealed that Elliot was a robot programed to follow his master's commands. And to top it all off, Elliot turns out to be yet another loose end that is not tied up in the least at the end of the story. We get no hint of resolution with him at all, which makes the weak struggles Nora has with him seem rather pointless. In short, Elliot was sloppily written in.
Jules: Fitzpatrick appears to be under the belief that she wrote Jules as a mysterious villain, one who is always present in the background, only to make a grand reveal that leaves readers slapping their foreheads and crying "Of course!"
As we saw though, Jules is not a significant background character. He is hardly a character period! I could probably count on one hand all of the times he is brought up in the text, and he makes even fewer actual on-screen appearances. There is a difference between having one's villain carefully hidden away, and having one's villain play virtually no part in the story at all, only to sweep in for the grand reveal. Fitzpatrick successfully employed the latter. Well done.
Of course, there's another other aspect to Jules character, one which is absolutely pitiable. Honestly, Jules' backstory came across as far more sympathetic than Patch's ever did. We see nothing that suggests that Jules deserved what happened to him, yet Patch goes waltzing in and mentally attacks the poor guy until he surrenders himself to an eternity of servitude and body theft. On the flip side though, when Fitzpatrick does nail down Jules being a creepy villain (albeit one who only succeeds because his targets are completely idiotic and inept), the fact remains that he sounds just like Patch, dragging Nora around, taunting her with inappropriate comments, and generally threatening her. Make of that what you will.
Dabria: Ah, Dabria. She is what I shall call our "vanity villain". By that, I mean that she is a villain who serves no purpose to the story, save to make the protagonist look good. Honestly, what else did she contribute besides showing that hey, Patch passed up the hot blonde bombshell for the clean everyday girl? Her advice to Nora, which had potential as words of wisdom from one of Patch's flings to another, is completely disregarded as jealous tactics to drive Nora away. Her sole purpose boils down to "want Patch back for some inexplicable reason, and thus try to kill Nora".
Ultimately though, the entire thing is completely pointless. The rising action, the climax, the falling action, and the plot of the story all center around Jules! Jules and his desire for revenge against Patch! One could be charitable and say that Dabria served as a red herring, as well as the one who acts on behalf of Heaven to win Patch back, but both of those arguments fall flat because of how clumsily two-dimensional she ends up. The idea of Heaven tempting Patch back is given virtually no explanation at all and thus does not sufficiently explain her presence. As for her acting as a red herring, take out Dabria's attack on Vee, or replace them with Jules, and nothing changes. Nada.
The only other thing worth mentioning about Dabria is how, like Jules, she still manages to come across as more sympathetic than the protagonists. When we first see her, she is a strong, confident woman who is trying to do her job and get Patch back on track. Because he manipulates her and plays with her feelings though, she is reduced to being a shrieking, psychotic harpy. Perhaps if the writing were better it would be more believable that Dabria was insane the entire time (which I'm sure was Fitzpatrick's intention), but as it is, it just looks like Dabria had her will shattered by Patch, which only leads me to hate Patch even more, feel even more squicked about Nora's fate, and feel more pity than anger for Dabria.
Marcie Millar: Given how little Marcie Millar is in this story, I normally would not include her in this little wrap-up. She is, however, a fairly big player in the next book, so I feel I ought to remind you all what she did in this book. She insulted Vee twice and Nora once, was bashed for hiding her freckles under cover-up, and was beaten up by Jules. Really, she's such a flat character, she could probably be put through a paper shredder. Please, dear readers, do keep the scant involvement she had with this story in mind when we begin Crescendo. It will give you all migraines.
Mrs. Grey: There is really not a lot to say about Mrs. Grey, and that disgusts me. Fitzpatrick wrote this character into a story where a mother/daughter bond would be absolutely perfect. Nora is struggling through a life having just lost her father, and now finding herself stalked and harassed and threatened by a creep. There are countless opportunities in there to see Nora and her mother bonding, yet Mrs. Grey is consistently written out of the story, making her come across as both a very bad parent, and a nonentity period. Of course, much like Charlie in Twilight, a lot of Mrs. Grey's absence from the story can be contributed to her having more sense than her daughter. It's more than obvious that she can see that Patch is trouble, so of course she has to be kept in the dark and remain completely gullible. Otherwise, how could we get such charming scenes like Patch trapping Nora in the motel? It's logical.
Writing Style
This was Fitzpatrick's first novel and, like with Meyer, it really shows. The writing, pacing, and overall quality is just sloppy, amateurish, and just plain bad. Even if you ignore or handwave the bad messages and general unfortunate implications (which will be discussed in a minute, believe me), the fact remains that it simply isn't a well-written book.
Prose-wise, things aren't horrible. Nora, Patch, and the other characters generally don't suffer from Thesaurus Syndrome. In fact, if there's one good thing I can say about the narrative, it can be readable and snappy at best. That's ignoring the general idiocy and creepiness, but again that's another story. That being said, while the prose isn't terrible, it still isn't anything particularly note-worthy. If the rest of the book weren't so bad it wouldn't stand out too much, but given how the rest of the writing is, it just comes across as one more missed saving grace. There's also the very bad cases of showing and not telling that go on. For Lord's sake, I don't want Nora to blandly narrate how Patch's smile clearly was hiding a secret! Show me that it is!
Finally, there's the matter of the angel mythology. Again, this entire thing was just sloppy. Things are thrown out right and left, in ways that can only be described as ass pulls and voodoo sharks. How is it that angels are apparently able to
just traipse about on Earth long enough to further the plot, but without the other angels catching them? How does killing the descendent of a Nephilim actually affect said Nephilim at all? Why does the descendent have to be female? How does Patch refusing to accept Nora's sacrifice miraculously heal her broken body and bring her back to life? Since when do Nephilim not have souls? Where the flip is God during this entire thing? None of those things are addressed, which suggests that Fitzpatrick couldn't even be bothered to keep her own mythology straight. And I could understand if there was the point that the angels are all crazy or useless and there's the moral that humans have to be the bigger people and take care of themselves, but there isn't even that. All we're ever told is that Angels Are Better, yet they're constantly shown to be blind, jealous, greedy, and generally assholes. This is never pointed out by any of the human characters, and indeed with Patch we're supposed to see this as desirable.
Yeah, good luck with that.
General Themes, Messages, And Unfortunate Implications
I've ranted about these in the sporkings, but they honestly are worth repeating. Over the course of reading this story, I got:
Fitzpatrick had claimed that she never wrote the story with the intention of having the characters be role models, nor for the events to be a reflection of everyday life. By writing in such terrible messages and having them all go unchalleneged though, she essentially is endorsing them, at least to the degree of misleading readers. Fitzpatrick stated that she was still careful to have a happy ending, which just makes it even worse, having the book indirectly teach that if a person puts up with the behaviors and actions shown, then it will be fine and a happy ending is to be had.
All I can do is repeat what I said before - I pray to God that this all somehow slipped past Fitzpatrick's notice. If not...the thought is very depressing.
Final Thoughts
This book is horrible. It is badly-written, it is vile, it is foul, and it is offensive on virtually every level. It is a slap in the face to every person who has dealt with rape or sexual harassment or abusive relationships! It is insultingly sexist, and contains downright terrible messages for the audience of young adult girls that it's aimed for! I hate to play the "it's ruining our youth" card because I like to give the benefit of the doubt to the readers and figure that they know the difference between fantasy and reality. Even so, it's downright disturbing that this was penned by a woman and has a large female fanbase, all of whom consider this story to be sexy and romantic.
ZeldaQueen: And thus, we end our horrific battle with this monstrocity. The hydra does not have just one head though, and there are sequels to contend with! Next up... this sporking reaches a Crescendo.
Onward to: Spite Fics (Part 1)
Back to: The Story Behind The Story
Return to: Table of Contents
Also, a very belated happy birthday to erikalyndis
Plot
I'm going to start off by saying that I know it's not fair to just say this is a Twilight rip-off for a few similarities. Many fans insist that it should not be read as as such, and lord knows that just because a few tropes are shared, it does not make one work a rip-off of the other.
The trouble, however, is that this book does not just share a few similarities. It shares a whole lotta them. More than that though, this book shares many of the same problems Twilight does, at least by way of plot. A plain, ordinary girl gets the attention of an ancient being who is male and - by complete coincidence - also in his teens and, oh yeah, very hot. They get all hot for each other almost immediately and focus exclusively on each other, while everyone else in the book serves no purpose but to comment on how great they are together or be jealous of their Twu Wuv. Oh, and the entire courtship is spent with the guy being an abusive asshole and the girl bending over and taking it because of course he knows better than she does what's good for her. That, and his abs are just so dreamy, how could she possibly resist.
The biggest issue, I would say, is the issue of pacing. Dear lord above, the pacing. The plot...it just is not put together. I don't even mean it's put together badly. It's half-baked, runny and pink on the inside and crusty and burnt on the outside. The plot kicks off on a rather weak note, with us getting virtually no introduction to the world we're spending the next twenty-three chapters living in. Like Meyer, Fitzpatrick began the book with a single scene, in this case the very first biology class. And like with Meyer, it's more than obvious that Fitzpatrick didn't put much thought into the story beyond that one scene. Getting the entire thing started hinges on the readers buying the idea that Patch is so intriguing that a girl would be interested in delving into his past to learn his story. And as I'll discuss later, he certainly isn't. At his most harmless, it's believable that a girl would ignore him in an attempt to escape his harassment. At his worst, it's believable that a girl would be doing everything in her power to put a small continent between herself and him. Meanwhile, the few attempts Fitzpatrick makes to inject plot and mystery into the story fail completely, mostly because they happen so randomly and are glossed over and forgotten almost immediately. Oh, we're supposed to think that Nora is scared by the events, but I fail to see evidence of that, given how she's mysteriously attacked one minute and wandering around areas of town she's unfamiliar with later. I really must ask, if Nora, the protagonist of the story, does not act in a way that convinces us that these things are cause for concern, why should we, the readers, believe we should be worried?
Act Two is just a desolate wasteland of various events, most of which are just boring or face-palm worthy. Fitzpatrick does make a legitimate effort to weave something into the plot beyond "Nora and Patch make goo-goo eyes at each other", but it's still too weak to carry much weight. The subplot with Dabria was completely unnecessary, and really only served the purposes of (A) giving the fangirls, Fitzpatrick, and Nora a reason to wank because of course Patch loved the plain human girl and not the smoking bombshell of an angel and (B) a weak attempt to throw the readers for a loop. The ultimate reveal with Jules as the mastermind was even worse, because we hardly saw him at all! I could count on one hand the number of times he was mentioned, and he made actual appearances even fewer times! There is a difference between diverting the attention of one's audience away from the true guilty party by downplaying them, and completely forgetting to set up the true guilty party at all. Really, the various red herrings that Patch is the guilty party are completely nonsensical and sloppy. I'd also like to add that they are badly set up. Fitzpatrick appeared to be going for the idea that from the outside, Patch looks like a frightening kid who is trying to kill Nora, but once the reveal is made, we see that he is a decent guy who is looking out for her. That just doesn't work here though, mainly because Patch is not a nice guy ever in the book, both before and after the reveal (but more on that in a moment).
The end of the book is a mess, plain and simple. Again, to Fitzpatrick's credit, she does make an actual effort to have something happen, and in the hands of a competent author I'd even bet that the climax could have been interesting. The way it is though, it's tedious. It only comes about because the characters are so unbelievably stupid, and the entire thing is just wrapped up offscreen, in an attempt to throw together a hasty happy ending.
Characters
Nora Gray: Poor Nora Gray. I don't think I've ever felt so sorry for a character who's supposed to be getting the greatest happy ending ever.
Let's back up for a moment, please, and take a look at exactly who her character is - she is still recovering from the violent murder of her father a year ago (which it's established that she is affected by to some degree), is often left alone by her mother with only a Germanic woman for guardianship, is mercilessly stalked, harassed, and frightened by a guy who is able to control and dominate her in pretty much any way possible, is unable to turn to her best friend, teacher, the police or even her therapist for help because they all either don't believe her, ship her with her stalker, or are evil themselves, is nearly killed by at least three different people, and is apparently perfectly mentally sound by the end of the book. Oh yeah, and this is proven by her passionately making out with the guy who outright told her that he intended to murder her for his own selfish gain.
Perhaps the most frightening aspect of Nora's character is the fact that throughout most of the book, she does show a modicum of intelligence and backbone. With characters like Bella Swan, you can at least argue that they're too stupid to realize what danger they're skipping off into. With Nora, there's no such comfort. She's well aware of how dangerous Patch is. She knows full well that he can hurt her. She realizes that he is stalking her and treating her in ways that are far beyond inappropriate. Yet she continues to flirt with him and kiss him and go back for more. All in the name of him being "irresistible" and "sexy".
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is either where the book gets very frustrating or extremely frightening or both. About halfway through the novel is when Nora is made well aware of exactly how far Patch is willing to go. He's not just being annoying or making crude comments or stalking her, oh no, he intends to flat-out murder her. She is told that he wants to kill her. Kill her, for no reason at all. And her response to this is to want to date him. Besides that though, there are many other points when the Harvard-bound Nora is incredibly stupid, making very bad decisions during her Portland trip and her stay in the motel, along with her constant decisions to lie to her mother and the police about the dangerous situations that she keeps finding herself shoved in. There are really only two ways to see this behavior - either Nora's character receives a lobotomy from Fitzpatrick as a way to keep the "romance" on track, or Nora finally suffers a mental breakdown and gives in and surrenders to her abuser. Neither of those cases is appealing in the slightest, and both leave me reeling in terror.
The treatment of Nora goes even worse than that however, when we see that, as the book goes on, she is slowly stripped of everything she has that defines herself. She's supposed to be a straight-A student? Patch actively works to sabotage her grade, forcing her to choose between meeting in a seedy, dangerous bar or be unable to complete an assignment. She's supposed to be a girl focused on her schoolwork and working for a scholarship to an Ivy-league school? After Patch enters the pictures, that all goes out the window, with him going so far as to tell her that she won't be bothering with such colleges because she'll find them unsatisfying. Any relationship with her mother she might have had? She's encouraged by Patch to sneak out and lie to her mother about it. She decided that she wasn't interested in boys or having a boyfriend at that moment? Patch smugly tells her that she just has high standards and outright tells her that she loves him and they'll be together, giving her no say in the matter and manipulating events so that she's forced to go on dates with him. Really, what can she do? She can't overpower him, she can't escape from him, no one believes her when she tries to tell people about what he does to her, and if she gets out of line, he has no problem with mindraping her or the people around her to make her come across as insane, isolating her even more from anyone who might help her.
All of that, coupled with the fact that Nora is only is involved in the events that play out because Patch fell in love with her (and notice how that played out - he made the decision first and continued to manipulate events to help himself to what he wanted) paints a very bad image. She is the point of view character. She is telling this story. She is supposed to be the protagonist. And yet every single thing about her is slowly removed, so her only trait, the only thing that defines her, is Patch. Nora is meant to be the everyday girl, brainy but plain and unpopular. We're meant to be cheered that she gets the hot boy because looks don't matter and her personality wins out, right? Wrong. And that brings us to the issue of...
Patch: Patch is meant to be our typical love interest, a bad boy who you feel an attraction to. Heavy emphasis on the "meant to be". Because there was nothing, absolutely nothing, about this guy that was the slightest bit appealing.
Let me start off by getting this off of my chest. I hate Patch. I hate him and find him horrifying and disgusting. I despise him even more than Jace Wayland and Loren Blake. Not even Edward Cullen invokes this level of revile in me. To any fans who might be reading this, I'm terribly sorry. I'm just one of those boring people who thinks that murderers are monsters who are not sexy or attractive in the least.
And yes, that is what Patch is, or at least aspires to be. The reason he met Nora to begin with? He was stalking her to murder her. His big plan? To murder her, and Jules. This is not like Edward Cullen's "Your blood is tempting me to kill you", this is, by his own admittance, premeditated murder. The reason he asked her out on dates? To have means to kill her. Everything about the start of their relationship stemmed from the fact that he would try to kill her, and I'm supposed to be moved by this? I'm moved to get an axe, that's about it!
And what is Patch's motive to murder an innocent, frightened girl? To be human. That's it. Because...he wants to feel things. Never mind that he only ever acknowledges humans to hold them in disdain. Never mind that there is no sign that he is particularly worse off without a human body. I'm sorry Fitzpatrick, but having your murderous love interest say "I want to be human" isn't enough to invoke any sort of sympathy in me, nor is it sufficient to make me believe that it's a genuine pay-off for him killing an unsuspecting person. It just makes your character look like the selfish douche he is, seeing as he gets along just fine without feeling things and is apparently fine with ruining the lives of unsuspecting people just for what he wants. A real prize, right.
I've seen people try to handwave Patch's behavior in various ways. That he is wittily sarcastic. That he and Nora have good chemistry. That he is cocky and sexy. One reviewer chalked his behavior up to values dissonance (because we all know that premeditated murder was perfectly fine in the good old days...oh, wait). Perhaps the one I see brought up most often is this: "Oh, he's not supposed to be a good guy! He's meant to be a bad boy!" And I will concede that on that score, Fitzpatrick did a fine job. From start to finish, Patch was a bad boy. In fact, he was completely and utterly terrifying.
Here's the thing that I've never seen answered to my satisfaction though: Why are we supposed to like him for it?
I'm serious. On no level whatsoever is Patch an appealing character. He is rude. He is antisocial. He is conceited. He is condescending to the few people that he actually acknowledges. He is a parasite. He is an asshole, plain and simple. Even Nora, the girl who he is supposed to love the most, out of everyone in the world, is treated like garbage by him. He stalks her, gives her no privacy, frightens her, baits her, puts her down, sexually harasses her, assaults her, manipulates her, leads her to engage in unsafe activities which her mother (and oftentimes she herself) disapprove of, and ultimately outright admits that he wants to kill her for his own selfish gain. If Patch were written to be a slasher villain, I'd applaud Fitzpatrick for her writing skills.
And for those who are shaking their heads and saying that I just don't understand? Allow me to show you something that we like to call the Hare Psychopathy Checklist:
Factor 1: Personality "Aggressive narcissism"
Glibness/superficial charm - Patch pretty much spends the entire book "dazzling" Nora (for lack of a better word). One could argue that this is the only reason he gets away with most of the shit he pulls on her
Grandiose sense of self-worth - Given how he's acting like he's the greatest thing to walk the Earth, I'd say so. He certainly believes he deserves what he wants even if it takes murder to get it
Pathological lying - I'd say that spending the first half of the book lying to Nora about his intentions for her, pretending to take her on outings with the intent of killing, ought to count. That's not even mentioning that fucking scam he pulled, pretending that his Jeep broke so he could get her in a motel with him
Cunning/manipulative - The entire book is nothing but Patch manipulating Nora to do exactly what he wants
Lack of remorse or guilt - Yeah, Patch isn't sorry for anything he does. Big yes
Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric) - Like I said, he spends the entire book doing nothing but laying it on thick to trick Nora. By her own admittance, she can't figure out what he's thinking or feeling, even though he constantly swears he'll be honest with her.
Callousness; lack of empathy - If failing to show guilt or sorrow for mindraping Jules and completely ruining his life or stalking and hurting Nora don't count, I really don't know what does
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions - Patch sure does drop the fact that it's his fault that Nora was nearly killed multiple times, attacked, frightened, and had part of her house burned down pretty quickly. He doesn't even acknowledge that the only reason both of the bad guys after her were entirely his fault, nor does he ever take responsibility for his inappropriate actions towards Nora, just insisting that she wants him, so that makes it alright
Factor 2: Case history "Socially deviant lifestyle".
Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom - Given that Patch spends his days running around, playing paintball and pool and getting into bar fights (when he's not stalking and trying to kill Nora, that is), I'd say yes
Parasitic lifestyle - While Patch does have a job at a restaurant it's pretty clear that most of his livelihood is made up by playing pool and gambling. Also, he completely ruined Jules' life, condemning the poor guy to an eternity of having his body stolen and used for a variety of activities, among which are implied to involve sex
Poor behavioral control - *raises eyebrows* Does throwing his girlfriend against a wall and threatening her life count?
Lack of realistic long-term goals - Patch's main goal seemed to be "Kill Nora and become human", with no follow-up plans at all. Really worth considering how his main goal is to be human, yet he shows no signs of what he intends to do when he achieves that goal
Impulsivity - If Patch actually thought out his actions, from Falling to earth without thinking about what he'd do from there to seducing Dabria, a lot of stuff in this story would not have happened. He also changes his mind about heavy topics like murdering Nora alarmingly quickly, as evidenced when he tells how he was ready to shove her out of the roller coaster up until the last minute
Irresponsibility - Unless a person calls taking a girl who is scared out of her wits, under false pretenses and against her will, to a motel instead of driving her home like she asked to be responsible...erm, yes. Because shoving aside all of the squick and nastiness there (and yes, I realize that's a big order), the fact remains that Nora more or less entrusted herself into Patch's safekeeping and asked for him to take her home, and he ultimately humiliated and hurt her.
Juvenile delinquency - Technically Patch is a Fallen angel, but he's still in the body of a teenager and he takes delight in committing crimes because he's so bad, so yeah, I'd say so
Early behavior problems - Given that he's been keeping this all up for several hundred years, starting with him mindraping and forcing Jules into servitude in the prologue, I'd say that's a yes. And yes, I'm aware that we're meant to believe that Patch was once a good person, but there's absolutely nothing in the book that suggests that
Revocation of conditional release - As soon as Patch is made a guardian angel, he goes right on to making out with Nora, using his mindrape to tell her he'd be doing so. Need I remind the jury that Patch himself said that the non-fallen angels would not use their mindrape on humans and that lust for a human woman is what made Patch fall before?
Traits not correlated with either factor
Promiscuous sexual behavior - While Patch did not seem to have slept with her, he was perfectly fine with seducing Dabria to get what he wants. He also constantly engages in activities like pinning Nora to walls, kissing her, touching her, and other such things which technically do not involve sex, but clearly are meant to have those connotations.
Many short-term marital relationships - While Patch was never married, he Falls from Heaven because he is in lust with a human girl, apparently fine with packing up and abandoning his job, his current girlfriend, and everything else. He then throws himself just as quickly into a relationship with Nora, despite the fact that (A) there is nothing to show that his infatuation with her is any more than lust as well and (B) Nora continues to voice displeasure with that.
Criminal versatility - *flatly* Gee, between cheerfully trying to steal a car, attempting to rape Nora, and planning to murder two people (Nora and Jules) to get what he wants, all of which he shows no remorse for, I think he just might qualify
Acquired behavioural sociopathy/sociological conditioning (Item 21: a newly identified trait i.e. a person relying on sociological strategies and tricks to deceive) - Patch constantly comes up with bullshit excuses and tricks to hang around with Nora, from stalking her to the library on the pretense of getting some books, to stealing her house keys so he could waltz into her house, to pretending his Jeep was broken to get her into the motel, to switching to a job as a home security installer so that he can make out with her. Word of God even says that Patch has a perfect understanding of how human psychology works, which means that all of his plans would have been already mapped out.
Vee: I hate Vee. I really do. That's all I can say about her. She's a waste of space in this story. She's alarmingly stupid, clearly unable to learn from her mistakes, and forgets about the fact that Nora's life might be in danger so often that it is almost horrific to read about. Vee is a terrible friend, and yet we are supposed to like her for it. I think I speak for all when I respond to that with a resounding "NO".
Elliot: Elliot was intended to the red herring villain. He was meant to be the one who was so frightening and suspicious that Nora's gaze (and ours, for that matter) were drawn away from the true mastermind and towards him. He was written to be the eyes and ears and extended arm of the real Big Bad, if you will. Unfortunately this doesn't really work, mainly because Elliot, like virtually everyone else in the book, has very little actual characterization. His backstory is thrown together so sloppily and hastily that it really makes no sense. In fact, nothing about Elliot makes a lot of sense, when it's all said and done. We're not told if he has family to be suspicious about him getting a lot of money out of nowhere or being accused of murder or transferring to another school. We're not told enough about his relationship with his girlfriend to let us care about him murdering her, or his motives behind it. We're not told much of anything about him. For all intents and purposes, Fitzpatrick might as well have revealed that Elliot was a robot programed to follow his master's commands. And to top it all off, Elliot turns out to be yet another loose end that is not tied up in the least at the end of the story. We get no hint of resolution with him at all, which makes the weak struggles Nora has with him seem rather pointless. In short, Elliot was sloppily written in.
Jules: Fitzpatrick appears to be under the belief that she wrote Jules as a mysterious villain, one who is always present in the background, only to make a grand reveal that leaves readers slapping their foreheads and crying "Of course!"
As we saw though, Jules is not a significant background character. He is hardly a character period! I could probably count on one hand all of the times he is brought up in the text, and he makes even fewer actual on-screen appearances. There is a difference between having one's villain carefully hidden away, and having one's villain play virtually no part in the story at all, only to sweep in for the grand reveal. Fitzpatrick successfully employed the latter. Well done.
Of course, there's another other aspect to Jules character, one which is absolutely pitiable. Honestly, Jules' backstory came across as far more sympathetic than Patch's ever did. We see nothing that suggests that Jules deserved what happened to him, yet Patch goes waltzing in and mentally attacks the poor guy until he surrenders himself to an eternity of servitude and body theft. On the flip side though, when Fitzpatrick does nail down Jules being a creepy villain (albeit one who only succeeds because his targets are completely idiotic and inept), the fact remains that he sounds just like Patch, dragging Nora around, taunting her with inappropriate comments, and generally threatening her. Make of that what you will.
Dabria: Ah, Dabria. She is what I shall call our "vanity villain". By that, I mean that she is a villain who serves no purpose to the story, save to make the protagonist look good. Honestly, what else did she contribute besides showing that hey, Patch passed up the hot blonde bombshell for the clean everyday girl? Her advice to Nora, which had potential as words of wisdom from one of Patch's flings to another, is completely disregarded as jealous tactics to drive Nora away. Her sole purpose boils down to "want Patch back for some inexplicable reason, and thus try to kill Nora".
Ultimately though, the entire thing is completely pointless. The rising action, the climax, the falling action, and the plot of the story all center around Jules! Jules and his desire for revenge against Patch! One could be charitable and say that Dabria served as a red herring, as well as the one who acts on behalf of Heaven to win Patch back, but both of those arguments fall flat because of how clumsily two-dimensional she ends up. The idea of Heaven tempting Patch back is given virtually no explanation at all and thus does not sufficiently explain her presence. As for her acting as a red herring, take out Dabria's attack on Vee, or replace them with Jules, and nothing changes. Nada.
The only other thing worth mentioning about Dabria is how, like Jules, she still manages to come across as more sympathetic than the protagonists. When we first see her, she is a strong, confident woman who is trying to do her job and get Patch back on track. Because he manipulates her and plays with her feelings though, she is reduced to being a shrieking, psychotic harpy. Perhaps if the writing were better it would be more believable that Dabria was insane the entire time (which I'm sure was Fitzpatrick's intention), but as it is, it just looks like Dabria had her will shattered by Patch, which only leads me to hate Patch even more, feel even more squicked about Nora's fate, and feel more pity than anger for Dabria.
Marcie Millar: Given how little Marcie Millar is in this story, I normally would not include her in this little wrap-up. She is, however, a fairly big player in the next book, so I feel I ought to remind you all what she did in this book. She insulted Vee twice and Nora once, was bashed for hiding her freckles under cover-up, and was beaten up by Jules. Really, she's such a flat character, she could probably be put through a paper shredder. Please, dear readers, do keep the scant involvement she had with this story in mind when we begin Crescendo. It will give you all migraines.
Mrs. Grey: There is really not a lot to say about Mrs. Grey, and that disgusts me. Fitzpatrick wrote this character into a story where a mother/daughter bond would be absolutely perfect. Nora is struggling through a life having just lost her father, and now finding herself stalked and harassed and threatened by a creep. There are countless opportunities in there to see Nora and her mother bonding, yet Mrs. Grey is consistently written out of the story, making her come across as both a very bad parent, and a nonentity period. Of course, much like Charlie in Twilight, a lot of Mrs. Grey's absence from the story can be contributed to her having more sense than her daughter. It's more than obvious that she can see that Patch is trouble, so of course she has to be kept in the dark and remain completely gullible. Otherwise, how could we get such charming scenes like Patch trapping Nora in the motel? It's logical.
Writing Style
This was Fitzpatrick's first novel and, like with Meyer, it really shows. The writing, pacing, and overall quality is just sloppy, amateurish, and just plain bad. Even if you ignore or handwave the bad messages and general unfortunate implications (which will be discussed in a minute, believe me), the fact remains that it simply isn't a well-written book.
Prose-wise, things aren't horrible. Nora, Patch, and the other characters generally don't suffer from Thesaurus Syndrome. In fact, if there's one good thing I can say about the narrative, it can be readable and snappy at best. That's ignoring the general idiocy and creepiness, but again that's another story. That being said, while the prose isn't terrible, it still isn't anything particularly note-worthy. If the rest of the book weren't so bad it wouldn't stand out too much, but given how the rest of the writing is, it just comes across as one more missed saving grace. There's also the very bad cases of showing and not telling that go on. For Lord's sake, I don't want Nora to blandly narrate how Patch's smile clearly was hiding a secret! Show me that it is!
Finally, there's the matter of the angel mythology. Again, this entire thing was just sloppy. Things are thrown out right and left, in ways that can only be described as ass pulls and voodoo sharks. How is it that angels are apparently able to
just traipse about on Earth long enough to further the plot, but without the other angels catching them? How does killing the descendent of a Nephilim actually affect said Nephilim at all? Why does the descendent have to be female? How does Patch refusing to accept Nora's sacrifice miraculously heal her broken body and bring her back to life? Since when do Nephilim not have souls? Where the flip is God during this entire thing? None of those things are addressed, which suggests that Fitzpatrick couldn't even be bothered to keep her own mythology straight. And I could understand if there was the point that the angels are all crazy or useless and there's the moral that humans have to be the bigger people and take care of themselves, but there isn't even that. All we're ever told is that Angels Are Better, yet they're constantly shown to be blind, jealous, greedy, and generally assholes. This is never pointed out by any of the human characters, and indeed with Patch we're supposed to see this as desirable.
Yeah, good luck with that.
General Themes, Messages, And Unfortunate Implications
I've ranted about these in the sporkings, but they honestly are worth repeating. Over the course of reading this story, I got:
- If a person humiliates you, sexually harasses you, or acts in ways that are inappropriate towards you, it's perfectly reasonable. He's just trying to teach you to be a more fun person.
- Your friends, family, teachers, and police will not listen to you if you feel like you are being threatened by someone, so it's best to just not tell them about it. After all, it's far more important to put yourself in danger than to risk someone thinking that you're overreacting.
- If a female teacher or guidance counciler warns you to stay away from a boy who is harassing you or otherwise makes you feel uncomfortable, ignore their advice. It's shady and probably just them being jealous and getting in the way of a great relationship.
- If a boy makes decisions for you or forces you into a situation that you are uncomfortable with, just go along with it. It won't end badly, even if it is within the boy's power to rape or kill you.
- If you feel as if you are being stalked or threatened by someone, it's still perfectly fine to accept rides from people you don't trust and go on outings without letting anyone know about it in case of emergencies.
- Even if a guy threatens and frightens you, if he falls in love with you, all of your problems will be solved.
- Parasitic behavior, recklessness, irresponsibility, refusal to adhere to the rules of society, and generally violent lifestyles are attractive and desirable traits to look for in a partner.
- A person who routinely tricks you, lies to you, and dodges your questions is a good person to trust.
Fitzpatrick had claimed that she never wrote the story with the intention of having the characters be role models, nor for the events to be a reflection of everyday life. By writing in such terrible messages and having them all go unchalleneged though, she essentially is endorsing them, at least to the degree of misleading readers. Fitzpatrick stated that she was still careful to have a happy ending, which just makes it even worse, having the book indirectly teach that if a person puts up with the behaviors and actions shown, then it will be fine and a happy ending is to be had.
All I can do is repeat what I said before - I pray to God that this all somehow slipped past Fitzpatrick's notice. If not...the thought is very depressing.
Final Thoughts
This book is horrible. It is badly-written, it is vile, it is foul, and it is offensive on virtually every level. It is a slap in the face to every person who has dealt with rape or sexual harassment or abusive relationships! It is insultingly sexist, and contains downright terrible messages for the audience of young adult girls that it's aimed for! I hate to play the "it's ruining our youth" card because I like to give the benefit of the doubt to the readers and figure that they know the difference between fantasy and reality. Even so, it's downright disturbing that this was penned by a woman and has a large female fanbase, all of whom consider this story to be sexy and romantic.
ZeldaQueen: And thus, we end our horrific battle with this monstrocity. The hydra does not have just one head though, and there are sequels to contend with! Next up... this sporking reaches a Crescendo.
Onward to: Spite Fics (Part 1)
Back to: The Story Behind The Story
Return to: Table of Contents